Movie Discussion Thread

Clock-la · Dec 11, 2013 10:05 PM

Stormy wrote:

Yeah, it's pretty bad at parts. XD I especially like the parts where the main girl is reading the comments about her and suddenly slams her laptop shut and runs away....

xD the ending...I mean...what the hell...that was far to cheesy "suddenly the girls tell the bullies to stop being bullies, and everyone agrees"

That and the title alone is just so funny

"cyberbu//y"

Mr. John · Dec 12, 2013 7:03 PM

Interesting title indeed.

Latias fan · Dec 13, 2013 1:08 AM

Reminder that The Hobbit Desolation of Smough is out tomorrow.

RangerOfIthilien · Dec 13, 2013 4:35 AM

So excited! Heard this one is much better than the first two. I did actually like the first though

Mr. John · Dec 15, 2013 8:41 PM

Saw trailer fir Mr. Peabody and Sherman should be good!

Flapjacks · Dec 16, 2013 7:27 AM

I saw The Hobbit Desolation of Smaug today. It was really good, definitely better than the first, but they changed a lot from the book. Apart from the orcs never appearing in the book, there's several other changes, whereas the first movie's only major change was the addition of the orcs.

Stormy · Dec 16, 2013 5:03 PM

Tbh I felt almost insulted by the inclusion of Legolas and Tauriel. Like, we movie viewers are so shallow, we'll only watch a movie if there's fanservice and hawt people in it. roll

They'd probably be right if they said I have a short attention span, though, because I thought the movie was way too long and started to get bored, especially during some of the unnecessary battle scenes. It wasn't bad overall, though.

Clock-la · Dec 16, 2013 9:55 PM

Stormy wrote:

Tbh I felt almost insulted by the inclusion of Tauriel..

The funny thing about her was the reaction she got...

"OIMG SO SEXIST NO WOMEENNN!!!1111"

Then when they added her

"OOMMGGG SOOO SEXIISSTTTTT VLOOK HOW HER OUUTTRFFIITTCLIINGGGGTOOHERRRBOOOBBSSSS!!!!!111111"

I never got the 2nd part...

I mean...what? the way people were going on about it I thought she was dressed like this!

female-shaman-desktop-wallpapers-free-download-backgrounds-pictures-funny.jpg

But I saw it today and I loved it big_smile

Latias fan · Dec 16, 2013 10:25 PM

Clock-la wrote:

Stormy wrote:
Tbh I felt almost insulted by the inclusion of Tauriel..
The funny thing about her was the reaction she got...
"OIMG SO SEXIST NO WOMEENNN!!!1111"
Then when they added her
"OOMMGGG SOOO SEXIISSTTTTT VLOOK HOW HER OUUTTRFFIITTCLIINGGGGTOOHERRRBOOOBBSSSS!!!!!111111"

I never got the 2nd part...
<snip>
I mean...what? the way people were going on about it I thought she was dressed like this!
<snip>
But I saw it today and I loved it

People complained that she was fanservice? She's fully clothed though.

If anything shes meant to appeal to feminists because STRONGINDEPENDANTWOMEN!!

Stormy · Dec 16, 2013 10:34 PM

Lol I really hope you guys don't think I'm complaining about all that political correctness crap. tongue I don't care how "sexist" her portrayal is or about her clothes or any of that; that's not at all what I meant. Complaining about there being no women and then complaining again when they don't like the woman they got is of course very silly.

But it was obvious to me they included both her and Legolas for fanservice. Mostly Legolas, really, because, you know, he was always the character the fangirls fawned over. As for Tauriel being fanservice, no, I didn't mean her clothing or even her attractiveness; I meant that they had to shoehorn in a silly love triangle that didn't exist in the book to add more drama.

I think the real reason they added Tauriel was because they needed a reason for Legolas to be there and to give him more screentime. Because he's the hawt one who will make teenage girls watch it, I guess.

Clock-la · Dec 16, 2013 11:12 PM

Stormy wrote:

Lol I really hope you guys don't think I'm complaining about all that political correctness crap.

Oh not at all, your point stands, but I kinda like thew fact they added hlegolas in, since he is the kings son (from what I read) plus

▼Hidden text

On the topic of the king...

▼Hidden text

Latias fan wrote:

People complained that she was fanservice? She's fully clothed though.
If anything shes meant to appeal to feminists because STRONGINDEPENDANTWOMEN!!

Yes but she needs to be wearing a potato sack to be a strong STRONGINDEPENDANTWOMEN!!!

Stormy · Dec 17, 2013 12:39 AM

Okay, good, haha, I can get why you'd like him seeing as he would fit within the universe and stuff as well.

