Squaremaster316

* out of ***** Bad writing, horrible acting, annoying characters, atrocious CGI, and a ridiculous copout ending that has never been good in any film (see The Forgotten for example).

The Schwarzenegger film: 5.5/10 The X-Men film: 1/10

Rope and Rebecca

Ellen Burstyn in Requiem For a Dream Gary Oldman in The Dark Knight Aaron Eckhart in The Dark Knight

1. Christopher Nolan 2. Paul Thomas Anderson 3. Coens 4. David Fincher 5. Martin Scorsese 6. Darren Aronofsky 7. Steven Spielberg 8. Quentin Tarantino 9. Steven Soderbergh 10. Brad Bird

It's the least amount of screen timeNeeson has had in any film this year, but it is, by FAR, the bestquality production he's had his name attached too. It's unfortunatethat his name had to be tarnished with such poorly written, directedand performed dreck such as Battleship and Taken 2, but at least hecan include high quality film making such as this on his resume andhopefully wash away the bitter taste of failure

Iron Man: Why doesn't Tony just use another wrist missile to blow up Stane at the end of the film?

Memento, Pulp Fiction, Boogie Nights, Shaun of the Dead, American Graffiti, Citizen Kane, Source Code, Se7en, The Incredibles, Juno

From what I've read by various boards, it seems to indicate:"Any film that expands the boundaries and elevates the film genre instead of rigidly adhering to imaginary guidelines and staying well within the box"or"Any film that uses humor that is subtle and/or dark rather than camp/slapstick"

And Tarantino has "Manos" as one of his favorite films.I'm just stating that the ridiculous analogy of "If X did Z instead of Y, it would be opposite" doesn't hold any weight.

If the Avengers were directed by Michael Bay, there would be non-stop whining about "dumb pop culture references", overuse of CGI and messy, overproduced action sequences.Whatever opinion there is about Nolan's film, majority consensus or otherwise, it all comes down to the film quality.

TDK's stamp on history was due to the fantastic all around performances, sensational directing and the phenomenal, whip-smart script.

TDKR was loved, very loved by the general public and critics with high critical acclaim and large rewatch value.If it wasn't for the shootings and lack of 3D, the gross would be much higher, it's just mathematical fact.The vocal minority can scream as much as they want, but regardless of their opinion of TDKR (better than/worse than/on par with The Avengers), it's clearly obvious that the vast majority of people enjoyed it greatly.Granted, neither film had the massive impact on film and pop culture like the Dark Knight did 4 years ago and still does today.

The only film Nolan has done that would rand down with Schumacher's best would be Following, and only due to the restrictive budget. Though I will say with regards to Lost boys, Whedon owes Schumacher royalties.

There isn't a single moment in any Michael Bay film (or his entire filmography) that has the raw emotional intensity as this:

Kim looks to be a good, consistently solid director.

Favreau: Bad Cop, Bad Cop

Gavin Hood. Tsotsi

Ralph Waldo Emerson once stated that life was a journey, not a destination. One could only wish that Jumanji director Joe Johnston would have taken that timeless quote to heart when directing the final installment of the Avengers' prequels. Instead, he opts to give us a film that was about as winding of a journey as a trip to the mailbox. Steve Rogers' journey from frail young man to, well, strong young man, presents us with the tale of one of the most one-dimensional, uninteresting protagonists in recent memory, as any amount of internal conflict or struggle is tossed to the wayside from virtually the opening frame. The only thing in the film that has any substantial development is the titular character's muscular frame. Along with Evans of lackluster supporting cast, including Hayley Atwell, who's monotone Carter provides a one-dimensional and particularly shallow love interest (any interest whatsoever in Rogers literally occurs after his CGI rendered frame is replaced with his natural torso), and a ultimately pointless villain in Red Skull (considering Hitler's role in the war at the time) a quickly forgotten about Richard Artimage, and a slumming, emotionless Tommy Lee Jones, all form a rather toothless cast. The plot is filled with poorly executed cliches (the kissing scene with the blonde, in particular, feels so forced that you could practically see Atwell standing behind the scenery waiting for her 'cue'), tepid dialogue, plot holes and boundless leaps of logic (discovering the underground base by going in through an above ground window, wearing a brightly colored suit when infiltrating a base to rescue soldiers, and the ending, which I'll get to), and rushed pacing. What makes this film seem more of an contrived Avengers prequel than its associated films is the ending, which features Rogers commandeering a plane with a nuke. After taking manual control, instead of jumping out of the plane after diverting it at the last minute to save himself and let the plane crash on its own, or diverting it to a warmer, isolated climate where it would do no harm, he instead chooses to go down with the plane. There is no logical reason for Rogers to do this except for the fact that he wouldn't be part of the Avengers film if he didn't (also to give some forced pathos between himself and Atwell's character). Overall, Captain America: The First Avenger is a piant-by-numbers origin that seems more of a bullet point presentation than a fully developed final product When it comes to the several years of audience buildup and putting the pieces into place for the upcoming Marvel crossover, it's little wonder why The 'First' Avenger, was given the 'Last' slot. [*] out of [*****]

An 80 on MRQE91 on Criticschoice.com

Yes, I'm simply replying to the Kids question which some have been asking long before the parody was made.

"I need to see my kids again" There are numerous ways one can look at this statement. - The fact that the children's faces are not revealed until the final scene of the film (one of the theories of the film) indicates that if it was all a dream and Cob's subconscious was not allowing him to see their faces until he knew, or at least accepted, that they were real. In this case, seeing them indicates an internal struggle to allow himself to see them and accept them. - An alternative theory is the more literal one, where he wants to physically get home to America and be with his kids again. Some argue why he couldn't just fly the kids to him. Putting aside the numerous plot holes that would form if the movie had taken that direction (Getting Mal's mother to agree to sign the papers allowing them to fly, the fact that they could trace them to Cobb's location), what kind of father would want his kids to be raised in a world where their lives are constantly in danger and they have to run from authorities and hit-men all the time? Which leads to the underlying theme of the film... - "I want to see my kids" is a metaphor for "I want the nightmare to be over". Whether Cobb's life of being hired by shifty organizations and running from authorities/hitmen is a dream or reality, he just wants it to end; he wants to have a normal life. He wants to see his kids without all of that baggage. The film just works on so many levels and gets better with each viewing.

"I need to see my kids again" There are numerous ways one can look at this statement. - The fact that the children's faces are not revealed until the final scene of the film (one of the theories of the film) indicates that if it was all a dream and Cob's subconscious was not allowing him to see their faces until he knew, or at least accepted, that they were real. In this case, seeing them indicates an internal struggle to allow himself to see them and accept them. - An alternative theory is the more literal one, where he wants to physically get home to America and be with his kids again. Some argue why he couldn't just fly the kids to him. Putting aside the numerous plot holes that would form if the movie had taken that direction (Getting Mal's mother to agree to sign the papers allowing them to fly, the fact that they could trace them to Cobb's location), what kind of father would want his kids to be raised in a world where their lives are constantly in danger and they have to run from authorities and hit-men all the time? Which leads to the underlying theme of the film... - "I want to see my kids" is a metaphor for "I want the nightmare to be over". Whether Cobb's life of being hired by shifty organizations and running from authorities/hitmen is a dream or reality, he just wants it to end; he wants to have a normal life. He wants to see his kids without all of that baggage. The film just works on so many levels and gets better with each viewing.

The whole "if X director made it instead of Y, it would have been (insert opposite opinion here)" can be used for anything. Example: If the Avengers was directed by Michael Bay, it would have been universally lambasted.