|
I haven't been reading these for a while, but I was interested to know what was up with Big Bad Wolves. I know these are supposed to be more serious reviews but, since this is a comedy website, I still expected there to be some actual jokes? There is the occasional pithy remark, but I distinctly remember these reviews maintaining some sense of humor "back in the day". Again, these are more serious reviews of movies, but this is still a comedy website, and it really doesn't seem to gel with the rest of the really, clearly funny content it shares space with on the front page. Is there something I'm missing here? Surely you can write worthwhile reviews that still contain good laughs, fitting in with the rest of the front page content while also setting it apart from the million other reviews on the internet?
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
Well I find the CR jokes to be pretty funny, but what sets them apart from the million other reviews on the internet is that they are actually good reviews of films as well.
|
|
#
?
Jan 27, 2014 23:45
|
|
|
I was laughing pretty hard at the I Frankenstein review. I don't think there's a better way to write a funny review of that movie than to just describe what's actually happening, which is something most serious critics seem averse to.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
BeanTaco posted:I haven't been reading these for a while, but I was interested to know what was up with Big Bad Wolves. I know these are supposed to be more serious reviews but, since this is a comedy website, I still expected there to be some actual jokes? There is the occasional pithy remark, but I distinctly remember these reviews maintaining some sense of humor "back in the day". Again, these are more serious reviews of movies, but this is still a comedy website, and it really doesn't seem to gel with the rest of the really, clearly funny content it shares space with on the front page. Is there something I'm missing here? Surely you can write worthwhile reviews that still contain good laughs, fitting in with the rest of the front page content while also setting it apart from the million other reviews on the internet?
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 05:00
|
|
|
BeanTaco posted:I haven't been reading these for a while... Did you catch this one? http://www.somethingawful.com/current-movie-reviews/catching-fire-dallas/1/ Catching Fire review posted:In an early scene, Capitol stormtroopers force the humble citizens of District 12 into the center of town, build a pyre of their belongings and set it on fire. "What a great way to communicate the horrors of the Holocaust to a generation of kids who care less about reading books than ever before," I remarked. Modulating his anger into a stage whisper, he told me the Holocaust was a grand lie designed to besmirch the greatest leader the world had ever seen. I looked back at Mordecai, who grimaced. Montague took another hit of ether.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 07:48
|
|
|
BeanTaco posted:I haven't been reading these for a while, but I was interested to know what was up with Big Bad Wolves. I know these are supposed to be more serious reviews but, since this is a comedy website, I still expected there to be some actual jokes? There is the occasional pithy remark, but I distinctly remember these reviews maintaining some sense of humor "back in the day". Again, these are more serious reviews of movies, but this is still a comedy website, and it really doesn't seem to gel with the rest of the really, clearly funny content it shares space with on the front page. Is there something I'm missing here? Surely you can write worthwhile reviews that still contain good laughs, fitting in with the rest of the front page content while also setting it apart from the million other reviews on the internet? Not every movie deserves a jokey review. Would you want one like that for Schindler's List? 
