|
Ian "ProfessorClumsy" Maddison posted:If I were to adapt Little Red Riding Hood for modern audiences I think I'd attempt to make it into a subtle comedy of etiquette wherein the young girl is desperately trying to appease he grandmother and not offend her with observations of how wolf-like her appearance has become of late. Then the wolf would get all belligerent about how it take its tea and the whole thing would lead to some hilarious misunderstandings. I would totally watch this. British cast, a 1920's feel, the young flapper from the city trying not to upset her straight-laced, old-money, country grandmother...
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2011 16:05
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
My Younger Sister, concerning Red Riding Hood posted:It was so good! A big part of the movie is this mystery over who the wolf is, and they keep you guessing right 'til the end. It's a big surprise when it's finally revealed!
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2011 20:22
|
|
|
Senior Woodchuck posted:Wow, I figured Mars Needs Moms would be terrible, but I just thought aesthetically, not philosophically. Yeah, that really was a shock. Given the comments about how far apart the film is from Breathed's book, I can only hope there was nothing like that in there; I haven't seen the book, and I'll admit I'm not that familiar with his work in general, but from everything I know about Breathed, I can't imagine that he would have a message like that in there.
|
|
#
?
Mar 13, 2011 20:58
|
|
|
Schwarzwald posted:I kind of agree with this sentiment, though. Both from the trailer and the inevitable comparisons against Twilight I was expecting the "mystery" element to be a complete sham that would get dropped in the first half-hour, but they actually do play it up and try to get you guessing so you have something to think about while all of the nothing-else-interesting is going on. The ultimate reveal was kind of weak--does every goddamn movie with a mystery or twist really need to explain itself with some character blatantly feeding us exposition over flashbacks?--but I thought it was a good attempt.
|
|
#
?
Mar 15, 2011 03:07
|
|
|
Vargo, I read the Mars Needs Moms review and was suitably outraged at the message involved, but now I've read the thread over in CI about how terribly it bombed and it gives me some faith in humanity back 
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 00:06
|
|
|
Nucular Carmul posted:Vargo, I read the Mars Needs Moms review and was suitably outraged at the message involved, but now I've read the thread over in CI about how terribly it bombed and it gives me some faith in humanity back And as a bonus, it looks like they're going to pull the plug on Zemeckis's remake of Yellow Submarine. Happy endings for everyone!
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 01:25
|
|
|
Nucular Carmul posted:Vargo, I read the Mars Needs Moms review and was suitably outraged at the message involved, but now I've read the thread over in CI about how terribly it bombed and it gives me some faith in humanity back I was upset that I was the only one talking about the message, then I saw that. Looks like not talking about it was the way to go.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 02:14
|
|
|
Senior Woodchuck posted:And as a bonus, it looks like they're going to pull the plug on Zemeckis's remake of Yellow Submarine. Happy endings for everyone! I had no idea such I think was a thing until just now, but I still feel greatly relieved hearing that it was canceled.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 06:27
|
|
|
Zemeckis is shopping Yellow Submarine to other studios now, apparently, so it's not totally gone yet.
|
|
#
?
Mar 16, 2011 07:03
|
|
|
That Movie of the Week graphic looks pretty nice.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2011 12:21
|
|
|
I find the tone of these reviews enjoyable but also odd in that less than a year ago we had a front page feature run by a guy who constantly used "gay loving human being" as an insult without the tiniest hint of irony and seemed to perfectly embody all of the hella edgey aspects of SA and now suddenly we have... this. It feels as if SA has a huge identity crisis now.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2011 20:06
|
|
|
ProfessorClumsy posted:That Movie of the Week graphic looks pretty nice. I agree.
|
|
#
?
Mar 21, 2011 22:16
|
|
|
Raymondo Person posted:I find the tone of these reviews enjoyable but also odd in that less than a year ago we had a front page feature run by a guy who constantly used "gay loving human being" as an insult without the tiniest hint of irony and seemed to perfectly embody all of the hella edgey aspects of SA and now suddenly we have... this. It feels as if SA has a huge identity crisis now. The fifteen year olds who were here when the site was first started are now like 27. It's been happening for a long time, the demographic is growing up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 11:58
|
|
|
I'm not sure I would mind if Current Releases let me know whether, for example, Bradley Cooper is a gay loving human being. Might spice things up.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 13:38
|
|
|
I'll take these things into consideration this week, because Sucker Punch looks completely loving stupid.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 14:46
|
|
|
Jay Dub posted:I'll take these things into consideration this week, because Sucker Punch looks completely loving stupid. YOU look loving stupid. 
