Do not take me bad dude, but you really gotta broaden your concepts if you think anime is just "child cartoon" and filled with over-the-top stuff.
I have an inkling that's the impression most people here have. I know there's good anime out there like this one and other assorted shows like Full Metal Alchemist and Bleach. And absolutely anything by Miyazaki. Spirited Away and Howl's Moving Castle were absolutely beautiful. It's not that I believe that anime is mostly cheesy crap like Pokemon and Yu-Gi-Oh, but I know that's what most people think. I was trying to make it sound as though this show deserves attention, and not to be overlooked just because people think of that sort of thing when they think of anime. Film critics are total snobs.
Now I understand what you meant, the way you said it sound that you thought that way. And indeed, this kind of sad opinion is still around.
Yeah, it was my bad. I probably should have just made it clearer.
You can't generalize, Lukey. The problem of film criticism nowadays is the fact that everybody think that they can be opinionated regarding movies. So that's one of the reasons that you think that you think that critics are snobs. Real critics are not. Some of them spent years on research, have a huge cultural background. A critic is supposed to study a movie, not only watch it. That's the problem of Art in general. Everyone think they are entitled to have an opinion about it. While you are authorized to have an opinion, criticizing is very different. So it is not fair to call a film critic a snob. Snobs are people out there that think they understand about the subject while they don't. I'm a Film Grad and, for me, the amount of bullcrap that I read online regarding movies makes me want shoot myself (including here, on this forum). I also do know how much effort goes into a movie. Being on a movie studio is probably one of the most exhausting jobs around (I remember spending almost 3 days without sleeping when I was in University). Still... Unfortunately, effort is not a synonymous of quality.
Ah, I know it seems like I'm generalising, but I have great respect for the critics who can study films properly. The points you've made are exactly what I'm getting at, so we are on the same page. I can reword my original statement, and say that I think most film critics are snobs. I.e. the ones who actually critique films, rather than just have an opinion on it.
I just consider people like that to be so uncultured, and to act all haughty and uptight like that is what makes them a snob. I know it sounds like I generalise when I say stuff, but really it's just the Australian's famous ability to exaggerate coming out in me. XD
While I agree with Phineas, it goes the other way around too: People implying that critics are idiots in the comment sections when they disagree without even attempting to articulate their opinions. Often, however, they will refer to the critical consensus as proof that those who disagree are "wrong". What, are we sheep?
While Elysium stands nowhere near the brilliance of Neil Blomkamp's District 9, there's no denying that his gritty action pieces and wonderful set design has not diminished. The film is fast paced; as soon as it has started, the story gets going right away and doesn't stop to take a break from everything. I also loved the differences in colour palette between the battered Los Angeles and the richness of Elysium.
While I agree with Phineas, it goes the other way around too: People implying that critics are idiots in the comment sections when they disagree without even attempting to articulate their opinions. Often, however, they will refer to the critical consensus as proof that those who disagree are "wrong". What, are we sheep?
PJ. Why don't comment more in the forum? You have the best insights around here.
HOLY SHIT, I'm accelerated. This, THIS IS HOW A MOTHERFUCKING COMEDY IS DONE (yes, I'm looking at you, Adam Sandler). Being crass without being offensive, this movie is absolutely hilarious, over-the-top stuff with some pretty parodies of buddy cop movies. The performances of everyone are great, Jonah Hill as always is good in comedy roles, Brie Larson gives the movie a little heart, and Dave Franco gives a nice performance as a spoiled drug dealer. Oh yeah, Ice Cube, playing outside of his usual gangster roles, great too. But my surprise is without a doubt Channing Tatum. Dude seriously surprised me with how much comedy tone he has, not without mentioning the chemistry between him and Hill is brilliant. Oh yes, two genius cameos appear in this movie, not gonna spoil for anyone. ;D
Anyway, excellent movie, one of the best comedies I've seen in a good time.
8.5/10
P.S.: alright, not saying the movie was perfect, because there was one stuff in the end, one joke that was dumb, and the movie did not needed it. Apart from that, it was all really funny.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
I completely agree, and to put further praise on this great comedy, I have to say that this is the last true comedy film I have seen. I haven't seen anything since that has kept me laughing throughout.
Too bad that Brie Larson won't be back. She said that her character is practically non-existent on the sequel. Also, she looks like Claudia from Grounded For Life.
It's releasing on the same day as How to Train Your Dragon 2, so June 13th, 2014, even with it being Friday the 13th, should be a great day for going to the cinema.