Latias fan wrote:
People complained that she was fanservice? She's fully clothed though.
If anything shes meant to appeal to feminists because STRONGINDEPENDANTWOMEN!!
Yes but she needs to be wearing a potato sack to be a strong STRONGINDEPENDANTWOMEN!!!

Not to get too off-topic, but this is one part of feminism where I start to get lost. Like, one minute it's "DON'T *bleep*-SHAME ME I CAN WEAR WHATEVER I WANT" but then if someone else like a movie character is wearing something revealing "IT'S OBJECTIFYING WOMEN OMG STOP IT NOW."

Edit: markup fail

Clock-la · Dec 17, 2013 6:05 PM

^ I don't get it either :-P

TBH my only issue is when they just do it for the sake of it...like the Catwoman movie -.-

Flapjacks · Dec 17, 2013 11:41 PM

Stormy wrote:

Tbh I felt almost insulted by the inclusion of Legolas and Tauriel. Like, we movie viewers are so shallow, we'll only watch a movie if there's fanservice and hawt people in it.
They'd probably be right if they said I have a short attention span, though, because I thought the movie was way too long and started to get bored, especially during some of the unnecessary battle scenes. It wasn't bad overall, though.

Legolas is actually in the book, just not by name. He's referred to as "the king's son" or something, which the Legolas in the Lord of the Rings is, so they had the right to include him into the movie. I don't remember Tauriel, though.

Mr. John · Dec 18, 2013 5:18 AM

The Amazing Spider-Man 2 looks good!

Clock-la · Dec 18, 2013 1:15 PM

Flapjacks wrote:

Stormy wrote:
Tbh I felt almost insulted by the inclusion of Legolas and Tauriel. Like, we movie viewers are so shallow, we'll only watch a movie if there's fanservice and hawt people in it.
They'd probably be right if they said I have a short attention span, though, because I thought the movie was way too long and started to get bored, especially during some of the unnecessary battle scenes. It wasn't bad overall, though.
Legolas is actually in the book, just not by name. He's referred to as "the king's son" or something, which the Legolas in the Lord of the Rings is, so they had the right to include him into the movie. I don't remember Tauriel, though.

she was added due to the "OMGNOWOMENNNBOOKISSEXIST!!!!!1111" crowed...

And as for Amazing Spiderman 2, looking forward to it, I loved the first! big_smile

Flapjacks · Dec 18, 2013 11:18 PM

I honestly don't get why people complain about The Hobbit movies (and similar adaptations) adding things to attempt to please people. I get that they're purist and want the movie to be EXACTLY the same as the text, but that's just boring.

Stormy · Dec 19, 2013 12:58 AM

It's because a lot of the time the things they add are stupid. tongue Legolas and Tauriel's large role in this movie, for example.

I'm totally fine with stuff being added if it makes sense and doesn't mess too much with the already established canon, but a lot of times they just add crap for extra drama or excitement or whatever, and it doesn't work. Certain Harry Potter movies are some of the worst offenders I've seen of this.

RangerOfIthilien · Dec 19, 2013 1:10 AM

drumroll...

Okay so here's why Tauriel's addition is retarded. The WHOLE POINT of Gimli and Legolas' friendship is that they had overcome an ancient racism for the sake of friendship and comraderie. They were the FIRST dwarf and elf to ever care about each other, even love each other (in a friend way). The whole Tauriel and Kili thing undermines that completely. She falls in love with him over something so minor as a story about a rock? That would never happen and makes Gimli and Legolas' friendship not a huge deal. Not only that, Tauriel's addition to the movie added what? Romance and cheap thrills. Neither of those add to the plot, if anything they detract from it. There was so much time spent on meaningless CGI fight scenes and Beorn, an amazing character in the book was in a whole 5-10 minutes of the film. Don't get me wrong, I liked the movie overall, but if they had stuck to the source material (Which, honestly, they only did for the Conversation with Smaug scene, and SORT OF the Gandalf in Dol Goldur scene [cut out him attempting to fight Sauron {which is also bad because Gandalf was sent to Middle Earth to aid its inhabitants to defeat Sauron, but never fight him himself because it would almost certainly kill him and therefore eliminate his usefulness to the people of Middle Earth} and that scene is strait out of the footnotes and Council of Elrond chapter in Fellowship]) it would have been so much better. Take the LotR trilogy, all the changes they made worked just fine. Removing Tom Bombadil? Fine, all he did was transition the reader from the playfulness of the Hobbit to the dark and serious trilogy anyway. But the changes they're making to The Hobbit undermine a lot of the points Tolkien's work was meant to make.

Source: I am rereading all the books as we speak

Edit: I do really like some of the changes btw, such as the one Clock la mentioned about

▼Hidden text

but only because that doesn't cheapen the plot

Stormy · Dec 19, 2013 1:21 AM

Good points. That first part about Legolas and Gimli was something I didn't really realize before, but it gives me even more justification to call Tauriel a Mary Sue.

