How many times have you watched it already?

0 times

>>86202250

fine i'll watch it again Jack....fuck off already.

Just once. Its a better review than the shitty TFA review but Fembusters gives me douche chills just looking at it.

>>86202250
once at 2x and I gave up half way through. It's really a piece of shit compared to the gb3 hitb

Once. The movie being reviewed and the observations about it were not that entertaining.

File: 1473433157861.png (90KB, 600x474px) Image search: [Google]

90KB, 600x474px

Somebody told me that there was a lot of salt from this, is that true?

>>86203604
no

>>86202250
Not once
Is it good?

File: 1463705825692.jpg (4MB, 1496x7784px) Image search: [Google]

4MB, 1496x7784px

>>86203604
not really, i mean everyone knows the movie sucks by this point.

the only people bitching are feminist progs but what don't they bitch about.

Once.Beating the Dead Horse get boring...
I actually just recently start Watching their videos(since you fucks wont Shut up about it )and now i just Watching the best of the worst on loop since i always loved B movies...

>>86202250
once and it was fucking boring

I couldn't even finish it

>>86203817
>attack the nicest, most harmless guy on the Internet
>get vitriolic backlash
What did they mean by this?

>>86203847
Their Half in the Bag episodes are alright but they have an expiration date because it's very topical.

I usually find ones where they review I movie I'm never going to see and just check out the highlights.

>>86203750
It's good at providing you with an extensive counterargument to the typical counter-criticism people like to throw that you're just being sexist for not liking the movie.

That said, the movie has already came and went and Plinkett was far too late for the train, the movie was so bad that it didn't even leave behind any particular legacy of horridness to follow up on like the Star Wars prequels, it was dropped and forgotten about with all of the fanfare of a flushing toilet, and didn't need to be refreshed in anyone's minds by this video.

I understand there's not a whole lot of movies you can really break down over nearly an hour to make a Plinkett episode, but I'd have rather preferred another shitty 90s movie honestly. It was educational in its own right though all in all.

7 times and read the transcript twice.

>>86202250
Once. Barely. He just fucking repeats the same fucking points he made in the Ghostbusters Half in the Bag. He did zero fucking digging into the actual script besides a basic analysis of various characters and their parallels instead of describing how and why this shit didnt fucking work on screen.

>>86203750
If you know the drama prior to the movie it's a good listen on why this movie was bad and why all the marketing in the world couldn't save this movie.

They praise the actresses for being funny but that Paul Fieg is trying to be like Judd Apatow and let them improvise way to much. Not ONCE did they mention anything negative about women, yet feminists are bitching.

>>86203999
I think Mike just wanted yet another excuse to praise the original Ghostbusters.

File: Movies-Half-in-the-Bag-Ghostbusters-Verdict-1020x571.jpg (145KB, 1020x571px) Image search: [Google]

145KB, 1020x571px

>>86202250
The Half in the Bag episode was better.

Plus it has Sexy Rich Evans and Mike getting drunk halfway through the episode.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HUEKreyTkvA

>>86204108
Take a shot every time he mentioned Star Trek

>>86203817
this is proof that SJW hate facts and are emotional disasters.

File: 20292857_1937306626537454_1620327779751550599_n.jpg (61KB, 960x846px) Image search: [Google]

61KB, 960x846px

At no point did he acknowledge the older than dirty sales tactics by feminists to advertise this movie through controversy.

I know he didn't talk about any of the scumbag shit feminists got up to to promote this movie on purpose, and that was a mistake.

This wasn't his best review because he held back, he wasn't as vicious as when he has to Lucas on the Star Wars reviews or Speilberg on his Indiana Jones review

>>86204364
They already discussed that aspect in their Scientist Man video.

I'm around ten minutes in. It's a really slow burn. Like fuck.

File: 1459010319831.jpg (66KB, 960x825px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 960x825px

>>86202250
Once. It's good.

>>86204111
I miss HitB. It's been maybe one month now.

>>86204364
The whole point was to present the review in a way that gave SJWs absolutely nothing to work with in trying to bitch about RLM/Plinkett being sexist and just break the film down as a piece of filmmaking. Adding any of the feminist agenda stuff would have ruined that.

>>86202250
1 time
Was way better than the force awakens review
I think Mike took notes from hackfraudmedia

>>86204513
Just post your fucking retarded video again and stop trying to pretend you're some samefag shilling.

