Movie Mini-Review Thread

Status
Not open for further replies.
cerebus said:
You're so right, having bad taste is an unmitigated blessing.
Click to expand...

What is worse is your obsession with reviews. Do you formulate your own opinion on things or is that what reviews are there for...? I frankly can't comprehend why you fail to understand that different people will enjoy different things.


EDIT: Finished watching blackfish (documentary on killer whales in captivity) and thoroughly enjoyed it. Solid 7/10.
 
Zenbaas said:
What is worse is your obsession with reviews. Do you formulate your own opinion on things or is that what reviews are there for...? I frankly can't comprehend why you fail to understand that different people will enjoy different things.
Click to expand...
How to respond without sounding totally arrogant? The critics are right. It's their job to have good taste, which should be grounded on a rigorous education and vast exposure to films. You don't accept a layperson's ill informed opinion on your profession.

A 27 Metacritc score indicates that a movie is deemed to be execrable - an unwatchable, incoherent, offensive blight on filmmaking. To score it a 9 and then claim that taste is subjective just means your subjective taste is bad, and needs uplifting. If you're content with that state of affairs, then you are blessed because anything can please you.


EDIT: Finished watching blackfish (documentary on killer whales in captivity) and thoroughly enjoyed it. Solid 7/10.
Click to expand...
That one looks very good.
 
So if we enjoy something that you and a poncy critic have deemed not to your liking, we're below you? Geezuz could you get any more hoity toity ....... what an arse.
 
cerebus said:
How to respond without sounding totally arrogant? The critics are right. It's their job to have good taste, which should be grounded on a rigorous education and vast exposure to films. You don't accept a layperson's ill informed opinion on your profession.

A 27 Metacritc score indicates that a movie is deemed to be execrable - an unwatchable, incoherent, offensive blight on filmmaking. To score it a 9 and then claim that taste is subjective just means your subjective taste is bad, and needs uplifting. If you're content with that state of affairs, then you are blessed because anything can please you.
Click to expand...

You failed at not sounding totally arrogant. ;)
 
So if we enjoy something that you and a poncy critic have deemed not to your liking, we're below you? Geezuz could you get any more hoity toity ....... what an arse.
Click to expand...
If you enjoy something that is universally deemed by critics to be an awful movie, it's a fairly safe bet that your taste is questionable. It certainly doesn't mean you're below me. It actually has nothing to do with me at all. You're welcome to like it, and it's a great thing if you can enjoy a bad movie (a friend of mine was just raving about Walking with Dinosaurs for instance, and who am I to kill his buzz?) but you've still got bad taste.

I've frequently found myself coming up short and having to readjust what I like in the light of a piece of very incisive criticism. I simply don't believe that taste is such a personal thing; a good movie is good, and a bad movie is bad - and the same goes for code, or cooking, or plumbing. It's a measurable quantity and an aggregated Metacritic score is about as good a way as any of judging the quality of a film before wasting time watching it and having to leave because it's awful.

Nick333 said:
You failed at not sounding totally arrogant. ;)
Click to expand...

I thought I might have done :/
 
Last edited:
cerebus said:
If you enjoy something that is universally deemed by critics to be an awful movie, it's a fairly safe bet that your taste is questionable. You're welcome to like it, and it's a great thing if you can enjoy a bad movie (a friend of mine was just raving about Walking with Dinosaurs for instance, and who am I to kill his buzz?) but you've still got bad taste. I've frequently found myself coming up short and having to readjust what I like in the light of a piece of very incisive criticism.



I thought I might have done :/
Click to expand...

What is the point of watching something and enjoying it just to go and read reviews and force yourself to reevaluate everything...?
 
Zenbaas said:
What is the point of watching something and enjoying it just to go and read reviews and force yourself to reevaluate everything...?
Click to expand...

If you care enough about films or anything really, that's just an unavoidable part of life. The opposite can also happen, where you dismiss something at first but then a piece of writing can cause you to reconsider what you thought. That happened with the late works of Picasso - most people ignored it until David Hockney wrote an impassioned defense, from the viewpoint of a master painter evaluating another master.
 
cerebus said:
If you enjoy something that is universally deemed by critics to be an awful movie, it's a fairly safe bet that your taste is questionable.
Click to expand...

BS. If I had to go on the opinions of Barry Ronge etc I would have missed some great movies. If Barry Ronge says it's crap then make a point of watching it!
 
