The Nostalgia Critic |OT| He Remembers It So You Don't Have To

Eh. Going through the top 10 for 1990 to 2005 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_highest-grossing_films#High-grossing_films_by_year), I don't really see how 96-2001 is particularly worse than the eras around it. There's at least one super fun blockbuster film among a bunch of stinkers in pretty much every year (especially if you count the SW rereleases in 97, and actually 92 was pretty dire for action films). If anything, all that happened after 2001 is that they started betting on cohesive series like Harry Potter, Star Wars, and Lord of the Rings to carry them through without coming up with as many new ideas.
 
The Scollard said:
Though I did enjoy the editorial as a whole, I thought his comparison of CGI to the gameplay offered by the original SMB was questionable, and didn't make much sense. My problem with it, is that games had to focus on gameplay during those times, because technical limitations prevented anything but the most barest of stories. The thing is, practical effects, good plots, and well-written characters all existed in film before CGI was invented, and the focus on CGI moved focus away from all them.

I'd instead think that the idea that games have to be "cinematic" to be successful (*cough*TheOrder*cough*) would have been a better comparison to make.
Click to expand...

Doug doesn't know much about games. He really shouldn't make comparisons like that. Leave them to his brother (who does know that stuff)
 
The Scollard said:
Though I did enjoy the editorial as a whole, I thought his comparison of CGI to the gameplay offered by the original SMB was questionable, and didn't make much sense. My problem with it, is that games had to focus on gameplay during those times, because technical limitations prevented anything but the most barest of stories. The thing is, practical effects, good plots, and well-written characters all existed in film before CGI was invented, and the focus on CGI moved focus away from all them.

I'd instead think that the idea that games have to be "cinematic" to be successful (*cough*TheOrder*cough*) would have been a better comparison to make.
Click to expand...

Yeah and I'd argue that some games even forget they're games and instead try for a shoehorned, in-your-face message (like the game he showed *cough cough*).

But as I said Critic isn't really much of a video game enthusiast.
 
Oh my god. Demolition Man is one of my favorites. Can't wait to watch tonight.

I finally watched the TMNT review (And the two James and Mike episodes) last night and loved it. (And the J&M episodes. Especially the second.)
 
At the very start of the review he talks about women being tough and developed, followed by images of Katniss from Hunger Games and Lucy from Lucy.

That was sarcasm, right?
 
DrForester said:
At the very start of the review he talks about women being tough and developed, followed by images of Katniss from Hunger Games and Lucy from Lucy.

That was sarcasm, right?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. In my opinion, there are so many better female action characters in movies than those two. I find the Hunger Games franchise just boring, it really isn't for me, but Lucy was painfully stupid. When you make a character as overpowered as they did in that movie, I don't exactly get worried that the character might not make it out, if I cared if that character would make it out anyways.

Funnily enough, two of my favourite female action heroes of all time came the MAY-EN time period, the 1980s. Sarah Connor and Ellen Ripley are such great characters, and some of the best action heroes of all time, for both genders.

Sarah may be tough, but she also human. She survives the T-800, and fights the T-1000, almost managing to defeat the thing before she ran out of bullets (thankfully, Arnie came back to help), however, as her scene with Miles Dyson, where she's struggling with killing an innocent man in order to stop Skynet's creation.

Ripley is the same, and contains many of the traits that make a good action star, humanity, strength, but also weakness. There are few scenes which match the incredible feeling of awesome that the "You stay away from her, you b---h" scene from Aliens, when she fights the Alien in order to save Newt.

When you think back on action heroes, the ones you remember are the ones that do have that weakness. John Rambo was a recovering vet in First Blood, and has that great scene near the end when the Colonel tries talking him down and he bursts into tears. John McClane uses his wits to get through Die Hard 1, and his motivation is trying to reconnect with his wife, and make sure nothing bad happens to her and the rest of the hostages. He almost never gets into a straight firefight, and gets hurt and almost killed several times throughout the film. Even in recent action movies like John Wick, the main character is still human, trying to get revenge on those who took something important away from him, and occasionally is overwhelmed by the enemy, despite his impressive skills. What I'm trying to say, is that the 1980s were much smarter than Doug seems to give them credit for.

