One Battle After Another: New Leo + PTA Movie, opens 9/25 (1 Viewer)

[Ilov80s]

Interesting the reactions here and the demographic we obviously represent. I think this movie is all but a lock to become part of the cannon where in 10-20-30 years people talk about the movies of the time, this will be held up still. Not saying that as my personal opinion of it, just from the writing on the wall/reading of the tea leaves. Same is true for Parasite which also had a lot of detractors on the board.

Whoa, it did? Parasite was awesome!!

Yeah a lot of people here have posted over the last few years in the movie thread that they didn't think it was all that good or was mostly hype or some kind of weird Oscar thing.

With "a lot of detractors" or "lot of people", what would you say is the % of people here who didn't like it?

It seems to me that in some cases when something is nearly universally praised (like One Battle After Another or Parasite) people seem to fixate on the few that don't feel like the majority.

What would you guess is the actual percentage that didn't like Parasite?

That is a great question and maybe worth a poll. Not necesarily didn't like it or thought it was bad but just considered it overrated or unworthy of the reception it got. 50%? Maybe? But that's a big number for a movie that's 8.5 on IMDB, 9.7 metacritic, 99%/90% on RT, 4.5 on LB making it their 12th highest rated movie ever, swept the Oscars, made $256 million on a $11 million budget telling an original Korean story. Maybe I am way off base there but I felt like I've read more people giving a meh review here than people giving a glowing review.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Interesting the reactions here and the demographic we obviously represent. I think this movie is all but a lock to become part of the cannon where in 10-20-30 years people talk about the movies of the time, this will be held up still. Not saying that as my personal opinion of it, just from the writing on the wall/reading of the tea leaves. Same is true for Parasite which also had a lot of detractors on the board.

Whoa, it did? Parasite was awesome!!

Yeah a lot of people here have posted over the last few years in the movie thread that they didn't think it was all that good or was mostly hype or some kind of weird Oscar thing.

I had a similar reaction to Parasite that I did to One Battle (but liked Parasite more) in that both were from directors I really like and absolutely love other movies by. For Parasite I also didn't understand the "best of the decade" type talk either, but much of that is because I thought that Mother and Memories of Murder were better movies. I didn't even think it was the best foreign language movie from 2019 (Portrait of a Lady on Fire and others came out the same year).

I wouldn't go so far as to say either movie wasn't good or well made, as I think it's almost impossible for great directors to make truly crappy movies. I do think both were a bit over-hyped though based on my ratings and reaction. I would also say that Parasite did get a boost from the shake-up of how the Academy is functioning now, and we have seen more international movies get praise and awards since. I think that part is an overall good thing, though.

 

[bigbottom]

Yeah, I think a lot of the “best of the decade” or “one of the best movies of all time” hyperbole can really do a
disservice as it creates unreasonable expectations which can ultimately impact enjoyment of the film for what it is.

That being said, I distinctly recall walking out of the movie theater after watching Inception and saying to myself, I just watched the absolute best movie I have ever seen in my life. I’m not sure I was wrong.

 

[Ilov80s]

Yeah, I think a lot of the “best of the decade” or “one of the best movies of all time” hyperbole can really do a
disservice as it creates unreasonable expectations which can ultimately impact enjoyment of the film for what it is.

That being said, I distinctly recall walking out of the movie theater after watching Inception and saying to myself, I just watched the absolute best movie I have ever seen in my life. I’m not sure I was wrong.

I definitely had that feeling at the time with Inception as well but it’s just fallen and fallen in my estimation as I’ve seen it more and thought about it more. Was an awesome time at the movies though that’s for sure.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Yeah, I think a lot of the “best of the decade” or “one of the best movies of all time” hyperbole can really do a
disservice as it creates unreasonable expectations which can ultimately impact enjoyment of the film for what it is.

That being said, I distinctly recall walking out of the movie theater after watching Inception and saying to myself, I just watched the absolute best movie I have ever seen in my life. I’m not sure I was wrong.