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 16:08
|
|
|
Martman posted:I'm not sure I would mind if Current Releases let me know whether, for example, Bradley Cooper is a gay loving human being. Might spice things up. We could edit it in.
|
|
#
?
Mar 22, 2011 22:43
|
|
|
Nucular Carmul posted:The fifteen year olds who were here when the site was first started are now like 27. It's been happening for a long time, the demographic is growing up.  " as if that made any difference at all.It's like SA is constantly going back and forth between stuff like that and Current Releases which are like... polar opposites. Raymondo Person fucked around with this message at 04:33 on Mar 23, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 04:30
|
|
|
Current Releases is certainly a big departure for Something Awful, but the support we're getting from Garbage Day, as well as generally positive responses from readers (with a few exceptions), suggest we're definitely going in the right direction with this. I'm really starting to feel lately that more people are taking us seriously as critics and getting over the whole "this is on somethingawful.com?" reaction.
|
|
#
?
Mar 23, 2011 11:52
|
|
|
It's not just us. I think there's a small outpost of mature satire on the front page in the past year. Hell, I think the Levi Johnson stuff is hilarious. And these two pieces by Zack Parsons are both brilliant.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2011 06:56
|
|
|
Just want to pipe in and say your reviews all make my morning, I read them right in-between my first two classes of the day. And I agree with the Mars Needs Moms thing, I was pretty put off by the idea of it and was glad to see I wasn't the only one who noticed.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2011 08:15
|
|
|
Senior Woodchuck posted:Wow, I figured Mars Needs Moms would be terrible, but I just thought aesthetically, not philosophically. See this is why I love current releases. I would never go watch Mars Needs Moms but now I know it's a technically and morally abominable movie, something that I wouldnt probably get from most other reviewers. Raymondo Person posted:I find the tone of these reviews enjoyable but also odd in that less than a year ago we had a front page feature run by a guy who constantly used "gay loving human being" as an insult without the tiniest hint of irony and seemed to perfectly embody all of the hella edgey aspects of SA and now suddenly we have... this. It feels as if SA has a huge identity crisis now. There is definitely a split between the "you should make fun of everything nothing matters" crowd and the more liberal minded people who care about cultural stuff like not using gay/racist slurs or what kind of message does a kids movie have. babypolis fucked around with this message at 10:08 on Mar 24, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2011 10:03
|
|
|
niggapolis posted:
Let us all hope then that Diary of a Wimpy Kid: Roderick Rules is deeply anti-semitic. I sure am.
|
|
#
?
Mar 24, 2011 16:57
|
|
|
Vargo posted:I'd actually like to hear more about this idea. Do other people feel this way? What exactly is it that make it seem out of place with the rest of the site? It just feels out of step with what something awful does/is. Now, SA is a lot of things to a lot of people, but an outlet for movie reviews really doesn't feel like one of them, especially as straight laced and serious as these. I've been on the forums for a long time and a pretty avid reader of the front page, and what I've come to understand about SA is that it is deeply, deeply in the counter-culture side of things. SA triumphs the bizarre, it pigeonholes the normal, and in a brilliant blend of absurdity and farce gives us a view of the world that feels at once deeply detached and yet pressed right up against reality. Something Awful has always been about being unique and poo-pooing the mainstream. SA blazes its own trail. To do what rotten tomatoes or film drunk does isn't unique and just feels, to be honest, lazy. Plus, the reviews aren't generally very funny and on occasion the advice isn't that great. I saw the green hornet on current releases' word, and I have to say, I wish I'd seen something else. Now about that humor, for the front page of a comedy website, humor's got to be an important part. In the more juvenile days, there was truthmedia, which would print phony reviews loaded with spelling errors and plot inconsistencies just to elicit the scorn and hatemail of angry nerds. SA would then turn around and print the flamemail, revealing how pathetic and sad these people's lives were when they took the time to write an angry letter about a review that was clearly fake. It was a nice little commentary on internet culture. So, if the front page is the tip of SA's spear, then it has to be dipped in the signature SA poison: a blend of wit, sarcasm, and parody. For frank discussion and exchange of ideas, there's always been a place for it on the forums, where it lives quite comfortably side by side with SA's unique brand of highjinks and humor. I guess I'd just expect more Plinket, less Ebert. The Ace fucked around with this message at 00:59 on Mar 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 00:56
