Movie opinions thread (what have you seen, what did you think?)

[Taiso]

the meta according to the definition of self referencing. You know, the real definition, not what some faggy gamers came up with.

Did Miller ever acknowledge this? Or did he dismiss it in defense of his artistic intentions? Has he ever had an opinion on this criticism?

I know he's a bit off his chair these days. But this work is 20 years old. I'm just curious as to who identified and confirmed this meta as objectively (as much as can be proven) factual.

 

[evil wasabi]

Did Miller ever acknowledge this? Or did he dismiss it in defense of his artistic intentions? Has he ever had an opinion on this criticism?

I know he's a bit off his chair these days. But this work is 20 years old. I'm just curious as to who identified and confirmed this meta as objectively (as much as can be proven) factual.

You’re asking if Frank Miller intended to be the emissary who disrespected Leonidas and his wife?

 

[Taiso]

You’re asking if Frank Miller intended to be the emissary who disrespected Leonidas and his wife?

I'm asking who established the meta of Miller as emissary and how they came to that conclusion.

Did Miller admit that he did that, either intentionally or unintentionally, at some point?

Or is this conclusion the result of someone else viewing the work critically? And if it's someone else, who? And how did they come to this conclusion?

 

[evil wasabi]

I'm asking who established the meta of Miller as emissary and how they came to that conclusion.

Did Miller admit that he did that, either intentionally or unintentionally, at some point?

Or is this conclusion the result of someone else viewing the work critically? And if it's someone else, who? And how did they come to this conclusion?

Ok, first off, run an internet search. You can easily find the answer you seek to if this is addressed by Miller.

Second, I see Miller as conveying a message to an audience, an audience of you, me, JHendrix, spinmaster, etc, and this is 2006, so fuck it. Go back to that thread and see how it went back then. The emissary is also, like Miller, conveying a message, and a message that could easily go over well or badly depending on perception and indoctrination. Thus I am able to present Miller to you as an unintended metaphor for the ignorant emissary who gets hoofed into the pit of despair by Leonidas.

Thirdly, if you’re drunk, just tell me what you’re drinking. I am genuinely curious.

 

[Taiso]

Ok, first off, run an internet search. You can easily find the answer you seek to if this is addressed by Miller.

Second, I see Miller as conveying a message to an audience, an audience of you, me, JHendrix, spinmaster, etc, and this is 2006, so fuck it. Go back to that thread and see how it went back then. The emissary is also, like Miller, conveying a message, and a message that could easily go over well or badly depending on perception and indoctrination. Thus I am able to present Miller to you as an unintended metaphor for the ignorant emissary who gets hoofed into the pit of despair by Leonidas.

Thirdly, if you’re drunk, just tell me what you’re drinking. I am genuinely curious.

Your own statement declares that the message will be received based on one's own individual perceptions.

Miller is the auteur. The architect. He was crafting a human story about sacrifice and valor. As I've stated, these are some of the most human values any of us possess. These are universal values that anyone can appreciate.

My assertion is that the authorial intent of 300 is to tell a mythological story. You are free to engage with that however you wish.

I already told you how I chose to engage with that.

I reject the notion that its only redeeming value is that 'it has cool fight scenes'. I wholeheartedly dismiss that summary completely. You are free to maintain it, of course.

But it's not how I engage with the story.

My position remains firm on this film.

As for 'what I'm drinking', passive aggressive insults towards me do not become you.

 

[evil wasabi]

Your own statement declares that the message will be received based on one's own individual perceptions.

Miller is the auteur. The architect. He was crafting a human story about sacrifice and valor. As I've stated, these are some of the most human values any of us possess. These are universal values that anyone can appreciate.

My assertion is that the authorial intent of 300 is to tell a mythological story. You are free to engage with that however you wish.

I already told you how I chose to engage with that.

I reject the notion that its only redeeming value is that 'it has cool fight scenes'. I wholeheartedly dismiss that summary completely. You are free to maintain it, of course.

But it's not how I engage with the story.

My position remains firm on this film.

As for 'what I'm drinking', passive aggressive insults towards me do not become you.

Wow, you get really defensive about your love for near-gay porn. 300 has no redeeming value beyond homoeroticism and cinematic fights. If you “like” the writing, you’re lying to yourself. Stein on writing would tear 300 apart and shit down it. It’s at best, a pathetic Frank Miller masturbation exhibition.

Ps: tell me more about how firm you are.