It's an even tougher sell when you have somebody like PTA who has put out movies like There Will be Blood and Boogie Nights, which are on many people's "greatest" movies lists. Somebody telling me it's the movie of the century means they think already it's better than TWBB, which already has me side-eyeing them. It also seems too often that the movies that get this praise have to be "about" something, and that tends to ruffle people's feathers as well.

 

[Capella]

Well, saw it today. I’m probably directly in the middle of the target audience this movie was made for and I enjoyed it but movie of the decade? All the people saying it was one of the best movies ever? I don’t get it. It was good! I’d say 4/5 stars. But definitely not worth the hype. My wife whispered to me at one point “when does this become great?” Never did for us.

For what it’s worth, I know a fair number of folks who have seen it and not a one of them has said it’s the movie of the decade or one of the best movies ever. And I don’t believe a single person in this thread has said that either. Which leads me to think this narrative (1) is being promoted by a bunch of pompous out of touch PTA devotee movie reviewers; or (2) is being created by some online bot algorithm created by the studio to generate buzz and juice box office receipts; or (3) is a combination of 1 and 2.

I have a friend who has seen it 4 times and feels that way. When I googled reviews when I got home I saw 2 that said that so idk.

4 times in the theater? Wow.

The last I saw a movie 4 times in the theater was Superman The Movie in 1979.

Lol and tickets were $1.25

Wow. We go like once a week.

I am talking seeing the same movie 4 times in the theater LOL!

Sorry bro I misread that lmao

 

[Ilov80s]

Yeah, I think a lot of the “best of the decade” or “one of the best movies of all time” hyperbole can really do a
disservice as it creates unreasonable expectations which can ultimately impact enjoyment of the film for what it is.

That being said, I distinctly recall walking out of the movie theater after watching Inception and saying to myself, I just watched the absolute best movie I have ever seen in my life. I’m not sure I was wrong.

It's an even tougher sell when you have somebody like PTA who has put out movies like There Will be Blood and Boogie Nights, which are on many people's "greatest" movies lists. Somebody telling me it's the movie of the century means they think already it's better than TWBB, which already has me side-eyeing them. It also seems too often that the movies that get this praise have to be "about" something, and that tends to ruffle people's feathers as well.

Would be interesting to try and make a list of movies that got instant canonization like that. No Country immediately comes to mind.

 

[Judge Smails]

Looks like so far this movie is a $100-$150M loser at the box office. And Leo gets paid first dollar gross

 

[Ilov80s]

Looks like so far this movie is a $100-$150M loser at the box office. And Leo gets paid first dollar gross

Was always going to be a tough sell. I’m pretty sure it’s still PTA’s highest grossing movie ever. It’s made double what There Will Be Blood made. PTA just has never been a big draw. There biggest marketing mistake was not trying to appeal more to Black and Latino audiences given how central a role that is in the movie. Leo probably didn’t make much on it but I doubt he cares much about that. If he wanted to make money he could have done a dozen Marvel movies by now. The movie itself still has awards and streaming. I doubt Warner Brothers is too worried about it. They were the big winners movie wise this year and if One Battle does as well as expected in the Oscars, it will be a massive 12 months for the old movie studio.

 

[TripItUp]

It was good, not great for me. I understand those who would gravitate to the movie for political reasons...and that's probably where we are getting the hyperbole from.

Welcome to over-politicized America.

 

[TripItUp]

Also, Benecio Del Toro is a great actor. I don't think there's ever been a film that I didn't like him in.

 

[TripItUp]

Dune, Dune 2 and maybe Top Gun Maverick are the only recent movies that stand up to the greats of the 80s and 90s IMHO.

We are in dire need of more great film makers. We have 3 or 4 that are good but not peak Spielberg great IMHO.

We were spoiled during a golden age of cinematic blockbusters in earlier decades that I fear may never be matched.


And of course, the obligatory....GET OFF MY LAWN.

