Okay, what the fuck is up with this absurd ritchie hate that

>>87570211
Dubs confirm, good movie.

File: 1494374701339.png (116KB, 402x398px) Image search: [Google]

116KB, 402x398px

I wondered the same.
Some normies I showed the film loved it, but apparently the mainstream crowd is pissed it's not a Nth 1/1 adaptation of the Arthurian myth.
Those I asked who pretended to hate it didn't see it, and that's the only reason they gave.
I was pissed. I think they were triggered by the trailer.

>>87570211
Pic not related?

>>87570211
>he churns out good movies

Except he doesn't. He had a couple indie hits that were dope-ass crime movies, but ever since then he just turns out generic forgettable paint-by-numbers bullshit. And before you point out Sherlock Holmes, I'll remind you of Sherlock Holmes 2.

File: Arthurvideogame.webm (3MB, 800x332px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 800x332px

>>87570211
>Good movies

>>87570211
Where did King Arthur get his hair gel and who did his hair and trimmed his beard so neatly?

>>87572703
>A shitty sequel invalidates the original

That's preposterous. If that's true then a lot of good movies are going to have to go in the bin now that Hollywood is obsessed with churning shitty remakes out.

>>87572714
The one near the end of the movie manages to be even worse. What did they blow the budget on? Jude Law?

>>87572714
This, the courtyard fight later on and part of the last fight looked like dogshit, yeah.

It was still a pretty good movie.

edgy directors gets bad reviews from people who are older than 20, wow what a surprise

>>87572786
1) A shitty sequel does not invalidate the original.
2) A shitty sequel directed by the same director >implies that he doesn't know what the fuck he's doing and just got lucky.
3) The first movie wasn't shot or paced in a creative or interesting way, it just had RDJ being awesome.

>>87572862
>It was still a pretty good movie.
Nah, it had poor pacing and schizophrenic editing for no reason.

>>87570211

Shit movie, cosplay armor, attempt at 'hip' mix old old and new fashion, it was a movie made entirely by ticking off some fucking laundry list Ritchie has concocted, even Jude Law looked like he was on autpilot.

And let's end it with yet another shitty CGI monster, I mean WTF !?

Aladdin will suck.

>>87570211
"The movie was dark, not a 1/1 adaptation of the tales and had too much of guy ritchie's hallmarks. It's also stupid."

Literally every 2/10 review of this movie spewing the same non-criticisms.

>>87572889
If that's the case then how come tarantino gets rave reviews?

>>87572634
Yeah KA was horrible. Cut out an entire section of action and then continually have "show up at place, here's what we just did with cheeky dialogue">>87572807

File: 55a1db68c780cc8a5a023c99d3fc3043.jpg (92KB, 1024x768px) Image search: [Google]

92KB, 1024x768px

>>87570211
man from uncle was kino, thanks to richie curse, we'll never get a sequel :(

Yeah I guess it's not actually a really bad movie but I just can't help but compare it to Snatch or lock stock and then wonder what happened to Guy Ritchie