SO MUCH THAT IT CAUSED THE FILM TO HORRIBLY UNDER-PERFORM BECAUSE IT LACKED RESONANCE AND MEANING?
-
-
Replying to @FilmCritHULK
@FilmCritHULK I haven't seen it but am a HUGE Dean DeBlois fan & loved the first. How did he miss the mark with this one?3 replies 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @MuseZack
@MuseZack@FilmCritHULK He didn't miss the mark. It's an amazing, gorgeous, stunning, brave film, in many respects better than the first.1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @Haunt1013
@Haunt1013 AND HULK HAS AN ARGUMENT THAT IT'S NOT. AND THAT'S OKAY. (THIS IS ALSO WHY COLUMNS NEED TO BE PUT UP FIRST :/2 replies 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @FilmCritHULK
@FilmCritHULK@Haunt1013 Artistic differences of opinion aside, I don't think it's good-not-great box office is related to its quality.1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @ScottMendelson
@ScottMendelson@Haunt1013 IN THIS CASE THERE'S AN ARGUMENT, AS "QUALITY" IS OFTEN RELATED TO RATE OF DECLINE. BUT IT'S COMPLICATED.3 replies 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @FilmCritHULK
@FilmCritHULK@ScottMendelson@Haunt1013 who else is kinda more interested in this argument than why the dragon movie isn't good?1 reply 0 retweets 0 likes -
Replying to @poopittypoop
@FilmCritHULK@ScottMendelson@Haunt1013 "this" argument being how "quality" can correlate to box-office decline (sorry, idk how twit work)4 replies 0 retweets 0 likes
@poopittypoop @ScottMendelson @Haunt1013 DAYS, BUT SIMPLY "DECELERATE MORE SLOWLY." AND WHEN YOU LOOK AT DRAGON 1. IT OPENED SMALLER BUT
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.