+Sebastian Reed Andrews Insert joke about "Fantastic Four" (2015)

If they ruin Deadpool too, I would say "Fuck you, Fox!" But they did a good job for X-Men franchise tho.

+Sebastian Reed Andrews Wrong.

+margareth michelina Don't give credit to Fox, those bastards! They refused to give back Silver Surfer and Galaktus for the MCU. And Another thing, Brian Singer is the man who made all good X-men Movies. Once X3 came out, because Fox wanted more Money, they hired just some guy to do it Epic and bigger (which we all know how that came to be) But if someone did right, it was Brian Singer! F*ck you Fox, give Fantastic Four back to Marvel!

movienaut You're right. Bryan Singer did a good job for X-Men movies. Too bad he was too ambisious to make Superman Returns and gave X-Men 3 to the douche Brett Ratner. Thanks to Matthew Vaughn that directed First Class and then Bryan Singer back at Days of Future Past. Hope, Apocalypse and Deadpool can do better to fix Fox reputation. I knew as soon as I saw Fantastic Four trailer last year that the movie is going to be shit especially the Doctor Doom's looks. Even the 2005 movie was more better than the reboot.

Let them, eventually they'll bankrupt themselves and fade away

+Jake Bryant (JBryant) I doubt they'll bankrupt themselves and fade away.

+Jason T Scott-West thank god marvel is taking over spiderman

ramdelure Indeed.

I know, right? They should learn to keep their damn hands to themselves.

Blame the studio suits, they decided movie audiences couldn't handle sitting for 3 hours or if a story is too dark, because they are not able to. Typical bad judgement, just more proof the suits don't deserved their over-inflated salaries and benefits. They only know what they like, not the paying public.

They do this a lot. Dumb down films because they believe the target audience can't handle it (usually where teens are involved) or they just go for a different target audience altogether. Take the Hunger Games for example. It was fantastic, don't get me wrong, but they seriously cut down on the dark stuff to get a low rating. Barely any blood, no close images of the deaths, no scarred Katniss after being caught in the explosion flames. I don't understand why kids can read these books and imagine all this horrible stuff happening but not watch it. I was a teen when the first film came out and read all 3 books straight after and I imagined some pretty gruesome stuff, things that if put on film would get an 18 rating. They can handle it, they're not stupid. Teens grow up a lot faster these days, they need to consider that and review/change the rating system. 12 year old's are watching stuff like Game of Thrones, South Park, Saw. Not the stuff that's actually rated 12 because it's pretty much PG to them anyway.

They cut the movies down so there can be more showings per day, thus more money made. Kingdom of Heaven was not cut down because it was too "smart" or whatever--it was just too long.

The highest-grossing movie of all-time is Gone with the Wind, which is at least 234 minutes long. So your argument fails.

PubliusAfricanus The Ten Commandments (4hrs)....Gone with the Wind (3hr/46min)...Lawrence of Arabia (3hr/36min)...The Godfather Part II (3hr/20min)...Malcolm X (3hr/22min)...Lord of the Ring: The Return of the King (3hr/21 min)...how would you explain these movies? All did well despite being over 3 hours long. BTW regarding Kingdom of Heaven, the theatrical version (with 45 minutes removed at studio suits insistence) received mixed reviews, but the director's cut (with the 45 minutes restored) received critical acclaim; citing the director's cut so much better both in character development and story. To quote one critic: "The added 45 minutes in the director’s cut are like pieces missing from a beautiful but incomplete puzzle."

Heat-Shock Of course, but brevity for the sake of brevity makes no sense. Can you imagine "The Lord of the Rings" being trimmed down to novella form? Operas could last six hours or more. Why have people gotten so impatient? Just tell them the length of the feature and let them organize their schedule.

fuck are you even talking about? even marvel movies are 3 hours long these days, if anything, hollywood movies have gotten longer (and worse)

BvS extendend Cut has 3 hours. All mavel's don't get close to 2 and half ours.. A shorter movie = more rotation on the theaters = more tickets sold = More money.

Hitchcock once said “the length of a film should be directly related to the endurance of the human bladder.” If you have to make a long-ass film, make it two (or three) pieces.

+Leo B fuck are you even talking about? No Marvel movie (MCU anyway) is 3 hours long.

He didn't die in the alternate did he? It's been a while since I saw the movie. I thought the super vampire zombies get in and just snarl at him, take the captive then leave.

+Meirstein OMG! I still like Heston's Omega Man over I am Legend. Comin' into Los Angeles.

+CalyGamer13 Yeah, I think he just apologizes to them.

+Meirstein If I remember correctly, it did very bad with test audiences prior to its theatrical release, so they changed it. However, it was included as a bonus on the DVD. This ending was later restored for the BluRay release.

