TONY MIGHT COME BACK 😃😃😃😃 YAAAAAZZ

SPOILER ALERT FOR DEADPOOL AND WOLVERINE They brough back Chris Evans tastefully so I wouldn't be mad if they brought back Robert Downey Jr. Just as long as it's done well.

The content and editing has gotten a lot better keep it up

i cant hate it, i do wanna see him but i understand it kinda ruins the plot. they did kinda make it work for wolverine so i trust them

bullshit

Is that a BlackBerry Torch?

I understand where you're coming from, and you make valid points. I do have a few counters, though. I really love Letterboxd because it gives me what feels like a genuine perspective of movie-lovers. IMBD isn't saturated/modern enough, and RT is somewhat poisoned by critics and a weird rating system. Yeah, the rating system of Letterboxd is also going to be flawed, like every other, because art is inherently subjective. As you point out, each person's biases, background, and even the way we feel on a given day will affect the ratings given. But Letterboxd gives me the inclination of how the average film buff is experiencing cinema. I really like reading reviews, because ratings are so subjective, but the reviews give me an actual idea of the person's thoughts and feelings about the film. Yes, there will be some pretentious reviews, but there will also be ones that make me laugh. There will be someone with a super harsh rating of a movie I love, but that's okay, we can disagree. That's not to say that other people's ratings never affect my own, but for the most part, I actually find it very refreshing to form and share my opinion, and then go scour reviews to see what other people think. When I find those who disagree, I read their reviews to understand what they saw differently. When I find those who agree, it's satisfying and refreshing-- "they get it!" But either way, it stimulates me to better understand a variety of perspectives on a film. There are also, to some degree, benefits to analyzing the details of a movie. Obviously it can go too far, and it's not helpful if it's done for the sake of being critical. But I love that Letterboxd gives me the motivation to pay more attention to what I'm consuming-- and it doesn't even typically result in a lengthy, tedious review (like this comment); it usually just results in me musing on the film more in-depth. If I want to turn my brain off and "just enjoy it" instead, then I can, but I often find that paying attention more closely *is* a way of enjoying it (within a certain extent). I also really enjoy finding "friends" on Letterboxd who have the same taste in movies (typically) that I do. I enjoy keeping up with what they watch, because it helps give me ideas of what to check out, knowing that there's a higher chance I'll like it. I actually love going to Letterboxd before I watch a movie, instead of going in blind, as seeing varying perspectives on the film often makes me more excited to go into it. I do agree there is pressure to "finish films for the count" or "keep up", and turning cinema into a consumption machine is an unfortunate side effect that comes with social-media-ifying anything. But I think once you can move past the stats and comparison, and be willing to straight up stop watching a movie if you don't like it (even if it's in the middle of the runtime... a skill I'm still learning), you can really enjoy Letterboxd. Obviously it's not for everyone, but I feel like it has mostly the same pros and cons as other social media platforms. It can be informative, unifying, and create a sense of community. It can be thought-provoking. It can also be soul-draining, result in comparison and isolation, and create self-doubt. So it's really just a mixed bag. Anyway, thanks for this video! It made me think. :)

Funnily enough, the same conversations are being had in the world of video games, with companies like Ubisoft that are trying to push for subscription-based access to their games library while actively and publicly telling people they need to become more ok with not owning their games

The problem is the concept of judging something qualitative with a quantitative measurement. Numerical ratings systems for art/entertainment is fundamentally flawed. Also, the problems you describe are also partially a consequence of people putting too much weight on the opinions of others when forming your own thoughts. Overinflating or deflating your judgment of something based on "consensus" or only engaging with a piece of media to be a part of "the conversation" afterwards whether you're actually interested in the thing or not are stupid and weak minded.

You are honestly taking it too seriously I had the same problem a while ago and let me assure you its not a letterboxd problem but a “you” problem I stopped rating movies years ago and I recommend you doing so cuz it helped me (atleast try it for sometime) I never stopped using LB tho . I think Almost 95% of the time I completely agree with movie ratings here unlike on something like IMDB . Also the lists feature is amazing and I love reading those funny reviews in my free time .

my rating system is nothing. I stopped giving star ratings a couple years ago and ive been so much happier ever since

You're kinda meandering to basically say that the process and concept is integral part of art and AI skips both of those things. I don't think AI is killing creativity, cause creating art is joy in itself, but it is killing the industry that allows people to monetize their skills, serving instead soulless, sanitized slop and misinformation, resulting in a subpar product. Sorry about the psycho in the comments.

