http://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments … people_in/

Just wanted to throw in and give Jeffery some props. He was fantastic. He is an added dimension that you guys have not had before: a very strait commentary without trying to be funny or a story teller, a true critic. I would love to hear him on a panel. Love all you guys also, just really liked his takes. It was refreshing and he has a great voice for the show.

I just got done watching firefly the series for the 1st time. It was  one of the best sci fi shows i have ever seen. I didnt fall in love with the setting and think the world they created was so far fetched and heavy handed with the western imagery. I would have liked to see that be more subtle. That said the characters were absolutely awesome and I loved the show.

I had scene serenity a couple of years ago. It does not hold up on its own at all. There are alot of things in the movie that make assumptions that you know and care about what happens to the characters because you saw the show. It came across poorly to me. It really reminded me off b rate sci fi like Virus with Jamie lee curtis and movies of that ilk.

After seeing the show I am really glad it was made. Even you guys point out how it seemed as if they pushed a whole season into a 2 hr movie. I did enjoy it afterwards.

Just wanted to throw my 2c in as someone who had seen the movie before the show.

aww crap, i should proof read my stuff better

you guys are great btw, this movie just deserved a much  better discussion about why it succeeds or fails than you guys gave it.
Just for future note: when a movie has a 90%+ on rotten tomatoes i dont care whether you agree or disagree but you really need to explore the reasons why that 90+ did like it and why they are wrong if that is your view point.

there are all kinds of movies that just dont work for me because i cant relate to the characters but even when that happens I can still generally critisise the movie objectively and say "well these lines and/or action do support the character/theme even though i can not relate to the character/characters". Just because i cant relate does not mean its bad. It just means i cant relate. If most of the actions are trying to serve the character (and in the case of this move) the theme of the movie at the same time, it is still a strong/good movie.

if spider man is = the princess bride ( a simple emotionally narrow fantasy tale)

Then The dark Knight is = Lord of the rings ( a very complex layered fantasy film)

Im just saying both styles of film making can work and not every film needs to be one or the other.

I agree and I think the characters in spiderman 2 are as on point as other very successful movies such as Indiana Jones, Who framed roger rabbit?, the princess bride or back to the future.

Hmmm.. good question.

sci fi fantasy - starwars spiderman most comic movies that involve supernatural elements.

horror fantasy - evil dead series

tolkeen fantasy - lotr, willow, dragonheart, stuff like that.

fantasy generally means taking place in some kind of alternate reality. At least that would be my best description.

I think you guys were criticizing this movie out of context. You would never try to evaluate the princess bride this way.

The movie tries to tie in theme and character through the plot constantly. I understood the and recognized the world we were in immideately. All 3 of the Marvell studios releases dont even bother with this. Ironman 1& 2, the incredible hulk have virtually no theme and if they do the creators put almost no effort into tying the theme into the details of the movies. Thats why most people like this movie and think it succeeds.

300 takes place in a real world location and time. it is still fantasy. Location is not always the primary indicator of what genre you are in.

It is also listed in imdb as fantasy. I'm not the only one who feels this way.

Its also never said that someone would have to stay there the whole time. That is an inference that you are putting in the movie that is never really said. The experement is never truly succesful.  Maybe once the reaction stabilizes it doesnt need maintenece like that. who knows? Acting like someone will always have to stand there is very nitpicky. It really doesnt matter its just a plot device and it follows the rules the movie sets for it pretty much the whole time. Light sabers and death stars are kind of stupid too. Again this is a fantasy movie

As for the goblin. Peter had seen norman as a father figure. Im just making the point that it wasnt an accident that he never told harry. It was a very intentional. Agree or disagree it is written that way to serve the character