>>86204491
Good point, in that regard it's probably the best review on youtube. Imagine that Plinkett being the most PC reviewer on youtube.

>>86204486
Any movies that have come out that need reviews? Dunkirk seems like the only movie.

>>86203604
it got some furries and sjws saying they were finaly done with then and they were unsubing
nothing unusual

>>86202250
1.5

>>86204364
the whole review was only to point out that the ghost catching machine were the new light sabers

>>86202250
Fuck off.

>>86202250

made it to 30 mins in, Ill finish it eventually

>>86203999
>Plinkett was far too late for the train
I haven't watch this, but his Star Wars reviews came out a decade after the movies.
But then again, those were notorious and infamous, Fembusters was just a passing flop. No one really cares that much and it didn't really require the in depth shit-talking SW deserved.

>>86204111
shit I miss this show. I had to skip the last one because I haven't seen either movie and I didn't want it ruined.

File: 1493524173864.jpg (86KB, 708x667px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 708x667px

Plinket's reviews work best on terrible movies that people generally liked, then state his case in fine detail why the movie is terrible. Nobody liked Ballbusters2016, a Plinkett review was completely redundant.

>>86204585

He reviewed the movie as a movie. He compares it to the original because it borrows so much from the original, but still highlights the issues with what was adapted and what was change. Bring up views on advertising or other opinions on the content of the film makes this no longer a film review. I won't comment on whether he's being PC or not, but he is sticking to being a "film reviewer" not a social commentary on impact the film had in culture.

>>86203817
Man, I hate SJWs for this, but can we just give a hand to Sony's marketing department? They managed to harness the power of butt-blasted feminists into pure PR gold.

i liked babies day out

>>86205140
>Cop Dog
>the movie was shit and no one liked it
Best Plinkett Episode EVER

>>86205187
but you think for this amount of exposure, they should have done better instead of doing the final figures they did.

If nothing else, I'm happy someone other than Richard Roeper was willing to call it a piece of shit. You have to wonder how much Sony spent on those "it isn't that bad" press.

>>86202250
Once. It wasn't super funny, but it did a good job getting the point across.

>>86205219
I'll watch the cop Dog review again but I remember being disappointed by that one

>>86203999
>I'd have rather preferred another shitty 90s movie honestly.
I agree. Cop Dog and Baby's Day Out reviews were kino.

>>86202250
I've never watched a Plinkett review before and I just looked it up.
>58 minutes long

Hard pass.

File: 4947676779.png (603KB, 613x593px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 613x593px

Apparently the original Ghostbusters is the '' perfect movie '' can't say it was ever higher than a 6/10 for me.

>>86203604
naaa, the usual suspects are butt blasted because thats all they know how to do but RLM didn't give them any ammo.

Plus Sony isn't backing a backlash to generate hype for a movie.

>>86202250
Once.
It wasn't very good.
Glad they didn't throw in any of their 'funny' bits though.

>>86205400
Don't start with Ghostbusters. The Phantom Menace one is the classic.

>>86205356
>cop dog was neither a cop nor a dog....HE WAS A FUCKING GHOST.

my sides

>>86205473
I don't know, man. I feel like these types of "reviews" don't need to be longer than 20 minutes tops.

>>86205414
shit tier trolling. don't feel proud.

>>86203847
I can barely even understand this post.
Get help, Anon.

>>86205516
You realize that RLM's fame comes from doing a feature length review of The Phantom Menace, right?

>>86205516
Give it a shot at least. It does a great job of breaking down all the problems with the movie, but it's also extremely funny, and a great watch.

>>86205516
>not wanting to listen to a drunk murderer for only 20 min.

>>86205141
I didn't mean it as an insult. Being political in film criticism even if it's warranted and correct is a weakness. Leave that to the political commentators. IMO most political and social criticism of art should be done by social and political commentators with some grasp of the subject rather than film critics who are apolitical 99% of the time unless there's a controversy. That's why even though I rarely agree with him Armond is a critic I like. He's a socio-political commentator in all his reviews not just when it's newsworthy.

>>86205548
>>86205565
How can you listen to that guy's voice for that long?

>>86205625
I like his jokes.

