In retrospect, there are certain things that aren't great. The script can be slightly iffy at times, there's probably too much action, there's not too much emotionality and the cinematography is at times a little average. Overall still a very good movie, though.
In retrospect, there are certain things that are great. The script is never even slightly iffy at any time, there's Just the right amount of action, there's not too much emotionality and the cinematography is always better than average. Overall A masterpiece
I wouldn't even consider TDKR a masterpiece, and that movie did far better. Than avengers which was a pile of crud
lol how is this even a question. The best thing about it was how they brought together a group of superheroes together, with the hype that brought for us fans.
I mean, it was VERY influential. I'd say, that's kinda the start of MCU hype train, or even the recent superhero hype train. It's almost crazy how impactful it was.
No, people toss around the word “masterpiece” too casually these days. Most movies people call masterpieces are merely great films. And, there’s nothing wrong with that. Most movies aren’t even good let alone great. To be a masterpiece a movie must elevate film as a medium in a new way which impacts the way creators approach their art. Lawrence of Arabia (1962), 8 1/2 (1963), The Third Man (1949), Rashomon (1950), and the Bicycle Thieves (1948) are examples of film masterpieces.
@iron_tiger: I am not, and yes I have seen Nosferatu, both versions in fact. I think I saw the original at my local public library when I was 8 and it gave me nightmares for months afterward. While there are more modern films which could qualify as a masterpiece, I do believe that retaining its importance and impact over time is an important element to becoming a film masterpiece.
Log in to comment