39
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[-] IWW4@lemmy.zip 32 points 1 month ago

Unfortunately for too long now: “A Long Time Ago in a Galaxy Far Far Away”

Directed by:

  • Uwe Boll
  • Michael Bay

If you see this logo:

The company is the king of what used to be called Direct To Video. Now it is all Direct to Streaming.

[-] cheat700000007@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago
[-] statler_waldorf@sopuli.xyz 9 points 1 month ago

Only if it's a Happy Gilmore production. If he's acting in someone else's movie, he can be a great actor.

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] aeronmelon@lemmy.world 27 points 1 month ago

Two character immediately infordumping to each other as if that’s how humans normally communicate.

“Are you ready? This is going to be a hard job. As you know, they’ve tightened security but we got a man on the inside. As long as does his job then it’s smooth sailing.”

“I was born ready. Eveeything will be fine as long as the shipment is on time. As you know, we put a tracker on the lead car and I can watch exactly where it is from this device in real-time.”

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 10 points 1 month ago

Compare this to the bank robbery opening in Dark Knight haha.

I've never seen Heat, but I've also never seen any newer movies top that scene since.

[-] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 9 points 1 month ago

Heat is as good as people have been telling you.

There's also a novel, Heat 2, written by the movie's director that serves as a prequel and sequel.

[-] passenger@sopuli.xyz 4 points 1 month ago

And I hear soon there is Heat 2 the movie

load more comments (2 replies)
[-] SharkWeek 3 points 1 month ago

Heat is, in my opinion, a really bad movie. I just don't see what others like about it, outside the action set pieces.

[-] harmbugler@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

The cat & mouse between the protagonists and the unfolding similarity of their drives and subsequent impact on their personal lives.

[-] SharkWeek 3 points 1 month ago

Ok, but that's through stilted, awkward, and dull conversations ... I stopped watching at the halfway point because I was bored, and skipped to the action bits TBH (and that's not something I've ever done for another movie)

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] mnemonicmonkeys@sh.itjust.works 8 points 1 month ago

Two character immediately infordumping to each other as if that’s how humans normally communicate.

How dare you besmirch The Princess Bride!

load more comments (1 replies)
[-] voxthefox 26 points 1 month ago

Oversaturated marketing campaign and overly bloated cast are the two big red flags for me.

Both are indicative that the budget for the movie was not put towards the actual content of the film but about trying to pull in the largest demographics of people.

[-] scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 8 points 1 month ago

bloated cast are the two big red flags for me

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_RWsI8BUkWc

[-] Notyou@sopuli.xyz 20 points 1 month ago

Directed by JJ Abrams

[-] gasgiant@lemmy.ml 16 points 1 month ago

Wow first one to say Jared Leto.

Unless I've missed morbin time suddenly becoming popular?

[-] JillyB@beehaw.org 10 points 1 month ago

Bladerunner 2049 is great. In that, he plays a self-absorbed sadistic rich asshole. Phenomenal casting if you ask me.

[-] luciole@beehaw.org 4 points 1 month ago

Meh, of course this is all subjective but I wish Jared Leto’s character wasn’t there in Bladerunner 2049. The first Bladerunner worked so well precisely because there was no real baddie. Everyone had reasons, a story, anguish, frustrations, internal turmoil. Jared Leto was standard issue evil mastermind creep.

[-] B0NK3RS@lazysoci.al 11 points 1 month ago
  • Camera cuts

It sucks for me because once they start with the unnecessary cuts it pulls me right out and I'll probably stop watching.

[-] wyldrstallyns@lemmy.dbzer0.com 11 points 1 month ago
load more comments (3 replies)
[-] A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

If it's a comedy: the first joke.

But there's always exceptions to any rule. I recently watched Spaceballs (yes, first time) and it would normally fall under "suck", but it got increasingly better as it went along.

[-] Senal@programming.dev 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

these logo's:

Though i will say the production value on the latest daily wire show was really high, probably the absolute fuck-tonne of money they spent on it.

[-] IWW4@lemmy.zip 5 points 1 month ago

What the hell is Angel. I am seeing that company logo all over. Are they a distribution house or are they some sort of religious shit?

[-] Senal@programming.dev 4 points 1 month ago

I think they are kind of like a production house with an additional kickstarter backing thing, or small individual investors of some other kind, i'm not sure.

Here is the wiki

Their programming is pretty faithy, have a look at the lineup and you'll see from the titles.

I don't care much for that genre, but i don't see it as that much different than any other genre, it's just not for me.

What i will say is that their productions are the faith based equivalent of straight to vhs action movies.

It's generic dross with meh writing and some reasonable production values.

but that's just my opinion, perhaps it's worth a shot if you're into that kind of genre.

[-] A_norny_mousse@piefed.zip 4 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Definitely the latter, but also MAGA, the whole shebang. They recently made full proper movie versions of Q-Anon "documentaries". One of my favorite podcasters grudgingly had to admit that the production is more than just OK.

They popped up on fascist grifters podcasts, but are going more mainstream now.
They are clearly benefiting from the current political currents in the USA.

Also, Jim Caviezel 🤮

[-] iagomago@feddit.it 10 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)
  • Netflix lighting
  • Generic, Zimmer-stolen OST
  • Franchises
  • Standard blocking
  • Overexposition
  • Whedonisms
  • More broadly, anything that's been big budget Hollywood for the last 30 years or so.
[-] Mycatiskai@lemmy.ca 10 points 1 month ago

Starring Mark Wahlberg.