People think im a trolling contrarian when i post my real rating opinions hahaha

I highly disagree. We will be the gods of our own new race, creating artificial souls for new beings. These beings will surpass us and live on as humans that will exceed our life expectancy and carry on our legacies. AI is not to be feared or disregarded. It is a powerful innovation that will change our lives and surpass the limitations of our bodies and minds. One day we will create souls for robots. They will have emotion and passion. You say that AI will never replicate what we have, but that is only if we deny it. We humans are very capable of, and even have the potential to make, another human person-artificial, yes, but in every way identical to ourselves. Detroit: Become Human is a perfect example of this. When does artificial intelligence become indistinct from a human person? No, AI can't do art like humans can, nor replicate music the same way as humans. But one day they will, because of us. This video, however well-meaning, is not looking at the entire picture. The future of AI is our future.

great point, the shortcuts not worth it

Imdb?

I have this same experience with IMDb movies because that is where I normally rate my movies. I much prefer movies to be out of 10 stars because there is much more wiggle room to rate a movie. I use 5 stars with books.

I purely use Letterbox to document the movies I’ve seen in theaters. I don’t think art was meant to be put on a rubric and rating “good” or “bad” usually stops interesting conversations. Like, I think Star Wars is dumb. My roommate is obsessed with it. We’ve had many fun conversations about Star Wars that couldn’t happen if we just spoke through the lens of rankings and tomatometers and number of stars 1-5.

I was just complaining about how our state fair is the same butter cow over and over again. haha.

Woah, it's almost like other people can also have opinions on movies that can be different and they put them on a service that compiles them. No service has a set criteria for how you should rate a movie, it would take all the opinions and fun out of reviews and feel restraining. Enjoyment and preference is a crucial part of a film review. I say Revenge of the Sith is a 5-star movie. Is it really? No. I just love it blindly and embrace its flaws, and my review and rating should reflect that. The same goes for a movie I really hate. If every review was purely about the filmmaking, it would feel incomplete and not your true thoughts. If a movie feels bland and generic, it is purely because of what we've seen before. If someone enjoys reviewing and talking about movies, who are you to say they shouldn't critique it? It's completely normal during a movie to say in your head: "That wasn't a great line delivery and it keeps happening", or "Wow that was a beautiful scene". Determining how good a movie is during it is completely normal, there's now just a system to do it on. People love to share it with the world because many people around them don't always share the same level of passion for movies. They want to discuss their opinion with others and a big movie just widens the scope and opportunity. Letterboxd hasn't gamified anything, it just makes people more passionate about filmmaking, discovering new films, and people to discuss them with. Not everything's a competition, and nobody cares how many movies you see, just that you see what they love so that they can share their thoughts. This widespread discussion on what we love also helps us think about these things when watching a movie. This enhances the experience by having more to appreciate. It's also how we educate the next generation of the film industry, by having discussions and broadening horizons. Why do you care so much what other people think of your rating? Why do you feel the need to be such a conformist? No one's going to be so mad that your opinion of a movie differs so much from the average that it causes you harm or embarrassment in any way. If on the off chance that happens, there are features to stop it. There's always someone who agrees with you, that's how average ratings work. Plus you can always seek out these reviews if you feel like you need to feel validated. If you don't like it, you shouldn't be on the app and just review it on your notes app or something.

this is such a weird take, everybody has their own taste

I hate how a lot of KZfaqrs have decided it's cool to hold micros in the hand. What's that for? It's so distracting and cheugy. Get a tripod, folks, please!

AMC Interview with the vampire next!!!

This is sch a great review. I like the enthusiastic opinions.

Reviews are kind of like Amazon reviews...It's something you want to have a good experience with but everyones experience with something is objective so I take them with a grain of salt.

Imagine how much of the budget was spent on butter...that stuff is like 4$ a lb now 😮lol

good to see people finally talking about this, it's been bugging me for a while. agree on a lot of these points, but I would add that i think the game of virality is a massive problem in this as well. the overabundance of joke reviews on every single film you click on where sometimes you have to click to the next page to find a serious review is awful and it makes reviewing films a game of having the best punchline to the point where they're probably thinking of the joke while watching the film and the film itself is secondary to that. There is so many large accounts like Karsten Runquist, that guy with the truman show pfp and others that just feel the need to review everything while also saying nothing, sometimes I see reviews that are just emojis and they have thousands of likes and when one of them finds a punchline, it spreads everywhere until it's just the same tired jokes because it's a game of virality. What's the point of the site's social aspect if people can't even discern what you think of a movie and it clogs up almost all of the popular reviews. the whole community for letterboxd sucks so bad. Great video though lol

I joined Letterboxd Jan 2024 and absolutely love it…. 5 Perfection, 4 Good, 3 OK, 2 Bad, 1 Horrendous

I love the shirt!

Video too long, you’re wrong, blah blah blah, random KZfaq comment, letterbox isn’t ruining anything except giving snobs a place to be snobs like with last fm or quite literally any other rating system ever

I’d say just take it like a man and not worry about being an outlier on a movie.

People have always been like this. Letterboxd is a great app to review movies on, its on the reviewers for conforming to others peoples opinions. Well made video btw

This is true of all rating systems online. Not only is there no agreed upon scoring, but not everybody rates in one place or at all. Or worse, they rate based on peer pressure, undermining the point of having a scoring system in the first place. It makes it impossible for anyone to get a true grasp of a film, album or game's true reception. I wish we could give two ratings. One for perceived greatness or competence. And one for personal enjoyment.

10 movie tickets thats a lot of money!

I didnt even know he was in this movie

Timothee and Barry are opposite sides of the same coin. Equally gifted, but in different ways. Timothee is a movie star who can act, plumbing emotional depths with ease. Barry is a chameleonic character actor who deserves to be a movie star. They are equally charismatic. Timothee seems to excel with the oratory aspects of acting - he can deliver a well measured/well-paced but still truthful monologue, which is an art form unto itself. Barry’s strength is in his unpredictability, & versatility. He almost seems to slip into a whole other skin. To see a 25 year-old Keoghan (pronounced Ke-O-gan, BTW) in “Sacred Deer,” portraying an awkward 16 year-old boy, talking with the cadence of uncertainty, so typical of many teens, was eerily accurate. Other roles you should check out are his small role in “ ‘71”; his first lead in “Light Thereafter,” in which he plays a 16 year-old autistic boy (light years from the “Sacred Deer” character, & it may be a bit of a dress rehearsal for “Banshees” ) it’s free to view on You Tube; then there’s his co-lead with Rachel Griffiths in “Mammal,” and his work in “Masters of the Air”. Chalamet is like Laurence Olivier. Keoghan is like Marlon Brando. Two great actors. Two different kinds of presence. As far as I remember, Chalamet has had all the proper training for acting and exposure to the art for years. He has had many lead roles and I would say he is this generation’s DiCaprio. His looks are viewed more favorably, and don’t tell me this doesn’t play into getting cast in lead roles. A talented, handsome guy is often going to get cast over an equally talented, regular-looking guy, so Chalamet will always get first dibs, on top of already being more experienced than Keoghan. For all that, though, I think Keoghan has more natural ability, but he needs to make sure he hones it in order to make the best use of it.

good video btw. how do you sell AD with no views? no offense just interesting

Tried to do "Her" with a human

some somehow i do not think he needs saving ? if i ever see a film with him in the cast listing i know it will be at least worth watching ! he plays many diffrent rolle's in many films . and always plays the part well ! [ well far better than i could ]

Is it bad that I really want to watch this movie now?

Joaquin Phoenix is becoming a flag for nonsensical movies. Nice video man!

God damn, now I want to watch it.

I've never seen Robert summon such fury out the iron man armour and watching this in the cinemas was amazing

Lol this’s fun

Brendan Fraser acted like Brendan Fraser. Austin Butler dominated internationally where Brendan Fraser's comeback and boo hoo narrative wasn't relevant. Butler won Foreign Press Golden Globe, UK BAFTA, Irish IFTA int, Australia AACTA Int, Spain Sant Jordi, South African Critics ect.

Umbridge is the most evil character, while Lestrange is the most deranged. You see what I did there? It's literally, in her name.

Hey man, loving your stuff. Can’t wait to watch your channel grow 🍻

I’m just gonna a quote that works for this character “Your a bitch” -suction cup man

I’ve seen a lot of people comment this and I don’t know why but: first

Amazing video