Like, it's really bad.

[fgadmin]

Darwinskid — 9 years ago(May 28, 2016 10:32 PM)

Yes, well, you rated E.T. a 4/10 so maybe we shouldn't use your judgement when deciding what's good or bad, shouldn't we?

[fgadmin]

HarveyManfredSinJohn — 9 years ago(May 29, 2016 02:05 AM)

Good point. E.T. is a classic.
RIP:
David Bowie (1947-2016)
Alan Rickman (1946-2016)
Prince (Rogers Nelson) (1958-2016)

[fgadmin]

residentevil6901 — 9 years ago(June 18, 2016 10:35 PM)

Not at all, it's the complete opposite of bad. I'm going to guess you're a Millennial?

[fgadmin]

TheArtOfBeingRandom34523 — 9 years ago(June 19, 2016 05:50 AM)

I made this bait-post just to see how people reacted, I'm going to make a serious one now.
This signature is hilarious and original.
NAAAT!

[fgadmin]

residentevil6901 — 9 years ago(January 25, 2017 12:53 PM)

That still didn't answer my question, how old are you? What year were you born?

[fgadmin]

TheArtOfBeingRandom34523 — 9 years ago(January 27, 2017 11:37 AM)

2001, so what? Take a look at my seen-list instead of judging me from my age.

[fgadmin]

residentevil6901 — 9 years ago(February 05, 2017 09:39 AM)

LMAO you don't know anything about life yet, in 20 years from now you're going to look back on your life at the age you are now and say "wow I didn't know anything about anything."

[fgadmin]

HellboundHero — 9 years ago(July 05, 2016 04:40 PM)

A lot of the people who grew up watching this movie are millennials(myself included). Millennials are defined as having been born roughly between 1977 and 1998, and I know a lot of the audience of this movie back in 1989 were kids.

[fgadmin]

lycosa — 9 years ago(July 31, 2016 05:13 AM)

Millennials are 1985-2000 more like.

[fgadmin]

IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

[fgadmin]

hnt_dnl — 9 years ago(July 10, 2016 10:20 PM)

If by "it", you mean TDK then I agree with you!

[fgadmin]

FridayOnElmStreet — 9 years ago(July 20, 2016 07:19 PM)

Uh, no. Not at all.

[fgadmin]

Norran — 9 years ago(July 21, 2016 05:26 PM)

I won't say its bad. Just mediocre other than Nicholson's performance. Of course a lot it is due to when it was made. The action in the movie was dull as hell, Keaton was a boring Bruce Wayne and there were plenty of scenes that just dragged and went nowhere.
As someone else said Singer's first X-Men is another film that doesn't hold up anymore due to the time it was made and the low budget it was made on.
You Never Go Full Retard

[fgadmin]

jmarkoff2 — 9 years ago(August 17, 2016 02:28 PM)

The whole movie seemed patched together from a lot of random themes that didn't mesh at all. I've always assumed that Tim Burton is ADHD when it comes to developing plots and character arcs.

[fgadmin]

ranger5171-52-266126 — 9 years ago(August 20, 2016 01:29 PM)

Yes it is and was bad when I saw it in the theater.
Keaton is not Batman.

[fgadmin]

justanicknamed — 9 years ago(August 24, 2016 05:21 AM)

Dam. I didn't know meth was a problem in 1989.

[fgadmin]

IMDb User

This message has been deleted.

[fgadmin]

TheArtOfBeingRandom34523 — 9 years ago(August 21, 2016 01:42 PM)

In fact, I agree with you.
The whole Nolan trilogy can suck balls AND dick to the Joker at the museum scene

[fgadmin]

stranglewood — 9 years ago(November 22, 2016 09:57 PM)

It certainly is. It starts off okay, but once jack becomes the joker it goes all the way downhill.

[fgadmin]

BigDDD — 9 years ago(December 07, 2016 08:01 AM)

It's my favourite batman film