 

[KarmaPolice]

Dune, Dune 2 and maybe Top Gun Maverick are the only recent movies that stand up to the greats of the 80s and 90s IMHO.

We are in dire need of more great film makers. We have 3 or 4 that are good but not peak Spielberg great IMHO.

We were spoiled during a golden age of cinematic blockbusters in earlier decades that I fear may never be matched.


And of course, the obligatory....GET OFF MY LAWN.

The industry has changed forever, and there is no going back. Probably more importantly - we have changed, and there is no going back.

I also found it interesting that the movies you are touting in the post above are a sequel and a couple movies based on decades old books. I liked those movies a lot, but much of the grumbling and discussion about movies in the theaters now is that few people take chances anymore and it's mostly sequel/reboot/known properties as the choices most times you walk into a theater. Already way fewer people are watching movies, and after that we are really split on what we want in the theater.

 

[Ilov80s]

Dune, Dune 2 and maybe Top Gun Maverick are the only recent movies that stand up to the greats of the 80s and 90s IMHO.

We are in dire need of more great film makers. We have 3 or 4 that are good but not peak Spielberg great IMHO.

We were spoiled during a golden age of cinematic blockbusters in earlier decades that I fear may never be matched.


And of course, the obligatory....GET OFF MY LAWN.

I reckon if this message board existed in 1995, most of the users would be saying they don’t make’m like they did in the 60s and 70s. Sure there’s a Back to the Future, Unforgiven or Silence of the Lambs but we don’t have film makers like Coppola or David Lean anymore. Just part of the life cycle I suppose. No doubt movies aren’t the center of culture they were in the past. That’s objectively true but that’s true for pretty much everything now- all media is so specialized and splintered.

 

[Judge Smails]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

 

[Softballguy]

I saw One Battle on opening night and thought it was good, but definitely left disappointed. Went again last night and liked it much more. For me, movies like this often take multiple viewings for me to appreciate how good they really are. I have a hunch many of you that felt like I did after one viewing will enjoy it much more a second time around.

 

[KarmaPolice]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

Chicken and the egg, though.

Imo the studios play it safe for a few reasons - much of it is because it seems that much of what gets us out of our living rooms, off our phones, and into the theater is predictable crap. Its more likely people feel like they will get their money's worth.

Its always been a business, but now people have way more options for entertainment and mostly just want to go to the theater to watch characters they know punch and kill each other.

 

[dgreen]

Do we have a thread for movies currently in theaters?

 

[Capella]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

Man this movie, Sinners and Weapons were all very good to extremely great original movies put out in 2025. There is plenty of trash but plenty of great stuff too.

 

[KarmaPolice]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

Man this movie, Sinners and Weapons were all very good to extremely great original movies put out in 2025. There is plenty of trash but plenty of great stuff too.

Part of what the studios have to be thinking is that of that list, only 2 of those movies will make big profits. It's no surprise to me that comes from the horror genre. IMO that genre is the best that it has ever been, and there are a lot of great directors and original ideas coming from that direction. I can't say the same for comedy or action. Comedy became neutered a decade or so ago. Action largely got taken over by pg-13 fair and known IPs like Marvel movies and Dune. With "prestige TV", people switched to watching many dramas at home.

If I was running a studio, I would for sure be focusing on horror. Built in audience that will see just about anything, it still gets a bit of that teen audience, and that group of people are far less likely to be offended about something in the movie. Much cheaper on average to make as well, so you can afford to take more shots on multiple movies and ideas vs. having $300M sunk into a movie.

 

[Ilov80s]

Do we have a thread for movies currently in theaters?

We have the recently rented one which is basically used for all movie talk. We need @FBG Moderator to change its name to just Movie Talk: Old and New or something.

 

[Joe Bryant]

Do we have a thread for movies currently in theaters?

We have the recently rented one which is basically used for all movie talk. We need @FBG Moderator to change its name to just Movie Talk: Old and New or something.