@Henrick have you seen Elysium yet? I'm planning on it this week and I remember us both commenting in anticipation of it. I'm very surprised by the mixed critical and audience reaction, I can't wait to see it for myself.
@Henrick have you seen Elysium yet? I'm planning on it this week and I remember us both commenting in anticipation of it. I'm very surprised by the mixed critical and audience reaction, I can't wait to see it for myself.
Watching it tomorrow probably, man! I'll let you know
While I agree with Phineas, it goes the other way around too: People implying that critics are idiots in the comment sections when they disagree without even attempting to articulate their opinions. Often, however, they will refer to the critical consensus as proof that those who disagree are "wrong". What, are we sheep?
Finally, something I agree with you on.
However, I'll counter that articulating an opinion in a comment section, of all places, where nobody gives a fuck, is probably a waste of time. In my eyes, anyway.
However, I'll counter that articulating an opinion in a comment section, of all places, where nobody gives a fuck, is probably a waste of time. In my eyes, anyway.
Well, yes, you do have a point. Nobody gives a fuck, but it might be productive in the sense that it makes you to reflect on a movie and you get better at articulating your opinions, which is quite useful in life. I would say that name calling is also a waste of time.
While I agree with Phineas, it goes the other way around too: People implying that critics are idiots in the comment sections when they disagree without even attempting to articulate their opinions. Often, however, they will refer to the critical consensus as proof that those who disagree are "wrong". What, are we sheep?
PJ. Why don't comment more in the forum? You have the best insights around here.
Thanks, I appreciate that. I have been quite busy lately and I gotta admit that I am not as enthusiastic anymore about commenting on forums as I used to be, but I do visit the forum from time to time.
Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters It's sad to see a movie that tries so hard every scene to deliver something good fail so hard in so many levels. There's some great humor spread across, but that's not nearly enough to make up for the senseless script flooded with the cheapest of genre clichés, which pretty much ignores dozens of estabilished characteristics from the previous film. Characters are dramatically changed and I won't even mention the source material because it's already estabilished that nothing but basics are taken from it. I wouldn't recommend this to kids or adventure fans, because there are far superior movies of the genre out there. 1/5
It's the opposite. The first one ignored lots of characteristics from the books and replacing it with cliches (the quest for the pearls, the underworld looking like hell, the battle with Luke, Annabeth acting like Clarisse).
The second one feels much more like the books, and with the characters acting like they should, and showing mythological creatures and persons in a present time (the Chariot of Damnation, Hermes, commercials). The way they explained the prophecy was lovely (and resembling the Tale of the Three Brothers). And this time, they established the tone for the next films (the prophecy, Thalia, Kronos being defeated to completely rise on the fourth film).
Unfortunely, the film suffers of the "Half-Blood Prince syndrome". They need to explain the missing stuff from the first film, and it makes the second one to have other missing stuff. They needed at least another hour to do things better. And which is why they did a film on it's own, but taking plot points and characters from the books.
They need to do something like in DH with the third movie.
It's the opposite. The first one ignored lots of characteristics from the books and replacing it with cliches (the quest for the pearls, the underworld looking like hell, the battle with Luke, Annabeth acting like Clarisse).
The second one feels much more like the books, and with the characters acting like they should, and showing mythological creatures and persons in a present time (the Chariot of Damnation, Hermes, commercials). The way they explained the prophecy was lovely (and resembling the Tale of the Three Brothers). And this time, they established the tone for the next films (the prophecy, Thalia, Kronos being defeated to completely rise on the fourth film).
Unfortunely, the film suffers of the "Half-Blood Prince syndrome". They need to explain the missing stuff from the first film, and it makes the second one to have other missing stuff. They needed at least another hour to do things better. And which is why they did a film on it's own, but taking plot points and characters from the books.
They need to do something like in DH with the third movie.
In a sequel, you can't go against what's estabilished in the first movie. As you said, Annabeth acted like Clarisse in the first one, and now in this one she's a bit more like the book's Annabeth. But what happened to the first movie's Annabeth? It's a matter of continuity. You don't estabilish a character in a movie and then make it a completely different person in the sequel. It doesn't matter if it's going closer to the book because despite being adaptations, movies are a thing of their own, especially in franchises, where the characters are expected to grow on their estabilished personality. And again, when you have such great source material to work with, why make a sequel out of a horrible adaptation? This became a generic adventure movie that overuses every cliché of the genre, from the "OMG he/she's dead... JK" trick to the overall character structure. Even the way they explained the prophecy was, while I don't like accusing, a complete Harry Porter ripoff. Despite all of this, I loved the humor they put in, it really worked for the film's benefit, but to me that was the only thing I took away from it.
