Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Short List)   30 inexplicably damning reviews for awesome movies. More Ebert can be expected   (shortlist.com ) divider line
    More: Strange, Rotten Tomatoes  
•       •       •

11440 clicks; posted to Entertainment » on 19 Nov 2011 at 7:53 AM (4 years ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



172 Comments   (+0 »)
   

Archived thread
 
2011-11-19 07:51:19 AM  
I click on each one, and nothing happens.

Is it just me?
 
2011-11-19 07:55:30 AM  
Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog.

Fight Club is crappy pseudo-philosophical tripe that is neither entertaining nor thought provoking.

Blade Runner can be appreciated for being a hugely important and influential film and inspiring nearly every dystopian Sci-Fi film since, but as a movie itself it sucks.

Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Everything else on that list is gold.
 
2011-11-19 08:04:25 AM  
"Schindler's List" is on there? Wow.
 
2011-11-19 08:05:14 AM  
I loved most of the films on there, although I did find Inception to be somewhat of a disappointment, not terrible, just not as good as I thought it would be.
 
2011-11-19 08:05:23 AM  
Huh...no Armond White. I'm surprised.
 
2011-11-19 08:14:09 AM  
And yet we have fanboys drooling over Starship Troopers as being an awesome action movie...I was one of those...and then, upon repeated viewings, I realized that the director pulled a quick one on me...that it was actually purposefully filmed as a "propaganda" film for a fascist society. Vapid and lame actors yet pretty faces, heroic scenes, etc. Leni would be proud.

Sometimes a movie requires another look at.

/YMMV.
//Inception is DEFINITELY one of those movies that demands repeated viewings to enjoy the totality of it. And what's wrong with wanting to watch it again if you feel you didn't get it the "first" time?
 
2011-11-19 08:16:10 AM  
LOL, someone shiat on "Schindler's List". I think that's illegal.

It's about time someone called "2001" out for the pretentious borefest it was.
 
2011-11-19 08:16:38 AM  

spman: Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog.

Fight Club is crappy pseudo-philosophical tripe that is neither entertaining nor thought provoking.

Blade Runner can be appreciated for being a hugely important and influential film and inspiring nearly every dystopian Sci-Fi film since, but as a movie itself it sucks.

Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Everything else on that list is gold.


emotibot.net
 
2011-11-19 08:19:18 AM  

spman: Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog.

Fight Club is crappy pseudo-philosophical tripe that is neither entertaining nor thought provoking.

Blade Runner can be appreciated for being a hugely important and influential film and inspiring nearly every dystopian Sci-Fi film since, but as a movie itself it sucks.

Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Everything else on that list is gold.


your post is bad and you should feel bad
 
2011-11-19 08:22:53 AM  

Knight of the Woeful Countenance: spman: Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog.

Fight Club is crappy pseudo-philosophical tripe that is neither entertaining nor thought provoking.

Blade Runner can be appreciated for being a hugely important and influential film and inspiring nearly every dystopian Sci-Fi film since, but as a movie itself it sucks.

Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Everything else on that list is gold.

your post is bad and you should feel bad


Was my post okay?
 
2011-11-19 08:26:01 AM  
Actually the Airplane! review was spot on, the reviewer just didn't understand that the movie was SUPPOSED to be that way.

Way to get the joke, without actually getting the joke.
 
2011-11-19 08:27:15 AM  
Mugato

It's about time someone called "2001" out for the pretentious borefest it was.

Yep. I'm a big fan of much of Stanley Kubrick's work & I had high hopes for it, but I just couldn't get into it. I thought it was beautifully filmed, and the sets were incredible, but as entertainment, it was like watching paint dry. So I'm with you.
 
2011-11-19 08:38:10 AM  
The Matrix criticism was spot-on.

And Ebert wasn't the only one who ragged on Fight Club. I remember that the previews and the panning made me think the movie was something it was not, and bad. Nowadays I've got my own issues with Palahniuk's stuff, but Fincher did a great job with that.
 
2011-11-19 08:41:56 AM  
Of the ones on the list I have seen I didn't like Fight Club, Inception , Trainspotting, Warriors, Goonies, 2001 and Blue Velvet
 
2011-11-19 08:42:36 AM  
Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.
 
2011-11-19 08:49:41 AM  

swahnhennessy: And Ebert wasn't the only one who ragged on Fight Club. I remember that the previews and the panning made me think the movie was something it was not, and bad. Nowadays I've got my own issues with Palahniuk's stuff, but Fincher did a great job with that.


That was one of the best parts of Fight Club. You went in thinking you were going to get one thing and boom something completely different. I walked out of the theater thinking that the critics were in on it. But quickly dismissed the idea, it would be like herding cats
 
2011-11-19 08:54:22 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: Actually the Airplane! review was spot on, the reviewer just didn't understand that the movie was SUPPOSED to be that way.

Way to get the joke, without actually getting the joke.


That's what I thought too. Airplane isn't so much the QUALITY of the jokes, it's the sheer quantity, and quantity has a quality all its own. Yes, some jokes suck, and yes, some are racist, but the whole thing is hilarity.
 
2011-11-19 08:57:50 AM  
There's quite a few of those I downright didn't like myself. "Heat" was two hours of crap around a couple decent action sequences, "The Matrix" was just plain bad, derivative dated S.F. , "Jaws" had quite possibly the stupidest ending in cinema history, "Schindler's List" was a manipulative, sentimental mess( but you're not allowed to critcize holocaust movies made by Jewish folk), "Gladiator" was empty headed spectacle dragged down by stupid,stupid plot devices, "Requiem" was a shrill, preachy after school special. I actually only like about 8 of those listed.
 
2011-11-19 08:57:52 AM  

Shostie: Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.


And 2001 is what happens when yo do, so, ya know, one way or another...
 
2011-11-19 08:58:32 AM  

drewogatory: "Requiem" was a shrill, preachy after school special.


Um...I don't know too many after school specials that do ass-to-ass.
 
2011-11-19 09:00:57 AM  
So, what you guys are saying is that different people have different opinions?

Huh.
 
2011-11-19 09:01:48 AM  

Grables'Daughter: So, what you guys are saying is that different people have different opinions?

Huh.


THE HELL YOU SAY!
 
2011-11-19 09:07:35 AM  
GONE WITH THE WIND
"Badly written...a bore" Arthur Schlesinger, The Atlantic


...pretty much, yeah. I'm a fan of old movies, but GWTW is incredibly overrated.

drewogatory: There's quite a few of those I downright didn't like myself. "Heat" was two hours of crap around a couple decent action sequences, "The Matrix" was just plain bad, derivative dated S.F. , "Jaws" had quite possibly the stupidest ending in cinema history, "Schindler's List" was a manipulative, sentimental mess( but you're not allowed to critcize holocaust movies made by Jewish folk), "Gladiator" was empty headed spectacle dragged down by stupid,stupid plot devices, "Requiem" was a shrill, preachy after school special. I actually only like about 8 of those listed.


The one thing that links all of those (otherwise disparate) movies is their fantastic cinematography. I suspect you are not a very visual person?
 
2011-11-19 09:11:54 AM  

Gunther:

The one thing that links all of those (otherwise disparate) movies is their fantastic cinematography. I suspect you are not a very visual person?


This. I think a lot of people can't appreciate a movie for its artistic merits. If a plot doesn't entertain them the entire time they are bored and don't like it.
 
2011-11-19 09:14:21 AM  

spman: Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.


I don't get how anyone could have difficulty follow Inception. I didn't love it, but it was easy to follow. The film is one-hundred percent straightforward, linear narrative.
 
2011-11-19 09:14:23 AM  

Wretschko: And yet we have fanboys drooling over Starship Troopers as being an awesome action movie...I was one of those...and then, upon repeated viewings, I realized that the director pulled a quick one on me...that it was actually purposefully filmed as a "propaganda" film for a fascist society. Vapid and lame actors yet pretty faces, heroic scenes, etc. Leni would be proud.

Sometimes a movie requires another look at.

/YMMV.
//Inception is DEFINITELY one of those movies that demands repeated viewings to enjoy the totality of it. And what's wrong with wanting to watch it again if you feel you didn't get it the "first" time?


Verhoeven was doing a satire of a fascist society, just like Robocop was a satire of corporations.
 
2011-11-19 09:15:06 AM  
The companion article of good reviews of bad movies is even better. (new window)

This one for the Clash of the Titans remage is just priceless:

"Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy."
 
2011-11-19 09:16:38 AM  

Wretschko: And yet we have fanboys drooling over Starship Troopers as being an awesome action movie...I was one of those...and then, upon repeated viewings, I realized that the director pulled a quick one on me...that it was actually purposefully filmed as a "propaganda" film for a fascist society. Vapid and lame actors yet pretty faces, heroic scenes, etc. Leni would be proud.

Sometimes a movie requires another look at.


Do you want to know more?
 
