Daily reminder that everyone hated Taxi Driver and Raging Bull when they first came out

Daily reminder that everyone hated Taxi Driver and Raging Bull when they first came out

Other urls found in this thread:

pbs.org/wgbh/amex/kane2/
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(film)#Reception
indiewire.com/2012/07/you-cant-please-everyone-negative-reviews-of-some-of-the-best-loved-films-in-cinema-history-108351/
twitter.com/TahirHawar96
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

No they didn't, DCuck. Go to bed.

I've watched this 3 times since they put it up on hbogo. I honestly enjoy it. The build up and plot makes the action scenes much better and more worthwhile imo. There is truly a palpable tension between batman and supes.

There were flaws, but at the very least Luther and Bruce were given the backstory/hinting needed, while I got enough from superman in MoS. Affleck carried the movie and Alfred was a good support to his role to let us know that his character was close to fully cracking from some of the more recent trama he's been dealing with. Superman should have been given a bit more moral high-ground to Batman, it being a bit more apparent probably would have made the contrast between the two of them more appealing to the general audience.

I don't think people who watched in theaters knew how intricate Luthor's plan was, but it's pretty evident once you realize all the pieces and how every possible outcome benefited him from the very beginning.

Wish Lois' character and actions were written a bit better, as well as WW's motivation to the present conflict since she was included in the ending fight.

Here's hoping they don't dumb down the movies in the future, even if they go with a "lighter tone".

it was shit

taxi driver sucks

Daily reminder that both of those movies were nominated for Academy Awards bc people didn't hate them. Nor did they hate Citizen Kane, 2001, or any other critically acclaimed film that you falsely claim to have seen.
But what they did hate was BvS, bc it was shit and it was peddled to shit eating faggots like you, OP

You mean that part where he unleashed an unstoppable killing machine was all in his favor?

The part where its first act was to try and kill him and which it would have succeeded in doing if his first plan hadn't ALSO gone wrong? (i.e. superman surviving)

It's a good film could have been god-status without doomsday and with a bit of refinement

Also the posters/DVD covers were so bad that I feel they honestly detract from the movie

>I MAKE SHIT UP TO JUSTIFY HOMOFAGGOTRY FOR GUYS IN TIGHTS

ok

This movie goes to shit the instant Lex Jewthor shows up

I agree. I enjoyed how the movie built up to the two battles at the end, rather than the token multiple battles. It made the final fight feel like it had more emotion and purpose. I also enjoyed that the batman va superman was a slugfest and not stylish dancing like iron man vs captain america in civil war. There heroes are at their lowest point and the fight reflected that in its zero glory

It's definitely flawed, but I liked the general idea of it.

Why are you so afraid of real art, Charles?

You couldn't even do vulgar auteurism correctly

he was unhinged at that point.

regardless he knew exactly how to stop kryptonians. Just because he didn't have the giant kryptonite rock, doesn't mean he didn't have any additional kryptonite taken from different sites from the World Engine.

He didn't care if Batman killed Superman or vice-versa. He's in a position to be the sole person to provide defense against meta-humans. Either through their support or weapons of deterrent (which he has probably been studying since MoS).

thisand ultimately it was in his favor because it killed Superman.

good analysis, always enjoy reading some people's opinions on this movie.

Citizen Kane was literally the target of a smear campaign when it first came out you idiot

pbs.org/wgbh/amex/kane2/

Not sure if this is true, but I kind of get it, especially for Taxi Driver. For me a big part of the movie is the way it depicts the time period. If you were actually living that time period while watching, it probably wouldn't have the same effect.

Yeah as stated by one guy because it was somewhat based on his life.

Yes, except BvS is actually good and not smarmy jewish anti-art.

