Jump to content

2010s Thriller - Official FF BMET (Nominations)


Deadpulse

Recommended Posts

1 minute ago, animaltested said:

Because its a romance movie.

tenor.gif

Marla is an absolute beotch in that film, usually in a romance I would want the female to actually be desirable to some degree.  Maybe a Bromance sure.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Joker was pretty predictable I thought, cool movie but so damn dark.  I would say Joaquin did not do a better Joker than Heath did, even though he was clearly the main character and Heath was on screen for what 33 minutes.  Guess more one can pick apart with Joaquin for sure, but still I would say Heath's was better.

 

I think the 1990s could be very impressive with the amount of quality there for this category.

I think if Heath would have done a stand-alone/solo film it wouldn't have been as good. That said, Heath is a far better Joker in the world of Gotham. I just can't see Joaquin's Joker going against Batman. So for straight up true Joker, Heath is better imo. Honestly, Joker shouldn't have even been about the Joker. It could have been about anything and they only used the name to sell tickets.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, kingseanjohn said:

I think if Heath would have done a stand-alone/solo film it wouldn't have been as good. That said, Heath is a far better Joker in the world of Gotham. I just can't see Joaquin's Joker going against Batman. So for straight up true Joker, Heath is better imo. Honestly, Joker shouldn't have even been about the Joker. It could have been about anything and they only used the name to sell tickets.

source.gif

tenor.gif?itemid=7893629

Anyone else predict while watching the movie he was going to shoot the TV shot host on the show?  Most of the audience new what was going to happen before the movie ending so that made it a lot less interesting I found.  Took the villain being the good guy/ main character/ focal point to an absolute extreme.    Maybe the villain should just stay the villain instead of being the absolute main subject matter.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, SlevinKelevra said:

well, no surprise you missed the whole point of it .

 

Who is discussing the overall meaning?  I was commenting on it being called a romance.  So you call that a romance film then?  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

Who is discussing the overall meaning?  I was commenting on it being called a romance.  So you call that a romance film then?  

You said it wasn't a romance because "Marla is an absolute beotch".

 

If you think that, you literally didn't understand anything the film showed you, so how can you know what genre it is?

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, SlevinKelevra said:

You said it wasn't a romance because "Marla is an absolute beotch".

 

If you think that, you literally didn't understand anything the film showed you, so how can you know what genre it is?

 

It is called a joke.  

 

But based on your comedy choices I guess that makes sense you do not "get it".  Now that comment I just made is not a good joke, but you do it constantly. 

 

Actually maybe the main love interest in Fight Club is his Ikea furniture, how about that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Ozzy said:

It is called a joke.  

 

But based on your comedy choices I guess that makes sense you do not "get it".  Now that comment I just made is not a good joke, but you do it constantly. 

 

Actually maybe the main love interest in Fight Club is his Ikea furniture, how about that.

you do realize that in the film (not the book)  Marla is another imagined character, a representation of part of his mind (guilt, resentment, emasculization, etc) ?  The romance element is him coming to accept (love) himself inspite of himself, a very common theme in the recovery/support group meetings he was visiting, and almost certainly something as a theme that the book's author had a lot of personal experience with.

 

but bring on your great ani-gif / meme response.

 

 

 

Edited by SlevinKelevra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, SlevinKelevra said:

you do realize that in the film (not the book)  Marla is another imagined character, a representation of part of his mind (guilt, resentment, emasculization, etc) ?  The romance element is him coming to accept (love) himself inspite of himself, a very common theme in the recovery/support group meetings he was visiting, and almost certainly something as a theme that the book's author had a lot of personal experience with.

 

but bring on your great ani-gif / meme response.

 

 

 

Yeah.  Does not mean she is not a character in the film, and does not mean she is not a beotch, and so the love interest in that film is not her?  Real or make believe, it is still her.  Should I even reply to you bully commentary or attempts to spread your wild intellect or not?  It is a mystery, because could easily see nothing you ever post ever again and that would be quite pleasant.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, Ozzy said:

Yeah.  Does not mean she is not a character in the film, and does not mean she is not a beotch, and so the love interest in that film is not her?  Real or make believe, it is still her.  Should I even reply to you bully commentary or attempts to spread your wild intellect or not?  It is a mystery, because could easily see nothing you ever post ever again and that would be quite pleasant.  

giphy.gif

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, SlevinKelevra said:

you do realize that in the film (not the book)  Marla is another imagined character, a representation of part of his mind (guilt, resentment, emasculization, etc) ?  The romance element is him coming to accept (love) himself inspite of himself, a very common theme in the recovery/support group meetings he was visiting, and almost certainly something as a theme that the book's author had a lot of personal experience with.

 

but bring on your great ani-gif / meme response.

 

 

 

That fan theory is ridiculous and completely false, she is absolutely real in the movie. Things she says are literally referenced by other characters and the ending blows that theory completely open, there is no way his minions could capture a figment of his imagination and bring it to him.

Some people like to try to evaluate things in movies WAY too much. She's real, period.

Edited by rob_shadows
  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, rob_shadows said:

That fan theory is ridiculous and completely false, she is absolutely real in the movie. Things she says are literally referenced by other characters and the ending blows that theory completely open, there is no way his minions could capture a figment of his imagination and bring it to him.

Some people like to try to evaluate things in movies WAY too much. She's real, period.

there's no way people would see him interacting/talking with Brad PItt and reference them either , huh?   So he's beating people up in the back of the bar, and when he says "who's next" people volunteer to beat themselves up?  yeh, ok.

Everything is seen through the lens of what he is experiencing or imagining.      It's the whole point of having ... wait for it.... a narrator.  The fact they even introduce the scene EXPLAINING the whole point of splice transitions....

Besides what I just said, I would suggest you STRONGLY revisit dialogue in the film

 

 

Edited by SlevinKelevra
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Searching

Nightcrawler

No Escape

Gone Girl

Bad Times at the El Royale

Pretty surprised no one else has said Searching yet. That's an objectively excellent movie.

Edited by Bullet Club
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
×
×
  • Create New...