2011-11-19 09:26:35 AM  

Gunther: GONE WITH THE WIND
"Badly written...a bore" Arthur Schlesinger, The Atlantic

...pretty much, yeah. I'm a fan of old movies, but GWTW is incredibly overrated.

drewogatory: There's quite a few of those I downright didn't like myself. "Heat" was two hours of crap around a couple decent action sequences, "The Matrix" was just plain bad, derivative dated S.F. , "Jaws" had quite possibly the stupidest ending in cinema history, "Schindler's List" was a manipulative, sentimental mess( but you're not allowed to critcize holocaust movies made by Jewish folk), "Gladiator" was empty headed spectacle dragged down by stupid,stupid plot devices, "Requiem" was a shrill, preachy after school special. I actually only like about 8 of those listed.

The one thing that links all of those (otherwise disparate) movies is their fantastic cinematography. I suspect you are not a very visual person?


Perhaps. I don't own a camera of any kind(never have), own no photographs or visual art of any kind actually. I'm pushing 50 and I've had blank, white walls in every place I've ever lived alone. My film tastes run more toward the avante garde though.
 
2011-11-19 09:29:40 AM  

Wretschko: And yet we have fanboys drooling over Starship Troopers as being an awesome action movie...I was one of those...and then, upon repeated viewings, I realized that the director pulled a quick one on me...that it was actually purposefully filmed as a "propaganda" film for a fascist society. Vapid and lame actors yet pretty faces, heroic scenes, etc. Leni would be proud.


You know the book was a parody of a fascist society, right? It wasn't the director's idea to film it that way. Heinlein deserves some of the credit there, is all I'm saying.
 
2011-11-19 09:30:55 AM  
The important thing is to completely ignore movie critics.

Who needs them?
 
2011-11-19 09:34:01 AM  
i.imgur.com
 
2011-11-19 09:39:07 AM  

PizzaJedi81: Grables'Daughter: So, what you guys are saying is that different people have different opinions?

Huh.

THE HELL YOU SAY!


That's just my opinion.
 
2011-11-19 09:40:58 AM  
Schindler's List IS like a theme park ride about the Holocaust.

On rewatching, certain scenes haven't held up; the "I could have saved one more" seems awfully maudlin and ridiculous.

Not saying it isn't a great movie, though. Great score, great acting and characterizations, for the most part.
 
2011-11-19 09:41:25 AM  

Shostie: Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.


Spartacus is what happens when you have an actor with the typical actor's ego essentially in charge of the production but who has no discernible talent as a producer or director and who is only making the film out of spite.

I actually like the film, but the review is spot on and the issues are largely Douglas' fault.
 
2011-11-19 09:46:44 AM  

I like the Matrix, but I don't understand some of the criticism. It's derivative? Yea, that' what the Wachowskis were doing with all the kung fu and action scenes. But it hadn't been seen much by the general movie public. I think they did a great job with the special effects and action scenes.


And I didn't think the philosophy stuff in the movie was too overboard. Did you want the movie to actually go into explicit detail about it? It was just enough to add to the plot without taking away from it.


The thing that hasn't held up much (or that never made sense) is the "Humans as batteries" part. They're machines and they can't use nuclear energy? But I guess for a movie about the world not being real the Brothers chose a bad explanation.


Now Inception was overrated even more than the Matrix. Awesome special effects but Nolan did overdo it with the dream within a dream. Hell, his other films are better than Inception.

 
2011-11-19 09:46:53 AM  

SharkTrager: Shostie: Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.

Spartacus is what happens when you have an actor with the typical actor's ego essentially in charge of the production but who has no discernible talent as a producer or director and who is only making the film out of spite.

I actually like the film, but the review is spot on and the issues are largely Douglas' fault.


Now that would be a great list: Films made out of spite.
 
2011-11-19 09:50:33 AM  

drewogatory: There's quite a few of those I downright didn't like myself.


Wow, hating on Jaws, that's a new one. The ending? You'd probably like the book ending better, the shark just gets tired and dies. It was Spielberg's idea to blow it the fark up. I thought it was great. i loved Heat too, I think it's one of Pacino's best films.

I thought Fight Club was almost universally panned. Another favorite of mine. I thought the use of CGI was awesome when he was explaining the bomb and the virtual camera ran through the wiring of the stove. Not something people usually think of when they think CGI.

TRAINSPOTTING
"Full of repugnant junkies so unpleasant that I was hoping they'd all OD just so I could escape this torture test"


Um, I think that's what they were going for.

I never saw Gone with the Wind (and I'm supposed to be a film geek) so maybe I can ask this here. That shot of the guy carrying the girl kicking and screaming up the stairs....did he rape her? If so, that's not very nice.

Ebert hating on Die Hard was inexcusable.

Oh and I couldn't stand Goonies either. You may begin throwing the rotten eggs now.
 
2011-11-19 09:53:29 AM  
I like most of the movies on that list and have very little disagreement with the lines from those reviews. The criticisms are by and large valid.
 
2011-11-19 09:55:38 AM  

skinink: The thing that hasn't held up much (or that never made sense) is the "Humans as batteries" part. They're machines and they can't use nuclear energy? But I guess for a movie about the world not being real the Brothers chose a bad explanation


Actually, that wasn't the Wachowski "siblings" fault. Originally. the machines were using people's brains as a sort of serial processor, which makes a lot more sense. But some studio suit thought it was too high concept or something and we all know what happens when a studio executive interferes with the creative process. So they changed it to humans are batteries. Why didn't the machines just use cows instead of people if their body heat was all they needed? Ask the suit.
 
2011-11-19 09:56:52 AM  
Airplane!
"Most of the jokes are groan-worthy, and some are downright racist."


That reviewer must not speak jive.
 
2011-11-19 09:57:07 AM  
Another hate-on for The Matrix. Mostly because I saw it after seeing Dark City and was pissed off that Bros. Wachowski basically lifted that movie and got all the praise and money that the makers of Dark City should have.

And people who don't like Heat need to get an attention span. The only flaw in that movie is that DeNiro's love interest is way too pretty. She should have been a sort of pleasingly plump girl, the kind of girl who's pretty and smart but a little too flawed to get a second look in LA.
 
2011-11-19 10:00:50 AM  
Wow, hating on Jaws, that's a new one. The ending? You'd probably like the book ending better, the shark just gets tired and dies.

I did like the book ending better actually. I think the shark sinking into the depths dragging Quint behind it is alot better than a ridiculous explosion that defies the laws of physics.I thought it was stupid when I was 12 and saw it in the theater and it ruined the entire film for me. I hate Spielberg and everything he's ever done though, except Raiders.
 
2011-11-19 10:09:44 AM  

drewogatory: Wow, hating on Jaws, that's a new one. The ending? You'd probably like the book ending better, the shark just gets tired and dies.

I did like the book ending better actually. I think the shark sinking into the depths dragging Quint behind it is alot better than a ridiculous explosion that defies the laws of physics.I thought it was stupid when I was 12 and saw it in the theater and it ruined the entire film for me. I hate Spielberg and everything he's ever done though, except Raiders.


Hmm. Wow. Well, diff'rent strokes I suppose.

/what was so racist about "Airplane!"?
 
2011-11-19 10:12:41 AM  
Oh great, another 30 icons that you have to click on individually. They somehow found a way to make a slideshow suck even more.
 
2011-11-19 10:15:45 AM  

akula: DoBeDoBeDo: Actually the Airplane! review was spot on, the reviewer just didn't understand that the movie was SUPPOSED to be that way.

Way to get the joke, without actually getting the joke.

That's what I thought too. Airplane isn't so much the QUALITY of the jokes, it's the sheer quantity, and quantity has a quality all its own. Yes, some jokes suck, and yes, some are racist, but the whole thing is hilarity.


I love the movie cause its so bad... And the fact that the racist jokes were so over the top that it cant be considered racist. Its just that type of movie that makes fun of making fun of things in its own way.
 
2011-11-19 10:19:34 AM  
The reviews of Alien and Inception were spot on correct. The reviewer of Airplane did not get the joke.
 
2011-11-19 10:19:52 AM  

EnviroDude: Wretschko: And yet we have fanboys drooling over Starship Troopers as being an awesome action movie...I was one of those...and then, upon repeated viewings, I realized that the director pulled a quick one on me...that it was actually purposefully filmed as a "propaganda" film for a fascist society. Vapid and lame actors yet pretty faces, heroic scenes, etc. Leni would be proud.

Sometimes a movie requires another look at.

Do you want to know more?


About Dizzy or Carman... Yes please...
 
2011-11-19 10:28:22 AM  
The theatrical cut of Blade Runner is not a great film and the ending is horrible. I would forgive any reviewer of this version. I would be curious to see what the same critic had to say about the significantly better directors cut.
 
2011-11-19 10:33:16 AM  

DoBeDoBeDo: Actually the Airplane! review was spot on, the reviewer just didn't understand that the movie was SUPPOSED to be that way.

Way to get the joke, without actually getting the joke.


That's exactly what I thought after reading that review.

The review was spot on except for the fact that the groan worthy jokes and racism makes the movie great, not bad.
 
2011-11-19 10:35:26 AM  

spman: If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.


Or, perhaps, you've failed as a viewer

Seriously, if you were OMG LIKE SO CONFUSED by Inception then you are probably not as smart as you think you are.
 
2011-11-19 10:39:37 AM  

Mugato: LOL, someone shiat on "Schindler's List". I think that's illegal.

It's about time someone called "2001" out for the pretentious borefest it was.


I bought 2001 and still haven't been able to make it all the way through it without falling asleep. I've given it many chances, tried watching it right after a huge cup of coffee and still no dice.