Please tag FBG moderator in the thread and ask them.

 

[TripItUp]

I reckon if this message board existed in 1995, most of the users would be saying they don’t make’m like they did in the 60s and 70s. Sure there’s a Back to the Future, Unforgiven or Silence of the Lambs but we don’t have film makers like Coppola or David Lean anymore. Just part of the life cycle I suppose. No doubt movies aren’t the center of culture they were in the past. That’s objectively true but that’s true for pretty much everything now- all media is so specialized and splintered.

I disagree. There is not a single movie in the 60s that holds up to Empire Strikes Back or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc. etc. Not to mention SNL's influence on comedy that proliferated into a slew of elite comedies...that impact is still here but it's not what it was.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I reckon if this message board existed in 1995, most of the users would be saying they don’t make’m like they did in the 60s and 70s. Sure there’s a Back to the Future, Unforgiven or Silence of the Lambs but we don’t have film makers like Coppola or David Lean anymore. Just part of the life cycle I suppose. No doubt movies aren’t the center of culture they were in the past. That’s objectively true but that’s true for pretty much everything now- all media is so specialized and splintered.

I disagree. There is not a single movie in the 60s that holds up to Empire Strikes Back or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc. etc. Not to mention SNL's influence on comedy that proliferated into a slew of elite comedies...that impact is still here but it's not what it was.

I would guess you disagree based on the movies you have listed today. The bolded, Maverick, and Dune 1&2. You seem to lean heavily into the fun, popcorn eating, blockbuster type fair. By definition that stuff didn't really exist in the 60s either - different type of movies. I would highly disagree that Kurosawa or Wilder or Kubrick movies from the 60s (just to name a few) don't hold up every bit as well as the ones you listed.

I think 80s was more pointing out that it is human nature to love the stuff you grew up on.

 

[bigbottom]

I think there is a ton of high quality original cinema coming out today. But it’s mostly not in the big budget blockbuster category. When you’re talking mega-budget blockbusters, I just think those are extremely risky ventures today what with the massive shift in how people consume content. As a result, risk averse studios rely on tried and true formulas for such ventures - hence remakes, sequels, and established universes.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I think there is a ton of high quality original cinema coming out today. But it’s mostly not in the big budget blockbuster category. When you’re talking mega-budget blockbusters, I just think those are extremely risky ventures today what with the massive shift in how people consume content. As a result, risk averse studios rely on tried and true formulas for such ventures - hence remakes, sequels, and established universes.

I would bet that most of the movies I would have at the top of my lists from the last 4-5 years had a budget of $50M or less, so I agree with what you are saying here. Much more risk when you are crossing $100M for a budget, so that is when you are likely to get a sequel, remake, or at least a known big director and/or actor. It blows my mind how much studios spend on some of these movies. My daughter and I went to Elio this summer (perfectly fine Pixar movie) and that thing $150-200M to make. Some of these MI type blockbusters have bloated to $300-400M to make? Sheesh. So risky with those types of numbers to just break even.

I have no idea why more studios don't try to pump out 10 or more movies for 30-40M each vs. going all in on one. The cynical answer is that it's not just about the movies and most of these studios are owned by huge conglomerates now, so it's probably worth it for them to have character, merch, and streaming rights (not to mention overseas tickets, and IP helps with that a ton). Box office is probably a fraction of their consideration when greenlighting huge projects.

 

[Ilov80s]

I reckon if this message board existed in 1995, most of the users would be saying they don’t make’m like they did in the 60s and 70s. Sure there’s a Back to the Future, Unforgiven or Silence of the Lambs but we don’t have film makers like Coppola or David Lean anymore. Just part of the life cycle I suppose. No doubt movies aren’t the center of culture they were in the past. That’s objectively true but that’s true for pretty much everything now- all media is so specialized and splintered.

I disagree. There is not a single movie in the 60s that holds up to Empire Strikes Back or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc. etc. Not to mention SNL's influence on comedy that proliferated into a slew of elite comedies...that impact is still here but it's not what it was.