I love the original ending way the hell did they changed it

+commander392 Another fokin SAME origin story. But hey, Spiderman produced only 3 stories during its run: - the origin story - Green Goblin - Peter Parker is a clone. Yes, there were some oneshots like The Black Suit, or Craven's Last Hunt, but face it: Spiderman's mytology-arc is damn thin.

Marvel said it will not be an origin story because people know how Peter became Spiderman.

lbsacris Actually this is whatthey said: "it [the origin-story] is inherent to who his character is. We want to reveal it in different ways" - so it will be the SAME bloody story with the SAME structure with the SAME characters, just with a new Goblin, who this time either will be the yellow or the red goblin, or "the goblin who's not called goblin because that'd be repetitive". And that last line is straight from the comics.

+lbsacris Spider-Man is finally joining the MCU. That's all that matters to us fans. Still very pissed off about them making the Ancient One a British woman instead of an Asian man.

+commander392 Except it's not gonna be an origin story

It worked with the hobbit, it, and mockingjay

Hell yeah!

4 years later Disney is reworking its animated films into live-action (including the lion king)

+Misty Rose this is the studio that got rid of Firefly (and aired it out of order). We can say without a doubt that they are completely and utterly stupid.

+StilesStilinski *starts singing "take my love, take my land..."

+StilesStilinski I only just watched Firefly for the first time a few months ago. I had been avoiding it as I knew it was cancelled after one season and wow... The show was great. I don't know how Fox can cancel a show like that and keep shows like The Life if an American Teenager running for years... And I watched Firefly on Netflix and then found out I had been watching the episodes in the wrong order as well... Wtf who thought it was a good idea to change the sequence if the episodes... Just sad how they threw the potential of Firefly away.

+Misty Rose what would the fox say ^_^?

+katnissandpeeta They made a continuation movie called Serenity.

...and lawyers.

+irishguy13 This comment reminds me of the great song by Rush, Spirit of the Radio, which is all about how music changed as it became corporatized (and all about money). "All this machinery making modern music Can still be open-hearted Not so coldly charted It's really just a question of your honesty, yeah Your honesty One likes to believe in the freedom of music But glittering prizes and endless compromises Shatter the illusion of integrity For the words of the profits were written on the studio wall Concert hall And echoes with the sound of salesmen...of salesmen...of salesmen" The movie industry went this way a short time later. It's all about the bottom line.

And Michael bay

+WhiplashGames its more of a balance between show and business - Hollywood isnt a charity

+Pat Maloney Michael Bay is *AMAZINGLY* successful commercially. He's one of the most profitable filmmakers in the world. For reasons known only to God.

I actually was hoping for NOT having a second movie after they butchered so deep the plot

This, so much.

Luckily BBC is making it into a mini series.

Wowzer Bowser except that they have said it will be "great for all the family" which makes me nervous. As the books are not "for all the family" They are dark and deep. Here's hoping they do it right.

My wife and I saw the movie with family, and were the only ones who had read the books. We both literally said, rather loudly, "THAT'S NOT HOW IT ENDS" in tandem during the last scene in theatres. Needless to say, we got some looks.

I think you'll find she had far more plaudits than critics.

Yup. That's what a healthy adult woman looks like, by the way...most of the "actresses" in more recent films are a good 20 pounds under a healthy reproductive weight!

You are an idiot for saying that. Is that the only thing you got from what was presented. What are you 15?

Agreed. Growing up, I only really knew her as the old weird fat lady that hung out with Michael Jackson. But she was smoooking hot when she was young. Suddenly Last Summer, Cat On A Hot Tin Roof. She was an unbelievable beauty in her day. Goddamn, time is a bitch.

Damn skippy

Or a con man run a country.

Perfect metaphor.

Or health insurance companies instead of doctors decide what treatments patients should get

@@nancyomalley6441 Well said Nancy

+Tyler Chee so compromise is needed

+AnishSWorld studio's are the ones paying for it.

+Tyler Chee what I say to that is why hire them in the first place just to use them and do it themselves

Yes directors need to get the final say. Like George Lucas oh wait bad example oh how about Micheal bay... You know not all directors are competent

But those directors need money, and the only way to get that is to make the studios happy.

Agreeeeeeeed

And the studio is the one that ordered the completely unnecessary "love triangle".

Watch behind the scenes for the third movie (Battle of the five armies). I generally feel sad for Peter Jacksson. He is depressed and has insomnia. Crew is lining up around him for guidance, studio executives are harassing him about schedual. Jacksson has no idea what is going on or how to wrap up scenes, he has to constantly scrap and even write scenes in the middle of the shooting.

The Godfather, arguably the best movie ever, was saved by studio honcho Bob Evans. Coppola handed in a shorter movie, and Evans told him to re-edit it and add much of what he'd cut.

MichaelGC8 American History X would be on the list for sure

Advanced Raymondology ) how does that count when Evans had demanded that Coppola cut film down at first?

