bunch of crap
i want my 3 hours back
i had to go as i was the minority last night
another shite blockbuster to sit alongside Spidey 3
its funny that this movie is on about 5 screens at my local cinema whilst the critically lauded THIS IS ENGLAND hasnt even graced the screens there
we didnt get Grindhouse here but yet we get overblown tripe like this with cinemas chock full of mr and mrs average scoffing their popcorn and jizzing all over the seats wholl go to see any big budget shite whilst original outstanding flicks such as This Is England and Pans Labyrinth make peanuts
yawnsome and the critics are right -a two star movie
Originally posted by InnerRise
I'm curious as to why when this thread was made that Shrek 3 was included in the title for discussion as well b/c that's just as big a contender as these 2 movies as has been proven by the discussions in this thread as well which have included Shrek 3.Anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
I knew someone would ask of this. I anticipated it actually.
I assumed Shrek 3 wouldn't be able to compete given it's date release in between the 2 mammoths, "Spiderman 3" and "Pirates 3". 2 movies where it's prequels, "Spiderman 2" and "Pirates 2", blew Shrek 2 out the water, with a good release date. And i was right. As big as "Shrek" is/was (no pun intended) it will only or probably has already, lost it's top spot that it held onto for only a week to "Pirates 3"
Yeah....Vintage. What a mature and non-retarded way of stating your opinion. Right...what a waste of posting space, dude. "jizzing on the seats?" You've got to be kidding me, right? I'd watch Spiderman 3 and Pirates 3 ten million times each before watching This Is England or Pans Labryinth. And I don't see whats so wrong with the two movies anyway. I saw them both and thought they were great. Oh well, let the critics watch their sophisticated snob movies like This Is England.
Originally posted by Strangelove
At World's End was certainly superior to Dead Man's Chest, but not as good as Curse of the Black Pearl. There was a little too much plot, it was hard to keep track of it all. Nonetheless, I was able to sift through it all and I much enjoyed the film.
yeahh same here
i thought it was about as good as the 1st, which means alot
but there was just a bit too much going on, i felt like i was 5 minutes behind on everything
Originally posted by vintageSW77Im gonna be frank, youre a serious elitist.
bunch of crap
i want my 3 hours back
i had to go as i was the minority last night
another shite blockbuster to sit alongside Spidey 3
its funny that this movie is on about 5 screens at my local cinema whilst the critically lauded THIS IS ENGLAND hasnt even graced the screens there
we didnt get Grindhouse here but yet we get overblown tripe like this with cinemas chock full of mr and mrs average scoffing their popcorn and jizzing all over the seats wholl go to see any big budget shite whilst original outstanding flicks such as This Is England and Pans Labyrinth make peanutsyawnsome and the critics are right -a two star movie
Originally posted by Arctic
Yeah....Vintage. What a mature and non-retarded way of stating your opinion. Right...what a waste of posting space, dude. "jizzing on the seats?" You've got to be kidding me, right? I'd watch Spiderman 3 and Pirates 3 ten million times each before watching This Is England or Pans Labryinth. And I don't see whats so wrong with the two movies anyway. I saw them both and thought they were great. Oh well, let the critics watch their sophisticated snob movies like This Is England.
If This Is England is a sophisticated snob movie (which it isn't) then Spiderman 3 is a diluted piece of story, stretched in places in shouldn't by Sony (which it is).
Vintage's post was a little inflamatory, a little direct, but I do agree with his point. Why should decent character drama like This Is England and enchanting stories like Pans Labyrinth have to tak a backseat to medicore sequels? Yes, the obvious answer is the money they rake in, but the audience does have a choice to watch a better quality cinema.
Originally posted by Arctic
Yeah....Vintage. What a mature and non-retarded way of stating your opinion. Right...what a waste of posting space, dude. "jizzing on the seats?" You've got to be kidding me, right? I'd watch Spiderman 3 and Pirates 3 ten million times each before watching This Is England or Pans Labryinth. And I don't see whats so wrong with the two movies anyway. I saw them both and thought they were great. Oh well, let the critics watch their sophisticated snob movies like This Is England.
Thanks
Heres the differance
ive actually seen POTC and CGIderman 3 whereas i doubt youve seen TIE or PL
id just rather see an interesting well directed tale these days than popcorn bullshit littered with lame unconvincing CGI action pieces
it just pisses me off that you cant get to see them because the cinemas fill the screens with multi start showings of this months blockbuster
Pirates has always been a one man show in search of a compact tale and Spidey3 was a ****ing mess and thats all there is to it .
Away from the hardcore fans the majority of people going to see the mentioned 2 blockbusters will watch any old turd thats the big thing this month
and i know what your problem is Artic.....its ok - i know whats up what with myself being a SW fan - i know what its like when one of your fave movie series drops a stiff (or 2)
the reviews say it all for this summers yawnsome 3quels
- **
If you didnt have Adam Sandler,Wild Wild West and White Chicks on your profile id probably be hurting right now but seeing as you have ill take your comment with a pinch of.
With this summers low quality sequels its obvious the days of The Empire Strikes Back and Godfather 2 are long gone(Spidey 2 being the exception imho)
Heres to more of where This Is England,Hot Fuzz and Death Proof came from and less of the money grabbing tripe weve had this May.
Originally posted by FistOfThe NorthYou weren't right in my opinion.
I knew someone would ask of this. I anticipated it actually.I assumed Shrek 3 wouldn't be able to compete given it's date release in between the 2 mammoths, "Spiderman 3" and "Pirates 3". 2 movies where it's prequels, "Spiderman 2" and "Pirates 2", blew Shrek 2 out the water, with a good release date. And i was right. As big as "Shrek" is/was (no pun intended) it will only or probably has already, lost it's top spot that it held onto for only a week to "Pirates 3"
That's natural that a newer movie will take the top spot over a movie that's been out already before it.
Spider Man made 148 Million opening weekend.
Shrek made 122-123 Million and
Pirates of the Carribean made 112.5 Million.
SO it would seem that Shrek was and is just as big a contender as Spider and Pirates.
anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
Originally posted by InnerRise
You weren't right in my opinion.That's natural that a newer movie will take the top spot over a movie that's been out already before it.
Spider Man made 148 Million opening weekend.
Shrek made 122-123 Million and
Pirates of the Carribean made 112.5 Million.SO it would seem that Shrek was and is just as big a contender as Spider and Pirates.
anata wa wakarimasu ka.....
very good point.I would say you won this debate. ✅
Im pretty sure this has been stated but I aint reading 10 pages of replies..
Technically, Pirates 3 did very well if not the best of the 3. Its Almost 3 hours long. 30 minutes longer than Spidey. And almost twice as long as 1 hour 32 minute Shrek. And I think Shrek was shown in more theatres, basically being able to play almost twice as much as POTC..
112M is not counting the 14M it made Thursday, which seems like an extra day, but opened at 8pm Thursday, meaning it only opened 4Hrs earlier than Spidey and Shrek.
And you factor in that fact that Memorial Day weekend a lot of people are probably on vaction, and the fact that it had to compete with Spiderman and Shrek....
In the end I think Pirates will out gross Spidey... its already passed Shrek. Its already made 400M and its only been open for 4.5-5 days.