They should've rebooted the franchise if they wanted to get things straight this time. Trying to fix in a second movie, breaking the continuity (which, in my opinion, was already broken by the 4-year gap between the movies), do put things in a strange path, mainly for non-fans of the book.
Anyway, this franchise is dead. I honestly can't see them greenlighting a sequel after the poor performance of the debut weekend.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
Good all round performances (Melanie Laurent makes me squee) and the cinematography conveys the grand sort of atmosphere of the show. I'm on the fence with the score though. One of those films that sucks you in effectively and delivers a spectacle well worth watching, but started to trail off around the third act. The final twist is kind of a weird shock that you have to suspend disbelief for in order for it to work properly until your second watch, which feels necessary to make it seem plausible. But then again this worked very well with the 'the closer you look' concept, so it does feel like a successful sleight of hand (hurr).
Elysium(Neill Blomkamp, 2013) While visually inventive, Elysium lacks the impact of the social criticism contained in District 9. It might be less pretentious, but the characters are basically caricatures - even Jodie Foster is over the top - and the script under looks character development and generates some embarrassing melodramatic moments. I was actually expecting something much different from what I experienced. In the end, it's basically a super-hero movie dressed as sci-fi. A huge let down, especially coming from the director of one of the most admirable Sci-Fi films of the past decade. Still, kudos to the beautiful soundtrack and to Wagner Moura and Alice Braga, the Brazilian actors that basically steal every scene that they are in.
I heard that Kruger too, was one of the best things from the movie, is it true?
Anyway, I'm kinda the black sheep when it came to the matter of the possible themes around Elysium, even from the trailers it felt too straightforward and simplistic to me (a rich minority, while the rest of the world suffers in poverty, this kind of stuff has been here and there before), my hype was that Neill Blomkamp is a talented filmmaker, and could deliver the goods.
Still, have to wait till September to see it.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
I don't know. The premise is simple, yes, but the visuals looked so stunning and powerful and, given Blomkamp's previous reputation for dealing with social commentary and allegorical filmmaking, this just looked like it had all the ingredients in the right place. I was absolutely sure it would be a masterpiece.
I don't know. The premise is simple, yes, but the visuals looked so stunning and powerful and, given Blomkamp's previous reputation for dealing with social commentary and allegorical filmmaking, this just looked like it had all the ingredients in the right place. I was absolutely sure it would be a masterpiece.
I say wait and see it for yourself because I just saw it last night and would give it a 7/10. It wasn't bad by any means. The characters were a bit stiff but the visuals were impressive and the themes were still there. Most of what I read on Rotten Tomatoes that was rotten were people expecting much more given the director but if you go in with an open mind and no expectations then you're good.
I also got to see Lee Daniels' The Butler. It was phenomenal. I knew some of the man's life was fabricated in sections to showcase more of the struggle of racial rights in America and the progress of history but that didn't change my perception of the film. The pacing was quick but not too fast, the portrayals of the different figures were fantastic. I don't get the oscar buzz about Oprah - she's great but in no way best actress worthy. The movie has a fantastic story of the struggle for equal rights in America being black that spans nearly for a century and shows the progress and struggle of what being black over the past one hundred years really means. I really liked how they handled the historical details and it was an incredibly lovely piece of work. Of course everyone's crying "oscar baittt! oscar baittt!" with this movie, however I don't think its easily a piece of bait. It isn't over the top, it just shows history for how it is. Now as for the portrayals of Presidents Johnson, and Reagan - that's been argued a bit but from what I've read they are true. Anyways I really enjoyed it.
The premise is only simple if you restrict yourself to think on the surface. The plotline could actually generate discussions involving a lot of social themes and instead of developing them, they are totally under looked. Probably, the most obvious social criticism of the film is an offensive one (at least for me) which I'm not sure if Blomkamp was trying to be sarcastic, ironic or just ignorant.
Regarding Kruger, I disagree with most of the critics. I thought he was totally over the top and unintentionally (?) funny. Almost like a villain from a comic book. And that's why I keep affirming that Elysium is like a super hero movie disguised as a sci-fi flick. Visually impressive? Without a doubt (not as District 9), but superficial and bland.