Star Wars a new hope. Lucas’ original vision for that film was completely different and likely never kicked off the rest of the franchise

@@giorgosmanahiaris7086 ahhh... Edward Norton can thank New Lines for giving him the opportunity. Without it, he wouldn’t be able to do it. Yes, he did a good job, but he wouldn’t be able to do this without New Line’s ok

***** He did. But he came out of retirement in recent years to make another animated film. It's a short film called "Last Days of Coney Island."

***** You're welcome. :) I saw "Last Days of Coney Island," and I enjoyed it. It's Ralph Bakshi returning to his roots (i.e. telling politically-charged stories through animation).

That should be in the sequel video to this.

+Mateus Honrado What should?

+velociraptor4you Cool World.

+Rinzler .exe It's first half was good, the rest was pretty bad imo.

+William Lamberti It was like to different movies cramed together.

+Jake Theberge Yup, very unfocused.

I liked it, but I agree that the first part was much better than the second part. The first part had a new fresh idea, but the second part sorta ruined that idea and transformed it into a regular superhero film.

An earlier version of the movie had a completely different second half than the version that was released theatrically. It was more in line with the first half (no major twists) but got exponentially darker in tone and didn't screen well with test audiences.

Kingsman: The Golden Circle: While Matthew Vaughn has made quite a few successful films so far,no one,not even HE knew what came his way. After hearing about the reviews of the first Kingsman,the executive of 20th Century Fox and his crew hatched up the Kingsman sequel FOR Vaughn before he even planned it up. As the film`s process went on,20th Century Fox made one demand after another,persuading Vaughn to add Channing Tatum and Jeff Bridges to the cast,as well as Colin Firth who`s character was supposedly killed in the first film. But they MOSTLY demanded Vaughn to add in references to the first film which led to THIS one trying too hard to top the first which MAY of course led to it`s critical reviews.

Sony is a pretty good runner-up.

Don’t forget Warner Brothers.

+Hoyatas Well, we'll still have to see how that one plays out.

+Hoyatas That's only because Ryan Reynolds

+Shaggy Rogers They do tend to fuck up a lot of things

+Xenomorphicalopod: The Offical ALIEN Channel The first trailer was ok but now it's starting to look like a "frat-house" movie with action and too much comedy...

+Shaggy Rogers Yup yup! They also think The Simpsons is still a good show, when in fact it's been awful for over 15 years

+TheBfutgreg The freedom the narrative would have would be refreshing to see

+TheBfutgreg The problem is that to make a 10 hour film is super expensive, and although there are people like you and me that would be happy to sit through such a long film many people are simply not that intrested in movies - so the studio would never manage to get their money back from sales, so it's not worth it from their perspective to make such a film :(

+vladxx2 Yeah, I guess TV miniseries are similar to what I was thinking, but those are split...laws of economics be damned!

TheBfutgreg I know :(

+TheBfutgreg I know what you mean. I've got all the LOTR films (extended edition) on Blu-Ray. It takes over 11 hours to watch.

I kinda liked the first one. Made Spidey feel youthful and sarcastic again instead of a woe is me hipster wimp like Toby McGuire.

SM 3 was ruined by Sam Raimi and his terrible taste and directing style. The Paul Feig of the early 2000s.

Andrew Garfield was an awful Spider-Man. Just the worst casting ever.

ReklawLah At least he's tall enough to pass for an adult. Tom "Spider-Boy" Holland is literally a dwarf next to Black Mary Jane.

TASM was promised to be a darker tone, and a more realistic and gritty setup when they wrote Peter's biological parent's backstory in it. TASM 2 screwed that up when they decided to go more fancy villains that was plucked right off the animation and comic book series(instead of re-interpreting them), the same costly mistake they made to Raimi's Spider-Man 3. Raimi did not intend Venom in Spider-Man 3, till Sony forced him into changing it. Raimi's retortion to the studios for that crappy decision : That cringy dance and the character twisted turnout of Peter Parker. Interviews has indications that the entire cast and crew loved the filming process, and backed Raimi for it.