Hate to admit it but, I kind of a agree with cerebus. The fact that so many crap movies make money is testament to the fact that most people don't pay enough attention to ratings. I went from barely watching movies because so many are just bad to only watching movies with good ratings. I watch and enjoy more movies that way.
I don't think it matters so much who does the rating as long as you have a big enough sample base.
But, really, being so critical of movies can also ruin them for you. I just enjoy a movie that tells a story well. If it draws me in and keeps me from teaching for my phone for an hour or two it's good. If it makes me feel something so much the better. I'm not really interested in the how and the why and I'm not sure I should be. Just because film can be art doesn't mean it has to be great art. A bit of craft will do too.
 
Nick333 said:
Hate to admit it but, I kind of a agree with cerebus. The fact that so many crap movies make money is testament to the fact that most people don't pay enough attention to ratings. I went from barely watching movies because so many are just bad to only watching movies with good ratings. I watch and enjoy more movies that way.
I don't think it matters so much who does the rating as long as you have a big enough sample base.
But, really, being so critical of movies can also ruin them for you. I just enjoy a movie that tells a story well. If it draws me in and keeps me from teaching for my phone for an hour or two it's good. If it makes me feel something so much the better. I'm not really interested in the how and the why and I'm not sure I should be. Just because film can be art doesn't mean it has to be great art. A bit of craft will do too.
Click to expand...

Yes use it as a guide but don't let it rule your life.
 
Nick333 said:
Hate to admit it but, I kind of a agree with cerebus. The fact that so many crap movies make money is testament to the fact that most people don't pay enough attention to ratings.
Click to expand...

No the average joe actually enjoys what you and I consider crap. Between reviews, imdb & rotten tomato ratings decide for yourself. Hollywood blockbusters are generally crap for the sheeple. I've been watching a lot of foreign movies over the last ten years or so and holyweird should be ashamed of what they do with their big budgets compared to these small foreign movies which excel.

like you I'm also after a good story and there are some really good movies out there if you are prepared to venture beyond hollywood and also consider some old classics.
 
Zenbaas said:
Yes use it as a guide but don't let it rule your life.
Click to expand...

Well, I generally won't watch anything rated under 6 on IMDB unless it looks particularly interesting. But, you really only have so much time to watch movies and trailers all edited to make their movies look as appealing as possible so what else is there to go on?
 
Nick333 said:
Well, I generally won't watch anything rated under 6 on IMDB unless it looks particularly interesting. But, you really only have so much time to watch movies and trailers all edited to make their movies look as appealing as possible so what else is there to go on?
Click to expand...

Sure I understand that and can agree with you. My issue is when you get to the point where you adjust your own perceptions of movies based on others critique thereof like cerebrus admitted to doing. That for me is a bit much.
 
Zenbaas said:
Sure I understand that and can agree with you. My issue is when you get to the point where you adjust your own perceptions of movies based on others critique thereof like cerebrus admitted to doing. That for me is a bit much.
Click to expand...

I don't have a problem with that I just don't think it's necessary any more than learning music theory it's necessary to appreciate music. But, if that's someone's thing... whatever turns you on right? I can see cerebus' point. Knowing the technical aspects of something or knowing what something could and should be compared to can enhance your appreciation. At the same time it could ruin your enjoyment of a lot of stuff that is first and foremost meant to be entertainment. Don't hate a good book because it's not literary.
 
Nick333 said:
I don't have a problem with that I just don't think it's necessary any more than learning music theory it's necessary to appreciate music. But, if that's someone's thing... whatever turns you on right? I can see cerebus' point. Knowing the technical aspects of something or knowing what something could and should be compared to can enhance your appreciation. At the same time it could ruin your enjoyment of a lot of stuff that is first and foremost meant to be entertainment. Don't hate a good book because it's not literary.
Click to expand...

And at the end of the day that's all we're saying.
 
Earlier in the year I recorded The Great Gatsby from 1974 starring Robert Redford, Sam Waterston and Mia Farrow, and directed by Jack Clayton. I've now watched the first part (it's two and a half hours long).

In my opinion, the 1974 film, aged as it is, is much better than the 2013 film. Quality acting and good direction will always trump big budget special effects. Not that I think the acting and direction of the 2013 film were bad, but I prefer real things to remain real. The 2013 film used too much (for my liking) hyperbole, caricature and special effects for things that did not need them. I think that's Baz Luhrmann's style (cf. Strictly Ballroom, Moulin Rouge!).
 
Watched "The Color Purple" yesterday for the 5th or 6th time.. I still rate it as one of the best movies ever made.
 
cerebus said:
If you enjoy something that is universally deemed by critics to be an awful movie, it's a fairly safe bet that your taste is questionable.
Click to expand...

And critics have universally raved about movies that sucked balls. Actually critics taste generally tend to be questionable. I prefer to make up my own mind :)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X