It's honestly crazy how Sound of Freedom's fake underdog status has let you pretend to be a victim of something. It's a movie. Who the f*** cares
Oppenheimer is about a sad tortured genius making a WMD and how difficult that was for him. It's going to make a billion dollars and get a ton of Oscars. It's a movie. Who cares
These are just consumer goods. It's like criticizing a chicken nugget anymore
It’s honestly sad that you can’t read if you seriously think I’m rooting for sound of freedoms success or that I believe it’s an underdog when I literally said I didn’t watch it
It’s not bad faith because I’ve seen plenty of critics openly admit their bias for these movies because of the diversity involved.
I don’t believe I’m over correcting. I still enjoy films made all over the world and I can still enjoy a movie like Nope even if I feel the praise it got was wildly unwarranted. But it’s honestly an objective thought that film criticism and award shows nowadays have massively over corrected and essentially believe that diversity in film automatically makes it a good movie. Even for a film like Oppenheimer, I’d say most of the reviews that praised it spent more time talking about its defense of communism, fragile male ego, and other woke agenda talking points rather than actually discussing the movies merits beyond “direction excellent, acting excellent, score was great”. I’ve never trusted these award shows and film critics less than I do now because I know they’re used to be a time when they actually praised movies that deserved it
“most of the reviews that praised it spent more time talking about its defense of communism, fragile male ego, and other woke agenda talking points…”
Most of the reviews?
Or the cherry-picked examples you’ve found in your echo chamber?
Certain woke points are also possible to be talked about, in a way that engages with the text of the film.
It’s honestly sad that you can’t read if you seriously think I’m rooting for sound of freedoms success or that I believe it’s an underdog when I literally said I didn’t watch it
You're legit doing "fake news" discourse in 2023. Grow up.
Media critics are in major cities and they might be more preferential to Spike Lee than Jim Caviezel- who is actually insane and a terrible person. Who would have guessed. Who the f*** is reading these articles. You might check RT or Metacritic and dip. Might.
A period piece generally goes down smoother than contemporary political discourse. That's why people make period pieces and launder contemporary discourse through it
“most of the reviews that praised it spent more time talking about its defense of communism, fragile male ego, and other woke agenda talking points…”
Most of the reviews?
Or the cherry-picked examples you’ve found in your echo chamber?
Certain woke points are also possible to be talked about, in a way that engages with the text of the film.
Yes, most of the reviews. And I know this because I’ve spent years going through reviews of movies and finding most of them absolutely worthless because they’re obsessed with their agendas rather than the movies merits
Don’t worry darling is an absolute piece of s*** dumpster fire that deserves a 0% on rotten tomatoes and a 5/100 score on metacritic but the liberal agenda still tried to softly defend the film. If a white male director made that movie, critics would salivate at the thought of annihilating it in a far more brutal fashion.
And yeah, you’re right. Some people genuinely enjoy films, but that number is drastically decreasing everyday as social media, mainstream media, and the internet has routinely displayed they don’t care about movies anymore but rather the short clips that make for great memes or attention to spew their bullshit agendas. Even film critics know this and that’s why they spend more time talking about diversity and liberal agendas because they know that gets more attention than actual movie talk.
The most interesting thing about Barbie to movie critics wasn’t the set design or the cinematography or the acting. It was how much it pissed white men off.
That’s such a f***ing strawman of the reason people liked Barbie
Please, get out of your echo chamber
Don’t worry darling is an absolute piece of s*** dumpster fire that deserves a 0% on rotten tomatoes and a 5/100 score on metacritic but the liberal agenda still tried to softly defend the film. If a white male director made that movie, critics would salivate at the thought of annihilating it in a far more brutal fashion.
And yeah, you’re right. Some people genuinely enjoy films, but that number is drastically decreasing everyday as social media, mainstream media, and the internet has routinely displayed they don’t care about movies anymore but rather the short clips that make for great memes or attention to spew their bullshit agendas. Even film critics know this and that’s why they spend more time talking about diversity and liberal agendas because they know that gets more attention than actual movie talk.
