Unpopular Movie Opinions: Part III

[kylor]

Originally Posted by DR Herbert West

I was thinking of a blood test.

[Show spoiler]

If only.

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon > Michael Mann's Entire Filmography

[Rodney-2187]

Coen Brothers > Scorsese

[kylor]

Zack Snyder > Scorsese & Sergio Leone combined

[BluBonnet]

Ed Wood Jr > Zack Snyder

[kobol]

That Predator Christmas Special reminds me of Rudolph skits Mad Tv used to do.

[kylor]

I tried objectively ranking cinematography and came to the irrefutable fact that Parasite's cinematography > Christopher Nolan's cinematography across all of his films.

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by kylor

I tried objectively ranking cinematography and came to the irrefutable fact that Parasite's cinematography > Christopher Nolan's cinematography across all of his films.

Which version, tho?

[CreasyBear]

Originally Posted by jess1581

JJ Abrams is a hack "yes man" gun for hire and a creative chicken shit.

This is true...and I shit on him a lot, deservedly so, but I will give him credit that the camerawork in Rise of Skywalker is very fluid and clean. The long (for nowadays anyway) steadicam shots that Spielberg is so effortless at, combining what would normally be several shots into one prolonged take, are a welcome retreat from the common chaotic tropes of effects driven cinematography. It's arguably his most competent work from a technical standpoint. I mean it doesn't belong in a Star Wars film and the movie is still a dumpster fire, but I'll give him credit where it's due.

[kylor]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

Which version, tho?

The color one, not the monochrome.

[jess1581]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

This is true...and I shit on him a lot, deservedly so, but I will give him credit that the camerawork in Rise of Skywalker is very fluid and clean. The long (for nowadays anyway) steadicam shots that Spielberg is so effortless at, combining what would normally be several shots into one prolonged take, are a welcome retreat from the common chaotic tropes of effects driven cinematography. It's arguably his most competent work from a technical standpoint. I mean it doesn't belong in a Star Wars film and the movie is still a dumpster fire, but I'll give him credit where it's due.

Yeah, he can put together a generally pleasing picture, but it's never anything distinguishable. Rise was a SW lunchbox, has all the visual swag that fans would like, even on the Thermos, but there's no lunch inside. Nothing of any nutritional value in cinematic terms.

[Kylo_Ren]

Originally Posted by jess1581

JJ Abrams is a hack "yes man" gun for hire and a creative chicken shit.

Originally Posted by jess1581

Yeah, he can put together a generally pleasing picture, but it's never anything distinguishable. Rise was a SW lunchbox, has all the visual swag that fans would like, even on the Thermos, but there's no lunch inside. Nothing of any nutritional value in cinematic terms.

I have to respectfully disagree. There's tons of symbolism and thematic depth/layers in TROS that get overlooked, and a lot of visual storytelling too. That's where the substance is for me. To me, JJ Abrams is a talented filmmaker who loves, respects, and gets why classic films work and revives/reinvents them for newer generations with tons of passion and emotion. His shot composition is great and super underrated, and he is great with characters/casting.

He has a genuine love for film that shows and has produced, written, and directed some of the best things to come out of Hollywood in the last two decades.

He revived and modernized Star Trek and Star Wars and created a whole new generation of younger fans in the process.

Of course, not everyone will agree and I'll get hate, but JJ is great in my book! And I stand by that statement. And so is Rian Johnson. Yeah, I said it!

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Kylo_Ren

I have to respectfully disagree. To me, JJ Abrams is a talented filmmaker who loves, respects, and gets why classic films work and revives/reinvents them for newer generations with tons of passion and emotion. His shot composition is great and super underrated, and he is great with characters/casting.

He has a genuine love for film that shows and has produced, written, and directed some of the best things to come out of Hollywood in the last two decades.

He revived and modernized Star Trek and Star Wars and created a whole new generation of younger fans in the process.

Of course, not everyone will agree and I'll get hate, but JJ is great in my book! And I stand by that statement.

You know it's an odd thing because with Star Trek, I enjoy the two newer ones directed by J.J. Abrams, but I disliked Star Trek Beyond. I think Beyond would have been so much better had J.J. directed it like the first two.

[Kylo_Ren]

Originally Posted by kylor

You know it's an odd thing because with Star Trek, I enjoy the two newer ones directed by J.J. Abrams, but I disliked Star Trek Beyond. I think Beyond would have been so much better had J.J. directed it like the first two.

I agree. I liked Beyond well enough, but I wish JJ came back to direct that one. His films have a heart and kinetic energy that just wasn't quite there for me in Beyond. It was still good, though.

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by Kylo_Ren

I have to respectfully disagree. There's tons of symbolism and thematic depth/layers in TROS that get overlooked. That's where the substance is for me. To me, JJ Abrams is a talented filmmaker who loves, respects, and gets why classic films work and revives/reinvents them for newer generations with tons of passion and emotion. His shot composition is great and super underrated, and he is great with characters/casting.