+uberjens he is certainly good at adapting good writing

+Kenny Spillman except seasons 3-5

TheInvshika ha except they won the Emmy for best TV show in season 5

Wrong again

Kenny Spillman Which was a fucking travesty. Says more amout the Emmys than it does about the writing. I did a long review on another vid, just gonna copy and paste it here, so if it seems wierd or out of context sometimes, you know why. Season 5 is bad in most aspects. They tried to do too much in one season. And it really damaged the show, even the parts that was good. Lets start with the storylines. Season 5 had to many of them, and therefore couldn't get the most out of each one. Most of them felt extremly rushed aswell, since too much happend in one season. The entire part with Dorne was embarrassing and deserved to be done alot better. I'm not sure who's at fault here, but everything from screentime to scripts were wrong. The sandsnakes had the worst dialog I've seen in a TV show for ages. I honestly feel bad for them. The casting wasn't great, but it was decent enough. I would say that Alexander Siddig were a good choice for Doran Martell though. But other than that, the Dorne storyline was hugely dissapointing. Brienne storyline was equally stupid. Brienne has for some time just been a way to make the episodes longer. She hasn't really done anything of importance, she has just been there, as a sort of comic relief with Podrick. She had some small part to play in the other seasons, and this one aswell with the supossedly killing of Stannis. But her entire character feels like a cliche. Especially the part where she turns away at the exact moment Sansa lights the candle. Also, nothing she said to Stannis made any sense at all, making here look even more stupid than she already was. The Stabbing of Jon Snow was coming. However, making Olli do the last stab was EXTREMLY predictable. I mean, he spends the ENTIRE SEASON just looking angry at Jon Snow. I'm not saying they shouldn't have stabbed him, because that was the right thing to do, story wise. I'm just saying that it was very badly executed, and disappointing for a show that has been great for 4 seasons. Everything Stannis did this season. Basically, nothing good came out of the Stannis storyline. His character didn't make any sense at all. The show makers have basically been doing everything they to make him unlikeable (for some strange reason), but wanted so suprise us I guess, by making him look nice, just as he betrayed the viewers and burned his daughter. Which was wierd. Not shocking, but wierd. Also, the parts in which Ramsay Snow can destroy an enemy encampment consisting of thousands of soldiers, by ''sneaking in at night with 20 men!'' was ridiculous. Especially considering how they burnt down a camp, that was just next to a river. Putting out those fires would be easy. Stannis then marching on winterfell, without any form of strategy or tactic made me furious. This is a man, that constantly have been praised in the show (and especially the books), about how good of a commander he is! He's supposedly one of the GREATEST generals in the entire world of Game of Thrones. Yet, he suddently forgot it all over night. Jorah and Tyrion. Being attacked by stonemen was fine. It had some lovely CGI etc. The part were Jorah denies having had contact with the stonemen, before dramatically revealing to the audiences he had was bad. It felt sort of childish, and makes me wonder what they thought making that scene. The Unsullied suck as usually. One of the worlds greatest armies, unable to properly defend themselfs against dissidents, who probably have little to none military training. These dissidents also somehow manage to kill the greatest swordman in the world. A man who claims he could cut through all of the kingsguard (which according to the show/book he probably could) with ease. Daenerys being saved at the last moment by her dragon. Woooooow, didn't see that one coming! Even the CGI in this scene felt bad. I don't know why they didn't manage it so well, because the dragon looks so good in every other scene in the show. ''The mood'' (I don't know if this is the right term in English) also feels a bit odd. Stannis burning his daugther was dramatic, it was expertly executed and felt horrible (Altough the scene felt stupid, storyline wise). But then it cuts straight from a dramatic scene where a father burns her daugther, to a 'comedy scene', in which Daario Naharis jokes about the size of the competitors. What were they thinking? The burning would have been a perfect ending to that episode, and tournament a good ending/beginning to another. Putting both in the same episode ruined it completely, instead of making it excellent (which I'm sure is what they tried).

Basically

Now that the marvel property like X-Men fantastic four have been taken away by Disney which is good news

Actually if you'd just look at when they're releasing it you would see that Fox is very skeptical about Deadpool. February is considered a dump month where studios will unload movies they have little faith in in order to minimize competition and losses, and at the very least break even. And there was plenty of studio interference in Deadpool. Fox was unflinching in trying to make Deadpool PG13, Reynolds and the writers had to work for yeas for Fox to hand over creative control so they could make the movie people wanted

Tyler Crist but the fact that they do trust in the property to run the risk of an R rated movie is pretty amazing not to mention the stellar marketing. And any movie can survive any garbage month as long as it's good. (American Sniper - January, Kingman - February, Star Wars tearing through the previous December record)

+Grayson Myers American Sniper was technically a December movie, since it did qualify for that year's Oscar (which is a big reason why it survived January). Kingsman was kinda of a testing project which turned out to be awesome and successful from word of mouth. Star Wars...well its cocking STARWARS!

+Grayson Myers Also Deadpool is kinda of a safer bet. 1. They have a actor that truly loves and is perfectly good for the role (also already proven good in the scenes which they didn't sew his mouth up in Origins). 2. Deadpool is one of the most popular and beloved characters in the Entire Marvel universe, so he already has a pretty loyal fanbase. 3. He is part of X-men, and X-men is one of the few series that Fox hasn't screw up in recent years (the last two were pretty fuckin good)

+Grayson Myers The Dead-Poo-L marketing picture is Ryan Reynolds idea, since he knew that would fit the character. Fox actually putting it out is a sign of how little they care about the movie, since it can very easily be bad publicity.