The mix of beautiful, peaceful music and long drawn out scenes is like ambien.
 
2011-11-19 10:45:25 AM  

Carth: This. I think a lot of people can't appreciate a movie for its artistic merits. If a plot doesn't entertain them the entire time they are bored and don't like it.


What is the goal of a movie? For me, it is entertainment. Whether that entertainment is too scare, excite, arouse, humor, etc. it has to be entertaining. There have been films that are poorly made but I loved (Clerks) and there have films that have been technical and visual achievements that left me bored to tears (LOTR:FOTR). Citizen Kane is a technical marvel, and is entertaining, but not a greatly entertaining film. I liked it, but didn't love it.

Look at Titanic. Many people rail against it's crappy dialogue, but the film is amazing from a technical perspective and is extremely well made. Also I thought Avatar was fairly boring (and about 45 minutes too long), but it is amazingly well done. Contrast that with the first Terminator. Some of it is very amateurish from a technical point of view, but it is very entertaining.
 
2011-11-19 10:50:48 AM  

Obscure Login: I bought 2001 and still haven't been able to make it all the way through it without falling asleep. I've given it many chances, tried watching it right after a huge cup of coffee and still no dice.


Interesting that there are others who don't think it's a masterpiece. Maybe I hang out with too many film snobs. I don't have ADD by any stretch of the imagination but I just don't understand what a 15 minute docking sequence contributes to the story. The first scene with the proto-humans discovering tools/weapons was great however, I'll give it that.

As for Starship Troopers, it was satire but it worked on both levels. It was satire and for those who didn't want to think too much it was also a kick ass action flick. However, the scene with "coolest gay guy on Earth" Neil Patrick Harris in a Nazi uniform mind melding with a giant oozing vagina was just WTF?-overload.

/Team Dizzy, BTW
//Michael Ironside, bad ass motherfarker as always
 
2011-11-19 11:27:33 AM  

Grables'Daughter: I click on each one, and nothing happens.

Is it just me?


They say insanity is trying the same thing over and over and expecting a different result...
 
2011-11-19 11:31:53 AM  
the only ones on that list that aren't very good are Airplane and Inception
 
2011-11-19 11:37:54 AM  
Again with this HORRIFIC format that requires me to click a grid (only after it's COMPLETELY LOADED) to see a giant cockfarking image and three lines of text for each movie. Nope.
 
2011-11-19 11:42:26 AM  

Barakku: Again with this HORRIFIC format that requires me to click a grid (only after it's COMPLETELY LOADED) to see a giant cockfarking image and three lines of text for each movie. Nope.


Once the initial window is loaded, you can right-arrow to scroll through the movies. It's not that bad.
 
2011-11-19 11:47:55 AM  

skinink:
The thing that hasn't held up much (or that never made sense) is the "Humans as batteries" part. They're machines and they can't use nuclear energy? But I guess for a movie about the world not being real the Brothers chose a bad explanation.


The humans as batteries/food shiat is farking absurd to anyone with a passing knowledge of biology (or like, basic physics). You will never, NEVER get more energy out of a living being than you put into it. I don't recall what they fed the humans, but you'd surely get more energy by just burning it or creating machines to metabolize the food.

I give Soylent Green a pass because it serves their goal of killing people, it's not intended to be an endless energy source, but raising humans as food is vastly more wasteful than raising cows and other fast growing, meaty animals that subsist on simple plants and such.
 
2011-11-19 11:49:37 AM  

BroVinny: Barakku: Again with this HORRIFIC format that requires me to click a grid (only after it's COMPLETELY LOADED) to see a giant cockfarking image and three lines of text for each movie. Nope.

Once the initial window is loaded, you can right-arrow to scroll through the movies. It's not that bad.


I finally found that after it took 5 clicks to open one of them, but jesus. It's just a worse slideshow format. In fact, it's a worse list format, for so few items it makes more sense to scroll. It is nice that they allow arrow key navigation, but the content is 1 paragraph per item.
 
2011-11-19 11:50:13 AM  

spman: If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.


If you had to watch Inception four times while taking extensive notes just to follow the story and have it make sense, you've failed as an intelligent human being.
 
kab
2011-11-19 12:06:10 PM  

spman: Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog.

Fight Club is crappy pseudo-philosophical tripe that is neither entertaining nor thought provoking.

Blade Runner can be appreciated for being a hugely important and influential film and inspiring nearly every dystopian Sci-Fi film since, but as a movie itself it sucks.

Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Everything else on that list is gold.


You're a terrible movie critic, and apparently have a poor attention span.

Wretschko: And yet we have fanboys drooling over Starship Troopers as being an awesome action movie..


It's unlikely that folks actually think this movie is *good*. It's more like "this movie is so bad, it's actually awesome". If you watch this movie sober, you're doing it very wrong.

As for the others... you know, Airplane was funny, but in retrospect, Top Secret was far better, and seems to get little credit.

Matrix was a solid flick that would likely be praised more today if there were no sequels at all. Heat was a good movie, but I feel that people were expecting a lot more from the DeNiro / Pacino cast, rather than the somewhat brief time they spend on the same scene (iirc).

Never watched Spartacus.
 
2011-11-19 12:09:08 PM  

mjbok: Carth: This. I think a lot of people can't appreciate a movie for its artistic merits. If a plot doesn't entertain them the entire time they are bored and don't like it.

What is the goal of a movie? For me, it is entertainment. Whether that entertainment is too scare, excite, arouse, humor, etc. it has to be entertaining. There have been films that are poorly made but I loved (Clerks) and there have films that have been technical and visual achievements that left me bored to tears (LOTR:FOTR). Citizen Kane is a technical marvel, and is entertaining, but not a greatly entertaining film. I liked it, but didn't love it.

Look at Titanic. Many people rail against it's crappy dialogue, but the film is amazing from a technical perspective and is extremely well made. Also I thought Avatar was fairly boring (and about 45 minutes too long), but it is amazingly well done. Contrast that with the first Terminator. Some of it is very amateurish from a technical point of view, but it is very entertaining.


I'm sure different directors have different goals when they make a movie. Some just want make an entertaining film, some care more about creating a work of art, and some aspire to both. Problems arise when the viewers' and filmmaker's expectations don't align. If you go into 400 blows or Roshomon expecting Fast and the Furious part 6 you're going to be disappointed.
 
2011-11-19 12:11:46 PM  

PizzaJedi81: Huh...no Armond White. I'm surprised.


I was expecting all 30 to be from White.
 
2011-11-19 12:12:53 PM  
2001 did suck. I'll agree with that one.
 
2011-11-19 12:19:17 PM  

simplicimus: SharkTrager: Shostie: Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.

Spartacus is what happens when you have an actor with the typical actor's ego essentially in charge of the production but who has no discernible talent as a producer or director and who is only making the film out of spite.

I actually like the film, but the review is spot on and the issues are largely Douglas' fault.

Now that would be a great list: Films made out of spite.


And shot on Fruit by the Foot?

Tasteless Asshole.
 
2011-11-19 12:19:34 PM  
The Goonies

"I find nothing entertaining about kids screaming for two hours"


Guy read my mind.
 
2011-11-19 12:28:37 PM  
I get the 2001 hate, I really do. I'm sorry the movie doesn't talk down to you troglodytes, but I understand the harsh feelings.
 
2011-11-19 12:29:17 PM  
Requiem For A Dream is a steaming pile of sh*t.

Why this lousy film gets so much cred is absurd.

Possibly the most obnoxiously OVER-DIRECTED bad film of all time.

The assinine super fast pace FLASH EDIT style is nauseating to me. It looks and feels like a two hour music video. Actually,worse...it is a film that runs like an extended trailer.

Requiem For A Dream is applauded by nitwits who have never seen a Sidney Lumet film.
 
2011-11-19 12:44:58 PM  

BroVinny: I get the 2001 hate, I really do. I'm sorry the movie doesn't talk down to you troglodytes, but I understand the harsh feelings.


Yeah, I was waiting for that. Surprised it took so long.
 
2011-11-19 12:53:30 PM  

Mugato: BroVinny: I get the 2001 hate, I really do. I'm sorry the movie doesn't talk down to you troglodytes, but I understand the harsh feelings.

Yeah, I was waiting for that. Surprised it took so long.


Sorry. I saw no one else doing it, and it takes time to affect the air of a pretentious movie snob.
 
2011-11-19 12:53:45 PM  

Great_Milenko: The companion article of good reviews of bad movies is even better. (new window)

This one for the Clash of the Titans remage is just priceless:

"Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy."


Ebert liked Speed 2 and The Happening, but dissed Fight Club and Die Hard?

I think several of those reviewers were just trolling their readers.
 
2011-11-19 01:03:11 PM  

craigdamage: Requiem For A Dream is a steaming pile of sh*t.

Why this lousy film gets so much cred is absurd.

Possibly the most obnoxiously OVER-DIRECTED bad film of all time.

The assinine super fast pace FLASH EDIT style is nauseating to me. It looks and feels like a two hour music video. Actually,worse...it is a film that runs like an extended trailer.

Requiem For A Dream is applauded by nitwits who have never seen a Sidney Lumet film.


