Objectively bad movie

>>86265259
ur gay lmfao

>>86265322
prove me wrong

You basically just said the movie would be better if it lacked emotional depth and characterization. That is actually, fundamentally a sign of either depression or autism.
Ultimately, I just hope you're okay, man.

this review has been brought to you by /autism/

>>86265463
THE ONLY EMOTIONAL DEPTH IN THE MOVIE WAS FUCKING GARBAGE AND HACKNEYED YOU'RE TELLING ME YOU THOUGHT THERE WAS EMOTIONAL DEPTH TO THE STORYLINE WITH THE LOVE INTEREST?

worst on screen romance in a long time. there was no chemistry and the writing was SHIT!!
>>86265508
prove me wrong

>>86265529
I heard walking in circles and repeating familiar phrases helps with anger outbursts in people on the spectrum.

>>86265259
Everything you said was objectively false and I'm not going to give you the respect to even explain it to you because you are so diminished intellectually that it would be a waste of yours, and what is infinitely worse, my time.

File: maxresdefault.jpg (77KB, 1280x720px) Image search: [Google]

77KB, 1280x720px

>>86265588
>Oh you're a getaway driver for criminals that kill people? Haha I literally don't even have to take time to accept this fact. It literally has no bearing on my perception or attraction for you. I will literally spend the rest of the movie not caring about this fact and put my life in danger to escape because I you even though we've only been on two dates.
Epically fleshed out character. Very emotionally deep. 10/10
>>86265602
yet you're angry enough to fill out a post and solve a captcha and hit enter telling me how much you don't care. face it, you cant prove me wrong because they're all objectively true irrefutable criticisms. if they weren't you wouldn't be so mad

File: 3c76e21b39e09b8992e9b92f7f387501e99cd90b8ea709357c819942808377d4.jpg (88KB, 625x434px) Image search: [Google]

88KB, 625x434px

>>86265259
(You)

>>86265529
I can't tell if you're just trying to fit in by shitting on something popular, but if that's not the case, I genuinely mean it when I say that you should probably get a counselor or wait until you're 18 to post here.

>>86265680
Nice, another passive aggressive "you're autistic dude seek help" post. There's no shortage of those but notice there hasn't been a single effort to refute anything said in the OP. I wanted to like this movie, I still do, that's why I invite people to prove me wrong.

>>86265259
>Objectively
The very first word of your post is wrong. Film is subjective. I'm not going to bother reading the rest of your stupidity since it's obvious you're either baiting or autistic.

>>86265720
>having a pointless argument with some random anon on the internet with someone who is determined to not like this movie.

NOPE.jpg

>>86265645
Perhaps putting on white noise in the background could help you?

>>86265744
Leave this board and never return if any of these are applicable:

>you watch any form of genre fiction
>you barely know your classics
>you tend to believe that if you like a given work, it is justified on an artistic level
>you think everyone's opinion should be accepted and respected
>you've seen more post 2000 movies than pre 1970 movies
>you think Darren Arronofsky makes good films
>you watch for the plot
>you watch for entertainment
>you rarely watch documentaries
>you don't have a solid grounding in surrealist avant garde short films that came out in the 1920s
>you've seen less than 500 structural films
>you have little to no understanding of film outside of your cultural horizon
>you have little to no understanding of film within your own cultural horizon
>you mostly watch contemporary films
>you believe 'the auteur is dead'
>you make your film analysis proceed from ideology
>you think intricate cinematography is 'pretentious' and that the filmmaker 'should just get to the point'
>your rarely watch short films
>you have a hard time forming structured and relevant film criticism
>you tend to refuse to judge works for yourself, rather relying on the opinions of film authorities
>you rarely watch for more than seven or eight hours straight

>>86265768
lol, this much autism

>>86265744
factually incorrect
>>86265757
not a retort
>>86265759
not a retort
>>86265803
not a retort

>>86265768
>>86265645
>>86265720
>>86265508
>>86265259
(You)

>>86265808
"not a retort" is actually a good phrase to repeat. start doing that before it escalates to punching yourself in the head

>>86265259
Girl was the worst part but that didn't ruin the movie for me desu

File: Return_of_stinkmeaner390.jpg (49KB, 720x480px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 720x480px