The most interesting thing about Barbie to movie critics wasn’t the set design or the cinematography or the acting. It was how much it pissed white men off.
Crine that movie got 38% on Rotten Tomatoes, was mired in controversy, EVERYONE was s***ting on it, probably derailed the directors career and you're still like "but if it was a white male😢".
I've seen some of the most ass movies, they rarely go lower than that on these critic sites. (and yes that movie stunk)
Martin Scorsese is dropping
You're legit doing "fake news" discourse in 2023. Grow up.
Media critics are in major cities and they might be more preferential to Spike Lee than Jim Caviezel- who is actually insane and a terrible person. Who would have guessed. Who the f*** is reading these articles. You might check RT or Metacritic and dip. Might.
A period piece generally goes down smoother than contemporary political discourse. That's why people make period pieces and launder contemporary discourse through it
Roman Polanski, woody Allen, Tom cruise, will smith, Christian bale, and plenty of others in Hollywood are terrible or insane people. Do you seriously want to go down the road of who’s a good person or not in f***ing Hollywood?
Here’s a better way to frame your argument. Media critics are more preferential to bad people who don’t go against their agenda like Jim Caviezel does
Fincher too
maybe they finally give him an Oscar...
maybe they finally give him an Oscar...
That’s my prediction
Too late tho, f*** em
Crine that movie got 38% on Rotten Tomatoes, was mired in controversy, EVERYONE was s***ting on it, probably derailed the directors career and you're still like "but if it was a white male😢".
I've seen some of the most ass movies, they rarely go lower than that on these critic sites. (and yes that movie stunk)
Movie 43 was more enjoyable than don’t worry darling
They gave Blackhat a lower RT score than dont worry darling….
A Michael Mann film got worse reviews. Let that sink in
Movie 43 was more enjoyable than don’t worry darling
They gave Blackhat a lower RT score than dont worry darling….
A Michael Mann film got worse reviews. Let that sink in
Imma have to watch Don’t Worry Darling lol
That’s my prediction
Too late tho, f*** em
would rather Wes Anderson got it
You didn’t like it. That’s fine. But you can’t ignore the response other people had to it. Everyone I know in real life loves this movie. Look at the Letterboxd reviews. Look at the YouTube reviewers. They’re creaming themselves. They’re acting like they’ve seen the second coming of Christ. Regardless of your personal opinions, to chalk all that up to diversity is just ridiculous.
Letterboxd rating lowkey get way inflated for mainstream movies that are above average bc the casual movie watcher isn't watching that many movies tbh
I mean subject matter alone is gonna be oscar-ish
Dated American film
White innovations during war times
Cracka ass cast
Nolan
Howling
How the f*** does Oppenheimer "defend communism"
The villain of the movie is literally Lewis Strauss who starts the communist witch hunt on Oppenheimer in the first place
It also portrays him and his team of scientists and his wife who were all communists as the people to root for against the government. There’s literally an audience moment for when Blunts character finally goes off on the interrogators
Letterboxd rating lowkey get way inflated for mainstream movies that are above average bc the casual movie watcher isn't watching that many movies tbh
Is the casual movie watcher on Letterboxd?
Regardless, my point was that the movie had a lot of passionate fans. Fans that liked the movie for reasons other than diversity.
Is the casual movie watcher on Letterboxd?
Regardless, my point was that the movie had a lot of passionate fans. Fans that liked the movie for reasons other than diversity.
We’ve already established most people are film illiterate and only watch a movie because an authority figure told them it’s good. Most people are too scared to ever have an opinion that goes against the consensus
Is the casual movie watcher on Letterboxd?
Regardless, my point was that the movie had a lot of passionate fans. Fans that liked the movie for reasons other than diversity.
not as much but I feel like there are some
We’ve already established most people are film illiterate and only watch a movie because an authority figure told them it’s good. Most people are too scared to ever have an opinion that goes against the consensus
Are you saying people were brainwashed into liking EEAAO?