The only exception is The Other Guys.

[-] mech@feddit.org 7 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

Pain & Gain is a goddamn masterpiece, and I'm willing to die on this hill.

[-] nonentity@sh.itjust.works 7 points 1 month ago

This is a very lazy observation, but for a US production, if it’s released in the US first it’s often a sign they’re trying to get the opening weekend without many reviews available to dissuade attendance.

If it’s actually a good film, it’ll open in a foreign region a week or two before the US so they can use those reviews in promotion.

[-] bigbangdangler@reddthat.com 6 points 1 month ago

Pacing that feels more like an Instagram reel than a feature film.

Excessive use of poor effects or artificial camera shake.

[-] PeculiarGoat@lemmy.world 6 points 1 month ago

When the trailer is just a highlights reel of the entire plot. If the movie was worth watching they would let it speak for itself.

[-] CmdrShepard49@sh.itjust.works 6 points 1 month ago

Typically things I look for are a movie that's pushed like its a big budget film but doesn't have any actors I've ever heard of.

Too much expositional dialogue at the beginning of the movie especially when its so foreign to the way people talk in real life.

In the new Star Wars movie, the "can you hear me now?" "joke" in the first 5 minutes.

Unnecessary sequels to a completed story.

I'm sure there are others but my break is over and this is all I could think of.

[-] DagwoodIII@piefed.social 6 points 1 month ago

More than five 'executive producers.'

[-] BarneyPiccolo@lemmy.cafe 5 points 1 month ago
[-] Krudler@lemmy.world 5 points 1 month ago

Promoted in media, then suddenly disappears and not heard of again for 4-8 months.

It went horribly with test audiences, then got sent for a focus-group-based reworking. Always trash.

[-] Frenchgeek@lemmy.ml 4 points 1 month ago

When you can't escape the ads for it.

[-] schroedingersKoala@piefed.ca 4 points 1 month ago

Directed by: Uwe Boll

[-] buliarous@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

exposition in the form of character monologue at a length longer than 30 seconds that is required for the rest of the movie to make sense.

[-] Focal@pawb.social 3 points 1 month ago

Two come to mind here, neither are bad.

Dune and The Lord of the Rings.

I suspect these two to be exceptions to the rule of thumb you're proposing though, but I can't actually think of any that does this poorly.

Got any examples?

[-] statler_waldorf@sopuli.xyz 3 points 1 month ago

I'd say any bad exposition, no matter how short. I was marginally interested in watching Shang-Chi after watching Wonder Man since I heard Trevor was in it too.

Right after the intro sequence, they jump to the present to introduce him and his friend and she immediately says something like "we've been friends for 10 years" and it was just so forced that I turned it off.

[-] Janx@piefed.social 4 points 1 month ago

For comedies, none of the jokes in the trailer are that funny or make you laugh.

[-] roofuskit@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Typically the impression I get from the trailer. I have seen so many trailers and so many movies I usually can't even tell you why anymore.

[-] SharkWeek 4 points 1 month ago

Opening exposition that involves silly names for things ...

There's examples if good exposition (see: the start of Mad Max 2) but anything that starts with shit like

"They came from the skies, mysteriously, the monsters we now call the Xergifaltuns. With their Spiglyzarfix weapons we didn't stand a chance ..."

Yeah, it's going to be rubbish.

[-] mlg@lemmy.world 4 points 1 month ago

Detailed CGI in sci fi that's been lense or motioned blurred into oblivion.

Doesn't even matter if the CGI was subpar because now the whole thing looks like RGB vommit.

It's especially painful coming from gaming where you get to see crisp visual quality at every angle even on games as old as Halo CE.

[-] lichtmetzger@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 1 month ago

Movies funded by Germany.

It's always the same type of movie. Either we get some boomer vs. youth plot, a family (+child) with relationship problems or something about the second world war. It's the most boring slop for our aging population you can imagine.

[-] yessikg@fedia.io 3 points 1 month ago

If it's a movie about a woman and it's written and directed by a man

[-] statler_waldorf@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 month ago
[-] yessikg@fedia.io 4 points 1 month ago

There are always exceptions but 99% of the time the movie ends up being misogynistic garbage

[-] whotookkarl@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 month ago

It opens with a talking head news reporter monologuing a voiceover of some bullshit

[-] NigelFrobisher@aussie.zone 5 points 1 month ago

Fucking news reports playing straight to screen without any characters reacting to them are a pox on storytelling. You can spot the exact moment where Sam Raimi mentally checks out of Spider-man 3 when this happens - the bit the studio made him do because they wanted Venom in the movie (not the Emo Parker bits, which are intentionally cringe and awesome).

[-] Cherry@piefed.social 3 points 1 month ago

Anything where the poster/promo has a man and woman apart but kinda the same each other (grumpy or lustfully). Relationship waffle made into movies is the most boring looking crap. It usually has a 3-5 word little like ‘you said forever’ or ‘beneath the elderflower moon’

load more comments
view more: next ›
this post was submitted on 19 May 2026
39 points (100.0% liked)

movies

3626 readers
313 users here now

A community about movies and cinema.

Related communities:

Rules

  1. Be civil
  2. No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
  3. Do not spam
  4. Stay on topic
  5. These rules will evolve as this community grows

No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS