Suicide Squad review when?

Suicide Squad review when?

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=JfwwKk7sUgM
twitter.com/AnonBabble

fuck that no one cares about capeshit

new botw when
new re:View when

Who cares?

Plinkett Force Awakens review when?

i really wish this was the case...but sadly the capeshit-bubble has not yet burst, it's almost assuredly going to be the next half in the bag.

and yeah, i want more re:View too.

>new re:View when
This please. I prefer it to half in the bag. I want to see Jay talk about Evil Dead and maybe one on Lawrence of Arabia or Apocalypse Now, but I can't think of a single time Mike or Jay mentioned either of those movies in any of their other shows.

"Well Jay, I know you're going to hate me.... but I loved it."

when it comes out, it will be terrific

The movies not even fucking out yet.

Nah they usually take a stance against studio edited movies as a point. Mike's tolerance for dumb shit is getting high but they don't defend fucky editing and muddled tone.

>but I can't think of a single time Mike or Jay mentioned either of those movies in any of their other shows

Off the top of my head, Jay has mentioned the heart of darkness documentary. And Mike said that the making of Osteoporosis Dance was just as long and grueling as Apocalypse Mow, except with more heart attacks.

"Well, Mike. It wasn't a good movie buuut. . . "

I'm rewatching their Jack and Jill review and I burst out laughing when Mike goes "I'm a racist and I found it offensive."

crepy

I love Mike.

>maybe one on Lawrence of Arabia or Apocalypse Now

Probably never gonna happen. As you've said, they've never mentioned them and will probably never discuss them at length.

re:View was made so that the RLM team can talk about shit they've been familiar with for a while, not any generic "classic," a category of movies they've already said they don't know much about.

(I get that fact from the Skyfall review where Jay says he's never seen a James Bond movie before and Mike says he's never seen a Hithcock film before, and when Plinkett responds something like, "you call yourselves film experts" they say they never said they were.)

So expect shit like Evil Dead, or Total Recall, or a Jodorowsky film, or maybe The Matrix.

>ywn get violently raped by Mike

why are they so biased in favor of marvel?

i thought they had good taste.

>re:View was made so that the RLM team can talk about shit they've been familiar with for a while, not any generic "classic,"
Source?

I'll wait.

why did you ask a question and then answer it yourself?

>Total Recall on re:View

Yes please

Marvel makes better movies and that's absolutely all they are exposed to
Rich just has shit taste or doesn't read enough comics
>mfw he said DC characters are lame outside of Batman and Superman
only a complete ignoramus would say that

The source is that that's what all the movies they've re:viewed have been so far. Also look at the movies they show in the short title sequence, which is undoubtedly a preview of the type of films they'll cover. It's all shit they've nerded out over before like Star Trek or Haloween movies.

i love booster gold hes so great

there is no source lad but it's blindingly obvious by the content and the films theyve chosen to feature so far.

bizarre point to take issue about too.

They review movies the same way Roger Ebert reviews movies. They consider the view of people who often go see a particular genre. So Ebert or RLM will review summer blockbusters from the perspective of people who like to see summer blockbusters (in addition to their own bias). I don't care for capeshit myself, but Marvel movies are much more exciting and fun than DC movies, I don't see how you could argue the other way.

If I were DC I would stop live action movies altogether and focus on animated movies, because most of Batman's animated movies -- Killing Joke, Red Hood, Year One -- are far better than any of the capeshit DC or Marvel puts out in theaters.

End of next week at best I imagine

Lazy hack frauds

also there's the fact that they aren't fucking Siskel and Ebert. when have they ever showed an interest in discussing something like Citizen Kane or Casablanca?

Booster Gold-Blue Beetle were one of the greatest superhero duos in all of comics

>>mfw he said DC characters are lame outside of Batman and Superman
>only a complete ignoramus would say that

Yea, what an idiot. Batman and Superman are lame as well.

