US WEEKEND THREAD: Record 70.25 OW (highest grossing OW for an original horror)

[The Futurist]

It is the job of the filmmaker to make you believe in the story that is unfolding.

If you don't believe in the perfect lie that is a movie (movies are lies, ask Cameron) the filmmaker has failed in his prime mission.

It is as simple as that.

US made me an atheist.

Until Dumbo.

[NCsoft]

33 minutes ago, That One Guy said:

 

You're being vague (and I get that because it's spoilers and whatnot) but given that the movie is critically acclaimed, widely beloved, and you're one of the few people I've heard that's talked about the plot holes as if it's a major criticism of the movie, I highly doubt that what you're referring to is something that 99% of viewers will give a shit about

This is not exactly true, online reactions that I've seen seems mixed at best, RT audience score seems to confirm that (there is no known coordinated attack against this movie), and most of the criticisms that I've seen either focus on tonal inconsistencies, or plot logical inconsistencies, with latter being more common 

[DAJK]

I dunno, I wouldn't harp on anyone saying that plot holes contribute to their dislike of a movie. I myself know of plot holes in movies I love and in movies I hate. Sometimes they jeopardize our enjoyment of the movie, sometimes they don't. 

 

For me (and I'm assuming Baumer too), I couldn't get past some of the "holes" in Us's narrative. But for other people it won't bother them at all, I think it in part also has to do with how much one is or is not already enjoying the movie. And yea, I would argue that some of the "unanswered questions" could be considered "plot holes" but other people would argue otherwise, and that's totally cool because this site would be incredibly boring if everyone had the exact same opinions on every movie. 

[The Panda]

4 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

Do you remember what happened with The Phantom Menace when it came out in 1999?  The general population and the overall wom on it was very positive.  SW nerds claimed them loved it.  Then as the years went by more and more people had to admit that they didn't care for the film even if some of them saw it 15X in the theatre.  They tried to convince themselves that they loved it because they were in love with the originals.  

 

It's not like this has never happened before.  People love certain films and that can influence their opinion of another film by the same film maker or actor.  I did it with Rambo 3.  Told my buddies that I loved it and that it was  on par with the first and second.  But that isn't true and it took me years to admit it.

Again, this is the type of comment that’s making people upset.  You’re implying people are lying to themselves about liking Us.  

 

I was pretty young when Phantom Menace came out so I can claim to be an expert on people’s reaction to it, however I’m pretty sure the whole “prequel hate” only really started catching on post-prequels.  I still see plenty of opinions that appreciate TPM and the prequels.

 

Im also not saying opinions can’t change overtime.  Of course some movies get better with time for some people and some don’t.  But you’re certainly not being fair to the people who liked Us to make the claim that “they didn’t actually like the movie as much as they say they did.”

[baumer]

1 minute ago, harrisonisdead said:

That's the thing. It's one thing to dislike a movie because of its ambiguity and its metaphors. But to ignore the existence of the very surface-level allegory that the film has (even ignoring whether or not anything else in the movie has a deeper meaning), and to be able to think hard enough about the film to come up with questions about it (incorrectly deemed plot-holes) while not thinking hard enough about the film to answer those questions with the material the movie provides is another thing. Though I understand why someone who dislikes a movie wouldn't want to think about it further and that's totally fair, that doesn't mean them claiming these things simply don't exist should be a thing.

 

Us is probably going to be a movie people over-analyze, because people think every single element and every single detail has a deeper meaning that contributes to the themes of the film. Some things in the movie are very likely only there to explain in-universe things and aren't a part of any sort of metaphor. But that doesn't mean that metaphors don't exist at all within the movie.

 

This is an incredibly pompous and ridiculous post.  First of all you don't know me at all.  I love films that make you think...I love allegorical films.  I love films with symbolism.  I just don't like this particular film.  It's also easy to ignore plot holes....GIANT GAPING FUCKING PLOT HOLES and just chalk them up to "unexplained" nuances than it is to admit there's a lot of this movie that doesn;t make any sense.  

[The Futurist]

2 minutes ago, baumer said:

 

This is an incredibly pompous and ridiculous post.  First of all you don't know me at all.  I love films that make you think...I love allegorical films.  I love films with symbolism.  I just don't like this particular film.  It's also easy to ignore plot holes....GIANT GAPING FUCKING PLOT HOLES and just chalk them up to "unexplained" nuances than it is to admit there's a lot of this movie that doesn;t make any sense.  

 

Don't get lost.

Edited March 24, 2019 by The Futurist

[The Panda]

3 minutes ago, NCsoft said:

This is not exactly true, online reactions that I've seen seems mixed at best, RT audience score seems to confirm that (there is no known coordinated attack against this movie), and most of the criticisms that I've seen either focus on tonal inconsistencies, or plot logical inconsistencies, with latter being more common 

Us certainly isn’t a movie that’s going to please everyone because it has a unique tone and style that won’t match with everyone’s tastes.  I don’t think that’s a bad thing on the movies part, and I’m not surprised that audience praise hasn’t been universal.