Requiem For A Dream is slammed by nitwits who have never seen a Sidney Lumet film.

See, I can write nonsense too!
 
2011-11-19 01:05:32 PM  

VoodooHillbilly: Great_Milenko: The companion article of good reviews of bad movies is even better. (new window)

This one for the Clash of the Titans remage is just priceless:

"Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy."

Ebert liked Speed 2 and The Happening, but dissed Fight Club and Die Hard?

I think several of those reviewers were just trolling their readers.


He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.
 
2011-11-19 01:14:39 PM  
I've never thought that Se7en was a good movie. A standard horror-thriller with some gross scenes and a kinda dumb plot.

The only thing I liked is that the copious writing of the bad guy turned out to be useless ramblings providing no clues, though they did come to that conclusion fairly quickly and easily.
 
2011-11-19 01:18:54 PM  

Carth: I'm sure different directors have different goals when they make a movie. Some just want make an entertaining film, some care more about creating a work of art, and some aspire to both. Problems arise when the viewers' and filmmaker's expectations don't align. If you go into 400 blows or Roshomon expecting Fast and the Furious part 6 you're going to be disappointed.


I agree, however something can be a work of art and entertaining. You mentioned the F/F franchise. "Fast Five" was entertaining. Mindless and stupid, but entertaining. Compare that to a "work of art" like AW's "Empire." I would rather watch "Fast Five" four times than watch "Empire" once, and it would take the same amount of time to do either. Of course AW was an aw, and not much of a film-maker.
 
2011-11-19 01:34:16 PM  

Fano: OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.


Well, who doesn't?
 
2011-11-19 01:45:53 PM  

Fano: He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.


I've seen Rapa Nui, and I totally agree with loving lot of breasts of any color.

Nicholas Cage and his nasal monotone voice makes my brain hurt. Nothing that douche does should ever qualify as "acting".
 
2011-11-19 02:17:39 PM  
"inception" wasn't a difficult movie to understand, it just wasn't a very good film. If anything, I found the movie to be patronizing. The movie goes out of its way to explain the rules of the film over and over again. It would have been better if Hellen Page or whoever that broad was wasn't in the film and they just let the viewer figure it out.
 
2011-11-19 02:31:45 PM  

VoodooHillbilly: Fano: He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.

I've seen Rapa Nui, and I totally agree with loving lot of breasts of any color.

Nicholas Cage and his nasal monotone voice makes my brain hurt. Nothing that douche does should ever qualify as "acting".


That's because it's "ACTING!" *Flourishy hand sweep*

www.old-portlethen.co.uk
 
2011-11-19 02:39:10 PM  

ciderczar: VoodooHillbilly: Fano: He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.

I've seen Rapa Nui, and I totally agree with loving lot of breasts of any color.

Nicholas Cage and his nasal monotone voice makes my brain hurt. Nothing that douche does should ever qualify as "acting".

That's because it's "ACTING!" *Flourishy hand sweep*

[www.old-portlethen.co.uk image 400x300]


MACBETH!
 
2011-11-19 02:47:29 PM  
Yo, to the people hating on Nicolas Cage, obviously you've never seen "Leaving Arizona" " Raising Las Vegas" "Bad Leutinent 2" and "The Wicker Man"
 
2011-11-19 03:14:30 PM  

GimpyNip: Yo, to the people hating on Nicolas Cage, obviously you've never seen "Leaving Arizona" " Raising Las Vegas" "Bad Leutinent 2" and "The Wicker Man"


Lord of War.
 
2011-11-19 03:16:55 PM  

MoronLessOff: GimpyNip: Yo, to the people hating on Nicolas Cage, obviously you've never seen "Leaving Arizona" " Raising Las Vegas" "Bad Leutinent 2" and "The Wicker Man"

Lord of War.


Matchstick Man
 
2011-11-19 03:24:45 PM  

GimpyNip: "inception" wasn't a difficult movie to understand, it just wasn't a very good film. If anything, I found the movie to be patronizing. The movie goes out of its way to explain the rules of the film over and over again. It would have been better if Hellen Page or whoever that broad was wasn't in the film and they just let the viewer figure it out.


I wonder if she was a last-minute add-in specifically for that purpose
 
2011-11-19 03:25:22 PM  

GimpyNip: MoronLessOff: GimpyNip: Yo, to the people hating on Nicolas Cage, obviously you've never seen "Leaving Arizona" " Raising Las Vegas" "Bad Leutinent 2" and "The Wicker Man"

Lord of War.

Matchstick Man


Adaptation
 
2011-11-19 03:27:56 PM  

MoronLessOff: Lord of War


Lord of War really was a good film. And on the Michael Bay style-blow shiat up tip, there's nothing wrong with The Rock and Face/Off was too absurd to not be respected. Not since Shatner and Ricardo Monalban did two actors fight so hard to chew the most scenery as Cage and Travolta in that flick.
 
2011-11-19 03:34:02 PM  

GimpyNip: Yo, to the people hating on Nicolas Cage, obviously you've never seen "Leaving Arizona" " Raising Las Vegas" "Bad Leutinent 2" and "The Wicker Man"


You almost had me, but you didn't stick the finish.
 
2011-11-19 03:40:59 PM  

Mugato:
I never saw Gone with the Wind (and I'm supposed to be a film geek) so maybe I can ask this here. That shot of the guy carrying the girl kicking and screaming up the stairs....did he rape her? If so, that's not very nice.
.


Rhett Butler (Clark Gable) and his wife Scarlett (Vivien Leigh) have been arguing when he picks her up & carries her to their bedroom. To get it past the censors, the very next scene has her sitting up in bed the next morning, purring away from (presumably) orgasmic bliss.
 
2011-11-19 03:42:11 PM  
Everytime I read anything from Ebert I remember that he also wrote Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, Beneath the Valley of the Ultra-Vixens and a few other Russ Meyer epics.
 
2011-11-19 03:46:51 PM  

spman: Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog.

Fight Club is crappy pseudo-philosophical tripe that is neither entertaining nor thought provoking.

Blade Runner can be appreciated for being a hugely important and influential film and inspiring nearly every dystopian Sci-Fi film since, but as a movie itself it sucks.

Inception was just flat out nonsense, lacking a coherent plot or anything even remotely resembling interesting or engaging narrative. If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Everything else on that list is gold.


Inception was a standard heist movie. It was well executed and clever, but it was not particularly complex. If you had trouble following the rather simple plot (put MacGuffin on the wrong side of a secure facility) the problem is with you.

None of the others are really worth debating, I just get peeved by people who think Inception was an incredibly inventive or complex film.
 
2011-11-19 03:48:45 PM  
It's about time someone called "2001" out for the pretentious borefest it was.

I worship that movie. I mourn the future it depicted didn't happen, but as an engineer it's non stop eye candy for me.

I'm building a hobby farm, and I'm going to set up the inside of the garage just like the pod bay. White walls, black floor, bright white lighting, the whole nine yards. I just hope the door opens when I get home....
 
2011-11-19 03:49:58 PM  
I watched GWTW a while ago. I really, really didn't get what the fuss was about. It's pretty much like a 1980s TV mini-series or an extended soap opera.
 
2011-11-19 04:04:04 PM  
No Armond White?

FAIL

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows - Part 2
" Now that the Harry Potter series is over, maybe the truth can be realized: This has been the dullest franchise in the history of movie franchises."

X-Men: First Class
" The entire film is a hackneyed exercise."

Bridesmaids
" It's an overly contrived jumble, trying out too many comic ideas that eventually swamp the central subject of what a modern young woman expects regarding friendship, courtship and marriage.

Blue Valentine
" Despite Blue Valentine's blatant sensememories of nakedness and affection, irritation and itch, what Gosling and Williams reveal about their own concepts of heterosexual experience is ultimately inane."

Black Swan
" Aronofsky's ethnic denial and escape into Nina's psychological trauma actually trivializes her artistic pursuit. Turning art into genre movie silliness is a careerist's dance."

The King's Speech
" Each scene in The King's Speech is so poorly staged that its ineptitude sometimes borders on the avant-garde."

The Social Network
" Like one of those fake-smart, middlebrow TV shows, the speciousness of The Social Network is disguised by topicality. It's really a movie excusing Hollywood ruthlessness."

The Town
" The Town is nearly as ludicrous as [Affleck's] debut Gone Baby Gone -- another poison pen letter to Beantown."

Toy Story 3
" Toy Story 3 is so besotted with brand names and product-placement that it stops being about the innocent pleasures of imagination -- the usefulness of toys -- and strictly celebrates consumerism."
 
2011-11-19 04:05:01 PM  

t3knomanser: None of the others are really worth debating, I just get peeved by people who think Inception was an incredibly inventive or complex film.


It was a good flick, though, with some concepts that, while not necessarily pertinant to a heist movie, were interesting and somewhat thought provoking, I felt.

Nature of reality stuff always gets my mental juices flowing, honestly.
 
2011-11-19 04:20:36 PM  

PizzaJedi81: t3knomanser: None of the others are really worth debating, I just get peeved by people who think Inception was an incredibly inventive or complex film.

It was a good flick, though, with some concepts that, while not necessarily pertinant to a heist movie, were interesting and somewhat thought provoking, I felt.

