Originally posted by Mr Parker
or maybe we should do that to you and A.C. take a look back at the posts,your buddy A.C started it all,
That's bullcrap. You just randomly told me that I had bad taste in movies, and called me "a brainwashed flunkie".
Oh, and for how it ALL began, you asked me what I thought about the Spider-Man movie, I said I loved it, then you wanted to know what I thought about 911, and called me brainwashed and stupid for not agreeing with you.
Originally posted by MildPossession
Batman Forever was definitely where it started to go all wrong...Yeah, that six minutes is wonderful. Love Ledger as the Joker from what I have seen. Was so happy when they said he was taking the part.
Ahhh but thats not where it started to go all wrong.If you want to get technical about it-heh heh,Batman Returns was actually where it all started to go all wrong.It was bad enough in the first film that the movie devoted the the majority of the screentime to The Joker and Batman was just a supporting character in it.Since that was the case,the movie SHOULD have been called The Joker.The movie devoted so much screentime to him you never knew what Batmans motives where for wanting to fight crime.All it ever gave the message to you was that Bruce was severely despressed about the death of his parents.It never explained his motives for wanting to fight crime or why he dressed up like bat or anything.It couldnt do so because so much of the film was devoted to the Jokers screentime. But thats beside the point.
The second film should also have been called by the villians names.Should have been called Catwoman and Penguin because once AGAIN the movie was all about the villains with bats having just a minor supporting role in them.But Batman Returns was really the Batman movie where the franchise started to go all wrong and that was because thats when they started with the stupid idea of having two villians in the movies.Batman Returns also was the Batman movie that made movie goers FIRST start raising their eyebrows.Unlike Batman 89 which was pretty much well received by the critics,Returns got a lot of well deserved backlash from parents because the first batman movie wasnt all that violent that much.Just a few scenes here and there.Where with Returns, it got far more violent and gory as well.
That more than anything brought the wrath from parents.It was all over the newspapers back then on how moviegoers were outraged over the gore in the film and the increased violence. The ratings were not near as good as the first one either. Because of that,They toned down the violence and got rid of the gore in Batman Forever.The Burton Batman movies like all the previous Batman movies before begins,was a disgrace to the comics.Burtons because he made Bats into a cowardly killer who killed people in cowardly ways like dropping that bomb in front of the jokers goons.Even early on in the Batman comics when he killed people,he only did so when it was absolutley neccessary and there was no other way out. 😠
The movie pleased a lot of Batman fans no doubt but not the movie going audience and the critics in general and thats the key to the successs of a sequal.Returns was the movie that definetely STARTED the downfall of the franchise.The facts speak for themselves at the box office.Because of the wrath from movie goers and critics,the movie had a HUGE significant dropoff at the box office from Batman 89.as I said earlier,Batman 89 grossed a little over 250 million at the box office where Returns took a huge downslide with only a little more than 160 million at the box office.thats a 90 million dollar dropoff.Huge dropoff there.Batman Forever was more kindly received by the critics and movies goers and that made a difference at the box office because it grossed a little over 180 million.
Compare the not so well recieved Batman Returns at the box office to the sequals of spiderman two and terminater two for comparison.Most the fans and critics agree that spiderman 2 was definetely better than the first one.I wont argue on that one.It wasnt near as horrible as the first one.First one was much worse.Unlike SM1,SM2 had some amazing special effects.The first one had cheesy special effects and cheesy diologue with a really bad story.The second one,not anywhere near as much cheesy diologue and this time good special effects and a better story. Because most critics and fans liked the second one better,the dropoff at the box office was not that significant at all.only around a 30 million dollar dropoff,thats pretty good for a sequal box office wise.The third film,sm3 was not well recieved by the movie going audience and this time it dropped by around 90 million as well.If it werent for opening weekend which it made its succes off of thanks to the succes of sm2,it more than likely would have bombed at the box office.The 4th film more than likely will bomb because of how moviegoers were not at all pleased with the third one.
Now take The terminater movies.the comparison is VERY similiar.The first film was so successful and loved by so many fans it became a classic and a cult icon.The second film,the movie going audience loved as well and like sm 2,it also was considered better by the critics and fans.Because it was so well received by the critics and fans,I dont know the numbers for those movies but as well all know,T2 did MUCH better that the box office than T1 did and that had a lot to do with its built in audience it got built up for after the success of T1 and how by that time,T1 had become a classic icon with fans.same thing here,it ALSO was well received and it even had a better return at the box office.The came the dreadful and awful Terminater 3.That one wasnt well recieved by the fans or critics and it showed at the box office.The dropoff was major big time and bombed at the box office.The numbers werent even close to the first two films box office wise.T1 actually only did 38 Mill at the box office,it was like the movie Blade Runner.wasnt a blockbuster at the movies but became popular cult classic in later years and more popular,thats why T2 did so much better when it came out and actually heres the numbers for T2.$204 million. T3 only did $150 mill so since the dropoff was so huge from the first film and because it wasnt well recieved by the fans they werent in any rush to make another one.Even though now they are hoping to revive it with another one of all things.sheesh.
so when you look at the facts,the box office numbers and the movie goers reactions to Batman Returns were not favorable to the film so it was REALLY Batman Returns that STARTED the downfall of the franchise not Batman Forever. 😉
Originally posted by Mr Parker
If you want to get technical about it-heh heh,Batman Returns was actually where it all started to go all wrong.
