"Movies" that are split into two parts are not movies. They are cinematic mini series. The, amirite?

So then The Lord of the Rings movies wouldn't be movies? This would get way too nit-picky on what would and wouldn't constitute as a concluded movie, especially if an Oscar or other award was on the line.

by Anonymous 15 hours ago

Can't say I haven't watched them since I was young. What I will say you know when a movie with a sequel tells a compete story. Those were multiple books, and usually, books have a complete story. Hobbit would fall into this category, but I'm not sure about the lord of the rings. I guess it would be an exception but I feel like that is obvious as the first one was it's own tail.

by Anonymous 15 hours ago

See where there are holes in what you're saying already. You've already had to make an exception on The Lord of the Rings and The Hobbit trilogies for the opinion. I'm sure there are many more that we can make that argument on. Not every movie or movie series is based off books either so if we are talking awards you cannot use that criteria to judge one movie and not a competing movie. Not to mention that movies can heavily stray from their source material.

by Anonymous 14 hours ago

I didn't. I said I haven't seen the Lord of the Rings since I was young and thus will not pass judgement. I said the hobbit is not a movie, and part of the reason I can tell is the source material. It's like chemistry in a sense that just because there are guidelines doesn't mean you can't break the guidelines. For every "rule" there is an exception.

by Anonymous 14 hours ago

Then I guess the OG SW trilogy aren't film either by your logic.

by Anonymous 14 hours ago

Each Star Wars movie had its complete story told.

by Anonymous 14 hours ago

"Empire Strikes Back literally ends in a cliffhanger." Not what 'literally' means ; )

by rippinbrad 13 hours ago

maybe never watched them, not my cup of tea

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

Another day, another half cooked "opinion".

by Vincent07 13 hours ago

"opinion" because I'm right

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

How can you be so certain if you haven't even watched Star Wars, one of the most famous trilogies of all time? You're already making more exceptions than concrete examples of when your idea supposedly works

by Anonymous 13 hours ago

"You haven't watched every movie ever how do you have an opinion" it doesn't work you just have to be unbiased and honest about it.

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

I've seen God Father

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

I agree, especially your examples, I would not just watch one episode of a mini series and feel my fulfillment with that, and the same with your examples, but I can happily watch many other films in a series and feel fulfillment with just one out of the series.

by Anonymous 12 hours ago

bingo thank you for understanding me

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

I just don't see how you can make such bold declarations without providing any reason or argumentation to back them up. Movies are an art form, so what constitutes a movie is always going to be open to interpretation. Tell me why I should be convinced that a movie needs to present a conflict and then come to a resolution.

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

Well thank you for admitting that there's no reason or argumentation to support what either you or OP said. That was my original point.

by Anonymous 11 hours ago

Not self-contained but complete. What separates a movie from TV is the fact that movie has one time viewing to tell a story. I gave multiple examples of stories that aren't self contained that'd I consider movies, such as Iron Man 3.

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

Yes, you gave examples of movies that you qualify as movies, but you haven't given a reason why a movie that has an incomplete story is not a movie.

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

The fact that you had to cite some obscure streaming service (?) to back up your completely arbitrary criteria really says it all. Here's the definition of movie from Oxford Dictionary in case you were confused: a story or event recorded by a camera as a set of moving images and shown in a theater or on television; a motion picture.

by Anonymous 10 hours ago

lol that's such a vague definition you can call my video of my dog a movie based on that definition

by Anonymous 9 hours ago

True. That's my point. You made an assertion about what constitutes a movie, but you still have yet to give a reason why you believe it.

by Anonymous 9 hours ago

Pornos are movies. That's why they're called pornographic films.

by Anonymous 9 hours ago

you're definition is amorphous. A porno is distinctly not a movie. If you told your significant other let's go to a movie, they would be surprised if you started watching a Porto. In lacking a definition of what movie is, it loses all meaning. You live in semantics, I live in the real world where I say "hey let's go to the movies," means we are not watching Bluey or a porno.

by Anonymous 9 hours ago

my video of my dog a movie based on that definition Which it would be. It's a movie.

by ernestolabadie 9 hours ago