Universal Love TRTT Part 9: Eat my ass you absolute man child

Remove this Banner Ad

Status
Not open for further replies.
I've seen the raw footage, the CGI team did an astonishing job and the colour grading was perfect.

Your original comment was it was "the most overrated film of the decade", that's a different discussion to "is is the best Mad Max film", a topic which I wouldn't dare comment on as you're comparing vastly different film making eras, production budgets and styles.

And forgive me if I don't rate the 4th hand opinion of Joe and Jane Toolpusher who run the Ipswich North deli over:

-The American Academy (10 Oscar nominations and 6 wins)
-The British Academy (7 BAFTA nominations)
-Australian Academy (15 nominations and 10 wins)
-Roger Ebert (ranked #1 and his best film of 2015)
-BBC Critics' Association (19th greatest film of the 21st century)
-New York Times (19th best film of the 21st century so far)
-97% of Joe and Janes rate it a hit on Rotten Tomatoes.

So it's beloved by critics and the nosebleed section alike, it's one of the greatest Australian films in the past couple decades, why wouldn't you be proud of that?

Oh boy! Are you in cahoots with Janus? Roger Ebert died in 2013!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 

Log in to remove this ad.

Speaking of horrible films, I sat through The Da Vinci Code last night for the first time (I have an irrational hatred of Tom Hanks) but there was literally nothing else on. What a complete piece of shit that was.

Even Daryl Hannah nude couldn’t make me enjoy a Tom Hanks fillum.

He’s ****ing terrible.

I would have thrown rocks at Forrest Gump just because he looked like Tom Hanks not because he was a ****ing idiot.
 

(Log in to remove this ad.)


You specifically said 'his', you were talking about Ebert as a person. You were Janus because he made the same mistake too once which completely undermined his crowning moment of self assured righteousness, but now you're Janus because of an inability to admit you've been caught out on your error and trying to explain it away as what you meant all along.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
Roger Ebert liked some terrible films lets be honest

He surely did, which is why using his reviews as some sort of evidence fails. If you think that I am missing a point somewhere and using Ebert to back it up that something was in fact a good movie, then you need to consider 2 outta 3 Star Wars prequels are half a star away from perfect films and maybe you are also missing something and are, in fact, wrong.

Otherwise, the POV that Ebert knows all is worthless.

So heck, I will concede on Fury Road if you do on Phantom Menace.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I think rating something's worth by critics reviews and industry awards is a bad idea.

Or by sales.

Highest grossing fillum or biggest selling album normally confirms for me the majority of people are idiots.

I mean isn’t Christian rock the highest selling genre of music ever?

**** people.

**** them all.
 
Or by sales.

Highest grossing fillum or biggest selling album normally confirms for me the majority of people are idiots.

I mean isn’t Christian rock the highest selling genre of music ever?

**** people.

**** them all.
How dare you! there's Harley Fatboy money in it for the Houstons
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Remove this Banner Ad

Remove this Banner Ad

Back
Top