>The state of DCucks

it still was ultimately forgotten in the public eye because of the campaign though

>Upon release, 2001 polarized critical opinion, receiving both ecstatic praise and vehement derision.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2001:_A_Space_Odyssey_(film)#Reception

indiewire.com/2012/07/you-cant-please-everyone-negative-reviews-of-some-of-the-best-loved-films-in-cinema-history-108351/

"Raging Bull"
"Robert De Niro is one of the most repugnant and unlikeable screen protagonists in some time… the director excels at whipping up an emotional storm, but seems unaware that there is any need for quieter, more introspective scenes in drama… the scenes it does choose to show are almost perversely chosen to alienate the audience – Joseph McBride, Variety

Oh my is this film terrible. I really wanted to like this film, honest; in fact, I bought it before actually seeing it. Seriously though, this film is grossly pregnant; there is nothing there; it's fluff; get it? Forgebodit!! Boxing movies are stupid enough as is, next to football flicks of course. However, I thought, "Well it's a Scorsese flick, he'll do something meaningful." Nope!!! Just a bunch of swearing, violent, irrational, testosterone-junkie wops walking around beating their women saying forgebodit. Peachy, let me tell ya; in fact, I want my time back, dig. This film is boring, redundant, annoying, and meaningless. The cinematography is somewhat sharp, but then again, somewhat sharp is just dull. One last thing, just because a film is black/white does not make it art…K?…K. – Kevin Cordia, IMDB

>I'm banking on people in 30 years liking my cartoon movie to validate my pretending to like it now

>1375▶
>Why are you so afraid of real art, Charles?

I didn't even like this shit that much.

>tfw watch Taxi Driver for the first time
>Only decent thing about the movie is that its shot well
>Story sucks, the build up sucks, the pedo angle is weird, and the climax is a big let down.

pls delet now..............

Want some orange slices marvelfag?

A study of permanence and impermanence and the ways we internalize our emotions until they explode into a physically affecting form, an abstraction of narrative that Snyder pushes so hard it loops into and under itself, there are snapshots of other films - images people have labelled unnecessary - but this is not so much misplaced exposition as it is a myriad of secondary narratives superseding our core one - that's why the titular fight takes over an hour to get going. We know these stories - by now the death of the Wayne family's parents is a household story, a cozy narrative with a moral to tuck your kids into bed with at night. Snyder tears these morals apart, he rebuilds a mythology from the ground up and Cavill is the face he puts to this.

The most ridiculous thing about any superhero mythology is that Clark Kent expects not to be recognized as the Superman solely because he takes off his glasses; Snyder messes with this: Affleck's (incredible) Batman has a constantly hidden face; a sociopath rejected by society to counterbalance Cavill's open, freely-displayed God amongst men.

But, holy shit, people are getting so caught up in the religious context of it all and that's not what Snyder is going for at all. This is a post-modern reflexive view of an entire genre, a scathing satire that doesn't provide any laughs. Eisenberg destroys any constructed idea of the 'supervillain' as he performs as somebody entirely displaced from social construct.

Nobody wants to speak out, nobody wants to share their thoughts but everyone knows what's going on: this is the way the world ends, God vs. Mortal - indeed the media (and the frequent newscast-based narrative interruptions) acts as a literal narrative obstruction... there's no way to understand those around us if our own voice is in the way, if we can't hear what they're trying to say. Too many people trying to communicate all at once, until all of a sudden there's a total blackout with cosmic consequence.

Most interesting is the idea of family - brother/sister, parent/child... somewhere in here, Martha Kent brings up a point about 'coming of age' - this is the comment which hit me hardest. Superhero movies have traditionally been mythological retellings of pathways to adulthood, coming of age films - Man Of Steel skipped the growing up part, instead tracking Kent from his adulthood, on his pathway to fame as a God, which is why it is so miraculously important that we are introduced to Wayne as a PTSD-riddled older man without a past: these people never had the chance to grow up, because they never had the chance to be young.

But none of this is what I want to talk about. I want to talk about the fact that the DC Cinematic Universe may very well be the one time, now - or ever - that an auteur is given a massive budget and free reign to do as he pleases. This is Snyder messing with form and genre on a fundamental scale, a film about the cycle of destruction breeding destruction, hate breeding hate, fire is only ever fought with fire and nothing gets in the way of human intimacy. Because ultimately, it's our connections - those we love, and those we hate - that forge the paths of our lives.

Let's not begin loving this in fifty years when the criticism no longer matters. Let's start appreciating this now, while it still means something.

...

I see you have nothing worth saying and can only speak in memes. Enjoy being on the wrong side of history.

Ironic shitposting is still shitposting.

