Comments by "TheNabOwnzz" (@TheNabOwnzz) on "WatchMojo.com"
channel.
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
@quantumhype9839 Unfortunately, kiddo, jumping around brainlessly in clubs and partaking in idiotic post modernist societal nonsense activities such as dating is not 'health behavior'. It's sheep following the herd, such is the way with people like yourself. You could indeed say modern life has rejected me indirectly, with its vulgarity, artlessness, left wing propaganda etc, but the real bottom line is that i have rejected it. Especially young people today are extremely disgusting, and laying eyes on either them or modern buildings is a complete eyesore. I'm a conservative, therefore i am relevant, because right is right. You're a moronic hedonistic subjectivistic left winger, therefore you're irrelevant. It's simple math, boyo. And quit the emoticons already... you're acting like a 12 year old.
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
Ricky B So you probably also think Taxi Driver is a crap movie because John Hinckley Jr used it as an inspiration to try and assassinate Ronald Reagan...? I mean, this is how ridiculous your rhetoric is. It's not a matter of disagreement. What happens outside of a movie is COMPLETELY IRRELEVANT. This is a fact, boyo. Of course, not with popularity, because that is measured by what happens outside of it, but the very definition of quality is in correlation with the internal components of something. That some people decide to build theme parks is completely irrelevant to something being good or not. Are you even being serious…? Rarely have i seen a more absurd rhetoric.
And your little rant here says nothing substantial, it's the same old 'doesn't appeal to mature audiences bla bla bla' without giving one actual point as to 'why'. Also, star wars is also fantasy fiction based on make believe heroes and monsters in a make believe world. Again, what kind of a clown are you, man? You keep embarrassing yourself with contradictions, it's really laughable.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@asinfinitascoisas5030 Boyo, again, the villains aren't supposed to be developed character. They are just there to create a setting for the impeccably developed protagonists. It's an irrelevant point. Perhaps if the villain had a lot of screentime, you would have a point, but they do not, unless you count Gollum, as i said, who is indeed a great character. What's poorly made about orcs? This is like complaining that sieges in war films have many people in it that are not developed, lmao. How is the fellowship ''not good''? It is the greatest in all of cinema, boyo. ''Acting very stupid''... again, such a ridiculous remark... how? The acting is very good by pretty much everyone in the cast. ''Can't get you to care about those characters'' is your most ridiculous complaint of all. This is a purely baseless subjective fancy of yours. If there were characters to care about in cinema, it would be those of LOTR, namely Frodo & Sam. Talk about trivial things? What's this supposed to mean? I guess you missed Sam's monologue about the stories that really mattered in TTT, and his reminiscences of the Shire in RotK. No weight to the story? These moments lead one to surmise the obvious fact that these two have been through a torturous journey full of famine and hopelessness, in a world that blatantly shows the decrepit evil in comparison to the sheltered Shire life they led. Yeah, the ring is powerful in its seduction, therefore people are seduced.... what's bad about that, lmao? That's like saying it's predictable people get killed in the Godfather because it's about the mob. Going crazy only character development? Let us ignore the utter transformation of Frodo, Sam, Pippin & Merry in their journey, Aragorn's return from selfish exile to selfless responsibility, Boromir's sin covered quickly by his final redemption, Faramir's gradual progression to acceptance (That also goes for Eowyn) etc etc. I mean, it's a fact that they're pretty well developed.
Atmosphere not very sinister? Again you're just twisting the facts here. There is a dark, melancholy musical score in many scenes, death is shown as a serious thing by usage of slow motion and the accompanying said melodramatic score, Nazgul scenes, or the Khazad Dum sequence in particular, are quite obvious examples of that. Editing horrible? Again this just seems like a flim-flam argument, you just don't like it so you pull baseless criticisms out of your sleeves, when in reality you really are not making any sense. The visuals at night are actually even better than at night, nor is it ever too dark, boyo lmao. The best shot in the trilogy is that of a Nazgul, in Fellowship, on a hill, with the moonlight lighting the background, in the dark. Therefore, one cannot deny the superior characters, superior (both day and night) cinematography and sets, and the genuine seriousness of its subject matter.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3