ITT literally 10/10 movies

ITT literally 10/10 movies.

Pic related.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=wwBLPaUYqFo
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

...

Thats some horrible taste you have there

These aren't even good b8

I agree I would also give that movie a 10 divided by 10 which is 1. Fucking boring as shit movie with a guy with a potato launcher.

Not even close to subtle. Try again.

Not even fucking memeing, it's literally the perfect Michael Bay movie. His style was met with the perfect script and the perfect cast. Literally everything in this move is perfect. Quite frankly I don't like the fat Australian girl, but she was alright as Black Hawk's bitch. That's my only complaint, and that's personal taste. Anybody who doesn't like this movie is probably a plebeian, and I won't hesitate to call you that.

>potato launcher

kek

I like Star Wars 1977

Yeah this is truly a hidden gem. I just don't get how it ties into the Transformer stories?

I don't know if you're joking, but it seems that Bay makes a big money making blockbuster for the studio Transformers, then he gets an R-Rated project like Pain & Gain or 13 Hours.

youtube.com/watch?v=wwBLPaUYqFo

>Avatar
>Rocky IV
Neck yourself, cockbreath.

>falling for the bait

Someone has the sample?

It has Star Wars FA in high tier. Certainly you couldn't fall for something like that.

...

Greatest Story Never Told is pure kino

Good pick. For me it's a tie between this..

and this.

...

...

...

...

...

DUDE NHILISM LMAO

>Dude "insert film's themes" lmao XDDD

...

This one isn't even trying

>fight with a cow

COME AT ME YOU FUCKING PLEBS

...

...

...

What a pitiful attempt at baiting

>DO EET. KIL MEEE. DO IT NAOOO.

Anyone else related hard to Arnold during this exchange?

I hated No Country for Old Men desu.

It was boring and I didn't like any of the characters. The bad guy was kinda interesting I guess, but not enough to make me care.

...

>boring
>didn't like any of the characters
You don't have to like them nor sympathize with them, in order for them to work, which they did certainly did theme wise. What else didn't you like about it? Also, since when is boring valid criticism?

Early X Files, I'd say season 1?

no
blob 1988

My bad then, but I've seen that actress in the first or the second X Files season so it looked kinda familiar.

Have you ever watched a sports game where you weren't rooting for either side? You end up really bored by it because you're not invested in anything. It's just a bunch of guys running around with a ball.

Same with movies. If you can't sympathize with any of the characters then you don't care what happens to them and you get bored more easily. Which is what happened to me.

Still, hating a movie just because you didn't connect with it, even though it's more than good, is a bit ignorant. It's okay if you didn't like it and all that jazz, but why hate on it? Is it because everyone raves about it on here or what?

i understand that, goddamn everyone was in xfiles

I thought they tried to blanket the horrifying shit they did with humor a little too much. The part where he cooked the dide's hands was pretty fucked.

Agreed. Coens are top-tier filmmakers. I would also rate Inside Llewyn Davis as 10/10, as well as pic related.

Totally.

Hey, I know this game!

All I know for sure is that I hated it. I can't be entirely sure why. It's more about the feeling you get than checking off boxes for things that are supposed to make a movie good. Even if all the boxes were checked you might still hate the movie.

If I have to give reasons why then I'm just kinda guessing about my mental state at the time.

I just posted about it because they called it 10/10 and I disagree. Wanted to make sure my side was represented.

It's all cool, man.

one of the dullest franchises in the history of movie franchises.

Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.

Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.

>a-at least the books were good though
"No!"
The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."

I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.