Pps: you need to re-examine the idea of making a movie during a time of war, a war against middle easterners for simply being Muslim, where the antagonists are supposedly Persians, who are also sexually liberal, perverted, deformed, and slaves. This is a strange propaganda in that for many Americans there’s no countering education on the Persians as a culture. Americans simply learn about Egyptians, Greeks, and Romans. Those are the empires. Maybe later on they can get a very brief footnote on the Sumerians, Hittites, Assyrians, Persians, Phoenicians, Babylonians.

It was okay because it was the story of Greeks defeating Persians. But imagine how it would be taken if Miller wrote about the Mexicans who attacked the Alamo as drug dealing rapists, sexual perverts, cripples, and whatever subhuman tropes he could come up with. A true auteur.

There’s a difference between a good story and an entertaining movie.

Neither of which are your girlfriend, so don’t worry about defending them so vigorously.

 

[Taiso]

Wow, you get really defensive about your love for near-gay porn. 300 has no redeeming value beyond homoeroticism and cinematic fights. If you “like” the writing, you’re lying to yourself. Stein on writing would tear 300 apart and shit down it. It’s at best, a pathetic Frank Miller masturbation exhibition.

Ps: tell me more about how firm you are.

You're really working hard to project your opinion of this movie onto me.

Also, an appeal to authority? Weak.

I told you what I liked about it. You don't think I know about the homoerotic underpinnings of the film? You think I haven't read all those stories?

And considering you castigate this film for its latent Islamophobia, it seems oddly inconsistent to suddenly use homophobic insults to try and discredit my position.

Dude...I want to believe you're better than this.

 

[LoneSage]

this back-and-forth made my morning

 

[evil wasabi]

You're really working hard to project your opinion of this movie onto me.

Also, an appeal to authority? Weak.

I told you what I liked about it. You don't think I know about the homoerotic underpinnings of the film? You think I haven't read all those stories?

And considering you castigate this film for its latent Islamophobia, it seems oddly inconsistent to suddenly use homophobic insults to try and discredit my position.

Dude...I want to believe you're better than this.

Appealing to your appreciation of homoerotica is not homophobic, unless being into naked muscular males is problematic for you? It’s merely an observation into the marketing strategy for luring in young men to kill middle eastern brown people.

 

[Taiso]

Appealing to your appreciation of homoerotica is not homophobic, unless being into naked muscular males is problematic for you? It’s merely an observation into the marketing strategy for luring in young men to kill middle eastern brown people.

Ps: tell me more about how firm you are.

This is a passive aggressive attack intended to unhinge me with a homophobic comment. It's not an honest attempt to challenge my position on 300.

At least you eventually got around to telling me what your problems are with the film after you insisted that 300 is poorly written because Stein would say so.

 

[Lastblade]

I was disappointed that they didn't get RuPaul at the end of 300.

 

[evil wasabi]

This is a passive aggressive attack intended to unhinge me with a homophobic comment. It's not an honest attempt to challenge my position on 300.

At least you eventually got around to telling me what your problems are with the film after you insisted that 300 is poorly written because Stein would say so.

I stand by it being a shit written story because it relied on too many silly cliches. Maybe you like that? I don’t know. I think you could write a better story, especially with whatever alcohol you’ve been drinking today. Do share.

 

[Taiso]

I stand by it being a shit written story because it relied on too many silly cliches. Maybe you like that? I don’t know. I think you could write a better story, especially with whatever alcohol you’ve been drinking today. Do share.

Charlie can't even try to win a discussion without it eventually devolving into insults and angry assertions.

This is embarrassing, dude. You're melting down in front of our eyes and you need to take a break.

I'm more interested in the Islamophobic gay agenda in Hollywood.

Please tell us more.

 

[evil wasabi]

Charlie can't even try to win a discussion without it eventually devolving into insults and angry assertions.

You do understand that your ad hominems are more explicit than any of these virtual slights that have your panties so twisted. You need to relax. You’re the one who wrote a book about how 300 is a classic. I merely offered the suggesting that it’s an offensive movie that appeals to the homosexual crowd, and was useful as a propaganda piece during US wartime. Sheesh, put down the Chardonnay and take a nap dude.

 

[ookitarepanda]

...I went to see Dumbo and it wasn't very good. Danny Devito was great, of course, but the rest...

 

[Taiso]

You do understand that your ad hominems are more explicit than any of these virtual slights that have your panties so twisted. You need to relax. You’re the one who wrote a book about how 300 is a classic. I merely offered the suggesting that it’s an offensive movie that appeals to the homosexual crowd, and was useful as a propaganda piece during US wartime. Sheesh, put down the Chardonnay and take a nap dude.

Transparent attempt to gaslight me.

But I'm serious. I want to know more about the Hollywood brown hatin' gay mafia.

One of us IS drinking tonight, but I don't think it's me.

