disqusfc96hczlhd--disqus
Daniel
disqusfc96hczlhd--disqus

I'm a huge defender of Snyder's two DCEU films (Man of Steel and BvS). I liked but didn't love Watchmen. I've only seen parts of Dawn of the Dead and that was years ago so I don't remember much of it. And I just watch 300 for the first time last week.

So, unlike the rest of America, Chuck E. Cheese is the only employer replacing robots with actual human workers?

I guess we should similarly hold "A Catcher in the Rye" and "Taxi Driver" accountable for lone-gunman assassins.

1997 was a pretty mediocre year for film. The only film on that list that I genuinely love is "The Game." The rest are kind of "meh."

Thor 3 looks like a dog just threw up a box of crayons, only not quite as good.

Democrats haven't swept Clinton's scandal under the rug. They simply view it in the context of what it was: Lying about a personal matter that was completely irrelevant to 1) the actual investigation (a real estate deal in which no wrongdoing was found), and 2) irrelevant to even the broader investigation that the

Mudslinging and sleazy campaigning. Two words: Lee Atwater.

Meh. After the cloying fan service of The Force Awakens and Rogue One, I think I'm done with Star Wars.

I was speaking more of the spin of the article writer.

But compare the Crystal Skull chase scene with the mine-car chase in Temple of Doom. Both are clearly effects (digital in CS, miniatures and matte paintings in TOD). There's no added verisimilitude in the TOD effects. There's artistry in both. So why celebrate one over the other? Some misguided attempt to celebrate

I would argue that much of the overuse of digital effects that you're referring to is, in many cases, actually practical effects that many people assumed were digital (but were not). For instances, in the Star Wars prequels, many people criticize them for their slick, overly shiny, CGI look. Whereas, in fact, there

I don't understand this fetishization of practical effects. Practical effects and digital effects each have their own strengths and weaknesses. Celebrating one over the other seems pointlessly silly.

I'm pretty sure the scene where they blew up Alderaan was improvised on the set, too.

This is pretty unprecedented. While it's not unheard of for another director to take over in post-production (Fierce Creatures, Rogue One, Justice League to name just a few), directors are hardly ever fired in the middle of a shoot. The only modern era example (e.g., post studio system) that I can think of off the top

Yeah, it's just like novelists: See how the public responds to the first chapter of a novel before releasing subsequent chapters.

I've loved the Universal Monster movies since I was a kid back in the 1970s. I was wary when I heard they were updating these to the present, but I actually like the initial trailers. I'm kinda looking forward to these.

This guy is obviously a nut job, but can we also agree that people who text during movies are complete and total, inconsiderate assholes?

"Louis Leterrier, an actual action auteur." Louis Leterrier, the director of "The Incredible Hulk"? An auteur? Really? Huh.

I'm a DC fan but, other than a handful of the Bruce Time designed/inspired films (Superman: Doomsday, Gods and Monsters), I find the aesthetics of the animated movies to be horrid and the movies unwatchable.