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 07:48
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:Did you catch this one? OK, now that it's been two months since I've seen Catching Fire and I'm not looking for analysis of it anymore, I have to admit that was pretty funny. edit: maybe in May I'll have a similar reappraisal of the one for August : Osage County. Some Guy TT fucked around with this message at 09:35 on Jan 28, 2014 |
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 09:33
|
|
|
The August: Osage County review is joke enough for the month, honestly.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 15:15
|
|
|
Some Guy TT posted:I was laughing pretty hard at the I Frankenstein review. I don't think there's a better way to write a funny review of that movie than to just describe what's actually happening, which is something most serious critics seem averse to. It's a cardinal sin to overload a review with too much plot summary. You'll go to the circle of Hell reserved for lovely film critics, where demons will poke your eyes out with erasers for the rest of eternity.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 16:53
|
|
|
In all fairness, I've always kinda felt that if you can't summarize the plot of a movie in one paragraph, either you're doing something wrong or the movie is. I also give very little fucks about major spoilers, so I sometimes give too much o a movie away, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 17:15
|
|
|
I appreciate that you all say what's in a movie because I can make a better decision about seeing it. My favorite example is Ian's review of 2012 where he summarizes the entire plot. I remember hearing from other people then that there was a huge twist, that you have to see it. I read the review and found out it was stupid poo poo.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 18:43
|
|
|
In my humble opinion current releases strikes the balance just right between being funny and offering critique of current movies. I don't always agree with their conclusions, but I respect how they arrived at them and that's what you want out of a good critic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 28, 2014 22:22
|
|
|
elpintogrande posted:In my humble opinion current releases strikes the balance just right between being funny and offering critique of current movies. I don't always agree with their conclusions, but I respect how they arrived at them and that's what you want out of a good critic.
|
|
#
?
Jan 30, 2014 16:06
|
|
|
All I really have to say about this week's reviews is that Imogen Poots is a pretty unbelievable name to have.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 08:23
|
|
|
Chairman Capone posted:All I really have to say about this week's reviews is that Imogen Poots is a pretty unbelievable name to have. Other things I took from the reviews: -I had a hard time following the review for Labor Day, imagine if I actually wanted to watch that garbage. -I thought at this point in his career, Brendan Fraser was doing movies for his kids.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 11:13
|
|
|
That last review literally drove me to tears. Been a whiole since I laughed this hard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 15:15
|
|
N. Senada posted:Did you catch this one? I don't get this joke. Is the feminist slant supposed to be some sort of ironic stab at postmodernist criticism?
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 16:54
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:If you can make it in Hollywood with a name like "Imogen Poots," then I can become president. There were so many terrible things about Labor Day that I honestly struggled to pick and choose what to talk about. I feel like I barely scratched the surface.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 17:36
|
|
|
"Doing movies for my kids" is code for "Doing whatever movies someone is willing to offer me." Also, I feel like Brendan Fraser and Nathan Fillian are in a race to see who can get doughiest the fastest.
|
|
#
?
Feb 2, 2014 17:56
|
|
|
Y-Hat posted:If you can make it in Hollywood with a name like "Imogen Poots," then I can become president. I'm a juvenile little poo poo because I looked her up and saw her full name was Imogen Gay Poots, and I choked from laughing so hard.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 02:26
|
|
|
John Dyne posted:I'm a juvenile little poo poo because I looked her up and saw her full name was Imogen Gay Poots
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 08:46
|
|
|
Vargo posted:Also, I feel like Brendan Fraser and Nathan Fillian are in a race to see who can get doughiest the fastest. Oh man, this forever I finally watched "You're Next", because of the CR review It's got some real good black comedy, and the best logic for defending your actions: "I would have never tried to kill you if I had known you would be so good at defending yourself!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 04:32
|
|
|
Vesi posted:The Humpback of Notre Dame remake could be some hot bodybuilder dude with massive traps Hey, anything's better than that animated Disney version made back in the 1990s. Not that it didn't have its moments...
|
|
#
?
