|
|
Post by MagdaFR on May 21, 2017 11:38:34 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 21, 2017 12:00:28 GMT
I hope it's good, of course but until now it's just award pundits doing wild predictions based in short clips. I remember The Playlist saying Suite Francaise was the most interesting looking movie and surely the one with more award potential at a Weinstein event in Cannes. TIG didn't seem "interesting" ("just people talking mathematics" or something like that) in the same event. The big question now is Weinstein actually released Suite Francaise at theatres at all in the USA? If I remember well they went directly for a TV release!
I don't remember if it was in the same year but I also rember a "critic" claiming Kirstin Scott Thomas would be a supporting actress Academy nominee based in a few minutes of Only God Forgives. The prediction died the next day when the whole movie was officially projected! She wasn't bad but the movie was not the typical Oscar material and the response by the real critics (not award pundits!) was divided.
I don't know if Weinstein still have their annual event. Maybe they would show some The Current War material but negative or positive we shouldn't trust the reactions at all! It's just some journalists trying to post click-baiting headlines based in their "awards speciality" but without actually having watched the whole product.
I thought Weinstein was the only producer of Mary Magdalene, by the way!
|
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on May 21, 2017 13:55:57 GMT
I hope it's good, of course but until now it's just award pundits doing wild predictions based in short clips. On awardswatch they are saying it isn't going to be good because of the tweets. I think they are divided between their liking of Phoenix and their hate for Harvey Weinstein and their despise of any movie which is a "tearjerker", as think is Lion. I think they didn't watch Lion, btw. The question is, if Phoenix is going to be pushed or not as lead actor for awards or not, because if not, then BC could be and, though I don't care for awards, I like pictures and videos of BC. I'm shallow. I thought Weinstein was the only producer of Mary Magdalene, by the way! Focus/Universal has the distributiopn in Europe and worldwide. |
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 21, 2017 14:07:36 GMT
How can they predict something based in tweets? Tweets by people who haven't even watched the whole movie!
was telling a friend the other day how "Twitter movie critics" liked Wonder Woman and I couldn't stop referring them as "Twitter movie critics" because it seems to me that their biggest achievement is being the first to tell if something it's good or not. They aren't talented enough to wait and write a formal review they just want to be quoted in the first reactions click bait articles! A few years ago people used criticize people like Peter Traver for being the king of critics quoted in movie posters and trailers. Well, Twitter critics are even worst! Their quotes aren't even part of a formal review! Also I hated myself for wait for the first reactions about Doctor Strange when the embargo ended! They were good but the formal reviews by real professionals were even better!
|
|
|
|
Post by MagdaFR on May 21, 2017 14:41:20 GMT
How can they predict something based in tweets? Tweets by people who haven't even watched the whole movie! I know, I know. It is not that I believe them, anyway I can hope. Some of the twitter movie critics are also critics somewhere else, like David Ehrlich from Indiwire. I think that having the possibility of an almost live reaction is tempting for the writer and the audience. First reactions are kind of sincere (if you are honest), like from your gut. If you have time you can rationalize why you didn't or did like something, make excuses, be influenced by others. |
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on May 21, 2017 15:33:30 GMT
IMO gut reactions aren't good for quality criticism. Thoughful reviews are better. Critics should be capable of expressing why they hated or loved something. Also the Twitter format isn't good. It's the opposite of depth. A thump up or down system without any context.
I don't doubt a few reviewers who enjoy to post their first impression are good but most of them are just fanboys. I admire some of them (people like Scott Foundas sometime do this when he goes to festivals although he is not the ones who wait for embargoes to end and remember a polemic a few years ago when I think A.O. Scott was bother by a studio using one of his tweets in the publicity. I think some serious critics stopped to do it when they understood the consequences for their way of life) But the vast majority are comic book or award/cinema fanboys and IMO it's just about wanting some attention for themselves.
|
|
|
|
Post by queenzod on May 23, 2017 0:44:24 GMT
I'm not religious in any way, but it really irks me how Mary M. Has been portrayed for centuries as a prostitute when she was nothing of the sort. She was an enlightened person (according to some gospels), educated and with a following of her own. But, no, a bunch of men from eons ago decided because she was a woman, she's a whore. *seethes*
|
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Jun 2, 2017 2:06:25 GMT
So it seems there wasn't a Weinstein event this year. I'm not surprised considering he announced one or two years ago that they would do fewer movies. Probably it's better so we wouldn't see too much award pundits' speculation...at least until the first trailer!
|
|