+Jerred Zoll Episode VII was never in development hell. It was never in development until 2012 when Disney bought LucasFilm and put it into development. Do some research

*****​ You really need to do some research. George Lucas had ideas for a sequel trilogy but they were never put into development.  Therefore they were never development hell. Development hell means something completely different then what you are trying to make it out to mean.

Why cant we all just get along.

Hahaahah I was laughing with you guys talking over each other, that could be an exciting KZfaq VID!!!!

+lynx777 To be fair, it was better than the prequels.

RXdash78 I don’t know why Zack Snyder gets a lot of hate. Warner Bros cut out 30 minutes of this movie and Snyder gets a lot of hate, which is not fair.

@@gwarriorpsxbox2978 He's a confrontational prick so it's way too easy to hate him. But yeah, Batman vs. Superman wasn't his fault.

+FNA If it does happen, it probably won't be from Fox, lol

+FNA The original Star Wars trilogy. We've seen what happens when George Lucas doesn't have anyone to rein him in.

+FNA The closest that I know of is The Godfather. Coppola wanted Godfather 1 and 2 to be one long movie, and Paramount convinced him (and it wasn't easy) that it would be far better if split into two.

+mysteryshrimp Same reason for Kill Bill. It was intended to be a four-hour film before being split into a two-part film.

Dredd was one

bigevilworldwide1 Midnight's Edge covered this in a very easy to understand and clear way on a series of videos named Trankgate, quoting and using official sources along with reliable sites when it comes to interviews and leaks. One of the main reasons Trank was fired was because of the $10,000 damages he made to his accommodations while filming and that shouldn't ignored because the studio had to pay for the damages and the higher ups had to issue an apology to the owners of the place, Simon Kingberg also complained to Disney about Trank's unreasonableness and difficulty to work with, Max Landis himself, who worked with Trank before in Chronicle only said "Karma" after the news of Trank's departure were out, showing that it wasn't just Fox that had difficulties to work with the guy. Oh and the Collider interview has a pretty funny question "Would you rather work with 20 angry PAs or 1 angry director?" the entire cast in unison said "20 angry PAs", interesting, isn't it?

kingdom of heaven is a great fucking movie

The director´s cut is simply incredible.

I know right....

Glad I never wasted money on it in theaters and have only got to enjoy the directors cut. :)

King Baldwin of Jerusalem.

At least Fox didn't get in the way of that.

They needed Eva Green nudity, not 45 extra minutes of royal plotting.

Actually I think Orlando did pretty well in this movie.

Bloom did great imo

+Naphtali Louis for one thing the author of the books are S an Atheist, he's admitted in his stories that they are about killing God.

+Naphtali Louis. Phillip Pullman is an atheist who wrote the "His Dark Material" trilogy as an atheist answer to CS Lewis' "Chronicles of Narnia" book series . But in the trilogy, even though God exists, Pullman used the "God is evil" answer to the "Question of evil", and the ending to the book has the main character's uncle on a quest to kill Him to bring peace to the multiverse; the main villains are basically the Vatican; they brainwash kids to be unquestionably complacent; and every heroic female became good only after turning against the church, with one woman being a nun who then turned against the church and became a scientist. Parents bitched about an atheist movie for kids (which is probably part of the reason for its low ticket sales) and part of the reason for the script rewrites (can't have a kids movie where the heroes are trying to kill God after all)

+Martin Guzman. You've posted the same reply a lot.

+Omar Harris knowing this, Im gonna make sure my kids watch this movie now, im always looking for media that depicts religion as what it is: delusional bullshit for morons

+Omar Harris That's the sad part. Hollywood was so afraid to offend ultra religious nations, like Iran, Pakistan and USA. If Hollywood had been smart, it would have made a pious cut for the USA and Middle East, and a secular one for the rest of the world. Remember, 75%, or more, of Hollywood's revenue comes from outside of the USA. Nowadays Hollywood movies do not necessarily have their world premiere in the USA. In short, by giving in to the Christian and Muslim fundamentalists (the minority) they lost the majority. And the books are highly praised in the secular world. There was already an existing market, which Hollywood ignored.

+McLarenMercedes Definitely Blade Runner. Does anybody even like the studio cut from 1982?

If a movie runs 5 1/2 hours long and is incredible all the way through, what's the problem?

A serious question, so let me give a serious answer: A) NOTHING is incredible all the way through. Not Citizen Kane, not Gone with the Wind, and certainly not Heaven's Gate B) Audiences can't sit through a 5½ hour film. They don't have the attention spans for it; they don't have the bladders for it. C) Exhibitors won't show it. They can't turn over their theaters quickly enough. A 5½ film would occupy an auditorium for the same time that 3 or 4 showings of a normal movie would. That means fewer tickets sold, and less money, even if the long film tickets carry a substantial premium. So what you end up with is a film that would show in a few art houses, but which cost a "tentpole" budget to make. The economics don't work, and the very best you could hope for would be a work of cinematic genius that lost the studio $30 million plus.