|
|
|
The Ace posted:SA has a long, long history of reviewing things, and, yes, Current Releases is probably the least funny, least spiteful, and most sincere of these features, but the difference isn't as great as you're making it out to be, and to a certain extent the change does reflect the changing tastes of a certain subset of the community. Plus, I think the uniqueness/subversiveness that you're lamenting as missing is still there; I know when I watched Skyline recently, a movie with 17% on rotten tomatoes, I did so with the absolutely glowing SA review of it in the back of my mind the whole time and had a lot of fun that maybe I wouldn't have had otherwise. I think people are just weirded out by Current Releases because it's not super mean and elitist like the music reviews generally are, silly like the video game articles generally are, or steeped in loathing like the old school hentai/awful game/awful movie reviews were. That doesn't mean it's not Good. King of Bleh fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Mar 25, 2011 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 03:35
|
|
|
King of Bleh posted:SA has a long, long history of reviewing things, and, yes, Current Releases is probably the least funny, least spiteful, and most sincere of these features, but the difference isn't as great as you're making it out to be, and to a certain extent the change does reflect the changing tastes of a certain subset of the community. Trust me, we're acutely aware of this. It's not easy trying to marry the SA brand of humor and serious film criticism, and sometimes we may not make it work, but it's an ongoing experiment that we enjoy doing and some people seem to enjoy reading. Where I think The Ace is wrong is that, yes, we do still try to poke holes in our own corner of the internet. Look at how often we call out "real" film critics for doing some of the stupid poo poo they tend to do. Taking potshots at blurb-whoring critics like Peter Travers and Ben Lyons is kind of our thing. Sure, we could probably call Vince Vaughn an assbutt more often, but would that really make what we do any funnier or more thoughtful? (It might, what do I know?) I try not to say a whole lot in this thread because I don't want to give the impression that I'm desperate for attention, but this is the kind of feedback that really keeps us focused. We appreciate it, really (you too, The Ace).
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 04:28
|
|
|
I think Lauren Kyanka's recent flashtubs are a pretty good example of the range that SA can pull off. However, I do see how some people can feel that SA is "supposed" to be about comedy above all, regardless of whether it's edgy or straightforward or what.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 04:50
|
|
|
Jay Dub posted:Sure, we could probably call Vince Vaughn an assbutt more often, but would that really make what we do any funnier or more thoughtful? (It might, what do I know?) I once started a review with "gently caress you, Jennifer Aniston." Does that count? I do post a lot in this thread (the most, actually) but that's because as "The New Guy" I really feel like I've got the most to prove here, and I thrive on feedback. (Also, I'm a self-promoting rear end in a top hat) I do think it's possible to do the SA style and make genuine statements. Zack Parsons' stuff I mentioned above is kind of what I strive for, but with, y'know, more words. I don't know, would it be funnier to call actors assdouches more often, or write on why movies that everyone loves suck rear end? "The King's Speech is a bunch of Brit fags, and I don't mean what those cocks call cigarettes. They're cigareetes, you fucks. Speak English." We do fly against popular opinion pretty often, and maybe we could hammer in the funny when we do that. It's also true that our work's humor depends entirely on what we have to work with. Some movies just aren't as good about providing material as others. Honestly, sometimes with films like Limitless, there just isn't much to say. Hopefully Sucker Punch and Diary of A Wimpy Kid will provide good ammo this week.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 07:12
|
|
|
The Ace posted:It just feels out of step with what something awful does/is. Now, SA is a lot of things to a lot of people, but an outlet for movie reviews really doesn't feel like one of them, especially as straight laced and serious as these. I've been on the forums for a long time and a pretty avid reader of the front page, and what I've come to understand about SA is that it is deeply, deeply in the counter-culture side of things. SA triumphs the bizarre, it pigeonholes the normal, and in a brilliant blend of absurdity and farce gives us a view of the world that feels at once deeply detached and yet pressed right up against reality. My god, that's a lot to put on a silly little website. Have you considered basing your happiness around something more, I don't know, important?
