This coat has more oscars than the entirety of the MCU

File: Fantastic Beasts RT.png (452KB, 1131x523px) Image search: [Google]

452KB, 1131x523px

>>79898121
And deservedly so. Why the film got such mediocre reviews is beyond me, it was one of the best big budget films in years with actually witty humor.

>>79898420
74% is considered mediocre now?

>>79898891
When manufactured MCU and Animated (((comedy))) movies get 80s and 90s, yes, yes it fucking is.

>>79898121
I fucking hated this movie, it looked like Looney Tunes

>>79898420
Fantastic Beasts is the perfect example of the modern Hollywood movie. It casts the hit Hollywood star of the minute and it's loosely connected to a wildly successful franchise. This movie was made for the sole purpose of making money. There is no other reason. Rowling, Yates, the actors, everyone... all in it for the money.

It's easy to imagine the pre-production meetings... You know, that cute tree in Guardians of the Galaxy was really popular among audiences, let's have one of those. And people really liked that dive bar with lots of goofy creatures and fun music in Star Wars, let's have one of those too. It's frustrating when I hear people call this film imaginative. There's a reason all the fantastic beasts look so cute. Because toys.

Yet again we see Eddie Redmayne overact, taking the role of "autistic British wizard" to a level not needed. There was no chemistry between any of the actors, which made for awkward moments throughout the whole 2+ hours runtime. The relationship between Colin Ferrell and Ezra Miller especially seems unintentionally predatory.

There are two completely separate plots that are sloppily connected. One of the plots is pushed so hard and is used only to create a franchise of this thing. If they focused on only the fantastic beasts instead of the bizarre possessed horror aspect with a cheap twist, the film might not have been half bad.

In the end, yet again, almost a whole city gets destroyed in the climax. By now it is beyond tiring and by my count that is how FOUR big budget movies have ended in 2016. And by what, a fucking dark cloud. The whole film, each and every scene, is predictable, features terrible CGI, obvious blue screen, lifeless sound stages, and is riddled with plot holes

>>79898978
But mcu movies have 0 oscars

File: 1476884181809.jpg (1MB, 1623x2886px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 1623x2886px

>>79898121
Its a shame that even with that oscar winning coat, he cannot escape being in a prequel to one of the dullest franchises in the history of franchises. Seriously each episode following the boy wizard and his pals from Hogwarts Academy as they fight assorted villains has been indistinguishable from the others. Aside from the gloomy imagery, the series’ only consistency has been its lack of excitement and ineffective use of special effects, all to make magic unmagical, to make action seem inert.
Perhaps the die was cast when Rowling vetoed the idea of Spielberg directing the series; she made sure the series would never be mistaken for a work of art that meant anything to anybody?just ridiculously profitable cross-promotion for her books. The Harry Potter series might be anti-Christian (or not), but it’s certainly the anti-James Bond series in its refusal of wonder, beauty and excitement. No one wants to face that fact. Now, thankfully, they no longer have to.
a-at least the books were good though
"No!" The writing is dreadful; the book was terrible. As I read, I noticed that every time a character went for a walk, the author wrote instead that the character "stretched his legs."
I began marking on the back of an envelope every time that phrase was repeated. I stopped only after I had marked the envelope several dozen times. I was incredulous. Rowling's mind is so governed by cliches and dead metaphors that she has no other style of writing. Later I read a lavish, loving review of Harry Potter by the same Stephen King. He wrote something to the effect of, "If these kids are reading Harry Potter at 11 or 12, then when they get older they will go on to read Stephen King." And he was quite right. He was not being ironic. When you read "Harry Potter" you are, in fact, trained to read Stephen King.

>>79899502
Okay that intro was good gotta admit

>>79899145
Who wrote this? It sums up my feelings about this movie perfectly.
Except I thought there were (very) small moments with some chemistry. The girls were cute.
Can't understand why people find it so good. 4/10 for me.

>>79899145
>>79900359
Ok, found it. Some dude on letterboxed
Thanks.

>>79900447
>that samefagging

Yikes