***** A) There are plenty of movies that are incredible all the way through. Incredible ≠ perfect. B) Intermissions and entr'actes. C) This right here is exactly why studios don't want long movies to be made. It has nothing to do with the quality of the film. It's all about making money, which is fair as movie making is a business but it's not fair to say that a movie is "ruined" if it has a long run-time.

and then there is Haxan and Metropolis thumbing their silent black and white grainy noses at you

Agreed. It should be a top five. And make it enhanced by studio interference. No one likes negativity.

Patrick Southern ; Hahahahaha

And there's a very dark tone to it. Maybe throw in some movies that where improved by studio interference as well!

true...Give it to Fox and they will totally screw it up.

Patrick Southern YOU FIEND. 🤣

+lurkerrekrul Exactly. People like genres of anything, really, because... well... that's what they like. It's like like people go "Man, there's so much rock music. I love rock, but if they keep making rock, I'll get tired of it!" I love sci-fi. I always will. Just because a few movies have completely failed doesn't mean that I'll stop liking it.

+lurkerrekrul Erm... So. People who didn't know The Iron Giant ? Or Tomorrowland ? (Poor Brad Bird, he makes a freaking masterpiece and a freaking awesome movie... AND THESE MOVIES FAILED ? Only because of the absence of Marketting for The Iron Giant, and, for Tomorrowland... Well, Disney is lame as promoting their films.)

Seun LAGOKE I never said Disney made The Iron Giant, I just said that Warner didn't promote it. Like, at all. And, I'm saying Disney didn't promote Tomorrowland, I'm saying that Disney BADLY promoted Tomorrowland, not showing why the movie was interesting. (Like I said, Disney did the same thing with Frozen and Wreck-It Ralph. They are LAAAAAME at promoting.)

couldn't agree more. two of the best best characters casually killed off-screen for no reason what so ever than to make a crappier version of the original Alien movie. always a recipe for failure. Don't change, or kill Character's off-screen or in between movies unless you're prepared to devote quite a bit of time on screen explaining it and there is legitemitely a great story reason as to why.

+EVO6reviews In all honesty, that line was the only good part of the whole film

+Urdnot Stark The opening credits were pretty good too.

Canadians are the most apathetic people on earth!! well...what are Ya gonna do? \('-' )/

+EVO6reviews All credit goes to the comics for that line.

+EVO6reviews ok, with all its credit, yes, origins was way off the comic books source material. it had plenty of flaws but it was not completely unbearable in my opinion

+pizzagrenade Unfortunately, people are judging what movie to see by how long it is. It's sad, but true. Hell, there's even a comment on this video from someone who asked, "Who wants to watch a three hour movie?"

+Rilumai To be fair a 3 hour is often the limit anyone expects to see a movie.

+pizzagrenade A better question is why they don't ensure that the movie stays in a certain time-frame from the get go? Why film so much extra-material?

It's about the number of showings you can get of the movie in a day. Shorter the movie more times it plays a day.

ajmrowland That makes sense. I can live with that answer.

I call that bullshit, they cut so many important subplot

bunnyfreakz Other than the boy king plot, which was incredibly boring, it was just extra scenes of Balian talking to people, or that bizarre duel that ends the movie.

But the boy was an emotional part of the movie. Also it helps with the character development of Sybilla. I would be furious too if it would be cut. And the fight was a conclusion in my opionion.

Kikiricki Kira But would you give a shit about Sybilla if she wasn't a big-tittied Frenchwoman? She could have been left out of the movie entirely and nothing would have been compromised.

PubliusAfricanus Sure. I did not say she is is important to the story, I just said that she is more complex than the cut version shows. I am not the biggest fan of her but I thought that the little lovestory (though unnecessary) was the counterpart to the brutality. - So it worked for me(the uncut version :). )

Which is why Home Coming was a great success

Or even Jodorowski's Dune

+Atheist Orphan I didnt know that film were finished.

+Atheist Orphan I didnt know that film were finished.

+Atheist Orphan The Rainbow Thief should be on the list.

+raycoustum It was never even been started to film, but it would have been a masterpiece and it influenced movies for decades.

Endgame was shit

@@DarkAttackYT it not a troll dumbass

@@marvelvsdc6624 the real shit is all inside your head :)

Dark O-man , however a truly disappointing movie. Way too long for an essentially simple one dimensional story with a predictable end.

I wonder if they had cut more of the fight scenes to include the character development, would that have worked to improve it? Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit are prime examples of this.