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 15:57
|
|
|
The Ace posted:It just feels out of step with what something awful does/is. Now, SA is a lot of things to a lot of people, but an outlet for movie reviews really doesn't feel like one of them, especially as straight laced and serious as these. I've been on the forums for a long time and a pretty avid reader of the front page, and what I've come to understand about SA is that it is deeply, deeply in the counter-culture side of things. SA triumphs the bizarre, it pigeonholes the normal, and in a brilliant blend of absurdity and farce gives us a view of the world that feels at once deeply detached and yet pressed right up against reality.
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2011 16:38
|
|
|
Would it satisfy everyone if I turned my Diary of a Wimpy Kid review into an essay about how much I hate my mother?
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2011 06:42
|
|
|
Honestly I don't really think every SA writer needs to be needlessly bitter about everything, sneak in unrelated complaints about furries and anime in every entry or be ironically offensive to truly "belong" here but I do think everything could be presented in a more unique way beyond just having different views, praising movies that most critics hated and whatnot. They're technically good reviews but I think they need some kind of unique aspect to them in order to be remembered as more than just "those normal reviews that seem out of place on SA"... as for what that aspect should be, I honestly don't know. But basically I think they need some kind of reasonably memorable defining trait.niggapolis posted:There is definitely a split between the "you should make fun of everything nothing matters" crowd and the more liberal minded people who care about cultural stuff like not using gay/racist slurs or what kind of message does a kids movie have. Unless he's gay and also physically & mentally disabled then I'm not sure how that attitude is not totally hypocritical.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2011 19:56
|
|
|
Raymondo Person posted:They're technically good reviews but I think they need some kind of unique aspect to them in order to be remembered as more than just "those normal reviews that seem out of place on SA"... as for what that aspect should be, I honestly don't know. But basically I think they need some kind of reasonably memorable defining trait. How do you feel about the Donovan Laird/Montague Smythe character reviews? I have a character in the works as well.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2011 22:16
|
|
|
King of Bleh posted:Plus, I think the uniqueness/subversiveness that you're lamenting as missing is still there; I know when I watched Skyline recently, a movie with 17% on rotten tomatoes, I did so with the absolutely glowing SA review of it in the back of my mind the whole time and had a lot of fun that maybe I wouldn't have had otherwise. The Skyline review is the only thing that made that thing tolerable as I watched it with friends. So if nothing else, thanks to ProfessorClumsy for that.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2011 09:14
|
|
|
Gyges posted:The Skyline review is the only thing that made that thing tolerable as I watched it with friends. So if nothing else, thanks to ProfessorClumsy for that. I'm still proud of that review.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2011 16:53
|
|
|
I'd like to thank Vargo for asking me to write the foreward to his upcoming tell-all memoir Making Babies with Vargo. Lord knows he didn't have to, especially after completely ignoring my advice on not making babies with strange women in truckstop bathrooms.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2011 18:37
|
|
|
Vargo posted:How do you feel about the Donovan Laird/Montague Smythe character reviews? I have a character in the works as well. Smythe is awesome. I can't remember which review it was but he said something about chasing evildoers around while naked and since they ran away they were clearly guilty. Donovan Laird is great, especially to review movies you know is going to be poo poo/ no one is going to take seriously anyway.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 15:22
|
|
|
I like you guys. Please keep doing what you're doing.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 15:33
|
|
|
Jay Dub posted:I'd like to thank Vargo for asking me to write the foreward to his upcoming tell-all memoir Making Babies with Vargo. Lord knows he didn't have to, especially after completely ignoring my advice on not making babies with strange women in truckstop bathrooms. Those weren't women, they were congressmen.
|
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2011 18:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 22:47 |
|
|
When you get down to it, I think that Current Releases is a good fit for the SA front page because it still manages to be humorous in addition to being a good source for movie reviews, and the first thing that comes to mind when I think of SA is "humor." As for this week's batch of reviews, comparing jump scares to "FWD: FWD: FWD: SCROLL DOWN FOR SCARY!!!" emails is brilliant and I don't know why no one has made that comparison before. I was a little confused about why Insidious had a higher score than Source Code, though. Vargo said that the last part of Insidious was terrible, while ProfessorClumsy didn't seem to put the ending of Source Code on that level.
|
|
#
?
Apr 3, 2011 09:14
|
|