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

 

[fatness]

I reckon if this message board existed in 1995, most of the users would be saying they don’t make’m like they did in the 60s and 70s. Sure there’s a Back to the Future, Unforgiven or Silence of the Lambs but we don’t have film makers like Coppola or David Lean anymore. Just part of the life cycle I suppose. No doubt movies aren’t the center of culture they were in the past. That’s objectively true but that’s true for pretty much everything now- all media is so specialized and splintered.

I disagree. There is not a single movie in the 60s that holds up to Empire Strikes Back or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc. etc. Not to mention SNL's influence on comedy that proliferated into a slew of elite comedies...that impact is still here but it's not what it was.

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I agree. From the 60's alone
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
2001: a Space Odyssey
Lawrence of Arabia
Dr. Strangelove
Midnight Cowboy
the Manchurian Candidate
To Kill A Mockingbird
A Raisin in the Sun
Easy Rider
the Great Escape
the Graduate

 

[dickey moe]

I reckon if this message board existed in 1995, most of the users would be saying they don’t make’m like they did in the 60s and 70s. Sure there’s a Back to the Future, Unforgiven or Silence of the Lambs but we don’t have film makers like Coppola or David Lean anymore. Just part of the life cycle I suppose. No doubt movies aren’t the center of culture they were in the past. That’s objectively true but that’s true for pretty much everything now- all media is so specialized and splintered.

I disagree. There is not a single movie in the 60s that holds up to Empire Strikes Back or Raiders of the Lost Ark etc. etc. Not to mention SNL's influence on comedy that proliferated into a slew of elite comedies...that impact is still here but it's not what it was.

You must not have seen enough 60s movies, then.

 

[foxco]

Enjoyed it. Certainly not Film of the Decade material but we're in a world of hyperbole so here we are.

 

[Max Power]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

Chicken and the egg, though.

Imo the studios play it safe for a few reasons - much of it is because it seems that much of what gets us out of our living rooms, off our phones, and into the theater is predictable crap. Its more likely people feel like they will get their money's worth.

Its always been a business, but now people have way more options for entertainment and mostly just want to go to the theater to watch characters they know punch and kill each other.

The studios have also learned this aspect gets international appeal as well. Superheros, fast cars, explosions translate well into any language. Movies with heavy plot focus or comedies don't translate well globally. We're at the point where international marketing weighs heavily on what studios put out.

 

[Ilov80s]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

Chicken and the egg, though.

Imo the studios play it safe for a few reasons - much of it is because it seems that much of what gets us out of our living rooms, off our phones, and into the theater is predictable crap. Its more likely people feel like they will get their money's worth.

Its always been a business, but now people have way more options for entertainment and mostly just want to go to the theater to watch characters they know punch and kill each other.

The studios have also learned this aspect gets international appeal as well. Superheros, fast cars, explosions translate well into any language. Movies with heavy plot focus or comedies don't translate well globally. We're at the point where international marketing weighs heavily on what studios put out.

This was especially true for the period where China was allowing a lot of American movies into their markets. The Marvel movies and such were very popular there. Simple easily translatable and nothing controversial at all that could get them banned by more restrictive conservative governments. However, China has been slowly closing it's doors to American movies more and more. Mostly I think as an protectionist policy to promote Chinese people seeing Chinese made movies. This accelerated with the current administration and things we can not discuss here. So the rewards for appealing to an international market are much much less than they were 10 years ago.

 

[TripItUp]

I agree. From the 60's alone
The Good, The Bad, and The Ugly
2001: a Space Odyssey
Lawrence of Arabia
Dr. Strangelove
Midnight Cowboy
the Manchurian Candidate
To Kill A Mockingbird
A Raisin in the Sun
Easy Rider
the Great Escape
the Graduate

Now compare that to the 80s or 90s.

not close IMHO.

