|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 22, 2017 13:11:59 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 7, 2017 2:40:46 GMT
Ouch! It made me laugh! By the way the first version of the original Blade Runner I watched was the director’s cut and I loved it then years later I watched the one originally released on theatres in the 80’s and I hated it! I couldn’t believe it was the one considered a classic! I hated the explanations in the voice over! It was much better without someone saying you what was happening!
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Oct 7, 2017 7:40:51 GMT
The new Blade Runner has been getting fabulous reviews so I don't think it's going to have any problems at the box office. It seems to have all the things I hate in movies, so I definitely won't be seeing it, though.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 10, 2017 16:51:14 GMT
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Oct 10, 2017 19:49:55 GMT
That's an interesting article. I, myself, wouldn't be swayed by a RT score. I use RT to look for reviews by film critics that I respect, even if I disagree with them. In the old days, I relied on Siskel and Ebert discussing movies every Sunday evening, and the occasional review in our local paper. An enthusiastic review might convince me to see a movie I would have otherwise skipped, but a negative review could never keep me from a movie I really want to see.
Even if Martin Scorsese thinks it's a masterpiece, I would never see "mother" because I don't like Jennifer Lawrence. One of the comments at the end of the article brought up the point that most people don't really understand what the RT scores mean. The example given was that if every review gives a movie 6/10, it's declared 100% Fresh even though 6/10 is just so-so.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 10, 2017 22:34:28 GMT
It's still a dumb system that encourage consensus. I haven't watched mother but the nature of the movie is that it was always destined to be a divisive movie. Revolutionary movies tend to be divisive because they are different but review aggregators reward uniformity. We can also mentioned The Child in Time which it's not necessarily revolutionary but it's different to anything on prime time BBC. It was acclaimed by some but let perplexed to others. How do you measure those reactions?
I also agreed with the not informed opinions which I think are exacerbated by social media reactions. It seems that the first reactions by professional pseudo critics are gaining more relevance every day. They are paid but most of them aren't even good in their work but hey! They are the first ones. So it's the hungry ones for wining the scoop who are now the tastemakers! Then compare it with OG article posted in the OP about how he has seen professional critics checking Twitter to see reactions to decide if they liked something or not before give an opinion and the situation sound pathetic!
|
|
|
Post by roverpup on Oct 10, 2017 23:17:38 GMT
These two statements are the truth and need to be repeated often!
Good for Scorsese for so clearly defining what the problem is with film “criticism” today. The first statement fits so perfectly with so many absolutely wonderful films that have been brutally skewered by loudmouths with a keyboard who are taken as seriously sometimes as skilled, educated, professional film critics who have some more to offer than just “an opinion” in their analysis of a piece of work.
And the second remark is so spot on as well. A lot of the “reviews” on site like those mentioned are written by people with no knowledge of films and axes to grind. They are also after shock value for “clicks” and to be first on the scene for a “scoop”.
:-))
|
|
|
Post by queenzod on Oct 10, 2017 23:36:37 GMT
So, in some ways, it appears with all the rush to judgement, that we are existing in a post-critique world. Informed, considered critique is dead. Rely on your own judgement.
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Oct 11, 2017 2:03:15 GMT
There are still great critics out there but the Internet created a world in which everyone could be a critic which sounded like a great democratization but it didn’t ended well. The same but actually much worst with political ideas!
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Dec 20, 2017 14:46:37 GMT
It seems Twitter just discovered Rex Reed! LOL. He reviewed The Shape of Water (one star out of five) and mixed the names of Guillermo Del Toro with Benicio in the section with the credits of the movie, wrote Benicio Del Toro name wrong; in the actual text he says Del Toro is Spanish; awfully he described a mute woman as "mentally handicap"; again it seems he didn't understand the plot, etc.
It's awful but actually not new and what surprise me (or maybe not!), it's all those persons calling him senile, making fun of his age and asking for his retirement! Really? He has ALWAYS been like that! Why to blame his age? Weren't people on Twitter worried about all kind of discrimination?
|
|