I'm seeing Kick-Ass 2 tomorrow but I'm very skeptical about it. It's got nothing to do with the reviews, it's what I've seen in the trailers that didn't impress me, plus the premise didn't do anything for me. I'm hoping to be proven wrong.
Crash - I don't know why it has taken me so long to see this film. A stunning, moving, thought-provoking, numbing and surprising drama. Featuring fantastic acting performances, a stellar score, brilliant script and great editing and directing work, this film paints a hypnotic and intriguing study of racism in modern day America. So, so powerful. I don't know how it held up against its competition in the 2004 Oscars (controversial for its BP win over Brokeback Mountain), but I absolutely loved the film. 9/10
Damn? Really, @aaron? I consider Crash one of the biggest mistakes of the Academy and in my opinion it shouldn't be even nominated.
Well, like I said--I didn't watch the Oacars that year and so I'm not sure how it holds up against the other nominees. I haven't seen Brokeback Mountain, so I'm not sure. There could've been more deserving films. But I definitely loved the film.
Damn? Really, @aaron? I consider Crash one of the biggest mistakes of the Academy and in my opinion it shouldn't be even nominated.
Well, like I said--I didn't watch the Oacars that year and so I'm not sure how it holds up against the other nominees. I haven't seen Brokeback Mountain, so I'm not sure. There could've been more deserving films. But I definitely loved the film.
Aaron, this issue Crash x Brokeback Mountain is a very divisive one. I, for example, found Crash to be a great movie, even better than Brokeback Mountain (even if I know the reason Crash won was related to controversial issues BM touched upon), whereas there is people who share Henrick's opinion. Back that time, everyone went apeshit with Crash's victory, but with the time it seems to have appeared a lot of defensors of the movie.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
Crash is one of the most offensive movies I have ever seen in my life. I hate how racism is treated and the film is so melodramatic that it almost looks like a Soap Opera. I despise Crash.
Even bloodier than the first and a mediocre effort at continuing from where the brilliant Kick-Ass left us, but it's definitely a step down from the first as a lot of the originality and irony that made Kick-Ass what it was is absent here. But in saying that, it surpassed my low expectations and was pleasantly surprising to watch. It definitely didn't lose its humor nor the over the top gore.
You're Next(Adam Wingard, 2011) A fast-paced and highly entertaining old-fashioned Slasher movie that, while has it flaws - if only the director spent a little more time to explore the family and the very interesting characters - turns out to be one of the surprises of the year so far. I had a blast.
The World's End (2013) In short: BEST movie, hands down, of the summer in my opinion. Everything about it was great from the complexe characters, the comedy, the action, the editing, the music, the acting (especially from Simon Pegg who was indeed amazing!), the plot and the dramatic/emotional scenes. I loved this movie a lot! In my opinion: Shaun of the Dead>The World's End>Hot Fuzz.
Comments
I just consider people like that to be so uncultured, and to act all haughty and uptight like that is what makes them a snob. I know it sounds like I generalise when I say stuff, but really it's just the Australian's famous ability to exaggerate coming out in me. XD
While Elysium stands nowhere near the brilliance of Neil Blomkamp's District 9, there's no denying that his gritty action pieces and wonderful set design has not diminished. The film is fast paced; as soon as it has started, the story gets going right away and doesn't stop to take a break from everything. I also loved the differences in colour palette between the battered Los Angeles and the richness of Elysium.
8/10
Director: Phil Lord/Chris Miller
Cast: Channing Tatum, Jonah Hill, Brie Larson
HOLY SHIT, I'm accelerated. This, THIS IS HOW A MOTHERFUCKING COMEDY IS DONE (yes, I'm looking at you, Adam Sandler). Being crass without being offensive, this movie is absolutely hilarious, over-the-top stuff with some pretty parodies of buddy cop movies. The performances of everyone are great, Jonah Hill as always is good in comedy roles, Brie Larson gives the movie a little heart, and Dave Franco gives a nice performance as a spoiled drug dealer. Oh yeah, Ice Cube, playing outside of his usual gangster roles, great too. But my surprise is without a doubt Channing Tatum. Dude seriously surprised me with how much comedy tone he has, not without mentioning the chemistry between him and Hill is brilliant. Oh yes, two genius cameos appear in this movie, not gonna spoil for anyone. ;D
Anyway, excellent movie, one of the best comedies I've seen in a good time.
