[QUOTE=Hellduck07;18492260]Terrible image, you've left in tons of white in spaces.[/QUOTE]
Well fuckin excuse me miss nancy.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18497256]The worst part with Twilight is the hate for it. [B]The first film was very well done and a great drama film too.[/B] As a studying director I think the director of the film is a genius. In general, Twilight is good, not "OMG AWESOME! EDWARD<333 *_*" and not the worst film in the world as many claim (especially if you've seen the postal movie).[/QUOTE]
No, it is pretty bad. I have seen worse though. Also the worst part is the fans.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18497256]The worst part with Twilight is the hate for it. The first film was very well done and a great drama film too. As a studying director I think the director of the film is a genius[/QUOTE]
I'm sry but it was really bad
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18497483]What was so bad about it then? Evaluate.[/QUOTE]
I posted this twice so far.
The writing was bland, the actors showed almost no emotion for a lot of the lines, and the plot is extremely predictable.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18497256]The worst part with Twilight is the hate for it. The first film was very well done and a great drama film too. As a studying director I think the director of the film is a genius. In general, Twilight is good, not "OMG AWESOME! EDWARD<333 *_*" and not the worst film in the world as many claim (especially if you've seen the postal movie).[/QUOTE]
The "drama" is actually what makes these movies unbearable to watch, Stephenie Meyer doesn't know shit about relations.
I loved the acting, especially the scene where Bella sits next to Edward for the first time and she notices he's regarding her. And the apathetic style to their acting really shows that this is a serious film and not a soap opera. Also, they're not even adults, you've got to admit that they are at least pretty good for having a little experience.
Also any movie that's based on a novel has a bland script because they had to skip many important stuffs in the novels because there's not enough time.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18497680]I loved the acting, especially the scene where Bella sits next to Edward for the first time and she notices he's regarding her. And the apathetic style to their acting really shows that this is a serious film and not a soap opera. Also, they're not even adults, you've got to admit that they are at least pretty good for having a little experience.
Also any movie that's based on a novel has a bland script because they had to skip many important stuffs in the novels because there's not enough time.[/QUOTE]
Mary Kate & Ashley did better acting when they were on Full House.
And that's no excuse for the script being bland, nobody held a gun to their heads and told them it had to be a certain amount of time. LotR was what, 3 or 4 hours? Hell, even the Harry Potter movies are longer then average movies because they don't cut corners with the script. If you're gonna make a movie adaption of a book, at least do it right.
Now now, why compare to others? You don't have to be the best to be decent. And Lord of The Ring is divided in three films since it doesn't have a proper ending until the very end of the series. Wasn't the author part director too? That would explain why It's semi-true to the books. And have you read the book? They actually made a very good adaption of that material, people are just being extreme about it.
You should have gone a step further and set fire to the place.
If you don't compare it to something\someone else, then everything\everyone is always the best. I highly doubt you're studying ANY form of film if you ask why I compare X to Y. Film making is all about comparisons, be it the persons past work to current, or one person to another.
LotR is divided into three films because there's three books. Twilight has four books, and there's going to be four movies. The difference between the two is that the movie adaption of LotR kept as much from the books as possible, regardless of the length of the movie. Twilight cut things out supposedly which (according to you) is why the writing is bland, though that still isn't an excuse. And no, the author wasn't part director, he died in 1973.
And no, I haven't read the books, but according to you, they cut a lot of for time, so I fail to see how they could cut out so many things and still have a "proper" adaption.
[QUOTE=vassikinexthree;18481742]And because I know somebody will bring it up, the posters that had the FP logo weren't shown at all in the movie.[/QUOTE]
Huh? Have I missed something?
[QUOTE=BLUchameleon;18498434]Huh? Have I missed something?[/QUOTE]
An FPer went to the school that they were filming some scenes for this in, and he put up fliers with the FP logo around the school to see if they'd get in the movie.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18497483]What was so bad about it then? Evaluate.[/QUOTE]
Sophomoric premise.
Witless.
Wooden acting.
Horrible dialogue.
Actors display zero emotional range through the whole movie.
For a movie so ridiculously campy you would expect it to have a sense of humor about itself, but it doesn't. It's played straight for the entire running length, which is also much too long.
[editline]03:00AM[/editline]
Looking at some of your other posts it looks like you might not be a native speaker of English? If that's the case that's probably why it's not as obvious to you how bad the dialogue is.
[QUOTE=vassikinexthree;18498381]If you don't compare it to something\someone else, then everything\everyone is always the best. I highly doubt you're studying ANY form of film if you ask why I compare X to Y. Film making is all about comparisons, be it the persons past work to current, or one person to another.
*cut cut*[/QUOTE]
Comparing films is just silly. I really like Meeting People Is Easy, just because I like it more than... let's say Twilight doesn't mean Twilight is bad because it's not as good as Meeting People Is Easy. One's a documentary about a band and one's a drama film about "vegetarian" vampires. Film making is basically about telling a story, fiction or fact. No comparison involved at all. Same goes for music and art.
The only people who compare films are film critics, and those are failed directors. Yes, I went there.
