These four movies get so much hate as superhero movies...

These four movies get so much hate as superhero movies, but I think we can all admit that they're each better than anything in the MCU or DCEU.

Other urls found in this thread:

youtube.com/watch?v=3U-btSA8YQc
youtube.com/watch?v=9XYWpVpNRlw,
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

I never admitted that!

Nah.

Incredible Hulk and Iron Man were the best MCU movies. First Thor and Cap were also pretty good. Then Paramount and Universal stopped making Marvel movies.

Not really

Just because the loud people here like to make "MCU SUCKS DCEU SUCKS" doesn't mean that they're right

>in the DCEU
Some of them are
>or MCU
Nahhh. Maybe you can make a stretch and say that Fantastic 4 or TASM are better than the Thor movies or Iron Man 2, but "better than anything"? no fucking way. So no, I don't think we can all admit that.
That they are underrated in some aspects but they get so much hate you'd be the hipsterest hipster ever by really liking them, that we can all agree with.

The four worst superhero movies I've seen have been Catwoman, Avengers 2, Thor 2, and Iron Man 3

What about Superman Returns?

Do you contrarian fucks like that bomb yet?

MCU movies post-Disney buy are all mediocre formulaic nonsense with filled with quips and no natural character development.

Winter Soldier is better than 3 of those 4 films

OP here and no. That sucks.

Better rewatch value desu.

I don't want to be that TWS dicksucking guy, but The Winter Soldier doesn't fill any of your descriptions.

Yeah. I'll put it up there as an exception. But the Avengers movies are overrated as hell and so was Holland's Spider-Man in Civil War as well as halfassed Zemo.

>Not Daredevil
>Not Elektra
>Not Batman and Robin
>Not Spawn (great soundtrack though)
>Not any of the Crow movies after the second one.
>Not Ghost Rider
>Not Wolverine Origins

Does fantastic four really get a lot of hate? That one was great.

nah, OP should replace it with Fant4stick

I enjoyed Daredevil and Ghost Rider more than Hulk, Thor 1 and 2, and Avengers 1 and 2.

I liked the Amazing Spiderman series.
Shame they cancelled 3 for Spider-Man SJWcoming

Also enjoyed Spawn more

Avengers 2 isn't overrated, it is perfectly rated as "a meh sequel, very flawed, messy with some good shit here and there". Holland's Spidey was okay and I believe he's great for the role, but I agree with you in that his actual involvement in the movie is way overhyped, I still look forward to this kid in the MCU. Zemo is legit forgettable crap though.

I never understood what the big problem with that Wolverine movie was, except for fucking up Deadpool. Other than that, it was fine.

I just disagree with your opinion then. Daredevil was so bad it nearly killed Affleck's career, and Ghost Rider was aggressively unlikable-to-boring based on a premise that should have carried it to amazing heights in movie history. How you even fuck up a guy with a flaming skull on a motorcycle that whips people back to Hell is beyond me. It should have been a no brainer.

Same thing with Spawn. Awful movie, with some very good actors in it too.

Remember you're not allowed to talk about these franchises unless you read whatever comics I've read and watched whatever cartoons I've watched (as an adult)

Batman & Robin is bearable in a "Cesar Romero's moustache" way. Nobody involved was taking it seriously the only people who did and still do are autistic fans who praise Adam West out of one side of their mouths as campy while being butthurt about this one 20 years later.

Spawn wasn't great but there are many others that are worse.

Awful plot, needless retconning, weird Professor X CGI head, that motherfucker from the Black Eyed Peas, boring and forgettable Gambit cameo, and as mentioned the last fight.

Also, the CGI claws. Fuck did they look awful. I saw that movie in theaters, and I was all ready for something great. It's not like I wanted to dislike it.

It's funny how people are saying Batman v Superman is the worst superhero movie ever when those exist.

I just did not like it. I also didn't like Forever, of course.

Honestly, I thought the Burton movies were alright. I don't know why the franchise went the way it did. Maybe he was just too weird and off putting.

I hated BvS but it was boring. It's not on the same level. It might be worse than Green Lantern, but not by much.

Problems have short memories and enjoy hyperbole.

I always wondered, was the title "X-men Origins: Wolverine" in hopes they got to do more "X-men Origins:" in the future? because that's hilarious.