8.5/10
P.S.: alright, not saying the movie was perfect, because there was one stuff in the end, one joke that was dumb, and the movie did not needed it. Apart from that, it was all really funny.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
Lord Stafford.
However, I'll counter that articulating an opinion in a comment section, of all places, where nobody gives a fuck, is probably a waste of time. In my eyes, anyway.
I changed my plans and I'll see Elysium on Tuesday. For sure! I'll let you know
Percy Jackson: Sea of Monsters
It's sad to see a movie that tries so hard every scene to deliver something good fail so hard in so many levels. There's some great humor spread across, but that's not nearly enough to make up for the senseless script flooded with the cheapest of genre clichés, which pretty much ignores dozens of estabilished characteristics from the previous film. Characters are dramatically changed and I won't even mention the source material because it's already estabilished that nothing but basics are taken from it. I wouldn't recommend this to kids or adventure fans, because there are far superior movies of the genre out there.
1/5
The second one feels much more like the books, and with the characters acting like they should, and showing mythological creatures and persons in a present time (the Chariot of Damnation, Hermes, commercials). The way they explained the prophecy was lovely (and resembling the Tale of the Three Brothers). And this time, they established the tone for the next films (the prophecy, Thalia, Kronos being defeated to completely rise on the fourth film).
Unfortunely, the film suffers of the "Half-Blood Prince syndrome". They need to explain the missing stuff from the first film, and it makes the second one to have other missing stuff. They needed at least another hour to do things better. And which is why they did a film on it's own, but taking plot points and characters from the books.
They need to do something like in DH with the third movie.
Anyway, this franchise is dead. I honestly can't see them greenlighting a sequel after the poor performance of the debut weekend.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
Good all round performances (Melanie Laurent makes me squee) and the cinematography conveys the grand sort of atmosphere of the show. I'm on the fence with the score though. One of those films that sucks you in effectively and delivers a spectacle well worth watching, but started to trail off around the third act. The final twist is kind of a weird shock that you have to suspend disbelief for in order for it to work properly until your second watch, which feels necessary to make it seem plausible. But then again this worked very well with the 'the closer you look' concept, so it does feel like a successful sleight of hand (hurr).
Elysium (Neill Blomkamp, 2013)
While visually inventive, Elysium lacks the impact of the social criticism contained in District 9. It might be less pretentious, but the characters are basically caricatures - even Jodie Foster is over the top - and the script under looks character development and generates some embarrassing melodramatic moments. I was actually expecting something much different from what I experienced. In the end, it's basically a super-hero movie dressed as sci-fi. A huge let down, especially coming from the director of one of the most admirable Sci-Fi films of the past decade. Still, kudos to the beautiful soundtrack and to Wagner Moura and Alice Braga, the Brazilian actors that basically steal every scene that they are in.
1.5/4
Anyway, I'm kinda the black sheep when it came to the matter of the possible themes around Elysium, even from the trailers it felt too straightforward and simplistic to me (a rich minority, while the rest of the world suffers in poverty, this kind of stuff has been here and there before), my hype was that Neill Blomkamp is a talented filmmaker, and could deliver the goods.
Still, have to wait till September to see it.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
I'd have to give it an 8/10.
Regarding Kruger, I disagree with most of the critics. I thought he was totally over the top and unintentionally (?) funny. Almost like a villain from a comic book. And that's why I keep affirming that Elysium is like a super hero movie disguised as a sci-fi flick. Visually impressive? Without a doubt (not as District 9), but superficial and bland.
Quaalude fight: because drunk fight is too mainstream.
Even bloodier than the first and a mediocre effort at continuing from where the brilliant Kick-Ass left us, but it's definitely a step down from the first as a lot of the originality and irony that made Kick-Ass what it was is absent here. But in saying that, it surpassed my low expectations and was pleasantly surprising to watch. It definitely didn't lose its humor nor the over the top gore.
7/10
You're Next (Adam Wingard, 2011)
A fast-paced and highly entertaining old-fashioned Slasher movie that, while has it flaws - if only the director spent a little more time to explore the family and the very interesting characters - turns out to be one of the surprises of the year so far. I had a blast.
3/4
In short: BEST movie, hands down, of the summer in my opinion. Everything about it was great from the complexe characters, the comedy, the action, the editing, the music, the acting (especially from Simon Pegg who was indeed amazing!), the plot and the dramatic/emotional scenes. I loved this movie a lot! In my opinion: Shaun of the Dead>The World's End>Hot Fuzz.
rating: 9.2/10