File: 4003.jpg (44KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

44KB, 300x300px

>>86205516
Blame Simon Pegg

He tweeted RLMs first Plinkett Review and they've been doing well for themselves.

>>86202250
3.

Thoroughly entertaining.

>>86205625
You get used to it.

>>86205473
>Don't start with Ghostbusters
This says it all right here. This is strike 2 for Plinkett

unrelated but who's the sjw cancer boss at sony who gave ghostbusters and dark tower the go ahead?

>>86205666
I knew he couldn't be perfect and british.

>>86205728
OH NO WHAT HAPPENS WHEN HE GETS TO YOUR OWN PERSONAL STRIKE 3??????

>>86205666
So did the creator of Lost and The Leftovers.

>>86202250
Gonna admit, the suggested subplot about having the gaybuster have to save and hook up with the mayor's assistant was a really good idea, and goes a long way towards diffusing claims that all criticism comes from sexism.

File: SimonPegg is RLM approved.png (69KB, 356x208px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 356x208px

>>86205666
i don't think it was the first plinkett review but it was the Phantom Menace review.

>>86205732
They're just plain retarded, not necessarily SJW retarded.
Selling that abortion as some feminist movie was just a desperate attempt to create interest in it.

File: mike laughing.jpg (200KB, 1032x1152px) Image search: [Google]

200KB, 1032x1152px

>>86205816
>Simon Pegg promotes these literally whos
>they repay him by trashing his Star Trek movie

>>86205895
They mostly praised Beyond though.

When I watched it, it was the first time I'd seen Fiege.
What kind of pretentious fuckhead dresses like that day to day?

>>86205895
The only nu-Trek they really trashed is the second one. They liked the third one, which Pegg wrote.

>>86205764
Its not me Plinkett to worry about. Its general audience malaise and eventual disinterest. Just calling it how I see it bro. IHE's Emoji movie review has more views than the current Plinkett review. And that nigger stole Plinkett's format, just in Australian.

>>86202250
Is there a way to watch it without giving them any clicks or views? Otherwise no thanks.

>>86204635
Emoji movie is up next, and you know it.

>>86206027
They would have done it by now if they were going to.

>>86206027
They didn't bother with Transformers, so I don't think they'll bother wth the Emoji movie.

>>86202250
no one gives a fuck about Ghostbusters anymore what were they thinking?

>>86206027
Emoji movie isn't even good enough for BOTW. Maybe they could do a two-parter like Jack and Jill (?) just to tear down the concept of these types of films but even then I don't think the premise is entertaining enough.

>>86206115
Agreed. This video is a good eight months too late.

>>86206024
hooktube i think

>>86206115
Mike cares

File: 5.jpg (29KB, 768x768px) Image search: [Google]

29KB, 768x768px

>>86206106
This, they'll probably just do 2 minute HITB opening sketch then black screen for 18 minutes GET IT! WERE TO GOOD TO REVIEW THIS CORPORATE SHIT DO YOU GET IT!

>>86205932
Now we know why.

>>86206115
They got called sexist by the popular kids when the film came out and are still upset about it so they made an hour long review to prove they could call it bad for non-sexist reasons

>>86206169
Thanks

File: ghostbusters_kate_mckinnon_still_2__0.jpg (91KB, 484x484px) Image search: [Google]

91KB, 484x484px

>they're still pushing the "ghostkino was bad" meme.

Freaks and geeks is great, mike is wrong

Probably the only good thing paul feig has done

poop

>>86206316
Freaks and Geeks is the high point of Paul Feig, Judd Apatow and James Franco's careers to name a few.

>>86206350
At least you are honest.

>>86202250
>The original Ghostbusters is a masterpiece
Um, what?

>>86202250
once, it wasn't that bad, got a couple of genuine laughs out off me, but they deserved the bombing with all the shitty marketing they did

>>86206432
>paul feig
is paul feig really responsible for the greatness of freaks and geeks? i seriously doubt that

>>86206492
Some people were born before the 90s...

>>86205140
Give me a paper bag and a bottle of lube

File: _o_sicle.png (146KB, 327x600px) Image search: [Google]

146KB, 327x600px

How bad did the movie bomb

>>86206537
I was and I know the original Ghostbusters isn't any kind of a masterpiece. It's just a fun dumb flick. Are people really this blinded by nostalgia?

3
also rewatched avatar and baby's day out

>>86206529
Associated with it at any rate. Who knows who's responsible for what.

