No. It was a terrible horror movie. I suppose it could have been a passable action film.

Robert Downey Jr's acting was fun, but my God that movie is overrated.

Haven't seen it. Don't intend to.

The Silent Hill film was the best videogame movie, no doubt. And yes, Silent Hill: Book of Memories makes me want to kill somebody, it looks horrible.

Downpour was nowhere near as bad as you make it out to be, the best thing about it was the characters.

I feel like I want to object to that, but can't think of any good video game movies.

For ages, I thought they'd done another adaptation of the Ted Hughes book. Then I saw a picture or trailer or something which dispelled that misconception.
Like Sekto, I don't see the appeal of superhero films. I don't see the appeal for superheroes generally. I find the whole idea really fucking boring.

I watched Taken on the television the other night. It was shit, to be honest, and I feel no compulsion to see no. 2, as much as I like some of Liam Neeson's acting.

http://images.moviepostershop.com/su...1020235102.jpg

Go ahead and judge me. I love the Super Mario Bros movie, perhaps because I don't like the games and the movie did it's damnest to be everything the games aren't.

I think what I don't like about superhero movies is that they're often so grandiose and ridiculous that I can't take them seriously. The Avengers was the most bloated, headache-inducing, loud, unnecessarily long, silly, overrated film I've ever seen, and I've seen Transformers 2. I guess you can only like that shit if you grow up with it. I somehow didn't, despite the influx of comic popularity in the 90's.

So... is he a plumber in it?

Of course he is. The basics are all still there, it's just they took all the color, magic, and LSD-fueled nonsense of the games and turned it into a drab, sinister, Bladerunner-esque kind of world. Fans of the games were so butthurt, which only made me like the movie more.

http://www.x-entertainment.com/articles/0905/6.jpg

http://www.smbmovie.com/SMBArchive/P...all_stages.png

I actually like that movie. Not because I'm a fan of Super Mario, which I'm not, although I enjoy some of it's titles, but it has a place in my heart. Maybe because I was a kid, maybe because something in it struck me, I dunno, but I like that movie.

http://i43.photobucket.com/albums/e3.../94459_gal.jpg
Seriously, fuck Konami. The Pyramid Head should have stayed only on SH2, yet they still exist consequent games.

Pyramid Head was a manifestation of James' guilt and sexual frustration, why they keep adding him in is beyond me.

Fangirls.

Pyramid Head is Silent Hill's mascot now. The new developers are pretty upfront about not giving a shit about the original lore, and they kind of just throw in whatever they think will help it sell.

I find this view very perplexing. Do you enjoy any fantasy or scifi movies at all? Super hero films are just a sub genre of those.

But they are a much less interesting sub genre. I also don't care for super hero movies. I liked the new Batman movies, but wasn't really interested in anything else.

Wait. I liked Watchmen.

Sure, but his reasons listed for disliking them you could put onto any fantasy or scifi film ever. I know I've met many people who dislike them because "they just aren't real bro", which is what I gathered from Sekto's post.

Really? Wow.

I mean, so did I but I didn't think you would.

I actually liked it quite a bit. I saw it in the theater, and I think I've seen it twice since then. I also think the changes they made to the story surprisingly made more sense than the comic did.

Fuck 'em.

I did. HA

Watchmen is really good. Why it gets so much hate on the Internet is beyond me.

Because it isn’t following Alan Moore’s vision you guysssss

I liked it too.

I get your point, but something about superheroes just doesn't do it for me. I could make the same exact arguments about the 80's cheesefest 'Krull', yet I fucking love that movie.

I guess that maybe it's because media culture has been completely saturated with Marvel/DC garbage for decades, so I'm just completely ambivalent (if not a bit contemptuous) about it. Like I can't get excited about a three hour movie featuring characters I've already seen a million times. I already know they're going to win in the end, because as superheroes they have to.

This is why Batman is perhaps the only superhero (but not really) character I still like. Batman doesn't have super powers, he's just a guy with limitless income who may or may not be insane.

The villains are compelling and have vastly differing motives. Some of them are idealistic anti-heroes, some of them are out for revenge, some of them are sympathetic, and some of them are downright monsters. Batman himself is a little bit of all those things, and it's because he's so fallible that the stories still make room for plenty of tension and depth, and don't always amount to just "good versus evil".

I guess what I'm saying is, I think any genre has the potential to be either really stupid or really cool and original. It's just that you often get the former with superhero stories.

But the newest batch of Marvel films have been very well done, and stayed true to the comics, for the most part. Plus a lot of the characters they've been introducing we haven't seen a million times before (Black Widow, Thor, Captain America and Iron Man never really got their own films until the recent stretch of films).

Hulk was boring, though.

