Right. It’s a Dynasty Warriors game. The article wants this series to take a fictional history seriously... in a series where Oda Nobunaga is a flying, telekinetic demon-man. Weird.

LOL, isn’t this the Dynasty Warriors game? And... you were expecting it to take fictional history seriously? The brand of those games is not taking real history seriously.

First Blood is about gutting the source material’s worth and replacing it with so-so action scenes, verging on truly good action scenes in some places... and nothing else, because the director took his hands off the wheel and let his star dictate the script to him.

The ending of First Blood is some of cinema’s most effective unintentional comedy.

It’s a mediocre movie that shows how it could have been a good movie if they’d made smarter choices, like not letting Stallone dictate changes to the shooting script.

Nah. It’s a so-so movie that demonstrates in convincing ways, much like Lynch’s Dune, that a good movie could have been made by the same people in the same span of time if just a few things had been different (for instance, if Stallone hadn’t been allowed to undermine the script by demanding that Rambo survive).

First Blood is not a good movie in any real way. It’s close in a few parts. The glowing praise in this article, on the other hand, is close to laughable. Neither quite get there, but they both get very, very close.

It’s... pretty easy to imagine First Blood with Eastwood or McQueen in the role. Newman would be a worse fit, but it’s imaginable. You just have to imagine a couple other easy-to-imagine changes in its production history: 1) that the movie were closer to the source material and 2) that it had turned out to be a good…

No, it doesn’t

He’s right

Yeah, I really miss his idiot homophobia

On the other hand, Archer is an undead, less funny, anemic version of Frisky Dingo, and I wouldn’t want to see that here.

It’s definitely a movie where a “wacky” description is the main appeal, not anything actually found in the movie

You don’t have to accept anything as “canon”, or care about “canon” at all in pop culture. “Canon” in that sense, like “lore”, is a barrier in the way of a fuller understanding of how stories work in cinema or any other medium. “Canon” is baby-town frolics, a sandbox play-pretend game for childish minds. Knock down…

I sort of feel sorry for people like that, because they were mostly little kids at the time they saw the movie, and they’re the type that never learned to differentiate between what they like, which is a matter of context and personal experience, and what’s good e.g. what’s effective cinema.

Phantom Menace had a script that seemed, genuinely, no fooling, to have been written, or at least plotted out in broad strokes, by someone in the age range of 12 to 16 years old. A kid gets into a spaceship, accidentally lifts off, accidentally joins a gigantic battle to decide the fate of a planet, accidentally lands…

Okay weird snob dude

Okay

Or a lot of people in NYC are rich snobs and it has nothing to do with Jews

Your understanding of the rent in NYC reflects when you lived there