Unpopular Movie Opinions: Part III

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by Lanegan

Or he didn't care. Don't take this wrong, I think the movie is great, but sometimes people read too much into the movies they love, like the director thought that and put those in there to hint something etc. You know ... and I too love to look for "secret and hidden meanings" in movies, books ...

"Paul is dead, Paul is dead ... "

Paranoia is not a secret hint or message of the movie. It's the movie.

If there is something in the movie that creates suspicion and heightens paranoia, it's there with the director's intent. Carpenter didn't accidentally have Blair cast doubts about Clark with no intent. He didn't accidentally have Fuchs find a pair of Mac's torn shorts, or accidentally muddy the waters about who had the keys and access to the blood storage at any particular time. And so on.

You don't know what you're talking about. Again.

[LanceL]

Originally Posted by drb999

It depends on what’s closest to you sometimes.

Perhaps if I understood what a toilet was... I always sit on the trashcan throwing tissues in the toilet. Ooops. No wonder if smells like crass in there.

Originally Posted by Streamingsux

Well....I mean....wasn't "Blair" able to do that because he wasn't actually Blair but an alien creature whose capabilities and intelligence aren't exactly thoroughly explored or explained in the movie? We never REALLY know what those things are totally capable of and how much they can do with just a few resources. Growing ten arms (for example since it was brought up) doesn't seem out of the question considering the other stuff we see them do..

Yeah, no, don't try reasoning with these folks. Their reason and rationale doesn't usually go hand and hand with putting two and two together. The idea of aliens being able to do stuff we can't doesn't really hit them in their membrane. Much like Replicants having to be explained to a retired Blade Runner. Sure, he's retired, but I bet he knows more than he let on in during that movie's second or third scene. After it being so difficult to be able to know if someone is a Replicant. If you go after the wrong person, it doesn't really matter because they can just cover it up... Just like the aliens.

Oh, shoot, I'm conflating two different movies.

I'd have to be willing to bet that Blair is a lot smarter and savage than the alien. Hence why he was trying to destroy everything despite having the cells within. Or, did the alien find him out there in the shed? Makes one wonder when he was 'taken' if not.

Originally Posted by Martoto

Paranoia is not a secret hint or message of the movie. It's the movie.

If there is something in the movie that creates suspicion and heightens paranoia, it's there with the director's intent. Carpenter didn't accidentally have Blair cast doubts about Clark with no intent. He didn't accidentally have Fuchs find a pair of Mac's torn shorts, or accidentally muddy the waters about who had the keys and access to the blood storage at any particular time. And so on.

You don't know what you're talking about. Again.

Oh, wow. This is possibly the first, and most likely the last, time I have agreed with you. Plenty of Dunning-Krueger running around here. And I'm not talking about A Nightmare on Elm Street.

Seriously, though. Aliens. The Thing. Shapeshifters. Has big-claws as it shrieks and screams...burning alive. And this thing isn't capable of tunneling and building a new spaceship? Really? Really?

[BluBonnet]

The

[Show spoiler]monkey-bots

in Superman remind me a lot of the online folks (?) who never stop talking about how much they hate certain franchises/studios.

[pjl69]

Originally Posted by Martoto

Paranoia is not a secret hint or message of the movie. It's the movie.

If there is something in the movie that creates suspicion and heightens paranoia, it's there with the director's intent. Carpenter didn't accidentally have Blair cast doubts about Clark with no intent. He didn't accidentally have Fuchs find a pair of Mac's torn shorts, or accidentally muddy the waters about who had the keys and access to the blood storage at any particular time. And so on.

You don't know what you're talking about. Again.

I believe Lanegan was talking about more subtle details, like Macready's visible breath, while Child's wasn't, in the end. Whether they're intentional or not, nobody seems to know.

[Martoto]

Originally Posted by pjl69

I believe Lanegan was talking about more subtle details, like Macready's visible breath, while Child's wasn't, in the end. Whether they're intentional or not, nobody seems to know.

Nah. This is what they were replying to.

I don't think Carpenter was really interested in explaining everything that happens in the movie. Like Norris-thing having a heart issue. Or trying to figure out when exactly people were assimilated. He possibly just thought everyone in the movie is paranoid so I want the audience to feel that as well.

You even have situations where The Thing is pointing out other things.

