Video Thoughts: Nostalgia Critic's Alita Battle Angel Movie Review

Summary

In this video, Marshall discusses his respect for differing opinions on movies, despite his personal dislike for the one being reviewed. He commends the critic's detailed review, highlighting the film's visual effects and the passion behind it. Marshall also touches on various elements like the lead actress's performance and the film's mixed critical reception. He emphasizes that box office success doesn't equate to quality and praises the critic's ability to present valid points. The video ends with Marshall acknowledging the critic's effort and perspective, even though it doesn't change his own opinion.

Takeaways

• 🎬 The video is a special critic episode, offering a positive review of a movie that the reviewer personally dislikes.
• 🙏 The reviewer emphasizes respect for differing opinions on the movie and does not intend to discredit others' enjoyment of it.
• 👀 The script mentions the detailed background and scenery, commending the effort put into making the video visually appealing.
• 🕷 The movie discussed is described as 'obscure' and deserving of more attention, despite the reviewer's personal dislike.
• 🤔 The reviewer acknowledges the passion of the critic for the movie and appreciates the valid points made for its appreciation.
• 👁 The character's eyes are a point of contention, being both distracting and contributing to the film's identity.
• 🎭 The script touches on the complexity of character design, with the rest of the character being as impressive as the eyes.
• 🍫 There's a humorous discussion about the overuse of the trope of women loving chocolate, suggesting a need for variety.
• 🤖 The script includes a debate on the future of relationships with AI, with the reviewer expressing a preference for consciousness over technology.
• 🚀 The video also addresses the commercial success and failure of movies, noting that box office performance does not always reflect quality.
• 🎉 The reviewer concludes by praising the critic's review as one of the best of 2020, despite not being convinced to change their mind about the movie.

Q & A

Who is the speaker in the video transcript?

The speaker is Marshall from the channel 'The Movement'.

What is the main topic of this video?

The video is a positive review of a movie that the speaker personally dislikes.

What approach does the speaker take towards the critic's review?

The speaker respects the critic's opinion and provides his own perspective on the review without dismissing the critic's positive view.

What does the speaker admire about the critic's review?

The speaker admires the amount of detail and effort the critic put into the background and scenery of the review.

What are the speaker's thoughts on James Cameron's potential take on Spider-Man?

The speaker would have loved to see James Cameron's take on Spider-Man but acknowledges that it will never happen due to Cameron's focus on other projects.

What is the speaker's opinion on the movie's development and final outcome?

The speaker acknowledges the movie was in development hell for a long time and finds it incredible that the movie turned out as good as it did despite this.

How does the speaker feel about the movie's use of CGI, particularly the character's eyes?

The speaker finds the character's big eyes freaky yet expressive, acknowledging they give the film a unique identity despite being distracting.

What does the speaker think about the actress Rosa Salazar's portrayal in the movie?

The speaker feels bad for Rosa Salazar as she rarely shows her real face in films, comparing her situation to Tom Hardy's use of animated filters.

What is the speaker's opinion on the movie's portrayal of action and character interactions?

The speaker believes the film has good acting and expressions that are often overlooked, and he appreciates the bond between the characters despite disliking the movie overall.

Why does the speaker think the movie didn't perform well at the box office?

The speaker attributes the movie's poor box office performance to its difficult marketing and the fact that it did not earn enough domestically, despite doing better overseas.