I mean, she's already a one-dimensional character who just happens to be high ranking, loved by all, very attractive, and super good at fighting. With no character flaws to speak of. And now she's also rewritten into the canon as the first non-racist elf instead of a way more important character? Kinda sounds like they just wrote some tumblrina's OC into the story.

Latias fan · Dec 19, 2013 2:21 AM

Stormy wrote:

Good points. That first part about Legolas and Gimli was something I didn't really realize before, but it gives me even more justification to call Tauriel a Mary Sue.
I mean, she's already a one-dimensional character who just happens to be high ranking, loved by all, very attractive, and super good at fighting. With no character flaws to speak of. And now she's also rewritten into the canon as the first non-racist elf instead of a way more important character? Kinda sounds like they just wrote some tumblrina's OC into the story.

Original the character. Do not steal.

Clock-la · Dec 19, 2013 9:47 AM

Stormy wrote:

It's because a lot of the time the things they add are stupid. Legolas and Tauriel's large role in this movie, for example.
I'm totally fine with stuff being added if it makes sense and doesn't mess too much with the already established canon, but a lot of times they just add crap for extra drama or excitement or whatever, and it doesn't work. Certain Harry Potter movies are some of the worst offenders I've seen of this.

Tbh i never really mind, for me it tends to be when the film sticks TOO closley to the book it ends up worse...that the Shining for example, the film is realy good, but the tv series is just dreadful!

Also, am I the only one who saw it as a friendship between them and not a romance? Everyone yabbers on about it and well, they held hands, so?

I mean I get he said she was a beauty and a dream ect...ect... But didn't Gimli say the same stuff about geladrial in the books when he met her? (I might be wrong here but meh) Heck he got a lock of her hair! Yet i don't see everyone going on about them to having bunk-uglys

Also here is one thing that gets on my witts, (in regards to adaptation changes) my friend once had this huge rant at me about in the book the girl had brown hair, but in the film it was...BLOND!!! yikes she was going on about how it "took her out of the experience" I p just thought "really?! Are you actually beeing serious!?"

Stormy · Dec 19, 2013 9:10 PM

Also, am I the only one who saw it as a friendship between them and not a romance? Everyone yabbers on about it and well, they held hands, so?

I thought it was meant to be like Legolas likes her, but she doesn't return his feelings. The king talking to Tauriel about Legolas pretty much confirmed to me that she was meant as a love interest.

Also here is one thing that gets on my witts, (in regards to adaptation changes) my friend once had this huge rant at me about in the book the girl had brown hair, but in the film it was...BLOND!!! she was going on about how it "took her out of the experience" I p just thought "really?! Are you actually beeing serious!?"

Lol. Now that's just silly. tongue

Swaffy · Dec 19, 2013 10:17 PM

Legolas = Woman made of Legos

Clock-la · Dec 19, 2013 10:46 PM

Stormy wrote:

Also, am I the only one who saw it as a friendship between them and not a romance? Everyone yabbers on about it and well, they held hands, so?
I thought it was meant to be like Legolas likes her, but she doesn't return his feelings. The king talking to Tauriel about Legolas pretty much confirmed to me that she was meant as a love interest.

Also here is one thing that gets on my witts, (in regards to adaptation changes) my friend once had this huge rant at me about in the book the girl had brown hair, but in the film it was...BLOND!!! she was going on about how it "took her out of the experience" I p just thought "really?! Are you actually beeing serious!?"
Lol. Now that's just silly.

Ohhh so it's more a Legolas and her rather than Khili and her :-p

#151 Dec 11, 2013 10:05 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#152 Dec 12, 2013 7:03 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#153 Dec 13, 2013 1:08 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#154 Dec 13, 2013 4:35 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#155 Dec 15, 2013 8:41 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#156 Dec 16, 2013 7:27 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#157 Dec 16, 2013 5:03 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#158 Dec 16, 2013 9:55 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#159 Dec 16, 2013 10:25 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#160 Dec 16, 2013 10:34 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#161 Dec 16, 2013 11:12 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#162 Dec 17, 2013 12:39 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#163 Dec 17, 2013 6:05 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#164 Dec 17, 2013 11:41 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#165 Dec 18, 2013 5:18 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#166 Dec 18, 2013 1:15 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#167 Dec 18, 2013 11:18 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#168 Dec 19, 2013 12:58 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#169 Dec 19, 2013 1:10 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#170 Dec 19, 2013 1:21 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#171 Dec 19, 2013 2:21 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#172 Dec 19, 2013 9:47 AM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#173 Dec 19, 2013 9:10 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#174 Dec 19, 2013 10:17 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

#175 Dec 19, 2013 10:46 PM

Re: Movie Discussion Thread

Board footer