Fair enough on the Schumacher Batman's.

I may be wrong but I think they wanted to get rid of Tim Burton after Batman Returns underperformed and was seen as too dark and violent.

Then they saw how long lasting and popular the 60s series was and figured they'd go with that, seemed to work at the box office for Batman Forever but even 90s Arnold Schwarzenegger couldn't save B&R

Definitely.

The next one was going to be Magneto if I remember correctly but of course the whole idea was kicked in the ass and turned into X-Men: First Class

They were planning on doing a Magneto movie. McKellan even wanted to do it himself with CGI facelift, but it then got shelved in favor of First Class.

Really a shame, because I think Fassbender could have very easily carried a Magneto movie if it were done in the style of First Class. He's practically the best part of the prequel movies.

jessica alba fantastic 4 movies are underrated

fight me

This. The second one wasn't great because it rushed everything and screwed the villains up. But I believe Andrew/Emma were much better in their leading roles than Tobey/Dunst. (Raimiverse had better villains, tone, and story, but Peter and love interest casting was stale) Tobey was a wussy crybaby, Holland is a kid with a high voice and quips with shitty MCU humor, Garfield was damn good making fun of the villains and distracting them with a better voice for the character. And Dehaan would have been a good Harry if they hadn't fucked him over by rushing the goblin thing and killed Gwen.

Fassbender was his best as Magneto in First Class. And at the end it looked like they were setting him up to be fantastic and much more intimidating than before along with the traditional outfit. Then Singer came in, brought back McKellan and gave Fassbender a shitty costume along with the compulsion to mimic McKellan's accent badly.

Aside from Alba, the casting of the Four was amazing. And even she wasn't that bad. Also, say what you will about the Doom they used, but you have to admit they nailed the costume (but only after Story begged and pleaded Fox to let him use the mask).

Eleven of the fourteen MCU films are better than anything in OP's picture.

Hell, even Suicide Squad and BvS are better than Origins.

>better than anything in the DCEU
Not really
>better than anything in the MCU
Better than most of the MCU for sure in the case of Amazing Spiderman and Green Lantern

>X-Men Origins: Wolverine
I have seen 95 theatrically released capeshit films, and Origins is in the bottom 5.

i'll bite. what are the bottom five? and top five?

1 Man of Steel
2 Man of Steel
3 Man of Steel
4 Man of Steel
5 Man of Steel

91 Le Iron Man
92 Le Civil War
93 Le Ultron
94 Le Avengers
95 Le Dottore Strange

1. 1978 Superman
2. 2012 Dredd
3. 2004 The Incredibles
4. 1989 Batman
5. 2008 Iron Man
...
91. 2009 X-Men Origins: Wolverine
92. 2013 Man of Steel
93. 1997 Turbo: A Power Rangers Movie
94. 2005 The Adventures of Sharkboy and Lavagirl in 3-D
95. 2005 Son of the Mask

>92. 2013 Man of Steel

>This is the worst Superman movie when Superman 3 and 4 exist.

kys yourself

>>This is the worst Superman movie when Superman 3 and 4 exist.
It is, though. It was truly sickening to watch. I try not to refer to it as a Superman film even ironically. I was really upset while watching it.

Nah

Superman
Superman Returns
Superman II
Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice
Superman IV: The Quest for Peace
Superman III
Man of Steel

samefagging

What was so bad about it?

I unironically enjoy X-Men Origins

You can dislike it if you want, but branding it as one of the worst superhero movies ever is a meme

This. It's not even the worst X-Men movie. That would be The Last Stand, and that one is okay at worst.

It's probably easier to answer what was good about it.
>A small amount of the music was very good.
>Cavill gave a decent performance. Costner and Shannon were adequate.
>The costume was okay
>A couple of the shorter action moments were cool

That's honestly it. Every single other aspect of the film was bad, ranging from mildly annoying to completely atrocious, with some unintentional hilarity thrown in for good measure.

It's not a meme to voice an honest opinion on a film, and when many people share an opinion that a film is uninspired, it generally means it is.

In fifty years, nobody is going to look back at the critics of 2009 and say "boy, were they wrong about that one!"