>>86265808
>The nigga will use words they don't understand

>>86265259
saying "prove me wrong" doesnt mean what you say is correct, you are objectively wrong on most of your points
Jamie Foxx was great, Kevin Spacey was great, the music was good
it fell short on the plot but its not a plot based movie
7/10 overall prove me wrong

>>86265322
Based

>>86265877
prove me wrong
>>86265986
it does mean i'm correct. the fact that you think jamie foxx means you're retarded

OP here i'll put you all to shame by refuting my own opinions
>the action in sync with the playlist was entertaining for 15 minutes
I disagree, I thought the use of this schtick was sparse for the most part (with some exceptions, see coffee scene). But overall it didn't feel too intrusive during the getaway scenes.
>kevin spacey played a caricature of le typical bossman
Not a bad thing imo, he did a good job and served to move the plot forward in an entertaining and concise way.
>jamie foxx was bad
Poorly acted or poorly written?
>zero chemistry between baby and debora
I disagree here. For an autist, he sure has game. See the first diner scene where they first meet. I think their obsession with music allowed for some cute back-and-forth that was music-based as opposed to the usual flirtatious dialogue we've seen thousands of times before in movies.
>how in the fuck did jon hamm survive that cop shootout when she died?
He killed them, were you blind?
>last 15 mins all of a sudden jon hamm is the bad guy
Well yeah, Baby was indirectly responsible for the love of his life.
>shouldve ended when he got sent to prison
I think this would've been an odd note to end things on but I agree that the way the ending was executed felt forced. I think it would've been best if they ended it with him driving with his gf touching the speakers to hear his mother's voice.
>so many cliche "funny bits" like the shot of the old black womans reaction when her car gets jacked "what the fuck?" WHY DOES THIS HAPPEN IN EVERY COMEDY MOVIE?
This is a really autistic thing to get mad about
>Baby's entire backstory felt so forced.
>Deaf man roommate was unnecessary
Without these he would've literally been just a random autistic guy with no character development who is a getaway driver and falls in love with a waitress. It would come off very hollow on screen

>watching a movie by a man that has made a career out of parodying genres and stereotypes
>complain when you see stereotypes and seemingly bad writing

File: IMG_20170812_173618.jpg (143KB, 720x939px) Image search: [Google]

143KB, 720x939px

>The more of OP's replies I read in the thread the more I think he's seriously autistic

File: 2591858-madkeyborder.gif (2MB, 320x240px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 320x240px

>>86266190

>Baby Driver
>Not a single scene of him shoving eggs into his cornhole

what a shit

>>86266207
i hate seeing this meme that baby driver was parodying other films. his other films that were parodies were parodies as intended by the writers simon pegg and nick frost. they didn't write this movie and this movie sure as shit doesn't parody any movie. stop trying to use this to cover the fact that many parts of the movie were shit

>>86266213
dude, first post should have given it away easily.

>>86265259
I agree with you. It was a film built around a single gimmick, and the gimmick wasn't good enough to sustain a film. Plus, zero characterization and weirdly uneven performances.

>>86266250
>this film isn't a parody because I'm too dumb to see it and I say so
Ok kiddo.

>>86266190
>being so mad you refute your own claims because nobody else would
this is a new kind of autism

File: b49.jpg (36KB, 680x680px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 680x680px

>>86265259
REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE: The Post

>>86265322
fpbp

someone defend the happy ending that was shoehorned into this flick, i dare you

File: 1392629477323.gif (442KB, 512x384px) Image search: [Google]

442KB, 512x384px

>>86266414
(You)

>>86266446
please respond

>>86265322
BTFO

I also didn't understand why this movie was rated so highly. I expected car chase kino but there was only the poorly done one at the beginning and the rest was him just crashing in to shit.

respond

>>86265259
I expected Drive 2, but it had none of the thrill and absolute dogshit soundtrack. You're absolutely correct about the ending.
It also ruins the word "baby", but that's just autism on my part.

>>86268113
The soundtrack was better than Drive.
Drive only had memetic "HUMAN BEAN" potential, I barely remembered anything one hour after watching it.

>>86268515
>The soundtrack was better than Drive.
t. millennial

>>86269899
Not only you're a millennial too, but the soundtrack of this movie is composed entirely of dadrock, it appeals way more to old people than Drive.

>>86265259
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WA9lfxbaHvk
it was a garbage film indeed