MovieChat Forums > CCRider01 > Replies
CCRider01's Replies
Thanks for the link, many of my favorite films are in the 251-600 range. I agree with the OP that something needs to be done (algorithm tweak) to keep these average (and too often outright mediocre) Indian films out of the top 250. They are clearly being subjected to a "patriotic boost" from the "home team" fans.
Adding another filter, where "home team" votes are either discounted, or a film must have a certain percentage of its votes from countries outside of its country of origin in order to make the top 250. IMDB is heading down the path where say 15 years from now, 35-40% of its top 250 will be made up of animated films, Marvel or DC superheros, and "home team" boosted foreign films.
On another note, IMDB must be using a different algorithm for the top 250 as they are using for the top 1000. Many films on the lower end of the top 250 are ranked differently, such as Jaws at 236 on the top 250, ranked at 332 on the top 1000 list. Quite strange.
Ha, fully agree, if they slapped tights and capes onto the characters, CGI'ed the crap out of it, and renamed it Marvel's One Hour Photo Man, it would be 8.1 minimum.
Yep, 6.8 does not accurately represent the quality of this film, it deserves a minimum of 7.5.
The score seems to have dropped over the years, I remember it being higher a decade ago.
"Yeah, that would be pretty stupid, but that's not how it went. Here's what happened"
Seems you were the only person on this thread that paid attention to the movie. As you stated, the pictures were taken on his lovers camera, and she took them to be processed.
The married man would have no idea that:
A. His lover would take her photo's to the exact same store as his wife does
B. The photo guy would recognize and connect him in the photo's
C. The photo guy would care (be psycho) enough to get involved
I found this part of the plot to not be unrealistic at all.
Living in Vancouver Canada during the height of the CD boom in the late 1980's to late 1990's, I never got the whole CD's were too expensive" thing that is common from Americans or Brits. There was a record store chain called A&B Sound that sold pretty much all their CD's in the $8-14 CDN range ($6-$11 USD or 3.50-6.50 pounds). Their pricing model was to basically sell CD's at cost and "live off" the monthly volume rebates from the record labels. A&B Sound is the reason why Vancouver had the lowest CD prices in Canada, and some of the lowest prices in the western world.
A&B Sounds aggressive pricing also forced other major players established in Vancouver to lower their prices, and was a prime factor in keeping Tower Records from expanding into Vancouver, which they were rumored to be interested in doing by scouting a location.
"Thankfully, this (rather cheesy) type of stock character is rare these days. In the 21st century, female characters have to be more Lara Croft style" - Yeah we have replaced one type of cheese for another, namely the damsel in distress for the 120 lb female character that can kick the butt of 230 lb muscle dudes (often two or more at a time). For me, they are both annoying and well played out, but if I had to pick one to watch, I would very slightly pick the Lara Croft kick butt type of female character.
Its not even the best Spidey movie of the 2010's, so no.
Yes you stated it used jump scares, but your original comment (and the one I replied to) was that it only had a total 3, in other words you were implying that Annabelle Creation is a very low jump scare horror film, I disagree on the number, that is all.
My point? should be obvious. Annabelle Creation is a modern horror movie that utilizes jump scares. You claimed it used hardly any jump scares, my point, is that its use of jump scares is a lot more extensive than you claim, whether or not you personally "jumped" much, does not have change that. That is pretty much it? No?
Obviously a horror film does not need jump scares in order to be scary, jump scares are merely a lazy way of eliciting fear in an audience, it is no coincidence that jump scares have become more common in today's horror films. Plenty of films have high IMDB ratings today that are nothing special, it is more a case of people having low standards, especial for the horror genre. Again just because YOU did not jump much does not mean that Annabelle Creation did not utilize jump scares, when it clearly did on numerous occasions. It is also not just the author of that sites opinion, it is pretty much universal all over the internet that Annabelle Creation utilized jump scares, whether or not YOU or myself jumped is irreverent to that fact.
There are plenty of films that I personally do not find remotely funny, but that does not change the fact that they are in the comedy genre, and attempted to utilize humor to make people laugh.
Perhaps because you have seen a lot of horror movies? I have also seen a lot of horror flicks and found this film quite lame, not to mention very cliche and totally lacking in originality, in other words just a typical run of the mill horror film, nothing special at all. Its relatively high IMDB rating for this type of movie is surprising. Having said all that, the film still had its fair share of jump scare scenes, the fact that some people jumped less than others, does not change that.
wheresthejump.com classified it as a "high jump scare" movie, and gave it a rating of 4.5/5 for jumps. 5 major jump scares and 18 minor ones.
https://wheresthejump.com/jump-scares-in-annabelle-creation-2017/
Read your original reply, and then my replies, lol.
Yep, the few are still out there!
All my posts are related the topic, OP, whereas yours seem to really miss the point. Food for thought.
Firstly, it could be said that just like the explosion in desktop computers from the mid 1990's to mid 2000's, smartphones would not have become a fraction as popular, if not for its connectivity to the internet. Conversely, if personal computers (desktop or smartphones) had not made it so easy for the masses to utilize the internet, the internet itself would have remained relatively niche in its usage (business, university, geeks). One without the other, would not have had anywhere near the same impact on society.
When people are talking about life without the internet, they are essentially talking about life before the information age, of which both the internet and computers (desktop and smartphones) are a part of.
Second,even if a person "decides" to not PERSONALLY utilize the internet themselves when in public settings, it does not mean they will be totally free of its influence, and increasingly that is the case. When it comes to internet usage today, for more and more people being in public settings is just an extension of the living room or bedroom. Unless you live in a vacuum, it is hard to not be impacted by that shift in society, either by accessing the internet yourself while in public, or by others you are spending time with doing so.
All my posts are very much on point with the OP and you initial reply, not sure why that is so difficult for you to understand.
Obviously one is a physical object, and one is a network (that also includes physical objects), but in today's world, most people (especially under a certain age), use the former to connect and interact with the world, via the latter, and increasingly that includes in all kinds of public settings, such as spending time with family & friends, at the mall, at the movies, when watching TV, taking a walk, eating at a restaurant, etc, etc.
It is 2017, very few people use basic cell phones, they are using smartphones, essentially small but very powerful computers, that are constantly connected to the internet. So when someone is out in public staring into their smartphone, in all likelihood they are utilizing the internet in some fashion.
Uhm, those little smartphones are connected to something, oh that's right, its's called the internet.
Except many people are still tethered to the internet doing those activities. Not specifically internet related, but go to pretty much any concert today, and you end up looking at the stage through banks of electronic pacifiers. ie smartphones wafting in the air. A great concert is just as much about a great crowd as it is great bands, thousands of people in the moment, sharing a collective experience. Even walking in nature has changed over the years, I am lucky to live close to a large, gorgeous park with dozens of long interconnected, tree lined trails inside, it is becoming more and more a challenge having to navigate through people walking head down, staring into a mobile gadget screen, oblivious to their surroundings.
Just going by the trailer, it does look quite promising.