>>86206529
Pretty musch the whole cast and crew is great, judd apatow probably had a big hand in it. Honestly I like a lot of apatows stuff.

Paul feig did create the show and the concept of a coming of age show in the 80s, it was kind of lightning in a bottle that it turned out so good

>>86205140
>this plinkett ghostkino review is... problematic

>>86206304
I watched it recently and it was absolutely mediocre. There's really no way to make a good case for it existing.

>>86206624
it's average, mike just has a weird obsession with ghosts and creatures and shit because he's a film nerd

reminder that mike unironically used to go on ghost hunts and he loves those shitty programs about ghost hunting

>>86206690
it was way ahead of its time. id say its a masterpiece of comedy considering its huge cultural impact and theres really no big flaws.

>>86206690
Well his MiB story it's really creepy, no wonder he likes Dan vodka.

I want some Papa John's, but I don't live near one.

>>86206885
its ok but id rather fuck your sister

>>86206594
Enough to turn Donald Trump into the new president.

>>86205926
reviewbrah does it, but it seems more natural on him. Feig treats it like his trademark

>>86205752
Considering all Brits are subhuman that's not hard to figure out.

>>86206027
animated movies are strictly banned from RLM

>>86206304
Stop. This is just sad.

>>86207074
Why to manchildish?

>>86206774
he got contacted by actual men in black?

File: qt.jpg (33KB, 640x425px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 640x425px

>>86207100
>he didn't see the laugh a minute extended version.

>>86202502
I think Mike sort of blew his wad on this one. HitB and Scientist Man didn't leave enough for a 58 minute review.

>>86205732
Amy Pascal

I don't get the backlash on this review, must be sony shills

Thought it was much better than the force awakens review

fuck you shill

>>86207159
I don't know, he was very suspicious about it I guess, he wanted to make it more mysterious, gotta say it worked.

REMEMBER SCARFACE?

>>86207749
STOP TALKING

>>86207597
the review was almost as obnoxious as the movie

File: Screen Shot 2017-08-10 at 11.53.17 PM.jpg (65KB, 616x504px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 616x504px

Wtf

File: 1502380481255.jpg (697KB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

697KB, 3840x2160px

>>86205414

>>86202250
1.5. It's okay. He was obviously tip toeing for political reasons

It was pretty unfunny tbqh

Once. Much better than the shitpile that was Force Awakens, but when they said "there was nothing wrong with casting" I was turned off.

>>86205140
what's her name /tv/ ?

>>86205140
Pretty much every movie Plinkett has reviewed has been terrible, excepting TFA and maybe Titanic for its production values.

>>86209520
But there WASN'T anything wrong with the casting. All four main actresses have had some great roles and have proven they can be successful in a comedic setting.

>>86209655

TFA isn't offensively bad, but it's as bland as white bread.

>>86209723
Not really. It had solid performances and a great score. The story was a rehash which is definitely a strike against it, but it's not bland. I don't see how anyone could say that.

They call it ghostbusters because it makes you want to bust a nut.

>>86209767

Weak characters, weak locales, weak world-building. Power levels are all fucked up and Rey is overpowered unless she has Geralt amnesia or something.

It's also a rehash, like you said.

Ghostbusters wasn't a criminally bad film. It wasn't good, it wasn't awful, I doubt most people complaining even watched it. Sure it's a stupid idea for a remake, but it didn't turn out offensively bad like some of the newer Marvel films. It's just on the level of throwaway crap like The Hangover.

>>86209829
Some are literally the locale and characters from the earlier movies, and everyone loved those.

>>86209829
I fundamentally disagree. TFA is 100% about the characters, at the expense of the actual story. The characters are absolutely a point in the movie's favor, I'm really curious to hear why you disagree.

>>86202250
Zero, and I've watched all their videos at least twice.

I don't understand why they wasted a Plinkett review on Ghostbusters.

>>86203817
>How Can the "I Refuse to See the Ghostbusters Reboot" Guy Be Masturbating If We Can See Both of His Hands
Someone was paid money to write that.

>>86202250
Once. I couldn't sit through it again purely because of how much footage of their verbal shitting he used. It gave me headaches listening to those women spew words

File: fag reaction image.png (529KB, 598x580px) Image search: [Google]

529KB, 598x580px

>>86209767
>solid performances and a great score

>>86209992
As someone who wrote for an online magazine, I think that no one got paid for that.