 

[HornheaDD]

...I went to see Dumbo and it wasn't very good. Danny Devito was great, of course, but the rest...

Didnt even know this was happening until I saw a trailer the other day, and saw that it was Tim Burton. I went ahead and passed. So tell me, which roles to Johnny Depp and Helena Bonham Carter play?

edit: And is the Danny Elfman score just as ear-opening as ever?

 

[oliverclaude]

Hollywood is mostly Ashkenazi and/or gay, plus just a phone call away from 1600 Pennsylvania Ave. Accordingly, saying that any of its films is filled with islamophobia, homoeroticism and propaganda hardly needs mentioning. You need to appoint tons of suspension of disbelief, because w/o sacrifice of realism and logic for the sake of enjoyment, you can't watch any of it. In my opinion, both Taiso and Evil Wasabi are on point with their statements about 300 and they remain on point in perfect simultaneousness.

 

[evil wasabi]

Transparent attempt to gaslight me.

But I'm serious. I want to know more about the Hollywood brown hatin' gay mafia.

One of us IS drinking tonight, but I don't think it's me.

You're entitled to have shamefully bad opinions, Taiso. When you, or anyone as has been the case, come out with a post glorifying 300, I am entitled to challenge that Mickey Mouse brain-queefing of such a Riefenstahlian nugget. What really gets me trolling you, is when the homoerotic accusation, that the film is homoerotic, appeared to be the biggest problem for you to reconcile with your saner-tier opinion. You took it as me calling you a homo, and that I have a problem with homos.

I mean, just say you liked the action sequences and didn't want to think about the social implications. Nope, you had to go full tilt closet denier.

 

[smokehouse]

Continuing our tour of classic movies with our daughter:

Uncle Buck: What's to say that hasn't already been said, great film. One weird thing of note...that film came out in 1989, I was 12 at the time. At the time, I had the serious hots for the character Tia in the film...who was supposed to be 15. I thought she was this spicy, cute older girl. Now? I see this bratty 15 year old bitch that I'd ground for life attempting to make her life miserable. Its funny how that works...

My daughter liked the film, mostly. Said it was a bit "slow" at times.

Happy Gilmore: Again, nothing new to say about this. My daughter loved it, two thumbs up.

 

[GohanX]

I didn't really care for Uncle Buck when it was released (I was just a kid myself then) but I caught about 15 minutes or so when flipping through channels not long ago and it was great. I need to watch the whole thing, but I imagine it's probably more fun for adults.

 

[xb74]

I watched some of the trailers... It's a hard pass even on "downloadz" for me...

Just watched The Highwaymen.... It's another Netflix Original Film...

The plot revolves the guys involved in basically "executing" Bonnie and Clyde...

It's sorta slow and involved but Woody Harrelson and Kevin Costner hold you in...

I never expected I would say that I am sorta a Kevin Costner fan atm... his films as he gets older seem to be better and his acting maybe more reflective...

Woody Harrelson is almost always great... so I enjoyed it...

xROTx

+1 for Highwaymen - a slow burn of a film but ultimately worthwhile. Enough intrigue and action to keep it ticking over.

 

[evil wasabi]

+1 for Highwaymen - a slow burn of a film but ultimately worthwhile. Enough intrigue and action to keep it ticking over.

There's a lot of these "slow burn" type movies out these days. The problem is that they're slow for a substantial deal of the movie. This is what's keeping me from spending money on Dragged Across Concrete.

 

[SouthtownKid]

You're entitled to have shamefully bad opinions, Taiso. When you, or anyone as has been the case, come out with a post glorifying 300, I am entitled to challenge that Mickey Mouse brain-queefing of such a Riefenstahlian nugget. What really gets me trolling you, is when the homoerotic accusation, that the film is homoerotic, appeared to be the biggest problem for you to reconcile with your saner-tier opinion. You took it as me calling you a homo, and that I have a problem with homos.

I mean, just say you liked the action sequences and didn't want to think about the social implications. Nope, you had to go full tilt closet denier.

Plus, Zack Snyder makes Michael Bay look like Orson Welles.

 

[smokehouse]

Plus, Zack Snyder makes Michael Bay look like Orson Welles.

Hmm...I'll admit it, I can't stand Michael Bay. To give an honest reply though, I went ahead and looked up the two of them.

Snyder made Dawn of the Dead in 2004, it was ok. 300 in 2006 was also ok. After that? Pretty much shit.

Bay made Bad Boys and the Rock...both of them were ok. The rest of his stuff was shit as well...

...but Bay really fucked up Transformers, something near and dear to me...so I say I still hate his work more.