Feb 6, 2014 02:35
|
|
|
HonkyDong posted:I don't get this joke. Is the feminist slant supposed to be some sort of ironic stab at postmodernist criticism? Number 36 posted:Oh man, this forever Keanu Grieves fucked around with this message at 08:54 on Feb 9, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 08:51
|
|
|
If I can't convince anybody to go see LEGO Movie with me, I don't think I can see it. A man sitting by himself watching a children's movie is not a man I want to be.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 16:46
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:If I can't convince anybody to go see LEGO Movie with me, I don't think I can see it. A man sitting by himself watching a children's movie is not a man I want to be. Eh, just do it! Sure you'll be this guy but you'll still see a cool movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 16:52
|
|
|
N. Senada posted:If I can't convince anybody to go see LEGO Movie with me, I don't think I can see it. A man sitting by himself watching a children's movie is not a man I want to be. That is a man I have to be frequently. Sure, I have the excuse that it's my job, but really here's the crucial thing: No one cares about what movie you're watching. Sit in the back if you have to. (Unless you think that makes it worse.) But you're in a dark room, no one cares or will even notice. Alternatively, you could just show all your friends my review and convince them to see the movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 16:58
|
|
|
I went by myself and I was not the only one either. The theater was half full, and most of the people were there by themselves with no children. No one is going to begrudge an adult seeing a movie about Legos by the directors of 21 Jump Street.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 18:01
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:I went by myself and I was not the only one either. The theater was half full, and most of the people were there by themselves with no children. Nerrrrrrrrrrrds.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 22:15
|
|
|
TheBigBudgetSequel posted:I went by myself and I was not the only one either. The theater was half full, and most of the people were there by themselves with no children.
|
|
#
?
Feb 9, 2014 22:36
|
|
|
Keanu Grieves posted:Pedophiles, Donny. I did find it odd that they asked me if I wanted candy.
|
|
#
?
Feb 10, 2014 16:11
|
|
|
Take an extra jacket with you and put it in the seat next to yours, as if a buddy of yours set it down and went to the washroom/concessions. For added effect, play around with your phone right before the movie starts and whisper to yourself just loud enough for people near you to hear, "Man, where is Phil? He's gonna miss the start of the movie!"
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 13:34
|
|
|
I would much rather be the guy at the movie by himself than the guy at the movie by himself pretending he has friends.
|
|
#
?
Feb 11, 2014 14:26
|
|
|
I'm really disappointed Vargo didn't like Feral more, as that was my favorite animated short from last years Sundance. I also feel the need to point out that while it looks traditionally animated, according to the Q+A I saw it was somehow done in Flash.
|
|
#
?
Feb 16, 2014 19:59
|
|
|
I think the best part of that Korean Robocop advert was that it used the Back to the Future 3 theme music? https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cAOypL96dRw
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 13:45
|
|
|
Did that Minority Report imply Robocop 2 was less than great? Egads!
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:09
|
|
|
Yeah, most of RoboCop 2 is straight up dogshit.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 17:21
|
|
|
RoboCop 2 is only good when compared to RoboCop 3.
|
|
#
?
Feb 17, 2014 20:04
|
|
|
But the premise behind RoboCop 2 is sterling.
|
|
#
?
Feb 23, 2014 00:25
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 2, 2024 20:36 |
|
|
Regarding Jay Dub's reviews of The Wind Rises, I like the idea that Miyazaki wrote a film about how he kind of hates anime even though he loves writing about it. However, I think making the metaphor only about anime is a bit limiting. I regularly read Animation Magazine, because one of the libraries I go to stocks it and I'm probably the only person who can read it so I do. This is a trade magazine for animators, so basically all the articles are fluff pieces for new animated films. Like, the filmmakers will brag about the creative process behind the Nut Job, praise the family driven morals of Despicable Me 2, and talk about how good a job they're doing engaging children for Walking With Dinosaurs 3D. It was right after reading the article for the last one (the only movie mentioned in this post I'v actually seen) that I got to the piece on The Wind Rises, and it just sort of hit me. These people are Horikoshi. They love animation, and they love making animated movies, even if they're not very good at it, and they're just doing their darnedest to hide or obfuscate the terrible messages these narratives actually have for children by cloaking it in creativity so they have a nice protective bubble for when the critics get around to panning it. Assuming they ever do. It's a movie I really need to see, because the review has convinced me this is a movie about the dark side of what the creative process actually produces. Which is something nearly everyone seems to hate discussing in movies. And I doubt that many people are actually going to read it that way because of course none of us are as terrible as Imperial Japan but still. I think I'd really like it.
|
|
#
?
Mar 3, 2014 02:16
|
|