"Pretty in Pink is awful. Rich @$$hole who won’t listen to the girl he’s dating vs the nice guy friend who thinks he’s owed affection. Characters can be terrible and annoying, but the whole movie just has me cringing and hurting for the protaganist the whole time.
In all reality, the rest of the movie was pretty good. I just didn’t like two of the central characters. No big deal"
3
1.
Bertha 2 year s ago
#3 nice movie!
2
2.
Alexis 2 year s ago
Bertha,
every...single...movie Costner has been the lead in, is an ego vehicle for him. Dances with Wolves started it when an entire Sioux tribe fell in love with him and in Waterworld he was the mysterious and alluring 'sailor' where men wanted to be him, and all females loved him. He's so self absorbed, I can hardly stand the sight and sound of him.
every...single...movie Costner has been the lead in, is an ego vehicle for him. Dances with Wolves started it when an entire Sioux tribe fell in love with him and in Waterworld he was the mysterious and alluring 'sailor' where men wanted to be him, and all females loved him. He's so self absorbed, I can hardly stand the sight and sound of him.
0
3.
Bertha 2 year s ago
#4 Aliens is MUCH better!
#13 True for must of them
#13 True for must of them
1
4.
Serena 2 year s ago
Phantom Menace... the kid didn't do it for me.
2
5.
Alexis 2 year s ago
Serena,
Qui Gon Jinn. he was dull, lack luster and monotone. Liam Neeson is 6 ft 4 he's huge. he looked awkward, off balance, bored and out of place the whole damn time. the movie didn't need him. Ewan McGregor would have been enough and was definitely the better character. natalie portman and Sam jackson were so busy having perfect elocution while trying to look stately and noble, that they were wooden and one dimensional. the kid was a walking headache brought on by sugar shock, and Jar Jar was the single greatest culmination of bad ideas and stupid cliches that only showed us how terrible Lucas is at making films, surrounded by yes men and women, and generally confused by his own creation. that movie was just plain awful. "Exsqueeeze me!"
Qui Gon Jinn. he was dull, lack luster and monotone. Liam Neeson is 6 ft 4 he's huge. he looked awkward, off balance, bored and out of place the whole damn time. the movie didn't need him. Ewan McGregor would have been enough and was definitely the better character. natalie portman and Sam jackson were so busy having perfect elocution while trying to look stately and noble, that they were wooden and one dimensional. the kid was a walking headache brought on by sugar shock, and Jar Jar was the single greatest culmination of bad ideas and stupid cliches that only showed us how terrible Lucas is at making films, surrounded by yes men and women, and generally confused by his own creation. that movie was just plain awful. "Exsqueeeze me!"
-3
6.
Waldo 2 year s ago
#2 It would not have mattered who played Diaz's role in Gangs Of New York; it was as bad as any movie ever made.
0
7.
Alexis 2 year s ago
Waldo,
It says a lot about Diaz and Decaprio when they can keep me away from a Daniel Day Lewis performance like Bill the Butcher. I can't do it. Just can't. They are just that bad.
It says a lot about Diaz and Decaprio when they can keep me away from a Daniel Day Lewis performance like Bill the Butcher. I can't do it. Just can't. They are just that bad.
0
8.
Alexis 2 year s ago
#8 oh is that so? well, when a favorite franchise gets ruined be a 20 years late cash grab sequel, what's ruined is the memory of how a movie, or series of movies, were something that formed your first impression of a bigger world and fired your imagination while giving you characters that seemed like friends and heroes both. Ask the people who grew up with Harry Potter films and Toy Story. such a thing like an endearing series is formative and familiar to you as a kid, and then the modern day sequel happens and you're adult enough to recognize not only what they did, but why they did it, and it stinks. your childhood isn't ruined, per se' but something important and special to it was dragged into the present and reduced to a cheap sell out. they made Toy Story 4 for nostalgia money and it sucked and we all know it did. it shouldn't have happened. most of these reheated sequels never should have.
0
9.
Asa 2 year s ago
Alexis,
If you have that little control over your thoughs and memories I feel very sorry for you. Why would you let anything disrupt a "special" memory or feeling. Maybe it's not the content that changed but you. It sounds like you lost that child innocence and wonder like almost all adults do. They where making the movies you loved as a kid for the same reason, a cash grab.
Example: The original star wars trilogy was my trilogy as a very young child. The prequil trilogy is not for me but my daughter loved it. The new trilogy, also not really my thing but my teenage son loves it. Their experience doesn't inform mine, I just enjoy watching them discover something in the same cinematic world as something I love. It's certainly better than watching reruns of paw patrol.
If you have that little control over your thoughs and memories I feel very sorry for you. Why would you let anything disrupt a "special" memory or feeling. Maybe it's not the content that changed but you. It sounds like you lost that child innocence and wonder like almost all adults do. They where making the movies you loved as a kid for the same reason, a cash grab.
Example: The original star wars trilogy was my trilogy as a very young child. The prequil trilogy is not for me but my daughter loved it. The new trilogy, also not really my thing but my teenage son loves it. Their experience doesn't inform mine, I just enjoy watching them discover something in the same cinematic world as something I love. It's certainly better than watching reruns of paw patrol.
1
10.
Charity 2 year s ago
Bro, you have such terrible kid taste.
every...single...movie Costner has been the lead in, is an ego vehicle for him. Dances with Wolves started it when an entire Sioux tribe fell in love with him and in Waterworld he was the mysterious and alluring 'sailor' where men wanted to be him, and all females loved him. He's so self absorbed, I can hardly stand the sight and sound of him.
#13 True for must of them
Qui Gon Jinn. he was dull, lack luster and monotone. Liam Neeson is 6 ft 4 he's huge. he looked awkward, off balance, bored and out of place the whole damn time. the movie didn't need him. Ewan McGregor would have been enough and was definitely the better character. natalie portman and Sam jackson were so busy having perfect elocution while trying to look stately and noble, that they were wooden and one dimensional. the kid was a walking headache brought on by sugar shock, and Jar Jar was the single greatest culmination of bad ideas and stupid cliches that only showed us how terrible Lucas is at making films, surrounded by yes men and women, and generally confused by his own creation. that movie was just plain awful. "Exsqueeeze me!"
It says a lot about Diaz and Decaprio when they can keep me away from a Daniel Day Lewis performance like Bill the Butcher. I can't do it. Just can't. They are just that bad.
If you have that little control over your thoughs and memories I feel very sorry for you. Why would you let anything disrupt a "special" memory or feeling. Maybe it's not the content that changed but you. It sounds like you lost that child innocence and wonder like almost all adults do. They where making the movies you loved as a kid for the same reason, a cash grab.
Example: The original star wars trilogy was my trilogy as a very young child. The prequil trilogy is not for me but my daughter loved it. The new trilogy, also not really my thing but my teenage son loves it. Their experience doesn't inform mine, I just enjoy watching them discover something in the same cinematic world as something I love. It's certainly better than watching reruns of paw patrol.