>>86203604
It's a good teardown of why the movie is shit without mentioning feminism or any other political garbage used to divert from the fact that the movie is shit. This isn't even the first time RLM tore the movie's asshole apart.

>>86203817
This image should be shown everytime an SJW whines about online bullying towards feminist cunt #2323098

File: AykroydGB.jpg (36KB, 638x472px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 638x472px

>>86204364
I completely disagree that it was a mistake. The fact that he systematically tore it down in terms of actual cinematic worth without ever referencing the "feminist controversy" is pretty damning and despite his occasional praise of the cast, the implication is there. I thought it was a pretty solid critique, especially when he re-edited a couple of scenes and made them less cringy just by cutting shit out. Also the side-by-side comparisons to the original were informative just from the standpoint of a complete layman (me) who intuitively knows that these scenes don't work, but can't pinpoint why.

>>86205400
I'd never watched one of these before yesterday but I ended up sitting through the whole thing. It's actually a damn solid critique and explains technically why the movie sucks without going after the low-hanging fruit.

File: 1502426858942.jpg (7KB, 200x213px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 200x213px

>>86204364
The reboot wasn't shitty because of a female cast, or because sony did what they always do and market their shit. It was shitty because it was poorly directed, not funny, had no focus, relyed on improv and so many other reasons.

Bringing up feminism, gender or sonys jew tactics had nothing to do with showing why the film is a bag of shit.

>>86205625
Its a character anon, do yourself a favor and watch his shit, they are all golden. RLM are one of the handful of people who are legit funny, not cringy shit like most reviewers who try to use humor.

Just don't start with the Ghostbusters review, its their worst one.

>>86209904
>Some are literally the locale and characters from the earlier movies, and everyone loved those

I don't want to see the same stuff rehashed, but worse.

>>86209938

Character development is rushed across the board and a lot of it doesn't make much sense. Why is John Boyega the only Stormtrooper with a personality and a face; When he deserts, why don't any of his mannerisms reflect his military background?

How is Rey able to pilot the millenium falcon and how is she naturally gifted with a lightsaber? In the awful prequels, the shithead kid has a droid doing most of the work, and in the original trilogy Luke references that his family owned an atmospheric airframe. No explanation for how Rey can fly. Luke didn't fucking know how to use his lightsaber for two movies and Rey can use it in her first one well enough to defeat a warrior monk.

Harrison Ford phones it in, the tall blonde woman from game of thrones is underused, none of the villains (the shitbag officer, "snoke", or the evil guy that did a song with justin timberlake in that cohen brothers movie) really seemed threatening or complex. Cross lightsaber cohen brothers guy also has too many temper tantrums, it jarringly plays like bad comic relief at times.

>>86210303
>It's their worst one

What is The Star Wars Awakens? I also don't like the really early Star Trek ones. The ones before first contact.

>>86203817
>dane cook calling james rolfe a moron
>dane cook calling anyone a moron
wasn't one of his tour logos the shocker?

>>86206115
>>86206162
how many years after the TNG movies and prequel trilogy did those reviews come out?

>>86210317
>I don't want to see the same stuff rehashed, but worse.

It's a sequel they have to use the same locations and actors otherwise it wouldn't have worked.

>Why is John Boyega the only Stormtrooper with a personality and a face.

I find them all full of personality, maybe you are racist.

>How is Rey able to pilot the millenium falcon

It's a famous ship and it's parked right around where she lives, probably grasped her curiosity more than once.

>how is she naturally gifted with a lightsaber?

Hate to break it to you but a lightsaber it's just a fancy stick.

>Harrison Ford phones it in, the tall blonde woman from game of thrones is underused, none of the villains (the shitbag officer, "snoke", or the evil guy that did a song with justin timberlake in that cohen brothers movie) really seemed threatening or complex. Cross lightsaber cohen brothers guy also has too many temper tantrums, it jarringly plays like bad comic relief at times.

Mindless nitpicking.

>>86202250
What, the movie or the review?

The answer to both is none, because the movie is shit and Reddit Letter Media is cancer.

>>86202250
Once. It was a better review than the TFA one, but I'm less interested in the subject matter.

