News Variety Reports Robert Pattinson is the new Batman
- Thread starter auntiehill
- Start date
- Status
Most people don't whine and complain when people don't agree with them. People who demand people always keep an "open mind" no matter how shitty something is are extremely tedious. They also pop up with every shitty movie, saying shit like "Oh, Fant4stic is going to be good, Josh Trank is a great director, keep an open mind"
In my experience, the "open mind" people are wrong a good 80 percent of the time.You know you're not talking to yourself right now, right? Because in my experience, that really describes your posts.
Also, unrelated, its hilarious to see how many apparent Twilight fans exist on a Trek board. Robert Pattinson is generally known as a shitty actor, but you wouldn't know it by how many members of his fan club apparently also like Star Trek enough to post on a forum.
Dude, whining and complaining is your entire schtick. Your first post in any thread is usually whining and complaining. You don't get to cast stones in that direction.Most people don't whine and complain when people don't agree with them. People who demand people always keep an "open mind" no matter how shitty something is are extremely tedious. They also pop up with every shitty movie, saying shit like "Oh, Fant4stic is going to be good, Josh Trank is a great director, keep an open mind"
Really? It's always shocking to me how dismissive some star trek fans can be to fans of other genres when trekkers have been the butt of so many jokes and insults over the decades
I can't help but think that most of the hate for Twilight is based purely on the fact that it's made for teenage girls. There are countless bad movies and they are bad movies, but none get the absolute hate and hatred of the actors that Twilight gets. It's just a shitty vampire movie, they're a dime a dozen. Lost Boys is shitty too, but it's beloved because of how shitty it is. But it's written for teenage boys, so it gets a pass.
The vast majority of the things that I say are evidence-based; my own individual interpretation of that evidence may be proven to be wrong, but I do not just "pull things out of my butt" the way that you do based on how you personally feel about something.
God, this backlash to the backlash is the worst. A lot of people think Twilight is shit, and people who say that don't have to have some other motive. Its a lot more notable of a crappy movie then you claim, I've personally never seen such bad acting and such stupid writing. Pretending that people that hate Twilight have some dumbass agenda is just bullshit. It turns out, bad movies get shit on, and Twilight is the kind of shit you remember, but not in a good way.
My understanding, though, is that Twilight has been roundly denounced on feminist grounds for portraying what's essentially an abusive, controlling relationship as something romantic and desirable. Which makes its popularity with impressionable young girls disturbing for reasons surpassing mere aesthetic or quality standards.
Although that has nothing to do with critiques of actors' performances. I get the impression that the Twilight movies were like the Star Wars prequels in that they were poorly directed so that normally good actors gave poor performances. So I don't think that's a gendered thing, since people denounce Hayden Christensen's acting in much the same terms as Robert Pattinson's.
If Twilight is the single worst film you've ever watched, then you have lived a blessed life. I've seen The Devil's Rain and Twilight looks like Citizen Kane next to it. This is just laughable.
It's more the fanboy reaction to it. There are legitimate criticisms of it, but the fanboy criticisms are fairly dumb and mostly boil down to "vampires don't sparkle".
It barely did, it only did survive because Nolan, Goyer and Bale did such a good job. Not surprising that people really, really don't want to see another B&R, both for how painful it was in itself and that yes it was quite damaging to the character.
For all the skills and experience of film professionals, films overall and parts of them, including casting, very often fail.
Yes, and that's something to judge after the fact, not before. Too many people believe their first impressions are where they should stop asking questions rather than where they should start.
The more things change the more they stay the same.
Once people actually pay $13 dollars to see Pattinson's portray of Bruce Wayne/Batman they'll be heaping praise on him
"He used his experience from playing tortured and distant characters to nail Bruce Wayne!"
Most people will come around like they did with Affleck.
Also I'm pretty sure Pattinson auditioned in the "Dark Knight" suit. I don't think he could have fit the Affleck suit lol
This was Bale in the Panther suit from "Forever"
Once people actually pay $13 dollars to see Pattinson's portray of Bruce Wayne/Batman they'll be heaping praise on him
"He used his experience from playing tortured and distant characters to nail Bruce Wayne!"
Most people will come around like they did with Affleck.
Also I'm pretty sure Pattinson auditioned in the "Dark Knight" suit. I don't think he could have fit the Affleck suit lol
This was Bale in the Panther suit from "Forever"
Last edited:
Agreed. There's always a primary audience, consciously catered to or otherwise. If others like the show (aka "it"), that's great. People are also free to dislike it but I wouldn't obsess over every episode, and if some want to do that - that's okay too. Some of them put out reviews that end up more entertaining than what they were watching.
Never heard of Lost Boys but I've never cared for most vampire shows (it's not my preferred genre) and even as a teen, shows aimed at teens were grating and often using stereotypes. And none of them have gotten any better since. But I usually am more interested in situations and personalities, not which body parts look like mine, in order to like a show.
But we nerds and geeks are very rarely catered to and when so-called "geek chic" started last decade, it was as patronizing and condescending as it got as it was just another hollow fashion statement - like the peace symbol in the 1980s/90s. No geek or nerd uses diminutive truncation of words down to their base or formative/initial syllable. Anyone who understands the evolution of language knows why words have multiple syllables, which is often not to make people fail tests but as a form of structure and hierarchical/grouped order. One easy example would be the use of the prefix "tech" versus "technology" or "technician" (and so on). Or abbreviating words from, say, "adventure" down to "adv" because of intellectual laziness. As such, all real Star Trek would never go "geek chic". I'm still amazed 80s and 90s Trek were this popular, imaging any of them using 21st slang would be insulting.
And not every creator or writer for a show is going to be universally great in any show, or universally bad either. Like thew guy who did Avatar did the Alien movies and Titanic. Or the other bloke who did Buffy did Firefly and episodes of Roseanne. The guy who did Star Cops wrote a ton of Blake's 7. A prominent Doctor Who writer also wrote for Blake's 7. Few fans of said writer or creator is going to like 100% of everything said person does. Some people do, that's their choice.
But that's my perception. It may or may not be completely accurate. That's par for the course for the human experience.
Chad michael murray? ian somerhalder?
Don't you always just watch Kids TV? How would you know what his acting is like? Are you really going to try and convince us you watched Cosmopolis, Good Time, The Lost City of Z or say High Life?
It's a 1987 movie directed by Joel Schumacher and starring a number of Brat Pack actors. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Lost_Boys
After the fact is for final judgements. There's nothing wrong with people having or discussing early and intermediate opinions. It's just a message board.
Of course, multipage treatises on how everything is shit shit shit and anyone who disagrees is wrong wrong wrong are a whole different kettle of fish, and understandably irritating.
- Status