Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Spartan, there's no fact here.Personal preference is not fact, it's opinion. Undeniable truth is fact. It's not undeniable truth that these movies suck, if it was, people couldn't say they liked them.
There are no facts in "your opinion". Something is a fact or it's not a fact. If it's not a fact, it's an opinion. You can't have the opinion that something is a fact. It either is or it isn't.
Water is wet, fact. The Sun is hot, fact.
-AC
You're joking right? I realize that sarcasm never travels as well through the internet as it does in day to day conversations, but I figured that after being on this site for 5 years people would begin to understand my sense of humor. Or not.
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
Spartan, there's no fact here.Personal preference is not fact, it's opinion. Undeniable truth is fact. It's not undeniable truth that these movies suck, if it was, people couldn't say they liked them.
There are no facts in "your opinion". Something is a fact or it's not a fact. If it's not a fact, it's an opinion. You can't have the opinion that something is a fact. It either is or it isn't.
Water is wet, fact. The Sun is hot, fact.
What do you mean? I never said any of that.
Firstly, I don't need movies to make me "think". I think anyway, it's healthy and stops you being an idiot (Not YOU specificially).
Secondly, exactly. The director did his job well if YOU think it was entertaining. I don't think that a director is good if the work he puts out requires YOU to make effort to think LESS, however.
Third, . You're not making a good case for yourself. You openly say you don't like thinking much.
-AC
🙂 1.I dont need movies to make me think either
2. 🙄 I didn't realise it takes effort to think less
3. 😐 This is where your very wrong,Read my post again carefully,I did not say I dont like thinking much,I stated there ARE TIMES when I dont like thinking much and times when I do
🙂 Anyway,I feel I have got my point across and am happy to end the debate
😎 Thankyou,please come again
Originally posted by K.Diddy
🙂 1.I dont need movies to make me think either2. 🙄 I didn't realise it takes effort to think less
3. 😐 This is where your very wrong,Read my post again carefully,I did not say I dont like thinking much,I stated there ARE TIMES when I dont like thinking much and times when I do
🙂 Anyway,I feel I have got my point across and am happy to end the debate
😎 Thankyou,please come again
...what?
If you have to try to not think as much, it's effort.
You just said you don't like thinking much. It doesn't matter if it's sometimes or not.
-AC
Originally posted by jinXed by JaNx
Because it was boring and the action was stupid 😉
to each his own i guess, for me it was the most entertaining movie of the summer, and the action was great. The Paris chase scene was fantastic, and the director did a great job of presenting it to the viewer in a way so you could suspend disbielef and enjoy the film. Unlike Die hard 4 that wasn't presented well IMO and it sucked.
Originally posted by darthmaul1
to each his own i guess, for me it was the most entertaining movie of the summer, and the action was great. The Paris chase scene was fantastic, and the director did a great job of presenting it to the viewer in a way so you could suspend disbielef and enjoy the film. Unlike Die hard 4 that wasn't presented well IMO and it sucked.
Yeah Die Hard 4 had way too many practical stunts and the CGI was too.... whats the word i'm looking for?
Oh yeah
Finished.
Saw this film.
7 out of 10.
There were just so many stupid stupid stupid science/physics problems with the show that it was retarded. Excellent action and effects. Story was way better than every was making it to be. I was not upset about characters being untrue to their origins: that's the lamest "most stupidest" reason to dislike the film, imo.
One thing: HOLY BAWLZ is Rachel Nichols hot in that film. She's just hot, period. pained
Film really stands out as an action flick, for sure. Certainly had that in spades. Who the "bad" guy was, was certainly predictable. Still, it is mindless enjoyment. Not as good as the Transformers 2 film, but still enjoyable.
Originally posted by The Nuul
I just didnt like the stupidness like Damon Wayne.
I honestly didn't see very much "humor" from Mr. Wayans in that film. Wasn't his typical type of humor. It was the generic "smart*ss" "clumsy" character type seen in just about every military film ever made.
In other words, I failed to see were that complaint was legitimized, as well.
Basically, the major complaints people hard were just not there for me. The complaints I had were the absurdly stupid "science" mistakes, plot errors, and a predictable villain outcome. Only the latter seemed to show up in one person's complain, from what I canh remember. Still, it was only worth watching for the effects and splosions...and...Rachel Nichols!!!!!!!!!
Originally posted by dadudemon
Saw this film.7 out of 10.
There were just so many stupid stupid stupid science/physics problems with the show that it was retarded. Excellent action and effects. Story was way better than every was making it to be. I was not upset about characters being untrue to their origins: that's the lamest "most stupidest" reason to dislike the film, imo.
One thing: HOLY BAWLZ is Rachel Nichols hot in that film. She's just hot, period. pained
Film really stands out as an action flick, for sure. Certainly had that in spades. Who the "bad" guy was, was certainly predictable. Still, it is mindless enjoyment. Not as good as the Transformers 2 film, but still enjoyable.
Thought it was better then Transformers 2
...at least you can make out who is fighting whom 😬
plus SIENNA MILLER!!! 131
Originally posted by S_D_J
Thought it was better then Transformers 2...at least you can make out who is fighting whom 😬
I am confused about that. Everyone says you can't tell who was fighting whom in that film but I had no trouble.
Originally posted by S_D_J
plus SIENNA MILLER!!! 131
She doesn't do too much for me. She borders on "skank" at times in some of her films, know what I mean?