I've seen most Peter Bogdanovich movies on CED. They suit the format rather well.

All right, this bold statement summarizes something that actually originated with Frank Conniff ( link ), but it is one that I completely agree with...

In addition to Gone With The Wind not being one of the best films ever made, it also is not even one of the 10 best films of 1939.

Die Hard 2 is the best sequel in the series.

It took me rewatching the film series to bring me around, but I now totally agree with this.

"Overrated" and "underrated" have never had any meaning as critiques.

It's okay to accept that David Lynch and Steven Spielberg don't wish to record commentaries.

Michael Cimino is not a genius.

If Jodorowsky had filmed and released his version of DUNE, it would be best known today as a colossal 70's flop, commonly invoking the question "WTF were they thinking?!" Jodorowsky's Dune succeeds better as myth than reality.

DEATH TO SMOOCHY is not the edgy black comedy or biting satire that many claim it to be.

Michael Crichton's LOOKER (1981) is not the most cerebral science fiction film ever made, and people who think it's poorly made are not "idiots who should stick to Michael Bay films."

Is there anyone who would say differently?

Yes, hence why I said that.

Most people view Die Hard 2 as the red-headed stepchild of the series for some reason. Die Hard with a Vengeance is almost universally agreed to be the best sequel, which I don't agree with. It's entertaining as hell, but if I was to rank the series it'd be:

Die Hard
Die Hard 2
Live Free or Die Hard
Die Hard with a Vengeance

Then just pretend A Good Day to Die Hard doesn't exist.

I don't dislike Die Hard 2, but I do like Vengeance better

I would. The ranking order is thus:
1
3
4
2
5

The McTiernan ones are best, at the top of his game he was one of the best action directors of the period, 4 is better than it has any right to be, and 2 is an average action film with a few nicely iconic moments. 5 would rank above a colonoscopy, but just barely, you'd have to make a pro and con list.

Another bold statement...

Andrei Tarkovsky is a terrible director.


(BTW, if you don't know who he is, look him up. He's considered one of the greatest directors ever in the world... unless you actually watch his films and realizes it's a "The Emperor Is Wearing No Clothing" situation.)

Chang Cheh was a true artist and a visionary filmmaker.

I thought most martial arts fan thought that?

Kaminey (2009) is nothing compared to Pulp Fiction movie.

There's "bold" and then there's "wrong" and then there's "dumb".

People who think Andrei Tarkovsky is the greatest filmmaker of alltime:

Ingmar Bergman, Akira Kurosawa.

People who don't:

dhmac.

At least he's playing the game right. Give him credit for that. At the rate this thread is going I half expect to click one day and see someone posting something along the lines of "Despite what anyone might say, Citizen Kane is actually pretty good." or "Michael Bay movies have lots of explosions."

"Bold" was the only prerequisite .

Most martial arts fans do---most non martial arts fans do not, I'd say.

Hence why my statement is bold and why I call it an "Emperor Is Wearing No Clothes" opinion. And I invite anyone who disagrees with my viewpoint to do a marathon bing watch of as many of Tarkovsky's films as they can take.

( a clip from Solaris to back up my statement )


And another bold statement about him:

Steven Soderbergh's version of Solaris starring George Clooney is not only a very good movie, but is drastically better than Tarkovsky's extremely overrated version.

I find your comment interesting and more a difference in 'taste' - this 'full highway scene' is somewhat mesmerizing if not fascinating for many reasons. The obvious, which I think you object to, is the it is out-of-place, overlong, unnecessary, etc. and I agree to a point. I found it iconic (sorry) for its not only bold injection to a 'outer space' movie but for the seeing the character's return to the city and, in the showing of that, how alien it was made to seem. Also, it is metaphoric for the actual space journey to the Solaris space station that is never shown. So it works for me but I understand your opinion. JANK

Everyone knows Tarkovsky was paying homage to the American cinematic masterpiece, Manos: The Hands of Fate.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="//www.youtube.com/embed/cOxZrRk4JK4" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

I think what dhmac was trying to get at was, the highway scene didn't need to be as long as it was to convey it's point. I get that it's suppose to convey a feeling of "out-of-place", but I think that same feeling could have been conveyed in a two minute scene instead of a five minute scene.

I feel the same way about the ending of Hey Jude & Freebird.

Hey, even though it's about music instead of movies, that is definitely a bold statement.

So I whole-heartedly support you making that statement here (although I personally disagree with it ).

(And maybe there should be a "bold statement about music" thread in the "Music" section)