Steam'i Yükleyin
giriş
|
dil
简体中文 (Basitleştirilmiş Çince)
繁體中文 (Geleneksel Çince)
日本語 (Japonca)
한국어 (Korece)
ไทย (Tayca)
Български (Bulgarca)
Čeština (Çekçe)
Dansk (Danca)
Deutsch (Almanca)
English (İngilizce)
Español - España (İspanyolca - İspanya)
Español - Latinoamérica (İspanyolca - Latin Amerika)
Ελληνικά (Yunanca)
Français (Fransızca)
Italiano (İtalyanca)
Bahasa Indonesia (Endonezce)
Magyar (Macarca)
Nederlands (Hollandaca)
Norsk (Norveççe)
Polski (Lehçe)
Português (Portekizce - Portekiz)
Português - Brasil (Portekizce - Brezilya)
Română (Rumence)
Русский (Rusça)
Suomi (Fince)
Svenska (İsveççe)
Tiếng Việt (Vietnamca)
Українська (Ukraynaca)
Bir çeviri sorunu bildirin
Name one... I'll wait...
An actor / actress can't "save" a movie... like I said, you can't call garbage ice cream because you put chocolate sprinkles on top... many, many, many awesome actors / actresses are in unsavable movies.
Speedy was pushing drugs on kids. Yes i know these cartoons was meant for adults originally. But they could of edited it out when showing it to kids.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7w1PTCdOM5Q
So you don't have an answer... got it.
See the problem with just saying "yes there is" is that eventually you have to actually prove it rather then just willing it to be because "I say so"... even small kids get that eventually... or more to the point, less and less are and they grow up thinking "because I say so" is the same as reality.
As for your "subjective" stance... I can assure you that where as you yourself can name Laurence of Arabia... nobody will in 58 years speak the same way about Avengers: Endgame... and I would feel safe to put money on that...
Need I go on? ;)
I could not have done it any better myself.
I probably still prefer the originals, though. Where you could only see the legs of the people. That was sort of a hallmark aspect, from the originals, if I remember correct, that I found funny.
That seems to be missing here. Here you can actually see the people their faces, instead of just their legs and feet. Or maybe I am confusing this with something else?
Again... name them... I'm still waiting for anything more then "yes there is"
You came up with "actors can save movies" not me... and then couldn't name any but "yes there is".. the burden of proof is on you because you said they could to my they can't... trying to shift blame isn't an answer... it's just a dodge because you know you can't prove otherwise.
"People"? Ok. name them... lol.. just kidding.
I rather doubt it at all... in fact there are more people alive today that can even name movies made in the 80's and 90's rather then in the 2000's... despite what Hollywood award shows want people to believe...
Again... repeating your "NO, YOU!" is just playing word games... I'll tell you one when you tell me one that dose... and I'm still waitng.
LMAO... you just proved me right and admitted you were wrong... agree.. Cats is a terrible movie..
Awesome musical by Andrew Lloyd Webber, Tony Award winning in fact... great director: Tom Hooper, great screenplay writers Lee Hall and Hooper, Budget $80–100 million so it had TONS of money put into it... and yet... and yet.. James Corden, Judi Dench, Jason Derulo, Idris Elba, Jennifer Hudson, Ian McKellen, Taylor Swift, Rebel Wilson, and Francesca Hayward...
could
not
save
it.
Thank you.. now, was that so hard to admit to?
Oh dear.. here we go.. can't win so start name calling and attacking the person that doesn't agree with you... how sad.
A name is a name... if your idea of what it means isn't up to your standard then it's "wrong"? Just shows how shallow and empty you are...
The original was great.. and yes, no one says it's a bad movie ~because it's a good movie~ People say it's a good movie because it is... I don't understand why that's so hard to comprehend.
It might of been "hilarious to watch" but him being in it saved the movie?... no.. and you agree the actor didn't "save the movie" but all you can say is "we don't talk about ( it )" which again says more then it doesn't that you agree but refuse to admit you're wrong because: "I'm right even when I'm wrong"
Not to mention... the reason people like the old Ghostbusters is because everything about it was good... not just the actors... and the reverse is true too... the actresses in the movie couldn't save the new Gostbusters movie alone even tough the original ones were in the movie because the rest of it was garbage and.. wait for it... wait for it... actresses no matter how "funny" ( if people say so, meh ) couldn't save a poor script, weak effects, recycled plot... ect. it takes an ENTIRE movie to make a good movie...
Now ( help me I'm textwalling again *sigh* )
"Bad" movies can be "good" movies... say... Plan 9 From Outer Space... but that's a niche movie genre that doesn't actually take itself seriously or try to claim itself as "good" even when it's not... that falls more into a "freudenschade" definition because it's so bad it's entertaining...
Oh well... goodbye troll... it was fun while it lasted but you now twice agreed with me even if you won't admit it... and that's good enough for me.
And I love this:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1JKd1C7izQ