[editline]03:29AM[/editline]
[QUOTE=TH89;18498478]*cut cut*
Looking at some of your other posts it looks like you might not be a native speaker of English? If that's the case that's probably why it's not as obvious to you how bad the dialogue is.[/QUOTE]
Does it show?
[b]This thread makes me[/b] [media]http://jamie-online.com/random-jamz/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/facepalm.jpg[/media]
[QUOTE=Pigeon87;18499319][b]This thread makes me[/b] [media]http://jamie-online.com/random-jamz/wp-content/uploads/2009/06/facepalm.jpg[/media][/QUOTE]
[b]You are a[/b]
[media]http://shepparded.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/red_dumbass.jpg[/media]
.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18499043]Comparing films is just silly. I really like Meeting People Is Easy, just because I like it more than... let's say Twilight doesn't mean Twilight is bad because it's not as good as Meeting People Is Easy. One's a documentary about a band and one's a drama film about "vegetarian" vampires. Film making is basically about telling a story, fiction or fact. No comparison involved at all. Same goes for music and art.
The only people who compare films are film critics, and those are failed directors. Yes, I went there.
[editline]03:29AM[/editline]
Does it show?[/QUOTE]
I'm going to just assume you're a troll at this point seeing as how you think that you aren't supposed to make any comparisons when judging a film unless you're a film critic.
Good day.
Lets all
[media]http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/9972/rawrd.png[/media]
[QUOTE=Keegs;18499607]Lets all
[media]http://img267.imageshack.us/img267/9972/rawrd.png[/media][/QUOTE]
Let's not create a 5-second image in Gimp, upload it on Google, and post it on Facepunch.
I used
[media]http://filesmelt.com/downloader/paint1.jpg[/media]
[QUOTE=vassikinexthree;18499603]I'm going to just assume you're a troll at this point seeing as how you think that you aren't supposed to make any comparisons when judging a film unless you're a film critic.
Good day.[/QUOTE]
You've got to agree that the first part of my post was pretty correct though. And why did you get all agitated about me hating film critics? I hate critics because too many people decide to listen to them instead of developing their own opinions about life, the universe and everything. Critics are however important to push people into the right direction.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18499831]You've got to agree that the first part of my post was pretty correct though. And why did you get all agitated about me hating film critics? I hate critics because too many people decide to listen to them instead of developing their own opinions about life, the universe and everything. Critics are however important to push people into the right direction.[/QUOTE]
No, it wasn't close to correct. That's WHY I said I assume you're a troll.
You also just said that people shouldn't depend on critics to form their opinions, but critics should be used to push them in the right direction to form their opinion. Come back to this thread when you can speak english better.
Media tagged images sentences suck because
[media]http://img121.imageshack.us/img121/7573/001bi.jpg[/URL]
[/media]
happens.
[QUOTE=vassikinexthree;18499962]No, it wasn't close to correct. That's WHY I said I assume you're a troll.[/QUOTE] No it isn't. VV
[QUOTE=vassikinexthree;18499603]I'm going to just assume you're a troll at this point seeing as how you think that you aren't supposed to make any comparisons when judging a film unless you're a film critic.[/QUOTE]
...And how would that make me a troll? Because I don't agree with you because your opinions are correct and mine are not. I'm sorry.
[QUOTE=vassikinexthree;18499962]You also just said that people shouldn't depend on critics to form their opinions, but critics should be used to push them in the right direction to form their opinion. Come back to this thread when you can speak english better.[/QUOTE]
Geez, take a chill pill. English is my third language but I'm trying my best, but I don't think it's how I type that makes you confused. You simply don't read between the lines before you go all jumpy on me. I usually type my opinion about things first, then what I think about it neutrally.
Learn to control your anger mr. bittercake! :p
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18500219]No it isn't. VV
...And how would that make me a troll? Because I don't agree with you because your opinions are correct and mine are not. I'm sorry.
Geez, take a chill pill. English is my third language but I'm trying my best, but I don't think it's how I type that makes you confused. You simply don't read between the lines before you go all jumpy on me. I usually type my opinion about things first, then what I think about it neutrally.
Learn to control your anger mr. bittercake! :p[/QUOTE]
Not because you disagree with me, but because it isn't an opinion that when in the film industry films need to be compared, as well as actors. The only thing you were right about was that you cannot mix genres when comparing. You claim to take classes for directing film, but also claim that it is wrong to compare two different films. Either your teacher is a complete dumbass and doesn't know how to properly teach their own subject, or you're just trolling.
Yes, it is your wording that confuses me, it doesn't matter how your stance is, you type it in a confusing way. You said that people shouldn't base their opinions on what the critics think, but should be influenced by the critics when they form their own opinion.
That's like saying "Don't smoke weed when writing your essay so you can write it sober, but write it when you're buzzed on weed."
And my name isn't Mr. Bittercake. It's Betty.
[QUOTE=Tape_worm;18500219] because your opinions are correct and mine are not. [/QUOTE] Truth.
[QUOTE=JustGman;18500459]Truth.[/QUOTE]
Did you read any of what I said? If you don't make comparisons to set the standard, then everything will always be the best regardless of how bad it was.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
