Topic: Other Unpopular Opinions (non-gaming tech/media)

I mean, the jokes include references, but they are generally said in a humorous way.

For example: https://youtu.be/3MBV-mKq8no?t=1m27s

Now it's not really funny to me anymore, mostly because it got old. But I don't see how a scene like that couldn't be funny on the first watch.

Big Bang Theory is a pretty amusing show, all things considered. It seems like the show has gotten popular enough now that it has become trendy to dump on it.

People have been dumping on that show the first season it was out. Its popularity has nothing to do with it.

Here here!

Oo I've got another doozy.

Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban is one of my least favorite Harry Potter movies. Alfonso Cuaron basically ditched every ounce of warmth and heart that Chris Columbus had instilled in the series. And in my opinion, that sort of tonal shift doesn't really happen in the novels until the end of Goblet of Fire.

It's also the first movie that took more liberties with the source material. That alone isn't a dealbreaker for me (I really like the David Yates films), but the sacrifice of accuracy didn't seem to benefit anything in return. The action wasn't particularly spectacular, and the characterizations weren't really improved.

Some of the casting like Gary Oldman as Sirius and David Thewlis as Lupin was spot on, but Michael Gambon as Dumbledore was a travesty. He didn't even TRY to emulate Richard Harris's spot on performance, and the costuming seemed completely off base.

It's not my least favorite (that would be Goblet of Fire), but I don't get why everyone loves it.

@iKhan: I personally thought that whilst Chris Columbus did the best he could do with the material, the first two films felt very American and whimsy in its approach; it wasn't until the fourth film where it's English roots begun to sow.

My favourite book AND film is The Prisoner of Azkaban purely because it felt like a stand alone story within the Harry Potter and Voldemort story arc. The tonal shift may well have been slightly abrupt, but the director is known for his foreboding imagery and mood in his films - almost a signature/trademark in a way.

The only person who I thought was absolutely spot on (in the casting) is Alan Rickman as Snape.

I like Oblivion. It's the Tom Cruise sci-fi flick where he believes he's maintaining attack drones that are hunting down the remnants of an invading alien army that was defeated, while the rest of humanity has escaped into space since Earth was irreparably damaged in the war. Of course, things aren't as they seem.

Anyhow, I don't believe it did all that well, and can't quite make out why.

I'm a bigger fan of film than I am TV (though anecdotal, this seems to be unpopular now, based on what I've witnessed online & IRL).

In fact, I've become a huge fan of film in the past couple years ever since I got my own Netflix profile, and would rather use it to watch movies than TV shows.

-TV shows are boring.
-Movies are, too.
-Plus, superheroe movies have too much flashy stuff and little substance.
Just my opinion, of course. I'll stick with videogames and books. Oh, and I can't understand, for the life of me, the idea of brunch. For me, breakfast and lunch are meant to be separated.

Youtube needs to die. I've said this earlier but honestly, I don't see the point of youtube anymore.

many youtubers make their own websites and push their viewers attention to their sites rather than on youtube. The unnecessary blame that coporates get for flagging down videos.....is just ridiculous.

People only leave YouTube because YouTube got too big and was too accessible so they tried to automate the copyright issues, which created more problems.
That being said, because YouTube is so huge that big and not-so-big content producers would be fools to ignore it.
YT is just too mainstream and makes content easy find to for people wanting to produce video content to just ignore and move on.
That's not even touching the fact YT lacks large enough competition to even make killing off YT feasible enough to not create problems.

@ZeroZX-Dev: Still, the very fact that these youtubers argue so much that they do marketing a whole lot better than what companies do for marketing is stupid because they aren't advertising the product but rather reviewing it. The problem I have in this is the review is more important than the advertisement and whether you give a product a good or bad review, that's not advertising, that's reviewing the product.

Showing footage of products is not advertisment either because you're basically showing it when its used.

@WaveGhoul: I'm the opposite. I get a nostalgic flood of positive emotions when I see PSOne era graphics, but N64 games look like a nightmare world where everything is made of ripped construction paper to me.

I've recently re-watched the 1976 version of King Kong and I found it many, many leagues better than Peter Jackson's remake.

Nothing tops the first one, but I'd call King Kong '76 the second best Kong film.

Give me your tired, your weary, your Rick Bakers in monkey suits, your weird women named "Dwan" and your Jeff Bridges beards.

I agree to an extent...I think a lot of games from that generation have aged poorly, regardless of whether they're on PSone or N64, though I'm also happy with a lot of them too. However personally I find Mario 64 has aged quite poorly, though more in terms of feel and control than graphics.

@WaveGhoul: N64 is definitely the kind of early 3D platformers. Nevertheless, the games are painful to look at for me. I owned an N64 for years and could never adjust to the way the games looked. Although I will admit that Conker's Bad Fur Day was a really visually impressive game for its time.

Still, games like Final Fantasy IX, Chrono Cross, and Parasite Eve beat pretty much anything on N64.

I don't like MMA (UFC, ect.). It just doesn't come of as professional.

When it comes to martial arts, I'd rather watch Karate, Judo, Boxing & the like during the Olympics. Everything looks so much more clean cut & professional.

Episode 4 was the best Star Wars movie.

@MrMario02: That is a 100% valid opinion. I think you don't hear it as much because Empire gets all the love from the cinephile community and Jedi is the favorite of my very vocal generation of Star Wars fans, just by virtue of it being the film that was around when they were kids (you can really get deep and nerdy into this — I was born in '85, which is when major TV syndication deals put Jedi on American TV more than any other Star Wars).

So that leaves A New Hope (or really, just plain "Star Wars") the odd man out sometimes. It's strange to say that it's underrated, because its impact on cinema and pop culture is certainly enormous and enduring, but it does seem to be overlooked as a "personal favorite" pick for folks.

And that's a shame, because as a film, it is pure dynamite. It's one of the best edited productions I've ever seen (thanks to the tragically blacklisted Marcia Lucas), and it created a pace for popcorn adventure films that decades of movies would follow. The world-building all happens on the fly — we're focused on the narrative, but we see a rich universe and mythology in the backdrop, which is what leaves us curious (this is, in my estimation, the most effective way to build fantasy worlds in film). And A New Hope is certainly the most pure distillation of two pillars that make Star Wars what it is: Joseph Campbell's archetypes and 1940s serial filmmaking (not to mention strong influences from Kurosawa, WWII dogfights, and hotrod culture). Lots of modern Star Wars projects stray from these core ingredients, and it ends up hurting them (let's hope J.J. is paying attention).

So, anyway. I think that is a solid opinion.

I completely agree, actually.