>10/10
>9/10
>8/10
1. Logan (Mangold, 2017)
2. X2 (Singer, 2003)
>7/10
3. Deadpool (Miller, 2016)
4. X-Men (Singer, 2000)
5. X-Men: First Class (Vaughn, 2011)
6. X-Men: Apocalypse (Singer, 2016)
>6/10
7. X-Men: Days of Future Past (Singer, 2014)
>5/10
>4/10
8. The Wolverine (Mangold, 2013)
>3/10
9. X-Men: The Last Stand (Ratner, 2006)
>2/10
10. X-Men Origins: Wolverine (Hood, 2009)
>1/10
>0/10

I thought Garfield was a better Spider-Man but I still like Tobey's wussy Parker more than the little prick Parker from TASM.

Outside of that Raimi's are superior because they did almost everything perfectly then when they rebooted it they had to do things "the same only different". So now Uncle Ben dies of his own stupidity and stuff like that.

Funny that's the same thing that happened with the BvS reboot of crime alley

>"this guy's got a gun on my wife and child, I could give him my money. But instead I'll give him the old right hoo-"
>*BANG*

Overall I liked DOFP. I think it was more Apocalypse that fucked Fassbender's Magneto over.

>Logan 8/10

I'm serious here. What you said about people looking back and saying "we were wrong" that's precisely what's going to happen with Logan when people get over the gritty violence-porn and accept how badly everything in it was developed.

Top taste

>Apocalypse above The Wolverine and Days of Future Past

This guy.

I also had issues with the script, which is why I didn't give it a 9 or a 10. Where do you feel it stands?

Honestly dude this "it sickens me" shit is the kind of stuff someone who lets RLM do their thinking for them talks like.

If I'm painfully honest I have trouble rating the movie on its own merits considering how much it both relies on AND shits on the entire X men franchise by having some labcoat poof killing all the mutants off screen in unexplained circumstances in the VERY NEXT FILM (canonical) after Wolverine and Xavier and everyone prevented the exact same thing from happening.

A big problem with the series for me was how much they focused on Wolverine in all the films at the expense of everyone else. Cyclops exists just to be a cuckold for example.

So killing off all the mutants just so that Logan can have some sort of forced arc was retarded. Moreso because this is like the 3rd or 4th time he's gone through the same shit starting out depressed then finding a sense of family and purpose in the end. The fact that now it's with a pseudo daughter and he snuffs it doesn't make it any deeper.

Fuck it's hard to give it a score cuz we both probably have such different views on the series but I'd rate it above everything except the first 2 original films and the first 2 prequels but I know that's just me.

I haven't watched too much RLM, and I certainly don't recall either of them using that phrase.
I don't really think my terminology needs to be read into too much. I felt ill while watching Man of Steel. Superman has always been one of my favourite characters, let alone comic-book characters, because of the ideals he represents. A scene of Superman in the Justice League cartoon helping down an idiot kid who climbed a telegraph pole and got stuck, or Superman rescuing the cat from the tree for the little girl in the Donner film are infinitely more true to the character than an unnecessary splatter-fest.
Wolverine going apeshit with blood and gore in Logan? Sure. Give Snyder that film, he would've done great with it. Not Superman. After 300 and Watchmen, it's bloody hilarious that WB thought this was the guy to handle it.

Everything from the extended Krypton sequence at the beginning, through the tornado scene, to the neck-snapping is just plain wrong. The tornado scene in particular reeks of a guy who kinda knows Superman lore but completely misunderstands it. The entire point of Jonathan's death is and has always been to teach Clark that he can't save everybody, no matter how powerful he is. This is why it's generally a heart attack. For all Superman's strength and speed, he cannot save a man from age.
Snyder (and Goyer, fucking Goyer) decided to make it a tornado. Because tornadoes are cool, and there are tornadoes in Kansas. So we get an impotent Clark screaming as if he's unable to help his dad, when of course he's entirely able to help his dad, while his dad dies satisfied in the knowledge that he's raised his son not to bother helping people, even when there is literally zero risk to himself. It is such a complete fucking fumble of the character of Superman, and the film never recovers from it. It doesn't even TRY to recover, instead dedicating the rest of its runtime to fistfights, one of which lasts literally forty-five minutes.