Nature of reality stuff always gets my mental juices flowing, honestly.



I think Inception was kind of like The Matrix in that it cribbed a LOT from a lot of other movies and literature but it wasn't a direct remake, sequel, prequel, reboot, re-imagining or based on a comic book and nowadays that's originality. So it had that going for it. Which is nice.
 
2011-11-19 04:29:57 PM  

Mugato: I think Inception was kind of like The Matrix in that it cribbed a LOT from a lot of other movies and literature but it wasn't a direct remake, sequel, prequel, reboot, re-imagining or based on a comic book and nowadays that's originality. So it had that going for it. Which is nice.


Nolan's good for interesting takes on existing concepts. The Prestige was based on a novel, and actually SURPASED that novel, in terms of quality for me. Memento was, when all is said and done, a disjointed murder mystery, but one which plays with, again, that whole nature of reality/perception's effect on reality concept that I really dig. Honestly, his most conventional movies have been the Batman ones, and even THOSE have some nice concepts in them (What is the nature of heroism, who deserves to be called a hero, what qualifies as redemption, and even, to a lesser extent, order vs chaos in TDK.)

As for the semi-snarky (And I'm sorry if I'm misinterpretting.) ending, yes, it IS originality. Let's face it, only so many stories exist, and anything original is going to be a twisting of that concept in some way. Take Inception: it was, to some extent, The Minotaur. It even had Ariadne giving the hero a method of escaping the depths of the maze!
 
2011-11-19 04:39:21 PM  

Flappyhead: GimpyNip: Yo, to the people hating on Nicolas Cage, obviously you've never seen "Leaving Arizona" " Raising Las Vegas" "Bad Leutinent 2" and "The Wicker Man"

You almost had me, but you didn't stick the finish.


Hey, The Wicker Man is an enjoyable film. Is it "good"? Not really. Is it entertaining? Hell yes!
 
2011-11-19 04:44:35 PM  
The problem with "Bridesmaids" is that the only likable character is the cop. The whole time I'm not thinking, "She's a great girl, I hope she figures it out." I was thinking, "this cop seems like a good egg, I hope she doesn't figures it out for his sake." She was a jealous, petty, manipulative, biatch.
 
2011-11-19 04:52:14 PM  
ass-to-ass.

never go ass-to-ass, man
 
2011-11-19 05:01:25 PM  
Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")
 
2011-11-19 05:04:37 PM  

struct: Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")


Who committed mass murder in Fight Club?
 
2011-11-19 05:07:21 PM  
You know what? I liked the LOTR Trilogy but I have no desire to watch it again. I might show it to a child or an alien but I don't need to see it again.
 
2011-11-19 05:40:23 PM  

Carth: struct: Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")

Who committed mass murder in Fight Club?


Maybe imy memory's a bit hazy, and if it is I apologize, but aren't a bunch of buildings blown up?
 
2011-11-19 05:42:46 PM  

struct: Carth: struct: Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")

Who committed mass murder in Fight Club?

Maybe imy memory's a bit hazy, and if it is I apologize, but aren't a bunch of buildings blown up?


Yes, but they make it very clear the buildings are completely empty. You can still dislike it for mass property damage.
 
2011-11-19 06:14:53 PM  
People changed their opinion of Heat to "like"? I don't remember anyone ever giving that movie good reviews. That was the huge story about it when it came out. "Two of the gangster "greats" finally together, but what a let down."
 
2011-11-19 06:42:24 PM  
The Matrix inspired a generation of gamer nerds to walk around in trench coats.
 
2011-11-19 07:02:10 PM  

SharkTrager: Shostie: Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.

Spartacus is what happens when you have an actor with the typical actor's ego essentially in charge of the production but who has no discernible talent as a producer or director and who is only making the film out of spite.

I actually like the film, but the review is spot on and the issues are largely Douglas' fault.


Anthony Mann was originally hired to direct Spartacus but was let go in mid-production due to "creative differences" with Douglas who replaced him with Kubrick. As for the movie itself, I agree with your assessment. I think the parts of the movie having to do with political skullduggery back in Rome are a lot more entertaining then most of the stuff involving Spartacus. (The way Charles Laughton's character manages to both do the right thing morally and screw over Crassus (Olivier) from beyond the grave is priceless.) Also, the final battle scene is interesting and well-mounted.
 
2011-11-19 07:24:36 PM  
Link (new window)
 
2011-11-19 07:33:31 PM  
Inception really was a terrible movie though. How it is so popular I will never understand. I couldn't stop laughing.
jeremysexton.net
 
2011-11-19 07:47:37 PM  

PizzaJedi81: drewogatory: "Requiem" was a shrill, preachy after school special.

Um...I don't know too many after school specials that do ass-to-ass.


At most there were only seven or eight of them.
 
2011-11-19 07:50:39 PM  
Is Heat supposed to be some unassailable classic?
I liked it okay, but I'm pretty sure it was never considered to be a Goodfellas or Godfather II
 
2011-11-19 07:52:13 PM  

excusemesenator: spman: If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.

Or, perhaps, you've failed as a viewer

Seriously, if you were OMG LIKE SO CONFUSED by Inception then you are probably not as smart as you think you are.


Actually, if you weren't confused you're probably not all that smart.
/Thing was full of holes big enough to drive a van through.
 
2011-11-19 08:15:35 PM  

Mugato:

Oh and I couldn't stand Goonies either.


That's because you're dead inside.
 
2011-11-19 08:16:52 PM  
Many years ago, I picked up a movie review book by Rex Reed and looked at Airplane. I recall that he complained that the plot went nowhere and gave it one star.

I put the book down and decided that Rex Reed was too dumb to be a movie reviewer.
 
2011-11-19 08:24:42 PM  

Carth: struct: Carth: struct: Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")

Who committed mass murder in Fight Club?

Maybe imy memory's a bit hazy, and if it is I apologize, but aren't a bunch of buildings blown up?

Yes, but they make it very clear the buildings are completely empty. You can still dislike it for mass property damage.


That's all and well, but no one got hurt with thousands of tuns of rubble falling around them? Really? You know who else brought buildings in a polittically motivated plot?
 
2011-11-19 08:28:30 PM  

struct: Carth: struct: Carth: struct: Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")

Who committed mass murder in Fight Club?

Maybe imy memory's a bit hazy, and if it is I apologize, but aren't a bunch of buildings blown up?

Yes, but they make it very clear the buildings are completely empty. You can still dislike it for mass property damage.

That's all and well, but no one got hurt with thousands of tuns of rubble falling around them? Really? You know who else brought buildings in a polittically motivated plot?

Uncle Pennybags?
 
2011-11-19 08:48:19 PM  
Wait, there were critics who gave positive reviews to Fight Club? Sure, the first two acts are great, but that third act completely falls apart and betrays the quality of the story and acting before that. (And wastes some fine performances by Norton, Pitt and Meatloaf.)

/Get off my lawn, you Mark-Millar-loving Fight Club fanboys.
 
2011-11-19 08:52:02 PM  

struct: Carth: struct: Carth: struct: Okay, I'll get some flak for this but I didn't like Fight Club or the Dark Knight, they all seem kind of overwrought and take themselves too seriously (I did like Batman begins though) for me. Maybe I don't like my social commentary coming in the form of voiceovers or gimmicks in action movies telling you what the point should be. ("We get the heroes we deserve" or "blow buildings up and commit mass murder because life bores you")

Who committed mass murder in Fight Club?

Maybe imy memory's a bit hazy, and if it is I apologize, but aren't a bunch of buildings blown up?

Yes, but they make it very clear the buildings are completely empty. You can still dislike it for mass property damage.

That's all and well, but no one got hurt with thousands of tuns of rubble falling around them? Really? You know who else brought buildings in a polittically motivated plot?


We don't see anyone get hurt and since it was the middle of the night in an empty financial district I don't think it would qualify as mass murder. It is pretty clear they are supposed to be terrorists and that the leader was schizophrenic. The idea that the United States' promotion of a consumerism is detrimental to society resonates with a lot of viewers so they give it a pass.
 
2011-11-19 08:52:36 PM  

The Stealth Hippopotamus: swahnhennessy: And Ebert wasn't the only one who ragged on Fight Club. I remember that the previews and the panning made me think the movie was something it was not, and bad. Nowadays I've got my own issues with Palahniuk's stuff, but Fincher did a great job with that.

That was one of the best parts of Fight Club. You went in thinking you were going to get one thing and boom something completely different. I walked out of the theater thinking that the critics were in on it. But quickly dismissed the idea, it would be like herding cats


It can be done. (new window)
 
2011-11-19 09:13:25 PM  

Fano: VoodooHillbilly: Great_Milenko: The companion article of good reviews of bad movies is even better. (new window)

This one for the Clash of the Titans remage is just priceless:

"Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy."

Ebert liked Speed 2 and The Happening, but dissed Fight Club and Die Hard?

I think several of those reviewers were just trolling their readers.

He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.


Wow. Talk about a loss leader.

Box Office
Budget:
$20,000,000 (estimated)
Gross:
$305,070 (USA)

/might have to see it now
 
2011-11-19 09:23:45 PM  

Pandora's Litterbox: Link (new window)


The ad on that page. Rosetta's Wop Shop? Really?
 