>dedicate your life to studying films
>all they do is watch garbage b-movies and review capeshit

why do people like these hack frauds?

Citizen Kane was referenced heavily in the Episode III review actually, and talked about very favorably.

Ah right. Forgot about that. My point still stands that this isn't a "guide to cinema history" show or something.

>enjoy watching b movie schlock
>discuss watching b movie schlock
I rewrote you dumb post to be more accurate to reality. RLM has never discussed "studying film" in any serious way. They're just schlubs that like what they like.

And it's never alluded to being so. You literally have no point.

my point is that it's stupid to claim that there is some hard rule about what they'll put on re:view. i don't expect them to cover classics, but i wouldn't completely rule it out either, especially on the flimsy basis that 72772623 does

Didn't Mike compare one of the prequels to Citizen Kane in the Plinkett Reviews?

I could see them doing a re:view of citizen kane. Citizen Kane is really easy to analyze. Not calling the movie basic or anything. Compare to some David Lynch film. Like, Lost Highway or Inland Empire, which I feel are almost impossible to make a concrete analysis about, but that doesn't mean Citizen Kane is more "basic" than those. The storytelling and structure of those movies are complex, not good.

i love aquababy

See

i dont value rlm's opinions on kino milestones but i do value their opinions on cult classics. they seem to know their audience pretty well

There's no hard rule, and possibly anything could happen, but desu so far all signs point to more nostalgia shit, b-movies, and art crap.

>RLM will never break 1 million normal viewers

feels bad.

weird thought I had the other day: I could totally see RLM / half in the bag as a tv show on adult swim.

All signs point to them discussing the type of stuff they enjoy. What's the problem with this? What point is anyone in this thread trying to make? Who the fuck wants to see RLM discuss Tarkovsky?

>all signs point to
flimsy

>Who the fuck wants to see RLM discuss Tarkovsky?

I'm just curious what they gotta say about Stalker.

There are probably many subtleties, intended or not, that warp our messages, but I'm just saying that it really doesn't look like they'll step out of their comfort zone when it comes to what movies they'll discuss on re:view. I'm not saying it's bad, but I really can't imagine them doing that.

where are you jay

i know youre in this thread

its obvious you post on this site

>it really doesn't look like they'll step out of their comfort zone
based on what
>I really can't imagine them doing that
why

Have they done a 2016 recap for movies that don't deserve their own show yet? Maybe it will be on there.

I've explained myself enough in this thread already. Now don't fucking reply to me unless you've got actual counter-evidence.

mike talks about Coppola and woody allen films during the mid-year catch-up episodes but no, they'll only ever cover schlock on re:view because reasons

does RLM consider themselves film experts?

The fuck are you talking about? The movie hasn't even come out yet.

Tbh there's enough material for a re:View every day... Half in the Bag should be at least twice a week. Honestly they should just double the frequency of their movies.

We all know about Mike "running over the kike in my BMW motorbike" Stoklasa's favorite movie...

New releases come out once a week. What would they do on Half in the Bag twice a week?

Also, you seem to have no understanding of how time consuming editing is.

>counter-evidence
you haven't even produced regular evidence for your position, just assumptions you're presenting as fact

They could easily save some time if they didn't do shit like skits or that useless multicam shit.

Like look at this video:
youtube.com/watch?v=JfwwKk7sUgM

It's nice and simple and requires like, no editing. You don't need dumb special effects. You're just talking about movies.

You deserve Doug Walker reviews, you worthless faggot.

>I could totally see RLM / half in the bag as a tv show on adult swim

Tim from Tim and Eric was on half in the bag

Did Jay kill Jessie?

>you haven't even produced regular evidence for your position

Except I have.

I can't help but finally realize you're just trolling me. Don't bother trying anymore, because I'm now going to hide the thread.

honestly, I'll bet people who post this shit haven't even watched the Star Trek reviews.