[baumer]

9 minutes ago, DAJK said:

I dunno, I wouldn't harp on anyone saying that plot holes contribute to their dislike of a movie. I myself know of plot holes in movies I love and in movies I hate. Sometimes they jeopardize our enjoyment of the movie, sometimes they don't. 

 

For me (and I'm assuming Baumer too), I couldn't get past some of the "holes" in Us's narrative. But for other people it won't bother them at all, I think it in part also has to do with how much one is or is not already enjoying the movie. And yea, I would argue that some of the "unanswered questions" could be considered "plot holes" but other people would argue otherwise, and that's totally cool because this site would be incredibly boring if everyone had the exact same opinions on every movie. 

 

I love love love JAWS.  But there's a couple of huge plot holes in that film.  Like when Hooper finds the tooth in Ben Gardner's boat, and then the next scene he fails to tell Vaughn  that he found Ben Gardner's head in the boat.  The reason for this omission is because Spielberg filmed this scene in post production in verna fields swimming pool.  So I get it....if you love a film you can overlook some glaring plot holes.  But in others films that you don't necessarily connect with, the plot holes are like neon signs.

[NCsoft]

6 minutes ago, The Futurist said:

It is the job of the filmmaker to make you believe in the story that is unfolding.

If you don't believe in the perfect lie that is a movie (movies are lies, ask Cameron) the filmmaker has failed in his prime mission.

It is as simple as that.

 US made me an atheist.

Until Dumbo.

I'm going to have to borrow this quote at some point 

[cdsacken]

18 minutes ago, Litio said:

It is easier to say that the movie is a mess and has several plot holes instead of trying to understand it.

Depends. If one can accurately access the situation and understand the movie I agree. If one is left to conceptualize or blatantly guess at the end then in my eyes it failed. Some love movies that have no real ending allowing you to philosophically think about the directors intentions. I loathe those types personally. 

 

To some a movie with obvious plot holes everywhere forcing you to fill in the gaps is bad. Others see it as a good thing.

[Valonqar]

8 minutes ago, NCsoft said:

You can't tell people to just do that, speaking as someone who suspend their disbelief very easily, I simply can't with this film. There's got to be a balance between creative premise and believability, and this film cross that barrier to a point that I can't buy it thematically because too many things don't make any sense.

 

It really doesn't help that the film tries to ground itself in reality and thus sort of inviting the audiences to explore logical inconsistencies, if it doesn't attempt to explain as much, I think it would have turned out for the better. If it comes to the point that in the process of trying to explain away 1 plot hole, I inevitably create 3 more gaping plot holes, I can't focus on the message and themes anymore. 

 

"Just try to have fun" is something you say for a Roland Emmerich movie, the thing is they never take themselves this seriously.

absolutely. you nailed it. the part what needn't be explained was over-explained. 

[cdsacken]

1 hour ago, baumer said:

I just didn't like it because I didn't care for the story and there was way too many plottholes and it just didn't really appeal to me. It really wasn't silent horror movie either in my opinion. But maybe you shouldn't listen to what other people are saying just go find out for yourself.

Oh I will but for me that doesn't good. I will report back once I see it

[Nero]

2 hours ago, Lucasmessi12 said:

You're right, Aquaman would not have made 1 billion in November, it would make $ 1,150 billion.

 

If Aquaman had hit the billion "only" because it was released in December, Bumblebee would have to made 1 billion as well, Bumblebee was a far more recognized character by the international audience than Aquaman was.

What he is saying is little different. Aquaman enjoyed the christmas holidays and hence it got great legs.

[Curtis1986]

Why is universal lowball and Sunday. Based on the Saturday number and the hype this was definitely going to do more on Sunday then their predictions.

[MCKillswitch123]

3 hours ago, diddykongracing128 said:

Some Random dude vs. evidence of empty seats from twitter and youtube videos. who should i trust...hmm

For your uneducated, feeble mind:

 

 

[DisposedData]

47 minutes ago, Alli said:

Hereditary was so much better

That doesn't take away anything from Us. Very very few horror movies are better than Hereditary.

[Valonqar]

4 minutes ago, cdsacken said:

Depends. If one can accurately access the situation and understand the movie I agree. If one is left to conceptualize or blatantly guess at the end then in my eyes it failed. Some love movies that have no real ending allowing you to philosophically think about the directors intentions. I loathe those types personally. 

 

To some a movie with obvious plot holes everywhere forcing you to fill in the gaps is bad. Others see it as a good thing.

 

Ha, my pet peeve are movie adaptations that one cannot follow without having read the source. For example, HP movies were extremely frustrating cause they really served as companions to the books and thus were hard to follow without reading them. You needed prior knowledge to fill in gaps and holes overload. I love them but I totally understand why non-book fans had problems with them.  whenever I watch I can't help thinking that such and such part needed this and that from the book since it didn't make sense without it. 

[The Futurist]

Moon landing.

Elvis Is Dead.

9/11

Captain Marvel en route to 1B WW.

 

 

[baumer]

Just now, DisposedData said:

That doesn't take away anything from Us. Very very few horror movies are better than Hereditary.

 

[Nova]

3 minutes ago, DisposedData said:

That doesn't take away anything from Us. Very very few horror movies are better than Hereditary.

@baumer reading this right now: