Rayman Pirate-Community

RayTunes wrote:Going to see ''Jack & Jill'' tonight. Looks a bit mediocre to me.
EDIT: It actually had some pretty good jokes in it. Though, a bit too American for me at some parts.

I suppose Citizen Kane and The Godfather were also ‘a bit too American’ for your sophisticated tastes? Jack & Jill is the worst film of the year, but that has nothing to do with the fact that it was made in America.

RayTunes wrote:Watched The Three Musketeers yesterday. Excellent movie!!

I’ve heard that one’s pretty terrible too.

spiraldoor wrote:I suppose Citizen Kane and The Godfather were also ‘a bit too American’ for your sophisticated tastes? Jack & Jill is the worst film of the year, but that has nothing to do with the fact that it was made in America.

Jack & Jill was indeed a mediocre title. I don't mean this in an offensive way, but think of it as the new commercial from Rayman Origins. Most of us don't seem to get the jokes in that commercial, and the same effect occurs with this movie.

spiraldoor wrote:I’ve heard that one’s pretty terrible too.

No, it had a good story line, fine actors, and some of the best special effects ever. The only downside seemed to be that some things didn't exist in those days.

Is it me or are 90% of all the posts you make in this topic disliking a movie?

RayTunes wrote:Jack & Jill was indeed a mediocre title. I don't mean this in an offensive way, but think of it as the new commercial from Rayman Origins. Most of us don't seem to get the jokes in that commercial, and the same effect occurs with this movie.

It’s not mediocre, it’s offensively horrible. ‘Although it features an inexplicably committed performance from Al Pacino, Jack and Jill is impossible to recommend on any level whatsoever.’ That’s the critical consensus according to Rotten Tomatoes, which has awarded Jack & Jill a glorious 4% approval rating. Please don’t equate Rayman Origins (a work of art that the creators genuinely cared about) with this rubbish.

RayTunes wrote:No, it had a good story line, fine actors, and some of the best special effects ever. The only downside seemed to be that some things didn't exist in those days.

‘It plays admirably fast and loose with Alexandre Dumas' classic tale, but in every other respect, The Three Musketeers offers nothing to recommend -- or to set it apart from the many other film adaptations.’ The aggregated opinion of the critics is far more important than yours or mine, and it says that this film is crap, with mild redeeming features bumping it up to 24% approval.

RayTunes wrote:Is it me or are 90% of all the posts you make in this topic disliking a movie?

It’s you, but what is wrong with disliking most films? It’s hard not to if you have good taste. I’d hate to be the sort of person who accepts uninspired, poorly-made rubbish and thinks it’s ‘excellent’.

spiraldoor wrote:It’s not mediocre, it’s offensively horrible. ‘Although it features an inexplicably committed performance from Al Pacino, Jack and Jill is impossible to recommend on any level whatsoever.’ That’s the critical consensus according to Rotten Tomatoes, which has awarded Jack & Jill a glorious 4% approval rating. Please don’t equate Rayman Origins (a work of art that the creators genuinely cared about) with this rubbish.

True. The movie was bad.

spiraldoor wrote:‘It plays admirably fast and loose with Alexandre Dumas' classic tale, but in every other respect, The Three Musketeers offers nothing to recommend -- or to set it apart from the many other film adaptations.’ The aggregated opinion of the critics is far more important than yours or mine, and it says that this film is crap, with mild redeeming features bumping it up to 24% approval.

Well, the ending gives away that they want to make a sequel.

spiraldoor wrote:It’s you, but what is wrong with disliking most films? It’s hard not to if you have good taste. I’d hate to be the sort of person who accepts uninspired, poorly-made rubbish and thinks it’s ‘excellent’.

I watch a huge amount of movies and seem to like most that I watch... except for some deep failures. I enjoy what most people like such as Lord of the Rings or Sherlock Holmes. But, you seem to be the only one who would call a movie such as Inception a rubbish. That is just my opinion, though.

Has anyone watched Watchmen or The Kings's Speech? I'm quite interested in both of them.

RayTunes wrote:I watch a huge amount of movies and seem to like most that I watch... except for some deep failures.

I watch a new film every day, but I always make sure that they are actually good first; I would never watch something like Jack & Jill or The Three Musketeers.

RayTunes wrote:I enjoy what most people like such as Lord of the Rings or Sherlock Holmes.

Being liked by ‘most people’ has no bearing on the quality of a film, so I’m not sure what you’re trying to suggest. The Lord of the Rings is very good in its own right, but a failure compared to the book. Assuming you’re talking about the Guy Ritchie version, I found Sherlock Holmes adequate but forgettable.

RayTunes wrote:But, you seem to be the only one who would call a movie such as Inception a rubbish. That is just my opinion, though.

Wtf? What exactly gives you the impression that I would call Inception ‘rubbish’? Please don’t make such bizarre claims about me without even attempting to justify them. For the record, it doesn’t escape the shadow of The Matrix, but it still was my favourite film of 2010.

RayTunes wrote:Has anyone watched Watchmen or The Kings's Speech? I'm quite interested in both of them.

Watchmen was directed by a boon who stripped out the most intelligent and challenging ideas presented in the source material, and changed the ending from an amazing one to a lame one. The film is OK when judged on its own merits. I haven’t seen The King’s Speech yet.

spiraldoor wrote:The Lord of the Rings is very good in its own right, but a failure compared to the book.

I find you very harsh here.

Then you’d hate to hear what some of the hardcore Tolkien fans think of them. I loved the films at first, but their weaknesses become more and more apparent as the years go on. Many important storylines and entire chapters were skimmed over or removed, and some of the extraneous storylines added by the filmmakers were very poor. The tone is also shaky – much of Tolkien’s quaint English wit was replaced by Jackson’s crude and boorish humour. You’d need a six-film series to really do the books justice, or perhaps a big-budget television programme similar to Game of Thrones.

Apparently one comment can lead to yet another discussion. *Becomes tired*

spiraldoor wrote:I watch a new film every day, but I always make sure that they are actually good first; I would never watch something like Jack & Jill or The Three Musketeers.

Holy shit. I would go insane from watching a movie every day.

spiraldoor wrote:Wtf? What exactly gives you the impression that I would call Inception ‘rubbish’? Please don’t make such bizarre claims about me without even attempting to justify them. For the record, it doesn’t escape the shadow of The Matrix, but it still was my favourite film of 2010.

Ah, I should have gone back in and read every single word in the Inception discussion and have carefully chosen what I would write.

Fuck it. Just ignore my posts next time.

spiraldoor wrote:You’d need a six-film series to really do the books justice, or perhaps a big-budget television programme similar to Game of Thrones.

That's exactly my point ; Jackson did quite well adapting that huge book in only three movies. The only thing I truly hate about the series is Legolas... his action scenes are just ridiculous. I'm not denying the movies' weaknesses, I'm just saying that those are inherent to a film adaptation. And it is a good adaptation.

RayTunes wrote:Ah, I should have gone back in and read every single word in the Inception discussion and have carefully chosen what I would write.

I’m not concerned by your failure to research by reading the Inception discussion; I’m asking you not to make inane claims about my personality and then run off when I ask you to explain them.

RayTunes wrote:Fuck it. Just ignore my posts next time.

Haha, nice try. You’re not getting off that easily.

DesLife wrote:That's exactly my point ; Jackson did quite well adapting that huge book in only three movies. The only thing I truly hate about the series is Legolas... his action scenes are just ridiculous. I'm not denying the movies' weaknesses, I'm just saying that those are inherent to a film adaptation. And it is a good adaptation.

Like I said, they’re very good films, but I still think that they could have come much closer to the quality of the book, even within the constraints of a trilogy. Many of the films’ problems were caused not by compression, but simply by Jackson mucking about with the story.

I recently had an X-Men marathon. Here's what I thought of the films:
X-Men: 8/10
X2: 8.5/10
X-Men 3: The Last Stand: 6.5/10
X-Men Origins: Wolverine: 6/10
X-Men: First Class: 9/10

I heard the Muppets are returning to the cinema. Another movie I would love to see.

Haruka wrote:I heard the Muppets are returning to the cinema. Another movie I would love to see.

Where you heart that Haruka?

In the television.

See Wikipedia. I'm skeptical, but yes, they are returning.

I watched Arthur Christmas today, and I suppose the movie was alright, but WHY WAS THE INTRO A JUSTIN BIEBER MUSIC VIDEO!!!!???!??!!!??

*Faints*

stan423321 wrote:See Wikipedia. I'm skeptical, but yes, they are returning.

Well, that was announced ages ago. It's about a new Muppet visiting his brother, and somehow all of the Muppets come and decide to restart their abandoned show. It came out today here. I'm seeing it tomorrow.

spiraldoor wrote:Haha, nice try. You’re not getting off that easily.

What are you trying to point out? That you'll continue to exhaust the last bit of someone until you can close your computer and say ''I won a absolutely pointless discussion about Jack & Jill''?

I also would like to see Puss In Boots from Dreamworks, I've seen the trailer and the movie seems to be really nice.

RayTunes wrote:

spiraldoor wrote:

RayTunes wrote:Fuck it. Just ignore my posts next time.

Haha, nice try. You’re not getting off that easily.

What are you trying to point out? That you'll continue to exhaust the last bit of someone until you can close your computer and say ''I won a absolutely pointless discussion about Jack & Jill''?

I was trying to point out that you can’t boss me around and tell me to ignore your posts. I respond indiscriminately.

GlueTube365 wrote:I saw Tintin, and I thought it was pretty good!

Isn't Michel Ancel making the video game for that?

I’ve seen nothing to suggest that he’s involved, just speculation.