2011-11-19 09:33:53 PM  

aniyn: Mugato:

Oh and I couldn't stand Goonies either.

That's because you're dead inside.


Have you perchance seen that movie again as an adult? It doesn't hold up to our memories.
 
2011-11-19 10:11:24 PM  

Carth: We don't see anyone get hurt and since it was the middle of the night in an empty financial district I don't think it would qualify as mass murder. It is pretty clear they are supposed to be terrorists and that the leader was schizophrenic. The idea that the United States' promotion of a consumerism is detrimental to society resonates with a lot of viewers so they give it a pass.


How many buildings get blown up? Any high-rise building is pretty much never empty, no matter the time of day/night. Whether it be a security guard (pretty much every building higher than 20 stories has at least one or a few on duty at any given time) or a cleaning crew, those building would not be empty. How many people have to die for it to be mass murder?
 
2011-11-19 10:15:53 PM  

mjbok: How many buildings get blown up? Any high-rise building is pretty much never empty, no matter the time of day/night. Whether it be a security guard (pretty much every building higher than 20 stories has at least one or a few on duty at any given time) or a cleaning crew, those building would not be empty. How many people have to die for it to be mass murder?


You could try watching the film. Might answer some questions.
 
2011-11-19 10:50:28 PM  

The Spoony Bard: Inception really was a terrible movie though. How it is so popular I will never understand. I couldn't stop laughing.


The last panel of your pic needs to be an animated GIF. DiCaprio has an expression that begs - nay, demands - to be turned into a spit-take.
 
2011-11-19 11:37:02 PM  
Anyone who doesn't like The Big Lebowski must be dead inside.
 
2011-11-19 11:46:21 PM  

I tried to watch Inception at home while my kids were asleep. I gave up after 15 minutes. This is my summary of the first 15 minutes

*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*

 
2011-11-19 11:50:31 PM  

PizzaJedi81: ciderczar: VoodooHillbilly: Fano: He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.

I've seen Rapa Nui, and I totally agree with loving lot of breasts of any color.

Nicholas Cage and his nasal monotone voice makes my brain hurt. Nothing that douche does should ever qualify as "acting".

That's because it's "ACTING!" *Flourishy hand sweep*

[www.old-portlethen.co.uk image 400x300]

MACBETH!


AHHH!!! Hot potato, off his drawers, pluck to make amends. AHHH!!!
 
2011-11-19 11:57:10 PM  

The Spoony Bard: Inception really was a terrible movie though. How it is so popular I will never understand. I couldn't stop laughing.
[jeremysexton.net image 425x706]


That was pretty good, but it would be funnier if you didn't spell Michael Caine's name wrong.
 
2011-11-19 11:58:14 PM  

Mugato: You could try watching the film. Might answer some questions.


I have (granted it has been awhile), and even though all cleaning, security, etc. might be part of Project Mayhem, there is no way those buildings would be completely empty.

//Maybe I'll watch it again, it probably was addressed.
 
2011-11-19 11:58:30 PM  

ciderczar: AHHH!!! Hot potato, off his drawers, pluck to make amends. AHHH!!!


What do ya know...someone else who actually listens to what's said.
 
2011-11-20 12:15:26 AM  

mjbok: Mugato: You could try watching the film. Might answer some questions.

I have (granted it has been awhile), and even though all cleaning, security, etc. might be part of Project Mayhem, there is no way those buildings would be completely empty.

//Maybe I'll watch it again, it probably was addressed.


I'll save you the time, they specifically said that all cleaning, security, etc. made themselves scarce as a result of Project Mayhem. Unbelievable as it may seem, Link (new window) says that is exactly what happens. One may argue about casualties from passersby, hobos, or other people, but specifically all staff were cleared from the buildings. Keep in mind that you are arguing this point about a movie in which a man with a split personality manages to convince everyone around him to follow him, unquestioningly while he runs the organization in both roles. Hell, at least in Batman, Scarface had a Ventriloquist. How do the other people reconcile him playing both roles?
 
2011-11-20 12:29:41 AM  

eddiesocket: Is Heat supposed to be some unassailable classic?
I liked it okay, but I'm pretty sure it was never considered to be a Goodfellas or Godfather II


I wondered about that too.

Also, for the folks asking about Airplane:

Full Review (new window)

Apparently he wasn't aware of the time in which "Jive" was somewhat new. Based on his faux concern for racism, I'm sure he twisted in knots watching Blazing Saddles.

Oh, wait... is this the same Josh Larsen? ThinkChristianEditor (new window)

I'm sorry, I suddenly started wondering what Armond White thinks about Airplane.
 
2011-11-20 12:29:43 AM  

Fano: mjbok: Mugato: You could try watching the film. Might answer some questions.

I have (granted it has been awhile), and even though all cleaning, security, etc. might be part of Project Mayhem, there is no way those buildings would be completely empty.

//Maybe I'll watch it again, it probably was addressed.

I'll save you the time, they specifically said that all cleaning, security, etc. made themselves scarce as a result of Project Mayhem. Unbelievable as it may seem, Link (new window) says that is exactly what happens. One may argue about casualties from passersby, hobos, or other people, but specifically all staff were cleared from the buildings. Keep in mind that you are arguing this point about a movie in which a man with a split personality manages to convince everyone around him to follow him, unquestioningly while he runs the organization in both roles. Hell, at least in Batman, Scarface had a Ventriloquist. How do the other people reconcile him playing both roles?


danke
 
2011-11-20 12:55:21 AM  
fark Gone With the Wind. It's important for the technical advances it made, but Scarlett O'Hara can shut the fark up about how sad she is that her side lost the war and she has to give up her slaves. Eat a dick, Scarlett.

Christopher Nolan is a bad writer/director and people who like his movies should feel bad. Otherwise, nothing on this list struck me as worth an aggressively bad review.

Oh, LotR blows a dick, but so do the books unless you're one of those types that likes the Herman Melville-style "Let me drop the plot for a chapter or two so that I can describe to you how the dative case works in this made up language that I created" digression that supposedly "builds up the world" but is really boring as shiat.
 
2011-11-20 01:01:50 AM  
WHER ARMOND WHITE!? WHER!?
 
2011-11-20 01:04:17 AM  

mjbok: Fano: mjbok: Mugato: You could try watching the film. Might answer some questions.

I have (granted it has been awhile), and even though all cleaning, security, etc. might be part of Project Mayhem, there is no way those buildings would be completely empty.

//Maybe I'll watch it again, it probably was addressed.

I'll save you the time, they specifically said that all cleaning, security, etc. made themselves scarce as a result of Project Mayhem. Unbelievable as it may seem, Link (new window) says that is exactly what happens. One may argue about casualties from passersby, hobos, or other people, but specifically all staff were cleared from the buildings. Keep in mind that you are arguing this point about a movie in which a man with a split personality manages to convince everyone around him to follow him, unquestioningly while he runs the organization in both roles. Hell, at least in Batman, Scarface had a Ventriloquist. How do the other people reconcile him playing both roles?

danke


Bitte, I actually wasn't very impressed by the movie myself, but I thought I'd save you the effort. I don't recall the exact lines, but that's how it played out: the destruction of multiple skyscrapers was somehow bloodless.
 
2011-11-20 01:10:12 AM  

craigdamage: Requiem For A Dream is a steaming pile of sh*t.

Why this lousy film gets so much cred is absurd.

Possibly the most obnoxiously OVER-DIRECTED bad film of all time.

The assinine super fast pace FLASH EDIT style is nauseating to me. It looks and feels like a two hour music video. Actually,worse...it is a film that runs like an extended trailer.

Requiem For A Dream is applauded by nitwits who have never seen a Sidney Lumet film.


You know, I've always been meaning to ask, but how am I supposed to tell how well-directed a movie is? It seems like the very thing that would be invisible to a viewer who is not knowledgeable in the movie making process.
 
2011-11-20 01:16:32 AM  

LoneWolf343: You know, I've always been meaning to ask, but how am I supposed to tell how well-directed a movie is? It seems like the very thing that would be invisible to a viewer who is not knowledgeable in the movie making process.


Depends. Spielberg has a very distinct style where you can tell it's his movie, but if a director isn't going for a particular style or flair you're correct that the movie should just "feel right", and the direction is more or less invisible.
 
2011-11-20 02:39:54 AM  

Smelly McUgly: Christopher Nolan is a bad writer/director and people who like his movies should feel bad.


While I generally agree with you, I thought Following was a great movie.
 
2011-11-20 03:14:28 AM  

Crewmannumber6: That was pretty good, but it would be funnier if you didn't spell Michael Caine's name wrong.


I doubt he's responsible for the image, but the rampant misspellings in memes are why I rarely use them. It's embarrassing. Even the ones where it's done on purpose (though there are myriad other reasons why I avoided lolcats).
 
2011-11-20 03:18:20 AM  

spman: Big Lebowski is an unfunny overrated mess of a film with no plot to speak of, and very little in the way of jokes or humor. Just 2 hours of meandering, pointless dialog..


Well, that's just, like, your opinion, man
 
2011-11-20 04:10:11 AM  

Grables'Daughter: I click on each one, and nothing happens.