+CorsetGrace Did lotr have many fight scene that is important to advance the plot?

+CorsetGrace Did lotr have many fight scene that is important to advance the plot?

+CorsetGrace Did lotr have many fight scene that is important to advance the plot?

gungrave10 Only the battles that were actually mentioned in the books and even then spending 30 minutes on each battle was a waste.

Not to mention LJN since most of their licensed stuff fails to deliver.

+Christian Orr Yup. Guess I have to check the studio of movies in the future, too. Time to boycut Fox, just like I already have done for years with EA, lol.

Toei is the ea of anime lol

+Christian Orr Damn right. Still haven't gotten over Firefly

yes haha!

Sepehr Lotfi I'd include Water World, Justice League, Eragon, that penguin movie...

agreed!

agreed!

+UnkeptMoss328 Yeah! In my opinion, it's worse than TAS2 which I think is an underrated comic book movie

+Ben Nixon honestly I felt AS2 was far worse. At least Spider-Man 3 tried to build up its many villains by properly characterizing them. I actually felt bad for Sand Man. Whereas Harry goes apeshit because Peter won't inject him with his own fluids, Electro becomes a villain over a misunderstanding and Rhino is literally nowhere to be found.

+Ben Nixon honestly I felt AS2 was far worse. At least Spider-Man 3 tried to build up its many villains by properly characterizing them. I actually felt bad for Sand Man. Whereas Harry goes apeshit because Peter won't inject him with his own fluids, Electro becomes a villain over a misunderstanding and Rhino is literally nowhere to be found.

Jutta Maier yeah me too...i never understood why so many people hate it, its not the best alien movie from the original trilogy, but its still a very good movie imo

The CGI was great for 93.

@Erick. I think that was the problem. Alien 3 would have been a fantastic standalone Science Fiction Horror with it's own beast, but sadly it ran roughshod over what had gone before. Even the whole buildup during the opening credits is highly dubious from both continuity and common sense viewpoints when you know the established continuity. But yes, what a great cast and some really tense scenes.

Kevin The movie has a great atmosphere and the result it's amazingly tight for such a troubled production. Wonderful Soundtrack too. Still, feels kind of shallow and lacking on purpose, like a beautiful nothing. Each time I watch, the drama of the prisoners becomes more annoying and false. It's a perfect candidate for a 'Cult' type of film. Great qualities/Great defects.

To think the studio made Ripley feel petrified when the Xenomorph went up to her face.

*Ambersons

I was certain that Ambersons would show up on the list somewhere.

No no one should respect Fox for what they did with that movie. I call is Fantastic shit ruined by fox coming to a theater near you.

That's just retarded. There's no need to spell the word "Fantastic" with a number. The makers of that movie only did that because it looked "kewl". Well, it's not cool, it's stupid (same with spelling the name of the movie Seven as "Se7en". Totally unnecessary and stupid).

So, how do you read Se7en?

Se-seven-en, yeah it sounds retarded but that's not my problem it was written by a mentally challenged ape.

I like Chris Stuckmann too

And they cast Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor. What were they thinking?

That was a definite straight forward blunder all together. We can all agree that was purely terrible.

+Jed-Rene Tuliao Not necessarily the studios fault. Warner Bros is actually one of the few studios that actually puts in a lot of faith into their directors. It was mostly Zack Snyder's fault for having to much control and cramming his extreme fetish of dark and gritty down our throats. Warner Bros were really confident in the movie doing good that they were actually shocked when it didn't and now regret giving Snyder too much power over it.

Blame David S Goyers bad writing also. I seen the movie and compared to Zack Snyder's other work I saw some differences.

Goyer infuriates me. He can create and come up with a good story like Da Vinci's Demons but is horrendous at movies (BVS, Blade Trinity)

Die Hard 4 is actually my 3rd favorite film in the franchise, and I agree with you about 5 being the worst.

I enjoyed Die Hard 4 to a certain extent

At least it's not A Good Day to Die Hard

Patdan 10 Yeah, exactly, ya get it.

+Josh Spicer The unrated version is great and yes it was fucking awesome.

really??? you're like 15 right??

It was ok

No it would've been horrible either way. The director is kinda stupid

It's Josh Trank, bitch !!! He does it awesome ..

Trank posted an outline of what the script was supposed to be. It would have been a SLIGHT improvement, but Doom would still be a lightblub goat and the film overall very boring. It would have been better but also more forgettable and thus achieved the same end: cancelation of a proposed franchise.

Not so much "GOOD?!" as...less shit.

Nope.

The book was retitled THE GOLDEN COMPASS to match the sequels THE SUBTLE KNIFE and THE AMBER SPYGLASS.

+Mo M The problem with the Thief and the Cobbler was more that nobody did interfere before it had a record-production time.

+swanpride Well, you are actually both correct.

