Ask Lemmy

27240 readers

2073 users here now

A Fediverse community for open-ended, thought provoking questions

Rules: (interactive)

1) Be nice and; have fun

Doxxing, trolling, sealioning, racism, and toxicity are not welcomed in AskLemmy. Remember what your mother said: if you can't say something nice, don't say anything at all. In addition, the site-wide Lemmy.world terms of service also apply here. Please familiarize yourself with them

2) All posts must end with a '?'

This is sort of like Jeopardy. Please phrase all post titles in the form of a proper question ending with ?

3) No spam

Please do not flood the community with nonsense. Actual suspected spammers will be banned on site. No astroturfing.

4) NSFW is okay, within reason

Just remember to tag posts with either a content warning or a [NSFW] tag. Overtly sexual posts are not allowed, please direct them to either [email protected] or [email protected]. NSFW comments should be restricted to posts tagged [NSFW].

5) This is not a support community.

It is not a place for 'how do I?', type questions. If you have any questions regarding the site itself or would like to report a community, please direct them to Lemmy.world Support or email [email protected]. For other questions check our partnered communities list, or use the search function.

6) No US Politics.

Please don't post about current US Politics. If you need to do this, try [email protected] or [email protected]

Reminder: The terms of service apply here too.

Partnered Communities:

Logo design credit goes to: tubbadu

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

925

Opinions: What is a movie you genuinely like, that is rated below 60% on rotten tomatoes? (xkcd.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

1131 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Inspired by the linked XKCD. Using 60% instead of 50% because that's an easy filter to apply on rottentomatoes.

I'll go first: I think "Sherlock Holmes: A game of Shadows" was awesome, from the plot to the characters ,and especially how they used screen-play to highlight how Sherlocks head works in these absurd ways.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Mortal Kombat was a fun movie, and exactly fits the description. The whole plot is basically a series of setups for characters to fight, and characters are a bit one-dimensional, which is exactly what we all want from Mortal Kombat movies.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

No it doesn't. It doesn't do "Mortal Kombat" enough. Whenever the film is actually doing "what we all" wanted it to, it instead focuses on other shit that no one cares about (Cole) and finally just gives us like these little bursts of Mortal Kombat that should've been longer. And saying a character is one-dimensional is never a compliment. Characters can still be simple and still have just enough depth to matter. Cole is painfully one-dimensional and is constantly shoved in your face, only to have a tiny role at the end of the movie, which is dumb. Also, many of the series classic characters are just shoved into the background while, again, focusing on stuff that neither the GA or the MK fans care about. Then you have Raiden, who completely sucks in this movie and apparently had the power to banish anyone he wanted at any time, but doesn't do anything to Shang Tsung earlier in the movie because.......reasons.

Netherrealm knew how to write these stories better and they should have more control over the story the same way CDPR had more control over the Cyberpunk anime story. The Mortal Kombat reboot is dogshit and people making excuses for it isn't going to improve the sequel.