Is it just me?


this
 
2011-11-20 04:15:48 AM  

PizzaJedi81: drewogatory: "Requiem" was a shrill, preachy after school special.

Um...I don't know too many after school specials that do ass-to-ass.


Requiem for a Dream: If you do drugs, something horrible will happen to you and your life will be shiat. Why anyone recommends this movie is beyond me.

//I dont even take drugs
 
2011-11-20 04:16:35 AM  

Smelly McUgly: Christopher Nolan is a bad writer/director and people who like his movies should feel bad.


watch THE PRESTIGE
 
2011-11-20 05:20:02 AM  
Wow, It's like someone said "there's no format on the internet worse than a slideshow" in front of Lex farking Luthor and the dude said "challenge accepted" and dedicated the entire processing power of a billion alternate universes into finding the one web-page format even more shiatty and unreadable.

I mean, come on, is your farking website hosted on geocities or something? Just put the goddamed list on the farking page, this is shiat you could type out yourself in notepad, not the development of farking skynet.
 
2011-11-20 06:48:55 AM  

Fano: VoodooHillbilly: Great_Milenko: The companion article of good reviews of bad movies is even better. (new window)

This one for the Clash of the Titans remage is just priceless:

"Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy."

Ebert liked Speed 2 and The Happening, but dissed Fight Club and Die Hard?

I think several of those reviewers were just trolling their readers.

He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.


Ebert's actual review (new window)

Concern for my reputation prevents me from recommending this movie. I wish I had more nerve. I wish I could simply write, "Look, of course it's one of the worst movies ever made. But it has hilarious dialogue, a weirdo action climax, a bizarre explanation for the faces of Easter Island, and dozens if not hundreds of wonderful bare breasts." I am however a responsible film critic and must conclude that "Rapa Nui" is a bad film. If you want to see it anyway, of course, that's strictly your concern. I think I may check it out again myself.



I wouldn't exactly call that a recommendation. It sounds more like "This is a bad film with some good bits (mostly in pairs)."
 
2011-11-20 08:02:15 AM  

simplicimus: SharkTrager: Shostie: Well... Spartacus IS an uneven, spotty drama. It's what happens when you hire Kubrick and don't give him full creative control.

Spartacus is what happens when you have an actor with the typical actor's ego essentially in charge of the production but who has no discernible talent as a producer or director and who is only making the film out of spite.

I actually like the film, but the review is spot on and the issues are largely Douglas' fault.

Now that would be a great list: Films made out of spite.


Like Escape From L.A.?
 
2011-11-20 08:11:47 AM  

saturn badger: Pandora's Litterbox: Link (new window)

The ad on that page. Rosetta's Wop Shop? Really?


(Further) proof that the seventies in Alaska were like a whole other (time-displaced) planet as compared to the rest of the U.S. They were still showing John Wayne's old movies in theaters.


While I'm not seriously advocating the doing of such, I can't believe that someone hasn't raised a stink about the name of this product. (new window)
 
2011-11-20 09:06:28 AM  
LoneWolf343how am I supposed to tell how well-directed a movie is? It seems like the very thing that would be invisible to a viewer who is not knowledgeable in the movie making process.

Watch 12 Angry Men1957


......then,watch any film by Michael Bay.

Asking "how well is a film directed?" is like asking "how well did those contractors I hired paint my living room?"

Are the brush strokes even and smoothly uniform?
Did they miss any spots?
Did they spill any paint on the carpet? ......etc.......


The reason I believe Requiem For A Dream sucks the sh*t right out of my ass is that the film is about drug addicts and their descent into calamity but the only thing I can specifically remember about the film is all the annoying fast-edits,cameral filtered shots,and overblown directing technique. This film is so over-directed it smothers the character developement.

Off the top of my head...here are much better films about drug addicts:

Drugstore Cowboy
Panic In Needle Park
Trainspotting
Man With the Golden Arm
Clean And Sober
Christane F
 
2011-11-20 09:49:37 AM  

craigdamage: This film is so over-directed it smothers the character developement.


IMO, the "over direction" is all completely justified by the type of story its telling and enhances rather than detracts from character development. We're supposed to feel as if we're on drugs ourselves, and I did.
 
2011-11-20 12:01:54 PM  
eddiesocketthe "over direction" is all completely justified by the type of story its telling and enhances rather than detracts from character development. We're supposed to feel as if we're on drugs ourselves, and I did.


yeah....but this concept has already been fully exploited,and with much better effect.

The idea of fast edits and various camera tricks to depict "drug effects" was done in the Scorsese film Goodfellas during the 1980 "helicopter montage part" when Henry is doing line after line of coke while being followed by a helicopter. Also note the rapid music edits as well. This is brilliant because up to this point the film is an allegorical biopic. Only this sole scene is done with this style to illustrate the character's descent.

So many bad film makers have been trying to copy this since. Poorly.

The film "Spun" is another example.
 
2011-11-20 12:05:40 PM  

craigdamage: eddiesocketthe "over direction" is all completely justified by the type of story its telling and enhances rather than detracts from character development. We're supposed to feel as if we're on drugs ourselves, and I did.


yeah....but this concept has already been fully exploited,and with much better effect.

The idea of fast edits and various camera tricks to depict "drug effects" was done in the Scorsese film Goodfellas during the 1980 "helicopter montage part" when Henry is doing line after line of coke while being followed by a helicopter. Also note the rapid music edits as well. This is brilliant because up to this point the film is an allegorical biopic. Only this sole scene is done with this style to illustrate the character's descent.

So many bad film makers have been trying to copy this since. Poorly.

The film "Spun" is another example.


I hated Spun. To me, Spun was all the camera tricks you were talking about, but Requiem was organic and unique. It wasn't just "fast editing", anyway.
 
kab
2011-11-20 01:17:49 PM  

Smelly McUgly: Oh, LotR blows a dick, but so do the books unless you're one of those types that likes the Herman Melville-style "Let me drop the plot for a chapter or two so that I can describe to you how the dative case works in this made up language that I created" digression that supposedly "builds up the world" but is really boring as shiat.


So edgy, man. I wanna be just like you when I grow up.
 
2011-11-20 01:35:27 PM  

kab: Smelly McUgly: Oh, LotR blows a dick, but so do the books unless you're one of those types that likes the Herman Melville-style "Let me drop the plot for a chapter or two so that I can describe to you how the dative case works in this made up language that I created" digression that supposedly "builds up the world" but is really boring as shiat.

So edgy, man. I wanna be just like you when I grow up.


It's not about being edgy, it's about having good taste. I hope you're like me when you grow up because right now, you're probably one of the morons responsible for all the shiatty blockbusters in cineplexes.

/Good luck with that!
 
2011-11-20 03:08:36 PM  

craigdamage: LoneWolf343how am I supposed to tell how well-directed a movie is? It seems like the very thing that would be invisible to a viewer who is not knowledgeable in the movie making process.

Watch 12 Angry Men1957


......then,watch any film by Michael Bay.

Asking "how well is a film directed?" is like asking "how well did those contractors I hired paint my living room?"

Are the brush strokes even and smoothly uniform?
Did they miss any spots?
Did they spill any paint on the carpet? ......etc.......


The reason I believe Requiem For A Dream sucks the sh*t right out of my ass is that the film is about drug addicts and their descent into calamity but the only thing I can specifically remember about the film is all the annoying fast-edits,cameral filtered shots,and overblown directing technique. This film is so over-directed it smothers the character developement.

Off the top of my head...here are much better films about drug addicts:

Drugstore Cowboy
Panic In Needle Park
Trainspotting
Man With the Golden Arm
Clean And Sober
Christane F


So, direction basically is how the film is edited. I can follow that.
 
2011-11-20 05:11:46 PM  
So, direction basically is how the film is edited. I can follow that.

yeah...pretty much.

See the God-awful "Redux" version of Apocalypse Now.
They basically edited out all of the pretentious crap and were left with a masterpiece with the original theatric release.

Sam Peckinpah usually shot some 6-9 hours worth of footage to edit down to 2-3 hours.

....and I will give Requiem For A Dream another look.
I fully admit,I am somewhat of a pretentious prick myself.
(got some drunk honesty going on now)
 
2011-11-20 06:11:48 PM  

Laserteeth: I tried to watch Inception at home while my kids were asleep. I gave up after 15 minutes. This is my summary of the first 15 minutes

*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*


If it was the Blu-ray that's DTS (DTS-HD MA) for you. No way to limit the dynamics.
Warner used to use Dolby TrueHD, which has the option of Night Mode for those who want to watch films at a decent without waking up the neighborhood, while retaining the option to bring down the house when full dynamics are wanted.
 
2011-11-20 06:37:15 PM  

craigdamage: See the God-awful "Redux" version of Apocalypse Now.
They basically edited out all of the pretentious crap and were left with a masterpiece with the original theatric release.


Agreed.
 
2011-11-20 07:59:53 PM  

Silverlock: Fano: VoodooHillbilly: Great_Milenko: The companion article of good reviews of bad movies is even better. (new window)

This one for the Clash of the Titans remage is just priceless:

"Leterrier certainly shows a better sense of meaningful, economic narrative than the mess that Peter Jackson made of the interminable, incoherent Lord of the Rings trilogy."