I liked Batman v Superman. Thought it was a breath of fresh air away from the crap disney regurgitates. But ofcourse, the disneylets will just pipe up and quote tomatometers and box office revenue

I know you are but what am I?

Want a glass of Grannys Peach tea, DCuck?

>I liked Batman v Superman.

Jesus christ man I'm sorry Rogue One had a smaller opening than BvS and that Suicide Squad humiliated Dr Strange but these false flag marlelcuck threads won't change anything

Who's trolling who here?

Citizen Kane had the same treatment BvS got, it pissed off some big shot of the industry (Hearst, the Mouse) and both received a smear campaign from paid off critics and shills.

Correlation doesn't imply causation.

Why is it never really discussed that lex is seeing the same visions of Darkseid that batman is, but he is thinking they are superman? Ive heard a lot of people say his actions make no sense, but he really is seeing "the devil above", he is just wrong about who it is.

The killing machine that ultimately killed his semigod mortal enemy? Haha so dumb!

The title is awful and the posters too, the marketing of this film was fucking awful. I guess they blew all their load on the action scenes and the following campaign had to do with whatever budget was left

>Grown ass men unironically enjoying capeshit.

>copy and pasting a letterboxd review from a known autist

You're arguing that Batman V Superman is on the level of a Kubrick film because people hated it. This is how mentally unstable you've become.

>movy bad cuz sux thanks snyderkino
The level of discussion here is just staggering.

BvS is Snyder's 2001 though. Big budget, bold as fuckity fuck, hated by critics and growing cult status among fans.

why did lex want to destroy the entire planet with doomsday

>bold as fuckity fuck
>growing cult status among fans

These are baseless assertions user.

Never stop.

>bold as fuckity fuck
There's nothing bold about directing a batman movie. It's going to make cash regardless of how terrible it is, so there are no risks taken. You're trying to compare 2001 with the most commercial trash ever made because it makes you feel tingles in your asshole to make people upset.

>have the most beloved superhero ever being a 50 year old insane dude who's basically a villain for two thirds of the movie
>not bold

It would've been bold had snyder pulled it off.

Snyder didn't pull it off.

>have the most beloved superhero ever being a 50 year old insane dude
Which he stole from a comic book. Also he doesn't look 50 at all.
You know who's actually doing that, though? Fox.

Pull of what, I'm just describing the movie and one of the main criticism it received

The only thing bold about that movie was how that chucklefuck had the brass balls to release something with such a terrible script, with a straight face and even showed up for the premiere with a shit-eating grin. It does take some cojones.

Your triggers aren't arguments my friend

He's not portrayed as a villain at any point in the movie. This is not some innovation of Snyder's, it's a premise that would have been told on screen had he been involved or not, it's also a story that had already been somewhat told earlier in the year by Marvel and much more successfully too.

What you're describing is what snyder was trying to do. He was not successful.

>wants to kill superman
>cites Cheney
>brands criminals
>one of the main complaints was "NOT MUH BATMAN"

Sure buddy. Also Civil War came afterwards I think? and none of the main characters were depicted as villains

>it's also a story that had already been somewhat told earlier in the year by Marvel and much more successfully too.
HAHAHAHA

It's always the Marvel Pajeets doing the shitposting.

One of the reasons the MCU is doing so much better at the DCEU is because the MCU characters don't come off as heroes or villains. They come off as people.

>They come off as people

Yeah, especifically as the same person

Neither are your knee-jerk reactions, or your requests for hipster cred.

It's always the same Marvel Pakis posting in these threads. Almost as if people in shitskin countries get paid to shill for cheap.

This coming from a fan of a movie where superman and batman could be flipped around and nobody would notice. Cavill's deadpan lack of acting is something to behold.

Now you're devolving into shitflinging because you have nothing relevant to say. This is the way these threads always end , I don't know why you retardas keep trying and why you keep visiting this board.

>This coming from a fan of a movie where superman and batman could be flipped around and nobody would notice

Are you for real or a DChad false flagging?

>Marvel Pakis
Hello tahir!
twitter.com/TahirHawar96

Describe Affleck and Cavill's characters without mentioning how they look or the things they do.

they're pretty much opposite

Bruce is just a man but he is on a vendetta against anything he can't control, ever since his parents died, he thinks the world is chaos and the only way to save it is by ruthlessly beating anything to a pulp that disrupts the order, which is even reinforced when he witnessed Superman and the destruction in Metropolis. he always wants control and Batman is his way of doing it.