>VERY NEXT FILM (canonical)
Wolverine was in the previous timeline and is no longer canon. Logan leads on from the timeline we saw in the last 2 minutes of Days of Future Past.
Also, they didn't kill off the mutants for a forced arc, they're adapting the Old Man Logan story from the comics. It's arguably his most famous solo title and fans have been asking for it as much as they were asking for Civil War (though nowhere near as much as The Dark Knight Returns, which they kinda-sorta got in BvS)

>Moreso because this is like the 3rd or 4th time he's gone through the same shit starting out depressed then finding a sense of family and purpose in the end.
When? In the first X-Men film, sure. But other than that? In X2 it ends with loss. In X3 it ends with loss. In Origins it ends with loss. In Wolverine it ends with him getting a friend but I'd hardly say he finds a sense of purpose.

I agree with everything else you said, though. Cyclops is handled very poorly in the first three films. Wolvie just gets his own films because audiences responded really well to Jackman in the first movie - and I'd honestly rather finally getting a decent solo Wolverine film than having yet another lackluster X-Men movie.

>6. X-Men: Apocalypse (Singer, 2016)
/10
>7. X-Men: Days of Future Past (Singer, 2014)
LOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOL

i dont even think DOFP is that good (like 5/10 as it is entertaining for the most part but rather dull) but apocalypse is literally PURE SHIT.

DOFP 5/10
Apocalypse 2/10

Yeah, everyone else in this thread also seemed to like Apocalypse a lot less than I did. I thought it had enough cool sequences (the opening one in Egypt, the cage fight, the Quicksilver Sweet Dreams bit, the fistfight in Xavier's mind) to stand up as a movie and allow me to have a good time.

Also, not that it adds anything to the film or my score, but that opening title sequence was dope.
youtube.com/watch?v=3U-btSA8YQc

I think they were trying really hard to do the real world thing.

As in him trying to hide who he was for so long because the world would freak the fuck out if one day superman showed up.

I don't really mind that approach because I think we've seen the other way Jonathan dies and origin story done to death and this was something new entirely.

That said Snyder hasn't got the ability to pull it off. I enjoyed the different approach but fuck me can I see how awkward it is because Snyder simply is too much of a hack to do something like that well.

As for the neck snap it's again something I can see why people have a problem with it but also question did these same people feel disgusted at Supermans actions in Superman 2?

As in killing Zod by throwing him down a hole when he provided no threat anymore. Yeah I know in the Donner cut Zod is taken away but for the longest time the only version we had was the theatrical edit where it appears Superman killed the guy and nobody cared.

Then there's the guy in the diner. Clark loses his power and decides that he wants to immediately get his ass kicked by picking a fight with an asshole at a truck stop? Then he gets his powers back and exploits them when he returns to beat the shit out of this guy just to satisfy his own sense of moral outrage.

Fuck it's even worse in the Donner Cut because he's turned time back again (somehow even more retarded than kissing Lois' memory away) so now he just wanders into this truck stop and beats the shit out of some guy who's not actually done anything wrong yet and the audience are supposed to cheer on this psycho.

But killing Zod to end his murderous rampage was out of character?!

Fantastic Four, Green Lantern and Amazing Spiderman can all make for harmless fun watches. Wolverine Origins, though is pure trash and deserves all the hate.

X-Men Origins was actually fantastic, can't believe people hate it so much

IMO Origins is the best X-Men movie, followed by First Class.

>did these same people feel disgusted at Supermans actions in Superman 2?
I certainly did. That's why I have it below Superman Returns here .

Just because Lester is almost as much of a hack as Snyder doesn't make Snyder okay. Donner and Singer did a much better job with Superman and Superman Returns of adapting the character to the screen.
A necksnap is absolutely out of character for Superman - especially for his first supervillain ever. Murdering a powerless kryptonian by throwing them to his death, and LAUGHING as Lois does the same to another, is also very, very wrong. Even as a child my mother and I would watch the film together and not enjoy that part.

>As for the neck snap it's again something I can see why people have a problem with it but also question did these same people feel disgusted at Supermans actions in Superman 2?
weird argument. why does the quality of a scene depend on the judgement of the critiques of other films? literally makes no sense.

the neck snap was VERY good IMO. he did not want to do it but was FORCED to do it as zod in the long run was going to become stronger than him (he was a soldier after all) if given enough time to adapt to his powers. cavill does a very good job portraying the great toll it takes on him to kill ZOD despite zod being a ruthless murderer.

it shows clark in a very humane light. i love that scene.