Ebert liked Speed 2 and The Happening, but dissed Fight Club and Die Hard?

I think several of those reviewers were just trolling their readers.

He watches quite a few movies, every once in a while he seems to phone it in. He also likes Nic Cage an inordinate amount and I believe gave a glowing review to "Knowing."

OTOH he also praised Rapa Nui (new window) because he admits he loves lots of big brown breasts.

Ebert's actual review (new window)

Concern for my reputation prevents me from recommending this movie. I wish I had more nerve. I wish I could simply write, "Look, of course it's one of the worst movies ever made. But it has hilarious dialogue, a weirdo action climax, a bizarre explanation for the faces of Easter Island, and dozens if not hundreds of wonderful bare breasts." I am however a responsible film critic and must conclude that "Rapa Nui" is a bad film. If you want to see it anyway, of course, that's strictly your concern. I think I may check it out again myself.

I wouldn't exactly call that a recommendation. It sounds more like "This is a bad film with some good bits (mostly in pairs)."


He claims to have wrestled with his conscience and reputation not to recommend the awful film, then confesses he's going to watch it again for the boobs.

I gotta give a guy of his caliber major points for penning such a review. He essentially calls it MST3K bad, notes awesome breasts, and then winks. Serious reviewers aren't supposed to say things like that.
 
2011-11-21 12:09:01 AM  
I guess I just find Ebert to be entertaining. I rarely fully agree with his take, yet he's the only critic I routinely read. Dunno, maybe just habit.
 
2011-11-21 06:48:18 AM  
Bladerunner is one of my favorites, although it is starting to look very dated now.

As for Old Boy. I own it. It is a well directed movie but I do think it doesn't deserve as much fan base as it gets. The story is so damn disturbing, which is why maybe people like it. More fans of shock I guess. For my money I liked Lady Vengeance (by the same director) a lot better. That movie should be getting most of the press IMO. Theres more a point to it all.
 
2011-11-21 09:25:03 AM  
Requiem for a Dream wasn't horrible, bu it was definitely one film where you feel a sort of suicidal hopelessness after watching it. It's one thing to see what one junkie will do (ass to ass) and how another will let themselves go (seeing them try to inject heroin into a gangrenous arm vein) once they descend to "that" level. Ironic that I felt similarly when I saw House of Fog, which was also a Jennifer Connelly vehicle.

The Matrix was a derivative film for anyone who saw the original Japanese inspirations. I think the goal was the Wachowskis wanted to expose America to the type of stories THEY liked, which happened to be Japanese sci-fi/anime/kung fu action pics.

Airplane, much like another reviewer said, was froma time and a place when you could still get away with insulting races but have it be generally funny. Blazing Saddles could never have been made after 1990, even Mel Brooks admitted that.

Bladerunner was a fillm that insists upon itself. Yes, the original idea was intriguing, but like every other Philip K. Dick adaptation fails to live up to the original story. It became a cult classic which the director found he could exploit to his financial advantage (much like Army of Darkness).

You're always going to find someone who hates a popular film. They stand out from the crowd, and even with pillars like Ebert, he's going to call one wrong from time to time.
 
2011-11-21 10:13:52 AM  
I remember Siskel and Ebert's initial review for Silence of the Lambs. Neither really liked it that much. Now I think it's in Ebert's "Great Movies" database.
 
2011-11-21 10:32:04 AM  

peterthx: Laserteeth: I tried to watch Inception at home while my kids were asleep. I gave up after 15 minutes. This is my summary of the first 15 minutes

*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*
*mumble mumble whisper whisper*
*!!!FARK!!!BANG!!!EXPLOSION!!!CRASH!!!!*

If it was the Blu-ray that's DTS (DTS-HD MA) for you. No way to limit the dynamics.
Warner used to use Dolby TrueHD, which has the option of Night Mode for those who want to watch films at a decent without waking up the neighborhood, while retaining the option to bring down the house when full dynamics are wanted.


This technology - can it be applied to television commercials?

/Newsletter etc.
 
2011-11-21 03:57:38 PM  
LOTR - That the quote review was 100% accurate is made up for by the attention to detail, (largely) good directing choices, and the parts that aren't snoozeworthy.
Blade Runner - Movie is largely overrated.
The Warriors - Truth. Love it anyway.
Trainspotting: Truth
GWTW: True - Deadly dull movie.
Jaws: Spot on. Pretty darn good nonetheless.
 
2011-11-21 04:22:25 PM  

Orgasmatron138: I remember Siskel and Ebert's initial review for Silence of the Lambs. Neither really liked it that much. Now I think it's in Ebert's "Great Movies" database.


You really can find damned-near everything on the web. (new window)

Also, they both disliked Eastwood's "Unforgiven" when it came out. They both gave it thumbs down and Ebert gave it 2 stars in his print review. (I never was [or have been] able to find a copy of Siskel's print review)
Then he named it one of that year's best films in his year-end wrap-up and expunged all traces of his original review (replacing it with a 4-star re-review).

He says he had his mind on his wedding (which was like a week or two away) when he originally reviewed the film but my (completely unprovable) theory is that he saw all of his colleagues in the critical field going (deservedly, IMO) ape over the film and didn't want to be left out. Only Siskel had the guts to stand by his original pan.

For some masochistic reason I like to read Ebert but I don't put ANY faith in his reviews (or at least any more than the zero amount of faith I put into the reviews of any any other critic)
 
2011-11-21 07:17:20 PM  

Pandora's Litterbox: Orgasmatron138: I remember Siskel and Ebert's initial review for Silence of the Lambs. Neither really liked it that much. Now I think it's in Ebert's "Great Movies" database.

You really can find damned-near everything on the web. (new window)

Also, they both disliked Eastwood's "Unforgiven" when it came out. They both gave it thumbs down and Ebert gave it 2 stars in his print review. (I never was [or have been] able to find a copy of Siskel's print review)
Then he named it one of that year's best films in his year-end wrap-up and expunged all traces of his original review (replacing it with a 4-star re-review).

He says he had his mind on his wedding (which was like a week or two away) when he originally reviewed the film but my (completely unprovable) theory is that he saw all of his colleagues in the critical field going (deservedly, IMO) ape over the film and didn't want to be left out. Only Siskel had the guts to stand by his original pan.

For some masochistic reason I like to read Ebert but I don't put ANY faith in his reviews (or at least any more than the zero amount of faith I put into the reviews of any any other critic)


How dare a man change his mind after considering the opinion of others!
 
2011-11-22 12:20:46 AM  

LoneWolf343: Pandora's Litterbox: Orgasmatron138: I remember Siskel and Ebert's initial review for Silence of the Lambs. Neither really liked it that much. Now I think it's in Ebert's "Great Movies" database.

You really can find damned-near everything on the web. (new window)

Also, they both disliked Eastwood's "Unforgiven" when it came out. They both gave it thumbs down and Ebert gave it 2 stars in his print review. (I never was [or have been] able to find a copy of Siskel's print review)
Then he named it one of that year's best films in his year-end wrap-up and expunged all traces of his original review (replacing it with a 4-star re-review).

He says he had his mind on his wedding (which was like a week or two away) when he originally reviewed the film but my (completely unprovable) theory is that he saw all of his colleagues in the critical field going (deservedly, IMO) ape over the film and didn't want to be left out. Only Siskel had the guts to stand by his original pan.

For some masochistic reason I like to read Ebert but I don't put ANY faith in his reviews (or at least any more than the zero amount of faith I put into the reviews of any any other critic)

How dare a man change his mind after considering the opinion of others!


With the rapidity of Ebert in this instance? Doesn't pass my smell test. Or Siskel's.
Yes, viewpoints can (and, very often enough, should) evolve, will evolve, and have evolved with the passage of enough time and the intake of new information. That's healthy and natural. Ebert flipped on a dime. He went from "the flick is alright but nothing special" to "Oh My God! This is the one of the greatest films since the advent of cinema" in the space of a month. Besides, he must have reviewed 30 films in the month leading up to his marriage. Why was this the only one he instantly re-evalutated? No. Even Siskel gave him sh*t about his suspiciously instantaneous change of heart re: Unforgiven in an interview they granted about a year following Unforgiven's release. Siskel pretty much flat-out stated that Ebert had no backbone and wavered because S+E's critical establishment colleagues couldn't believe that they both panned it. Ebert's always been insecure as all Hell. He wants people to love him.
 
2011-11-22 11:53:32 AM  

Jamdug!: If it was the Blu-ray that's DTS (DTS-HD MA) for you. No way to limit the dynamics.
Warner used to use Dolby TrueHD, which has the option of Night Mode for those who want to watch films at a decent without waking up the neighborhood, while retaining the option to bring down the house when full dynamics are wanted.

This technology - can it be applied to television commercials?

/Newsletter etc.


Usually only Dolby coded material. However there are external Dolby Volume devices that work with any input signal.

Article (Link) (new window)

www.audioholics.com

Newer receivers like the Onkyo TX-NR709 have it built in and can be used with any source.
 
2011-11-22 02:30:21 PM  

spman: If I have to watch your film four times while taking extensive notes just to follow your story and have it make sense, then you've failed as a filmmaker.


I think you think you are smarter than you are.
 
Displayed 172 of 172 comments



This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report