Clark just wants a quiet and calm life, he never wanted to be Superman, he just wanted to explore what his own limit is, but when the Kryptonians attacked he had to take responsibility and stand there in the spotlight, he struggles with that responsibility when in BvS everybody seems to want something from him and he just wants to be the tiny ordinary man Clark Kent but he is always forced into being Superman because he feels guilty otherwise

>different opinion is bait
back to plebbit, friendo

Nobody even gives a shit about Marlel movies. They're like McDonald's of films. You forget all about it the moment you consume it and then you remember it again when you're on the shitter and realize it's really bad for your system.

Stark was an outright villain for almost the entirety of Civil War and effectively remains a villain at the end of it.

You're so fucking delusional

Batman is a jaded veteran superhero who lost his faithful protegee and has wacthed the destruction caused by the unlimited power of the Kriptonians. Having nothing to fight for anymore and realizing the futility of his conventionial fight against criminals, embarks in a personal crusade against a living god.

Superman is a naive new superhero who doesn't know how to use his unlimited powers to make a real difference yet. His figure is divisive among the people he loves (the humans) and that hurts him. He's losing faith in his ideals as the world (manipulated by Luthor) turns its back on him, the role of the superhero, the all-powerful superhero no less, is proving to be too much of a burden for a Kansas farm boy.

The only true similarity you can find is that they are both conflicted about their role and one can argue that both are on their last mission in BvS. But that's it

yeah sure lol. the shitty writers couldn't develop him at all to be a villain. They had to hamfist in a 'behind the scenes the author of all your pain' villain just to make a passable 2 hours film

Daily reminder that it's still shit

Brendan Fraser

Except they most certainly are. Snyder did the unthinkable by deconstructing Superman and by proxy, the idea of the Ubermensch archetype. BvS will be regarded as a very intelectual film given the right amount of time. We can only properly a book after annotating it and reading it more than once.

K I N O
I N
N I
O N I K

Him trying to revenge-kill Bucky after Zemo's reveal in the finale is actually the least egregious and least relevant of his villainy throughout the film.

Batman v Superman is simply the representation of the artistic bankruptcy plaguing the contemporary film industry.

Like Man of Steel, Snyder's last endeavor in hackery, this latest attempt is to convince the masses that what they are viewing is something deep or meaningful, when all it has done is push forward shallow technicality and exaggeration to make the frame pulsate with vulgar loudness. Characters are mere veneers, the cinematography is pretty but so conspicuous as to be rendered aggravating and the thesis is about as overdone as Eisenberg's acting. The camera feels like it has been waiting all day for a climactic shot and the film's deliberately difficult production history is laid bare in the indulgent cinematography.

Thematic complexity and philosophical subtext take a back seat to what amounts to as basically an action movie with action stars wrapped up in the veil of capekino. And much like Salome, what lies beneath is ultimately puerile, obscene and holding fascination only for adolescents.

Snyder is guilty of something far greater than simply making a bad movie. He is guilty for the crime of gestating his pretense and self-importance, forcing many others to labor over it in a misguided attempt to create art and daring to call the afterbirth a film. Perhaps instead of taking his cast and crew to greenscreen rooms in search of a better shot, the American counterfeit filmmaker should have taken his juvenile and crass sensibilities to the seedy San Fernando valley. There he could have at least made a profit of filming all the money shots he wanted.

>Snyder did the unthinkable
There you go with the hyperbole. You're essentially begging for this tripe to be meaningful in some way.

Pretty much every movie that will change your life will be hated by plebs.

>Marvel shitskins
>Marvel pajeets

>The title is awful
If it was vs instead of v. I'd agree.

>Snyder's last endeavor in hackery, this latest attempt is to convince the masses that what they are viewing is something deep or meaningful, when all it has done is push forward shallow technicality and exaggeration to make the frame pulsate with vulgar loudness
>it's ok when villeneuve and PTA do it

>The camera feels like it has been waiting all day for a climactic shot
>>>/reddit/

>shilling this hard
We have this thread every day, DCucks