>>86205895
>x person liked y person's video
>therefore y has to like everyone x does
you're a fucking faggot

>>86205187
>but can we just give a hand to Sony's marketing department?
No. If they had done a better job, they would have realized they overestimated the brand value of Ghostbusters, that they shouldn't have insulted the main audience, and that the movie should have hit a different tone.

>>86210521
>It's a sequel they have to use the same locations and actors otherwise it wouldn't have worked.

Empire Strikes back didn't reuse a single location from Star Wars and it's the best Star Wars movie. No death star either.

I forgot to mention that most Star Wars movie with a death star are mediocre-bad (II, III, VI, TFA).

>I find them all full of personality, maybe you are racist.

Is Stormtrooper a race? Boyega's performance was alright, his character was just badly written. I'm taking more issue with the context of his character than the character itself.

>It's a famous ship and it's parked right around where she lives, probably grasped her curiosity more than once.

I've lived on Fort Bragg and been on a fucking C-130 many times, no idea how to fly one. No one without training does, that shit makes no sense. Aviation is a skill and the previous movies acknowledged this.

>Hate to break it to you but a lightsaber it's just a fancy stick.

So is a sword but you couldn't beat an olympic fencer if you've never fenced before. Luke didn't know what the fuck to do with his when vader toys with him in Empire, and he's had that thing for months or years by that point. Swordsmanship, like aviation is a learned (mainly taught) skill and the movies have reinforced this so far.

>Mindless nitpicking.

Those are my genuine complaints with the rest of the characters. The movie's biggest problem in my opinion is the lack of a good villain, followed by YET ANOTHER death star adventure.

The Last Jedi RLM review predictions:
>they will call the "new" guards badass
>they will continue to jack off to Rey
>they will either like or be neutral on the force tree and complain about midichlorians instead of actually talking about the tree
>they will like the reincarnation chosen one crap because of their Rey fetish
>they will be neutral on the porgs and call them better than the ewoks

Plinkett TLJ review predictions
>half of the review will be complaining about the prequels again instead of talking about the movie he is supposed to be reviewing
>another third will be praising TFA again
>of the small fraction actually talking about TLJ he will say many of the things said in their review
>he will say that since Finn has a romance it solves his only real problem he had with TFA

>>86210372
>The ones before first contact.
First Contact is the 2nd TNG movie. Only Generations came before it.

>>86208637
What it deserves, desu.

File: cisbusters_streams.png (480KB, 767x419px) Image search: [Google]

480KB, 767x419px

>>86210589

>>86210317
>How is Rey able to pilot the millenium falcon
she's flown ships before, probably cargo ships given the type of work she does but all we know is she has flown ships

if Luke's T-16 is close enough to an X-Wing, then whatever Rey flew before is close enough to the Millennium Falcon

she even has a line about her not knowing how she pulled the shit off that she did, spoiler alert: it was the force

>>86203817
>more like cinemASSacre

I legitimately laughed out loud.

>>86210038
>Talking shit in any way about John Williams.
This board is 18+.

>>86210646
>the movie he is supposed to be reviewing
reading titles is hard

>>86210734
>she's flown ships before

I highly doubt that considering it's never mentioned and she's a dirt fuck scavenger. No one hires the homeless dudes that illegally rip copper wire out of walls as freelance electricians. Why would any ship owner on that poor ass planet trust a dirt fuck diseased desert person to fly their ship which is more valuable than the lives of every single person in that salvage camp combined?

Makes no sense.

Best Plinkett review in awhile. Mike actually gives a shit about Ghostbusters. He doesn't care about the new Star Wars.

It was like an earlier Plinkett review in that there was lots of complaining and few gags or bits and callbacks. He wasn't hoping to build an audience.

>>86210646
>they will call the "new" guards badass
Oh do we already hate these? Why is /tv/ so fucking incapable of appreciating good design?

>>86210734
She's never flown ships. The whole scene with her putting on the helmet is to show that she dreams of piloting a ship but has never actually done it herself.

>>86210827
>it's never mentioned
she literally says, "I've flown some ships," after they escape the planet when her and Finn are talking excitedly to one another about what just happened

>>86205895
Maybe watch the Beyond review? Because they generally praise it for being a good action movie and the best of the new Star Trek movie series.