What do you mean "If you want to get technical"?
Nobody wants to get technical about how much money it made because that's not being discussed. What about that do you not understand?
The sole reason you are pushing it is because it's the only fact you have, and nobody is disagreeing with those facts, but they are irrelevant to what's being discussed.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
so when you look at the facts,the box office numbers and the movie goers reactions to Batman Returns were not favorable to the film so it was REALLY Batman Returns that STARTED the downfall of the franchise not Batman Forever. 😉
Here's what you do not understand:
Box office numbers, earnings etc; these are facts. They do not prove how good a movie is, they prove how many people paid to see it. It does not indicate or PROVE quality.
You are arguing that Batman Forever was not the financial downfall...ok. So what? Who is arguing about financial downfall? Nobody. We're saying that we feel it is where the QUALITY decline, and that is opinion. There are no facts to say we are wrong, or you. It's opinion, taste is opinion.
Do you not understand that or are you just ignoring it cos you know you're wrong?
Stop talking about numbers or how much it earned, nobody cares, nobody's discussing it. We're discussing quality, which isn't fact. Critics "agreeing" is opinion. Mass opinion, not fact. Lots of opinions. Lots of opinions does not equal fact.
If that's your opinion, then Spider-Man is a factually awesome movie and you must agree, right? Cos it broke shitloads of records and critics loved it. No, that's not true is it? You dislike it because the QUALITY is subjective, it cannot be proven by numbers or critical praise. So your argument is futile and stupid, which is probably why you're ignoring me.
-AC
Originally posted by Alpha Centauri
What do you mean "If you want to get technical"?Nobody wants to get technical about how much money it made because that's not being discussed. What about that do you not understand?
The sole reason you are pushing it is because it's the only fact you have, and nobody is disagreeing with those facts, but they are irrelevant to what's being discussed.
Here's what you do not understand:
Box office numbers, earnings etc; these are facts. They do not prove how good a movie is, they prove how many people paid to see it. It does not indicate or PROVE quality.
You are arguing that Batman Forever was not the financial downfall...ok. So what? Who is arguing about financial downfall? Nobody. We're saying that we feel it is where the QUALITY decline, and that is opinion. There are no facts to say we are wrong, or you. It's opinion, taste is opinion.
Do you not understand that or are you just ignoring it cos you know you're wrong?
Stop talking about numbers or how much it earned, nobody cares, nobody's discussing it. We're discussing quality, which isn't fact. Critics "agreeing" is opinion. Mass opinion, not fact. Lots of opinions. Lots of opinions does not equal fact.
If that's your opinion, then Spider-Man is a factually awesome movie and you must agree, right? Cos it broke shitloads of records and critics loved it. No, that's not true is it? You dislike it because the QUALITY is subjective, it cannot be proven by numbers or critical praise. So your argument is futile and stupid, which is probably why you're ignoring me.
-AC
Woah.
seeing your post apparently it is.Toku and A.C obviously want to continue it even though for me its long over with. 🙄 it ended for me yesterday.today I got back on topic about the movies but they just want to continue to drag it on.Well I for one arent going to play thier childish game that A.C likes to bait people into so I got them on ignore.
Originally posted by Mr Parker
seeing your post apparently it is.Toku and A.C obviously want to continue it even though for me its long over with. 🙄 it ended for me yesterday.today I got back on topic about the movies but they just want to continue to drag it on.Well I for one arent going to play thier childish game that A.C likes to bait people into so I got them on ignore.
And yet I said back on topic?
A film that really killed my childhood for me was "Pokemon: The Movie". It was so terrible to me as a child. Here was their chance to make the most epic film of all time, and they messed it up by using friendship and non-violence themes. Did they even watch their own show?!
And don't even get me started on the crying scene.....
The Patriot. The effin bloody Patriot. I'm all for a little historical embellishment for the sake of drama but when you completely obliterate reasonable historical representation and portrayal for the sake of a revenge story, you've walked into a kettle of sh*te.
I know Americans are fond of their creation myth of the "big, bad empire" versus the "ragtag rebels" and that I run the risk of coming across sore simply because I'm British, but consider the reaction if the "Loyalists" were shown brutally persecuting other Americans apathetic to their rebellion, which they did. Or perhaps considering the extent of the French role in the conflict, little Louis wanting his revenge for being dicked on in the 7 Year War. Or perhaps the British aversion to killing people they considered from their own stock, of which many could be considered the richest in the Empire. Roland Emmerich's gotta have a secret agenda somewhere. Just an awful film.