On cinema

mike and jay review space cop pls

did they ever fuggg?

it's a big leap to go from "i want rlm to cover apocalypse now" to "i want rlm to cover tarkovsky"

citizen kane, casablanca, apocalypse now, 2001 are not challenging art films. they're half in the bag style crowd-pleasers that happen to have come out in the past

I think he's just saying ss might appear later in the year on one of those recap shows.

did they ever fuggg?

Because DC is shit. It's not kino, it's just a series of evocative shots and statements with no deeper meaning. I haven't enjoyed Marvel since the first Avengers, but it's objectively better then literally any of the DCU movies.

>colin is older than mike or jay but looks way younger

canadian magic

More than one movie comes out per week.
They don't need the skits or lame setup. Nobody finds that shit funny.
It should be doable to give two updates a week or one on average every three days.

>I have a firm grasp on how RLM should be able to handle their production schedule despite having no clue about their actual production schedule

RLM puts out content so fast that their fanbase will become less and less patient, I fear.

to the point where people will now demand RLM opinionblogs on every single film that comes out like within days of release. remember when they used to put 2 or 3 films in HITB?

They consider themselves honest schlubs from miwalkee who like movies

Mike and Rich didnt like Civil War

>Mike "punch a kike" Stoklasa
>Mike "impale jews on a spike" Stoklasa
>Mike "I'll kill you dyke" Stoklasa
>Mike "The White Shrike" Stoklasa
>Mike "Third Reich" Stoklasa
>Mike "Hitler was Right" Stoklasa

Hitchcock is literally in the title sequence. Based on this stupid fact: you: btfo

>I'm a stupid moron with an ugly face and a big butt and my butt smells and I like to kiss my own butt

I don't mind this, what could they possibly have to say about the classics that hasn't already been said

>say about the classics that hasn't already been said
didn't stop them from doing eraserhead

No, Ebert would consider what the movie was trying to accomplish and whether it succeeded, not whether some theoretical everyman would like it. That would've been pretty stupid.

Mike "Burst the Dike, kill that dyke kike Anne Frank" Stoklasa

That wasnt very good user

>Plinkett Force Awakens review when?

There needs to be one to counterbalance their main persona's "review".

I rewatched VII yesterday when it dawned on me that Sanatation Trooper Finn was the new sidekick.

Colin looks like a Steve Dillon character. It's all I can think of when he's on the screen.

>There needs to be one to counterbalance their main persona's "review"
the "mike's opinion changes when he becomes plinkett" claim
i know i'll be accused of trolling but is there any evidence that this has ever happened

Jay is the one with the best taste, and more knowledge

What the fuck possessed him to think that facial hair in his older self looked good. Beards without moustaches haven't been in fashion for 150 years.

i feel like this doesn't happen anywhere near as often as memesters keep implying, if at all. on one or two random occasions one of them will really like a shitty movie while the other will be realistic. but they are too close as friends to completely shoot down the other person.

it's fine to abuse rich evans though, that seems to be an accepted fact among the cast

It's happened twice truthfully and once as a meme in their ghostbusters review.

...

it's cause he couldn't grow a proper moustache before, but when he started working out and taking test on a regular basis to please his boyfried his facial hair started growing better as well

if you like booster gold you should watch a series called Tiger & Bunny

it's a whole show of characters with the same gimmick of corporate heroing

Disney seems to know what they are doing.... Fox, Sony, and the rest do not have a fucking CLUE in comparison...

Deadpool was the first good idea to come from a FOX ip in so long and that only got made because the faggotron vetoing it left

civil war was bad

i love j'onn j'onnx, the martian manhunter

no

>the faggotron vetoing it left
and went directly to being the head of sony

and they're quickly sinking into the pits too. it hasn't been a very good couple of years for any of their divisions besides the ps4, which has inexplicably sold tens of millions of units worldwide despite releasing with literally NO GAMES WORTH PLAYING for the first like... 2 years

frankly i find everything about sony to be suspicious and wonder if most of their success isn't a complete fluke.