[Rzzzz]

Originally Posted by RossyG

Superman: The Movie (1978) in my opinion isn't that good. It feels like three films stuck together: one good, one bad, and one okay.

I like the hard SF opening, but then we get to Smallville, which I find a bore. It perks up a bit when we reach Metropolis, but that stuff is very hit and miss. And the whole thing culminates in the worst ending to a blockbuster I've ever seen. Does anyone really find a "reverse time to fix everything" ending satisfying?

Reeves is great, Kidder isn't and the usually excellent Gene Hackman is massively miscast and underplays where he should've gone big. Kevin Spacey was far better in the part.

2.5 out of 5

I saw it in the theater when it came out. I enjoyed it until that part. I just laughed and thought to myself, "Are you kidding me?". I could suspend belief on everything else but that was just beyond dumb. I never saw the sequels (except for bits on Tv, which seemed equally stupid)) and I have never been a fan of the film.

[spider-neil]

I think Superman: The Movie is a masterpiece apart from the Deux ex machina of going back in time at the end, which totally undermines the narrative of mortality and puts future movies in the bin because after every **** up he can just go back in time and fix it.

Superman gives Lois the magic kiss of forgetfulness in the sequel, but he could just as easily flown back and in time to undo the moment she learns his secret identity.

[DR Herbert West]

Time travel should be messy (like in The Flash).

[wonderer99]

Henry Cavill in a more light hearted, dare I say it, more campy Suoerman movie would have been perfection.

[Lanegan]

leave Sman alone. Done to death.

[BluBonnet]

You could tell from his screen debut that this guy was gonna play Lex Luthor some day...

[Jay H.]

"I didn't like this sequel/prequel/remake/reboot/revival, but I'm going to buy it in order to complete the collection!"

This is very strange to me. I'm glad it's not my money being spent.

[Lanegan]

Originally Posted by BluBonnet

You could tell from his screen debut that this guy was gonna play Lex Luthor some day...

by him hiding skull w/ no hair?

[CrimsonLegionVMCXIX]

Originally Posted by Jay H.

"I didn't like this sequel/prequel/remake/reboot/revival, but I'm going to buy it in order to complete the collection!"

This is very strange to me. I'm glad it's not my money being spent.

I detest Seed of Chucky and Cult of Chucky. I will not buy them to complete my Child's Play collection. Likewise for the Rob Zombie Halloween films and Halloween Ends for my Halloween collection, or the Nightmare on Elm Street remake for my NOES collection and so on and so forth.

That money could be better spent on a movie I actually do want.

[Martoto]

Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid is an overrated load of old tosh.

[Winslow Leach]

Butch Cassidy & the Sundance Kid is not only a masterpiece, it needs a 4K. But the Mouse...

[Hellboy]

Robert Eggers is the most overrated filmmaker working today.

[BluBonnet]

Did Nolan just announce his retirement???

[LanceL]

Originally Posted by CrimsonLegionVMCXIX

I detest Seed of Chucky and Cult of Chucky. I will not buy them to complete my Child's Play collection. Likewise for the Rob Zombie Halloween films and Halloween Ends for my Halloween collection, or the Nightmare on Elm Street remake for my NOES collection and so on and so forth.

That money could be better spent on a movie I actually do want.

But Halloween Ends is the best Michael Myers Halloween since the original.

[moreorless]

Originally Posted by mwynn

I don't think Carpenter was really interested in explaining everything that happens in the movie. Like Norris-thing having a heart issue. Or trying to figure out when exactly people were assimilated. He possibly just thought everyone in the movie is paranoid so I want the audience to feel that as well.

You even have situations where The Thing is pointing out other things.

Yep that would be my feeling as well, there's a certain degree of internal logic in the film but parts of it are just happy to leave themselves unknowable, theres things which serve to build up the drama/atmosphere the film want to create.

I would say for an unpopular opinion as well I think as great as they are the VFX in The Thing often tend to lead to the films overall quality being underrated, really there the icing on a very well made peice of cinema, well shot, well scored with a large cast of characters who are well realised and act pretty realistically for their natures.

The prequel I thin actually just shows you how good the original and Carpenter was, I mean its not a bad film by horror franchise standards at all but I think people putting its faults down purely to CGI ignoring that they go far deeper, its a generic horror film full of generic monster fodder horror characters were as the original is so much more than that.