Hulk was one of the very few recent-ish marvel films that I enjoyed.

Why? It was boring. The only redeeming quality was Edward Norton, because he is awesome in everything.

Which reminds me, I need to watch Moonrise Kingdom.

I just thought it was executed rather well. better than the 2004 one.

That's true enough. Maybe I should give it a rewatch, I've heard a few people tell me it was good.

It doesn't matter if they actually had movies or not before, because they've already permeated every other media outlet. Even if they hadn't been so prevalent, I'm willing to bet I still wouldn't have been impressed by these characters. Take Iron Man; he's Bruce Wayne, minus the depth and plus a robotic super suit.

Thor; a pagan God conceived before the written word. If I wanted to know about Thor's exploits, I'd rather read a Norse mythology book.

Black Widow? Please, the only reason she was in that movie was because Joss Whedon needed some T&A to offset all the homoerotic tension between the bicep-flexing male heroes, and to provide fap-fuel for all the escapist neckbeards who saw it on opening weekend.

I won't even mention Captain America because nobody gives a fuck about Captain America.

As for Hulk, I actually preferred the 2003 iteration over the new one(s). It tried to go above and beyond the source material and create a conflict that was actually complex and personal. But of course, everyone else hated that one, so they rebooted it and made it as dumb and boring as possible and that was the one that carried over.

I think if you took The Avengers movie and replaced the titular characters with completely original action heroes that didn't already have a huge following, the movie would have flopped and been regarded as just another overlong, noisy, mindless Hollywood cashgrab. It was a completely risk-free affair, and that's part of why it bored me to tears.

Hulk was utter shit.

Captain America is actually quite beloved here in Canada. Ironic, I know. Everyone loves him, myself included.

Also I loved the shit out of Avengers. Maybe I'm just a fanboy (probably) but I just thought it was a very well done Superhero movie. Full of action, witty one-liners and great effects. If you don't like Superhero movies, then obviously you wouldn't like Avengers.

I dislike how you state your opinions as if they are fact.

This is sad but true. It was inevitable, the problem with today's films is lack of imagination, and that's because studios don't care for their films, they only want to smash box-office records, and grab all the moneys. This is why you find some amazing indie work.

Isn't it more to the point that the lack of imagination makes amazing indie work stand out more?

Thing about Avengers is it was probably as good as it could possibly get, and even then I still didn't like it. Like, it could have been far worse, and then I'd be free to hate it without these long-winded explanations.

One question the film community loves to ask you if you have a problem with a film is "How would you make it better?". My response in regards to The Avengers would probably be "I just wouldn't make it".

I'm sorry, do I need to? Is it not obvious enough I'm stating my own opinion?

I didn't enjoy it in the slightest. No character had any depth, pieces of the Hulk mythos (Which I will straight out admit I have no interest in*) were pulled out of nowhere and made the second half of the film feel very forced and disjointed, Liv Tyler's character was MY GOD the blandest most vanilla love interest I've ever seen, Banner's motivations just DIDN'T MAKE SENSE IN THE FINALE and Jesus it was just all so underwhelming.

I loved Hulk in The Avengers and thought he was awesome and hilarious, so there's really no excuse for that movie being so poor.

*I also have no interest in Iron Man or Thor's mythoses (Mythi?) but I enjoyed those movies. So don't go using that against me.

As a side note, my flatmates and I joked going into Avengers that our favourite character was going to be Hawkeye, considering how unnecessary and boring he was in Thor. We were all suitably impressed that the movie actually made him quite cool.

That's another thing I enjoyed about Avengers. All the characters had their own interesting quirks, and they were all just so fun to watch on screen. They did a great job with the characterization of the heroes.

You seem to be forgetting that the movie was built up to over five films. It was only so good (In my opinion) because we got to know those characters throughout the series so far. Making the film with entirely new characters would sort of be missing the point.

And it bored you because it was a risk free affair? Really now? You said yourself that it probably couldn't have been better. If Marvel didn't care and just wanted to churn out money, they wouldn't have made it as good as they did. They obviously care. Whedon obviously cared. They made a damn fine movie.

PS: I don't actually like Marvel. Like, really I don't. At all. I just sort of liked the movies so far and really liked this specific one.

Have I mentioned that Thor was a boring-as-bottled-water movie that pretty much only existed to set the stage for the Avengers movie?

At least I think it does. I haven’t seen Avengers but the main gist I seem to get from it is that Loki is the main villain? If not then that makes Thor double-pointless.

Yeah, I haven't seen Thor. He's a pretty boring characters, to be honest. Whedon did a good job making him interesting though.

I liked Thor. I'm thoroughly prepared to admit it was one of the dumbest movies I've ever seen, but I liked it.