This. The only real problem was what they did with Deadpool. He was used as a plot device rather than a character. I would have replaced him with Maverick, Omega Red or another character desu.

No dude I get why Logan gets his own film and I know it's based on OML but it still shits me.

And yeah I know new fucked up timelines and all that but now you watch DOFP and it's fucked knowing "oh well everything is happy.....until they're all killed off screen by some irrelevant character".

He never got some hokey everything is perfect ending and but they were often presented that way. Like I say from being a total loner he finds some sense of belonging at the school or whatever in several films then bingo bango he's gotta be depressed again at the start of the next one.

>he did not want to do it but was FORCED to do it as zod in the long run was going to become stronger than him (he was a soldier after all) if given enough time to adapt to his powers. cavill does a very good job portraying the great toll it takes on him to kill ZOD despite zod being a ruthless murderer.
That's kinda a decent justification, sure.
Unfortunately it's not at all what was shown in the film. What we saw was Zod's heat-vision slowly crawling towards civilians, and Superman, instead of angling Zod's head in literally any other direction, or punching him unconscious, or flying him away, decided to execute the guy who he'd already defeated and who posed very little threat.

What I was saying was that I don't mind the neck snap myself but I can understand if people felt differently. However I wonder if the people who do have such a problem with it and consider it such an affront to the character feel the same way about the shit he does in Superman 2.

If they do then that's fine but I've seen so many people defend one while call the other out of character. To me THAT makes no sense.

>Unfortunately it's not at all what was shown in the film. What we saw was Zod's heat-vision slowly crawling towards civilians, and Superman, instead of angling Zod's head in literally any other direction, or punching him unconscious, or flying him away, decided to execute the guy who he'd already defeated and who posed very little threat.

nah i disagree. what we were presented was clark having zod in a head lock, okay. but they were still in a power struggle, clark could not fly zod away and ensure zod not getting out of the lock. i also dont see him being able to move his head in a controlled manner.

remember that if zod gets free he a) certainly will kill more people and b) MAYBE will overwhelm clark either by chance or by getting acustomed to his new powers.

this scene was great because it put superman, the guy that allegedly never kills, in a position where he HAS TO CHOSE to either let two people die or kill that other guy (or let him get away again and MAYBE be unable to lock him up again resulting in countless more deaths.)

superman can only NOT KILL if there never comes up a situation such as a MOS scene.

>The only real problem was what they did with Deadpool
>The only real problem

>the performances from everybody except Jackman and Schrieber, and briefly Reynolds, I guess
>the terrible wire effect of Shrieber running on all fours
>the ladder in the alley
>the bathroom scene
>the awful green screens straight out of a SyFy original film
>the retarded dialogue
>the plot-hole riddled story (which isn't even a good story)
>the nonsensical editing
>gambit
>the inconsistencies with powers, terminology and internal timeline
>terrible, terrible cliches (at the cinema, as Wolverine carries Kayla into the sunset, I literally nudged the guy next to me and said it would be terrible if a gun popped into frame and shot them. and then it actually happened)

And, yeah, like you said, Deadpool, which I feel like was a much bigger problem than you're making it out to be.
also, pic related.


The only GOOD things about Origins are the performances by Jackman and Schrieber, and then the helicopter scene and the music throughout the film are fine.

addendum:
if he flys up with zod the beam destroys even more, so that is not possible

>why didn't he do X Y or Z

Holy Monday morning quarterbacking Batman.

The fight had already been going on for like 10 minutes and Zod had already killed fuck knows how many people while Superman tried to knock him unconscious or stop him some other way. Remember Zod was a soldier who while Clark was a farm boy.

Superman finally managed to get the upper hand for once in the whole fight and the solution is that he should have....let it continue for a while longer and kept trying to knock him out and stop him some more?

Yeah, and I agree with you that this is absolutely what was happening in the scene.
It's not how it looked, though, and if it's going to look retarded on-screen, it either needs to be handled a lot better or scrapped entirely.

We can blame the direction, or the cinematography, or the editing, but the fact of the matter is it looked and felt fucking stupid to many, many people, including me.
Kudos to you for seeing what they were trying to do and giving them points for it, but that's not good enough for a lot of people.