 

[TripItUp]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

 

[dkp993]

Really torn on if I should go see this one. I have very mixed feelings about PTA as a director. Boogie Nights and Magnolia are great. There Will be Blood is absolute garbage (yes, I know this is not the group sentiment). But I love Leo, especially over the past decade plus. Will probably wait to watch it streaming but would really like to see original movies do well at the box office. Is it worth my 20 bucks and time at the theater?

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

You gotta see LofA on a really big movie screen, most folks have only seen on it on a living room TV and whatever sound comes thru the TV over the years with lots of commercial cuts
You're really stretching the comparison and using the word "stratosphere"

Raiders in '81 won Set Decoration, Sound, Editing,, Visual Effects and a Special Achievement in Sound Editing, all technical marvel awards
Lawrence of Arabia won all the technical achievement awards in 1962, 2 decades before they had the kind of effects used in Raiders PLUS PLUS PLUS it took home Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and of course Best FILM

You're playing a bad hand IMO but you are welcome to have your POV and I bet some if not many would take Raiders over LofA
I absolutely love both movies and it would simply depend on my mood

 

[Ilov80s]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

That has a lot more to do with the ages of people alive today. Also Lawrence is a complex very long movie. Raiders is a short easy watch.

 

[Ilov80s]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

You gotta see LofA on a really big movie screen, most folks have only seen on it on a living room TV and whatever sound comes thru the TV over the years with lots of commercial cuts
You're really stretching the comparison and using the word "stratosphere"

Raiders in '81 won Set Decoration, Sound, Editing,, Visual Effects and a Special Achievement in Sound Editing, all technical marvel awards
Lawrence of Arabia won all the technical achievement awards in 1962, 2 decades before they had the kind of effects used in Raiders PLUS PLUS PLUS it took home Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and of course Best FILM

You're playing a bad hand IMO but you are welcome to have your POV and I bet some if not many would take Raiders over LofA
I absolutely love both movies and it would simply depend on my mood

I don't know Trip's age exactly but I know he wasn't alive in the 60s and I know during the 80s and 90s he was in his younger formative years. That plays a major role in what people gravitate to. Kind of like how many people's favorite music is still the music they liked when they were 15-20.

 

[dgreen]

Really torn on if I should go see this one. I have very mixed feelings about PTA as a director. Boogie Nights and Magnolia are great. There Will be Blood is absolute garbage (yes, I know this is not the group sentiment). But I love Leo, especially over the past decade plus. Will probably wait to watch it streaming but would really like to see original movies do well at the box office. Is it worth my 20 bucks and time at the theater?

We have some theaters that do cheaper tickets on Tuesdays, so I saw it for $7. I was ok with that. I would not have been happy with $20.

 

[KarmaPolice]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

You gotta see LofA on a really big movie screen, most folks have only seen on it on a living room TV and whatever sound comes thru the TV over the years with lots of commercial cuts
You're really stretching the comparison and using the word "stratosphere"

Raiders in '81 won Set Decoration, Sound, Editing,, Visual Effects and a Special Achievement in Sound Editing, all technical marvel awards
Lawrence of Arabia won all the technical achievement awards in 1962, 2 decades before they had the kind of effects used in Raiders PLUS PLUS PLUS it took home Best Director, Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and of course Best FILM

You're playing a bad hand IMO but you are welcome to have your POV and I bet some if not many would take Raiders over LofA
I absolutely love both movies and it would simply depend on my mood

I don't know Trip's age exactly but I know he wasn't alive in the 60s and I know during the 80s and 90s he was in his younger formative years. That plays a major role in what people gravitate to. Kind of like how many people's favorite music is still the music they liked when they were 15-20.

Only rational reason he keeps brining up Raiders. That movie blows.

 

[KarmaPolice]

The change is there are so many ****ty reboots happening. Nobody wants to take risk on original scripts. Everyone looking for a franchise. Too many playing it safe. I used to love going to the movies. Been to 2 in 5 years now. Just not interested in most of the lazy trash being released

Chicken and the egg, though.

