Bradley Cooper should play Nathan Drake.That is all.
I was actually hoping you would review Kung Fu Panda 2 because I had a bad feeling about this sequel from the get go. Really, I'm wondering if KFP2 is worth seeing in 3D in the theater or not?
mr. rabbit will haunt my nightmares
Ditto @Beard, I was hoping it would be a Kung Fu Panda 2 review as well... I mean, I don't know who decides what movie gets reviewed in these things, you or Russ Pitts or whatever. I'm not blaming anyone or anything like that.Still. Sad Face. D:I enjoyed the little storybook intro. The funniest part was when it suggested that movie executives could ever understand why a movie was well-received."If four executives were stranded on an island with a crate of food and a can-opener, three would starve and the fourth would choke to death on the can-opener.-Cracked.com"
I never really thought about it that way before but your right Todd Phillp's movie are in the end High End "Dude Bro" movies.
This was the best review you've done in a while, nice one. The story time bit was sad and true.Did you really like Due Date? I didn't see it but it seems most people hated that one.
My question: why was this movie even greenlit?The story was finished.It's just my policy, but a completed story needs no sequel (unless the creator has something new to add).Full stop. The transsexual bashing just made it worse.
@AaronBradley Cooper as Nathan Drake?I'm pulling for Nathan Fillion.
Still seems like the only really worth while thing Todd Phillp's ever did was filming GG Allin being GG Allin.
You know, I really liked the overall summary analysis of the hangover 1 that you started it off with. Why it works, why it had a lot more to offer than regular dudebro movies, as you put it...why the first one was really the best that genre has to offer.I also like that you chop the second one to bits over the presentation of transsexuals; the analysis made by the production company is very presumptuous on this, and it feels incredibly demeaning to be told you're supposed to feel disgusted about something that, well, hurts real people if you always act like that on instinct.Here's the thing; I know you would rather your presentation err on the side of obnoxiousness, so it's not really something you can easily steer towards, but I think your criticism is sometimes too destructive, and not really deconstructive enough, strange as that may sound. In this case, the hangover was a sequel nobody needed, but since they decided to do one anyway, what could be gained from that?See, I'm completely on the same page as anubis, another commenter here. It was done. The concept had lived out it's use, the plot was resolved. It would take you less than 30 seconds to hammer that argument into the ground, dispelling all need to comparison with the first one on basis of conceptual or for that matter narrative continuation.But that's my opinion. I'm not blind to the fact that there are other reasons to make movies. second indiana jones sequel; "The Last Crusade". It sure as heck didn't follow temple of doom up with anything, and it didn't attempt to follow up the lost ark either, so... there was no reason for it. And yet, it has 8.3 on imdb. Clearly, _clearly_, people liked it in spite of these failings so there is such a thing as a derrivative sequel that delivers everything people could reasonably want.This review doesn't really scratch that itch for me, and it's something that's a lot more relevant than rehashing arguments over why this shouldn't have been made. I would like to know more about the specifics..was the goal with this, essentially, using actors and well-known characters to try and sell tickets merely by association? And if so, what would it take to succeed?Meh, not sure I'm comng accross very clearly here. Maybe it's just the attribution of nearly willful malevolence to film producers that set me off on something that didn't really need to be said.
Hey Movie Dude...Go fuck yourself. Im sure that hasnt changed in the countless years that you've masturbated, right? The pleasure's still the same right?Ahhahaha. No shit.Bye. Critic Faggot.
Wasn't the whole joke that Ed Helms, a straight guy, had sex with a transsexual? It wasn't like Transformers 2 where they made fun of little people when the little person didn't even do anything.
As a trans person I just wanted to say thank you Bob.Also I was hoping for Kung Fu Panda to.
I knew to go see Kung Fu Panda 2 instead. That's doing a sequel right.
I got sick of the "ew, she's a dude, with a penis" "jokes" long ago. It says something about the culture when it's not OK to make homophobic jokes, but it's OK to make trans-phobic jokes.The so-called tranny chaser is becoming a recognized sexual preference, with a number of dating sites adding it as an option.There was a time when it was considered a disorder, now we're coming to realize that it has to do brain gender. Because, yes, brains have gender, just as bodies do. But also, brain gender and body gender are selected through hormones, while in the womb, at two different stages. So, the theory goes something like female brain in a male body. Sexual preference is something else, entirely.
I agree that gay-bashing ain't cool, but you gotta admit Bob, that if you were getting married and found out that you drunkenly took it from behind with a transgender chick, (not to mention the rest of the added stress you woke up with) you probably wouldn't keep yourself so calm either.
Post a Comment