It's been so long since I saw it but I always remember that every time they walked into a room or an alley it was always obvious by how spacious and open the set was that they would be having a fight sequence.

>It's not how it looked, though, and if it's going to look retarded on-screen, it either needs to be handled a lot better or scrapped entirely.
honestly: i just rewatched the scene a few times, youtube.com/watch?v=9XYWpVpNRlw, how does it not look like that? you see him struggling to keep zod in place, i dont see how he should control zods head while having him in that head lock. he cannot fly him away for obvious reasons (power struggle + beam destroys even more).

The only one there that is really garbage is The Amazing Spiderman. The others at least had some redeeming qualities.

Superman would've put his hand over Zod's eyes before murdering him.

>This opinion

>Superman would've put his hand over Zod's eyes before murdering him.
in the movie it can be seen that kryptonians cannot endure the heatvision for prolonged time. so not an option + it weakens or removes the head lock

I just don't think there's any way it could have been done it that people would've been happy with when the core issue is "superman kills Zod" and some people as a rule are not ok with it.

>Amazing Spider-Man 1

No, it's actually regarded as being fairly decent, though not as good as the 2002 original.

ASM2 is the hated one.

>Holy Monday morning quarterbacking Batman.
To follow on from this: it's the same deal with, say for example, the door scene at the end of Titanic.
Everyone can see that Jack could've got on the door. Or at least tried to get on it a second time. Or got on something else nearby. Or they could've taken turns. Etc. Etc.

Now, obviously in the context of the film, Jack couldn't get on the door. That's obvious. The issue is that it looks like he should've been able to. And it's the same with Man of Steel. Obviously that was Superman's only option as far as the script went. But the movie needed to handle it better.
This isn't a novel. In a novel you could just write "Jack attempted to climb up alongside her, but a lack of room rendered this impossible" or "Superman frantically ran through his options. The beam was getting closer. There was only one thing he could do. He closed his eyes and twisted and his wrists, feeling the neck snack beneath him".
This is film. We can SEE it. You need to make it believable, especially if the situation is one where a character feels that they have zero other options. If members of the audience feel like they can see other options, the tension of the moment is ruined and it becomes more comical than suspenseful.

The door in Titanic will always be a joke, and so will the neck-snap. Many will defend either or both, because obviously you can see the director's intention and to some that's the most important thing. To others, though, it just looks dumb.

I disagree. Nobody really had a problem with Superman killing Doomsday in BvS, because they did a much better job of convincing us that it needed to be done. He couldn't be defeated. Zod was beaten, trying one last, impotent time for a bit of futile revenge before being taken away.

This right here.

And again it always comes back to "he should've done X Y or Z" but what would that have accomplished?

Had he put his hands over his eyes and burned his hands had the fight gone on for another half hour and Zod killed another million people in the process and had Superman tried unsuccessfully to do the sleeperhold like 3x before being overpowered.

Would THAT have been enough?

What was wrong with The Amazing Spiderman?

Not much wrong, see It has a really fake/absurd CGI villain, and retreads a lot of the same plot points as Raimi's original Spider-Man, but it's overall a decent movie.

I liked the part where he spins a web in the sewer for the Lizard.

>fight gone on for another half hour
He was beaten... he just had his head slammed against the floor multiple times and the heat-vision was his final fuck-you to Clark. He was done fighting him.

Pretty much this.

If they took the elements they had and just done a soft reboot then they probably wouldn't have needed to reboot the series again with Marvel's help a few years later

Others might like it but me personally I hated the two leads and the villain was just a fucking CGI character. Denis Leary was the only redeemable aspect for me. The sequel actaully managed to be much worse.

>If members of the audience feel like they can see other options, the tension of the moment is ruined and it becomes more comical than suspenseful.
fully agree. thing is that we all assume different things about the situation that neither of us can prove. using these assumptions we come to different conclusions ("why doesnt he just fly away?" vs. "power struggle made it impossible" blabla)

neither of us is wrong as we cannot prove our assumptions. so all we can do is to agree to disagree.

That was pretty cool.

>Not much wrong
Did we watch the same movie? Just about everything was trash.

please no reasonable discussion on Sup Forums.

Pretty much this.