Imo the studios play it safe for a few reasons - much of it is because it seems that much of what gets us out of our living rooms, off our phones, and into the theater is predictable crap. Its more likely people feel like they will get their money's worth.

Its always been a business, but now people have way more options for entertainment and mostly just want to go to the theater to watch characters they know punch and kill each other.

The studios have also learned this aspect gets international appeal as well. Superheros, fast cars, explosions translate well into any language. Movies with heavy plot focus or comedies don't translate well globally. We're at the point where international marketing weighs heavily on what studios put out.

Oh, 100%. I watch my fair share of foreign movies and I often think I am missing something in the translation or there is a cultural aspect I don't pick up on.

My position is that is what makes them interesting, so it makes me more grumpy if I think studios are making stuff specifically to market abroad. Maybe I am wrong, but it feels very much like a one-way street and we worry too much about what might sell overseas vs. making quality movies.

 

[BLOCKED_PUNT]

That movie blows

considering that you think deathgasam is one of the best in the past 20 years we should all take this with a large helping of salt

 

[KarmaPolice]

That movie blows

considering that you think deathgasam is one of the best in the past 20 years we should all take this with a large helping of salt

Bit of an inside joke, guy.

No, i don't think its one of the best movies of the last 20 years, it one of my favorites of the last 20 years. Big difference.

 

[bigbottom]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

I like Raiders. Despite the glaring story problem . . .

 

[Ministry of Pain]

I strongly disagree and think your post is just proof of my post how subjective it is based on our age the time people grew up in. The music and movies people grow up with is usually what they consider the best. Lawrence of Arabia is a far better movie to me than Empire or Raiders.

I would guess 80% of movie watching people would rather watch Raiders than Lawrence of Arabia.

There is a reason why Raiders of the Lost ark still airs multiple times per week and Lawrence of Arabia barely airs at all.

I like LofA, but it's not in the same stratosphere of the greats of the 80s and 90s and later IMHO.

I like Raiders. Despite the glaring story problem . . .

Go On...

Raiders of the Lost Ark Does Not Have a Glaring Story Problem

There’s an episode of The Big Bang Theory where Sheldon introduces Amy to Raiders of the Lost Ark (the first Indiana Jones movie) and, having expected her to be awash in amazement, is disconc…

bobbieconti.com

 

[bigbottom]

I wasn’t being serious.

 

[Softballguy]

Really torn on if I should go see this one. I have very mixed feelings about PTA as a director. Boogie Nights and Magnolia are great. There Will be Blood is absolute garbage (yes, I know this is not the group sentiment). But I love Leo, especially over the past decade plus. Will probably wait to watch it streaming but would really like to see original movies do well at the box office. Is it worth my 20 bucks and time at the theater?

This movie features one of the greatest chase scenes of all time. Plus it's a great movie. Definitely worth the $20 to see it on the big screen.

 

[Ilov80s]

Really torn on if I should go see this one. I have very mixed feelings about PTA as a director. Boogie Nights and Magnolia are great. There Will be Blood is absolute garbage (yes, I know this is not the group sentiment). But I love Leo, especially over the past decade plus. Will probably wait to watch it streaming but would really like to see original movies do well at the box office. Is it worth my 20 bucks and time at the theater?

This movie features one of the greatest chase scenes of all time. Plus it's a great movie. Definitely worth the $20 to see it on the big screen.

Yeah it was amazing at the super emax, especially the chase

 

[Joe Bryant]

I thought the chase was kind of interesting as it wasn't the normal chase scene in a tight city and crashing into things like most do. More of a Vanishing Point vibe. Was nice that it wasn't CG. Although, I'm in the minority as most loved it.

Spoiler: Spoiler

Most people predicted the ending of the chase as people watching were thinking "just slam on the brakes on the other side of the hill"

Although it wasn't comically predictable like the ending for Colonel Lockjaw. LOL at even typing the name.