+Mo M The problem with 'Theif and the Cobbler' was the evil company Walt Disney Pictures after witnessing it's production knowingly releasing 'Aladdin' and stealing it's viewership before it could get big.

I agree 100%. In fact, I think Heaven's Gate is the very reason today why studios interfere with directors. Because they do not want to risk having their business go bankrupt.

True. Cimino wasn't the most efficient director. A Great movie, but the damage it did to the industry was quite noticiable.

Cimino also scammed the studio. He told them that they had to rent the land the movie was shot on for an outrageous amount. It was later discovered that Cimino OWNED that land and was pocketing all the rent money for himself. I don't think that the went into Heaven's Gate wanting to make a great film. He was trying to bilk the studio from the start

For the studio's perspective, read executive Stephen Bach's excellent making-of book FINAL CUT.

well.... ironically, its Fox who gave us Logan, and Deadpool, and thats it hahahaha

Kingsman: The Golden Circle: While Matthew Vaughn has made quite a few successful films so far,no one,not even HE knew what came his way. After hearing about the reviews of the first Kingsman,the executive of 20th Century Fox and his crew hatched up the Kingsman sequel FOR Vaughn before he even planned it up. As the film`s process went on,20th Century Fox made one demand after another,persuading Vaughn to add Channing Tatum and Jeff Bridges to the cast,as well as Colin Firth who`s character was supposedly killed in the first film. But they MOSTLY demanded Vaughn to add in references to the first film which led to THIS one trying too hard to top the first which MAY of course led to it`s critical reviews.

Not to mention it had the lowest Rotten Tomato score out of ALL the films Vaughn directed.

Good luck with that

+Corbin Greiner That's what I thought was going to be number 1

+Corbin Greiner The original theatrical release never had any studio interference. The writers and producers did intend to have the immortals come from planet Ziest. The whole concept and ideas they had for the film were botched from the beginning. It was only after the horrible response by audiences and critics did the producers realize what a turkey they had in their hands. The later redone versions were just to make amends for their mistakes. While the changes made the film better they were only polishing a turd.

ComicBook Ninja I put it up there with the likes of Road House and The Wraith. So bad, yet entertaining. Also Water World uncut(hard to find) made a lot more sense.

+Corbin Greiner They did release a directors cut but it still isnt the full version

Apparently the original draft for the film fleshed out Electro a lot more and his downfall didn't happen within 5 minutes - he's shown to be a bit mentally unstable (schizophrenic) at the beginning, this is actually reflected in his theme, he lives alone with a sick mother, kind of like the new Joker film, Hobgoblin was supposed to be alluded to but not make the actual transformation yet in the film, you're totally right about the villain thing, TDK is a phenomenal film and it does three (four if you count the mob bosses) incredibly well - Scarecrow dispatched in beginning, mob bosses second tier villains, Joker main villain, and Two-Face as the martyr for the themes in the film. There's a lot more about TASM2 that sounded so much better than the final cut, it could have been the best Spider-Man film to date - the amount of care that was put into the composition/music/sound design/CGI and attention to detail, if you listen to interviews with those who worked on the film they were so elated to be a part of it and it's disappointing what it turned out as. You can find much more detail online on this. Also, it's worth mentioning a ton of material in the original trailer did not make it into the final film, with some lines not being in the film at all and some subplots dropped. But yeah, your main complaint about TASM2 (the bad writing, particularly Electro's weak motivation - was not a problem in the original script; watch/read interviews with Jamie Foxx for confirmation on this).

I'm sure that media tycoon William Randolph Hearst contributed more than his fair share to discredit Welles; since Charles Foster Kane was a thinly fictionalized slam on the real life news mogul.

Orson will always be the best example. Did great movies after Citizen Kane, even with subpar budgets. I suppose you cannot stop a genius completely, he finds a way.

And they seem unaware that they`re blamed by the viewers of these films.

It was a dumb film regardless. It was boring. The villains were cartoonishly evil, and Balian was so dull and wooden. He was literally Mary Sue at everything, knew how to do anything and turned everything he touched into gold, and was generally some sort of moral bastion. The whole movie was basically about how evil and unlikeable can we make one character versus how perfect and glorious can we make another character, and then have them interact. This is the dumbest way ever to make a clever historical epic. Saladin was the only interesting character as he was actually somewhat conflicted over his religious fevor, duty to his vassals, and ethical morals towards his enemies, sadly he was given very little screentime in a 3,5 hour movie.

Now THIS is news to me! Never knew this movie had production issues this level.

I get disgusted every time they insert needless adult humor into children's movies. The product placement & pop-culture crud just made it that movie worse than it already was.

@@swmovan Yeah, I couldn't believe I used to like the film when I was little and even I never understood those references. But its pretty clear that Universal is the most greediest studio company in the industry. They're adding in what's best for their films just because others were successful.