>>86210734
>flown ships before
The most we see or hear of is her riding a speeder, not an old as fuck ship

>it was the force
Remember when luke flew the falcon better than Han ever could? No? because as Han said in TFA

"the force doesn't work that way"

Which ironically, I was saying to myself the entire movie

>>86210939

After a quick google, the novelization (lol) mentions it. Not the film.

>>86210959
>>86210894
the line is pretty quick so I don't blame anyone for missing, but you're acting so sure of yourselves when you're flat out wrong

>>86211015

Not in the movie

File: 1446327743917.jpg (75KB, 476x719px) Image search: [Google]

75KB, 476x719px

>>86202250
3 times but twice was mostly background noise.
Anyone else appreciate how this was a real surgical strike of a Plinkett review? There wasn't any side stuff and it was just one thing after the other

Once, but I'll watch it again at some point down the line. Easily the best Plinkett review since Crystal Skull.

>>86210985
>>86211036
0:35:56
have some shitty streaming site as a source http://watchfree.ac/movie-star-wars-the-force-awakens-2015-watch-free-putlocker.html

"I've flown some ships but I've never left the planet."

File: 1494127628091.png (205KB, 501x445px) Image search: [Google]

205KB, 501x445px

>>86202250
>Mike watches SNL and LIKES IT

>>86210623
>Empire Strikes back didn't reuse a single location from Star Wars.

It was also made following the original and not deviced for a completely new audience.

>Is Stormtrooper a race?

At some point point they were all clones of some asian looking guy, so yes.

>Aviation is a skill and the previous movies acknowledged this.

That's why Luke could defeat Vader in his first try?

>you couldn't beat an olympic fencer if you've never fenced before.

Kylo ren wasn't an olympic fencer, in fact he wasn't very athletic at all, he clearly trained the psychokinetic side of the force more than swordmanship, in wich Rey was clearly better than him even before taking a lightsaber.

Also i liked Kylo Ren as a villain, grumpy, powermad and insecure, like villains should be.

How can Sony ever recover? RLM's reviews of their movies are so biting.

>>86211101
that's like someone winning a formula one race despite having no racing experience and explaining it away by saying
>well i've driven a car before

>>86211124
>At some point point they were all clones of some asian looking guy, so yes.

The original clones were, but at one point they started using volunteers and stuck with it

>>86211124
>At some point point they were all clones of some asian looking guy, so yes.

That's clearly no longer the case. Is this bait?

>That's why Luke could defeat Vader in his first try?

He couldn't. Han clips Vader's ship by surprise in Star Wars, Luke gets his hand cut off and pushed down a well in Empire.

Ugly white guy built his own lightsaber and trained with a warrior monk (also supposedly had his own death squad of warrior monks), he would have known how to use it better than Rey, who had never used one before.

>>86206746
Nigga he loves shlock and made Space Cop. Of course he likes that stuff

>>86211201
did it piss you off in episode IV?
it did kind of annoy me then too

>>86211316

It makes more sense in Star Wars because Luke has experience with airframes with weapons systems. The spacefighters in these movies seem to travel at atmospheric speeds in combat so it's not that much of a leap. Seems like going from a little bird to an apache, which isn't insane.

>>86206584
seriously? a paper bag? i bet you look worse than she does

>>86211528
what kinda sex you havin where you lookin at yourself all the time?

Couple of times, mainly to feed on the rage of seeing the director try to shoot movies wearing a full 3 piece suit plus accessories.

He looks like such a try-hard.

>>86211580
i mean yeah she has a dog face but shes not even that bad im trying not to white knight, its just sometimes i forget /tv/ has no idea how real women look

>>86205140
>Nobody liked Ballbusters2016
Haven't you heard? It's Certified Fresh!!
Except it wasn't before they stopped requiring top critics to go over 60% for a full Fresh rating. They changed that little detail right as the movie was coming out. Hmmmmmm.

Aww man, the top critics are at 61% now. Sheeeit

>>86211445
It makes MORE sense? Really?
Luke had some consumer craft with guns, so he can fly a space fighter. I can get over that, but you're saying that makes more sense than Rey flying ships so she can fly the Falcon? She doesn't say, but you'd have to assume she's flying something to do with cargo transport. The connection there is much closer than Luke's jump to an X-Wing.

>>86211036
>>86210985
>>86210959
>>86210894
anons sure got quiet

>>86202250
Three