He has a genuine love for film that shows and has produced, written, and directed some of the best things to come out of Hollywood in the last two decades.

He revived and modernized Star Trek and Star Wars and created a whole new generation of younger fans in the process.

Of course, not everyone will agree and I'll get hate, but JJ is great in my book! And I stand by that statement.

How is it a sign of talent to merely repeat what has been done before, and better, in a slick way, if you will, but without adding anything new of any value?

Lucas and Spielberg borrowed a lot from what came before, but gave it a brand new spin and created something that felt fresh and new and exciting, even as it acknowledged its debt to older movies and serials.

[Kylo_Ren]

Originally Posted by CreasyBear

This is true...and I sh$# on him a lot, deservedly so, but I will give him credit that the camerawork in Rise of Skywalker is very fluid and clean. The long (for nowadays anyway) steadicam shots that Spielberg is so effortless at, combining what would normally be several shots into one prolonged take, are a welcome retreat from the common chaotic tropes of effects driven cinematography. It's arguably his most competent work from a technical standpoint. I mean it doesn't belong in a Star Wars film and the movie is still a dumpster fire, but I'll give him credit where it's due.

And wow, CreasyBear saying something actually positive about TROS?!! This can't be!

And you're wrong about TROS! I am joking obviously - I respect your opinion even if I disagree.

By the way: TROS > Conan The Barbarian

Yeah, I said it.

[jess1581]

JJ relies too much on nostalgia though, like overly dependent on it, and Rise was the result of JJ not willing to take risks folding into himself trying to please EVERYONE. He coulda ran with what Rian set up just as Rian did after TFA, but no... he back pedaled reaching for his STAR WARS blankey for security. Because of that need to play it safe, he ended that trilogy with an utter mess that generated more questions than answers with all the spitballing and darts he was tossing at the narrative. Not to mention he seemed in an awful hurry to spew all of the story beats he wanted without properly developing any of em.

[Kylo_Ren]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

How is it a sign of talent to merely repeat what has been done before, and better, in a slick way, if you will, but without adding anything new of any value?

Lucas and Spielberg borrowed a lot from what came before, but gave it a brand new spin and created something that felt fresh and new and exciting, even as it acknowledged its debt to older movies and serials.

Well, BluBonnet, "without adding anything new of any value" is pretty subjective.

I find value in JJ's work. Super 8 is a great example of paying homage to Spielberg while doing your own thing as well. I never see his work as copying, but admiring and respecting previous work. It's okay if you don't see it this way. It's totally cool to disagree.

[Kylo_Ren]

Originally Posted by jess1581

JJ relies too much on nostalgia though, like overly dependent on it, and Rise was the result of JJ not willing to take risks folding into himself trying to please EVERYONE. He coulda ran with what Rian set up just as Rian did after TFA, but no... he back pedaled reaching for his STAR WARS blankey for security. Because of that need to play it safe, he ended that trilogy with an utter mess that generated more questions than answers with all the spitballing and darts he was tossing at the narrative. Not to mention he seemed in an awful hurry to spew all of the story beats he wanted without properly developing any of em.

Well, I fundamentally disagree with pretty much all of this and that's okay. To me TROS is not a "mess" at all, but a logical conclusion to the trilogy:

The Force Awakens: Thesis
The Last Jedi: Antithesis
The Rise of Skywalker: Synthesis

I am a frim believer that if people didn't know about the behind-the-scenes process in making the new trilogy, then they wouldn't be discussing how well it fits as much as they are now. And "too much nostalgia" and "properly developing" depends on who you ask. Some will love it, some will hate it. The last entry in the Skywalker saga was never going to satisfy everyone. That is just us being completely honest and realistic. Lots of people even hated Return of the Jedi and the Ewoks when that had first come out. Tons did not find it to be a proper trilogy capper. It's just the nature of last entries.

Let's see how the other films are received now that they will supposedly be disconnected from the Skywalker legacy. Perhaps they will be judged with more fair expectations.

[BluBonnet]

Originally Posted by Kylo_Ren

I find value in JJ's work. Super 8 is a great example of paying homage to Spielberg while doing your own thing as well.

Super 8 is precisely what usually comes to mind when I think of just how creatively challenged JJ is. It's the perfect example of a soul-dead imitation of the real thing. But to each their own, I guess...

[Kylo_Ren]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

Super 8 is precisely what usually comes to mind when I think of just how creatively challenged JJ is. It's the perfect example of a soul-dead imitation of the real thing. But to each their own, I guess...

That's pretty harsh, but okay. It's cool we disagree. Not everyone is going to like the same approach to filmmaking. Sometimes filmmakers themselves don't even like their own films while producers or audiences do.