When talking about great modern female action leads, I would say Judge Anderson from Dredd is up there. She's a strong character, who sometimes gets overwhelmed, but can use her wits to save herself, and saves Dredd about as many times as he saves her, which isn't often, since they both are badass.
 
DrForester said:
At the very start of the review he talks about women being tough and developed, followed by images of Katniss from Hunger Games and Lucy from Lucy.

That was sarcasm, right?
Click to expand...

If it was a joke, then it's a running joke, because in his "Dark Age of Movies" video, he listed Hunger Games 3 (part 1 of 2) alongside Avengers and the Lego Movie as examples of "great summer blockbusters are the rule today, not the exception". Whereas in the so-called Dark Age, "everything was Transformers 4".

Of course, right after putting up Katniss and Lucy as positive modern female role models, he put up Andrew Garfield's Spiderman (crying over the
dead body of Gwen Stacy
in ASM2) as an example of modern men being able to be "emotional and deep", making them more interesting. And ASM2 was the franchise-killing work of hacks Kurtzman and Orci, the other half of the unholy storm which was Transformers 2. I think it comes down to... Doug sometimes has an odd sense of taste. He actually liked ASM2, and hated the Matrix while he liked the Matrix sequels, so I guess he liked The Hunger Games part Four of Seven (I liked the first Hunger Games well enough, but none of the sequels have measured up to the first, and it doesn't help that they're being milked hard). I'll take Arnold Schwarzenegger's the Running Man over ASM and Hunger Games combined.
 
Yeah Demolition Man review was hilarious. And is really creepy in a way that it managed to be able to predict the future lol

With that said I watched the movie as a kid but didn't realize that the three seashells meme came from that
 
Yep the DM review was great. Was a great mix of his old style while incorporating some of the new. Was happy that the skits were to the point. Those are always my favorite ones.
 
so yeah just watched the review, holy shit this is like the neutering of a PG13 movie

with that said I doubt Banderas wanted to be "removed" from Zorro back then, wasn't his character in Shrek based off that?
 
had no idea the zorro sequel was so bad. i know it was a flop but i assumed it was decent like the first

what the hell were they thinking
 
120v said:
had no idea the zorro sequel was so bad. i know it was a flop but i assumed it was decent like the first

what the hell were they thinking
Click to expand...

It's basically the same mistake The Mummy Returns made. The first movie is a really well-executed adventure film with some occasionally (intentionally) disturbing imagery, but then in the sequel they add the little kid, replace the disturbing imagery with more family-friendly humor/slapstick and make the action far more cartoony.
 
Loxley said:
It's basically the same mistake The Mummy Returns made. The first movie is a really well-executed adventure film with some occasionally (intentionally) disturbing imagery, but then in the sequel they add the little kid, replace the disturbing imagery with more family-friendly humor/slapstick and make the action far more cartoony.
Click to expand...

Also, they hired Kurtzman and Orci to write it. You might remember them from such critically-acclaimed sequels as Transformers 2, Amazing Spiderman 2, and Star Trek Into Darkness.
 
Man, that movie is worse than I remember. I just remember finding it boring.

That and the sequel was a lot worse.
 
So what happened to the game show? Are they planning on airing any of the other episodes they filmed or they scrapped them and back to reshooting?
 
BatDan said:
I didn't say they had to be good or bad
Just shows obviously trying to cash in on the Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles formula.
Click to expand...

And I loved them. Along with Creepy Crawlers, Gargoyles, Street Sharks... even have a soft spot for Battletoads and Extreme Dinosaurs.

The 90s were a magical period.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

I don't understand why more people don't order their groceries online and have it delivered
2 3
105
845
Sub_Level replied
Andor S2 |OT| Remember Star Wars?
2 3 4
193
3K
BadBurger replied
I Visited India So You Don't Have To ( And offended 1 billion people ) (Youtube video)
2 3
148
12K
LordCBH replied
It's legal to download pirated material if you don't seed
37
2K
adamsapple replied
  • Poll
Do you have your phone on silent? I can’t remember the last time I heard a phone ring?
39
2K
GymWolf replied
Top Bottom