RE: Oh dear (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews



Message


Woger -> RE: Oh dear (26/5/2011 2:37:05 PM)

it's going to be on of those threads; I almost wosh the world ended saturday.




Cameron1975Williams -> Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (26/5/2011 3:33:48 PM)

Matthew Vaughn's not really lived up to the promise he showed in Layer Cake. Fluke maybe?




Darth Marenghi -> RE: More of the same from posters (26/5/2011 6:03:27 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

My biggest hope is that there is an Avengers tribute with the Hellfire Club.



Well, it's a rip-off to begin with isn't it? [:D] They don't want to make it more obvious!




Whistler -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (26/5/2011 6:18:17 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cameron1975Williams

Matthew Vaughn's not really lived up to the promise he showed in Layer Cake. Fluke maybe?


I dunno.  Kick Ass was pretty kick ass.




JIm R -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (26/5/2011 11:17:51 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Whistler

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cameron1975Williams

Matthew Vaughn's not really lived up to the promise he showed in Layer Cake. Fluke maybe?


I dunno.  Kick Ass was pretty kick ass.



Seriously ? Each of his film's has been excellently made and been solid in it's completed work, especially Kick Ass which was just superb, his background in production first prior to direction clearly shows.




primebhoy -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (27/5/2011 10:53:38 AM)

Johnathon Ross tweets - 'I am coming to the conclusion that Empire Magazine are Idiots. They give X Men First Class 3 stars, and Thor 4!!?? Idiots.'





UTB -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (27/5/2011 12:05:14 PM)

Johnathan Ross gets to play with the screenwriter's bewbs. His opinion is invalid. 




klause -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (27/5/2011 5:55:51 PM)

I'm with J Woss on this one. Thor was 3 stars max. All the reviews I've seen so far for First Class have been positive.




Darth Marenghi -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 6:14:42 PM)

Ross has also come out with the classic "I think they did a deal with Marvel. Over generous to Thor in return for access to the Avengers set...". Guy should've realised he was never going to look good whinging about reviews of a film his wife wrote.





Darth Marenghi -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 6:15:53 PM)

EDIT: Post appeared twice for some reason.




superdan -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 6:24:36 PM)

I think in this instance Wossy should be deliberately ignored, given the blatant bias. Besides, three stars is hardly a bad rating.




sanchia -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 6:48:04 PM)

All well and good standing up for the missus but poor show Mr Ross. Poor show, after all we remember how..eclectic and fawning some of your reviews could appear to people you knew.

quote:


"I think they did a deal with Marvel. Over generous to Thor in return for access to the Avengers set..."


Isn't this also a Marvel film?




MonsterCat -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 7:09:00 PM)

I challange Rgirvan44 to take on Ross on Twitter. [:D]




MonsterCat -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 7:10:03 PM)

EDIT - Apologies for the double post.




Darth Marenghi -> RE: Ross goes nuts over Empire's review of First Class (27/5/2011 7:12:02 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sanchia

All well and good standing up for the missus but poor show Mr Ross. Poor show, after all we remember how..eclectic and fawning some of your reviews could appear to people you knew.

quote:


"I think they did a deal with Marvel. Over generous to Thor in return for access to the Avengers set..."


Isn't this also a Marvel film?


First Class is from Fox as were the other X-Men based films, not Marvel themselves like with Thor and Avengers.




Super Hans -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (27/5/2011 10:32:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UTB

Johnathan Ross gets to play with the screenwriter's bewbs. His opinion is invalid. 


[:D] And what boobs they are!  True though, Ross is hardly impartial on this one.

To be honest, I'm impressed it's get as many as 3 stars - a second spin off from a trilogy whose coffin was nailed shut by a shit, generic second sequel to two films that were pretty different among superhero films is hardly classic material on paper!  Regarding the 3 star rating itself, I've always seen it as a pretty average rating - neither decidedly shit nor especially good.




klause -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (28/5/2011 11:41:18 AM)

Still 100% on RT after 17 reviews




Workshed -> RE: Kick-Ass wasn't as good as I hoped either. (28/5/2011 11:59:51 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: UTB

Johnathan Ross gets to play with the screenwriter's bewbs. His opinion is invalid. 


HAHA![:D]




Spaldron -> RE: More of the same from posters (28/5/2011 4:54:01 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

If you think it's more of the same from Empire how have you managed to miss this being brought up and debunked in virtually every 'big' or fanboy movie review thread in the past 5 or more years? [:D]

A review is an individual opinion, not a committee 'consensus'. And if the committee 'consensus' didn't agree with what you expect, then you'd still just query that anyway.

The only issue here is the review doesn't meet your expectations of what you think it should be. That isn't the reviews fault, and the reviewer doesn't have to agree with you because we're talking about opinions here. And I emphasise the 'think' because, of course, you're choosing to criticise the review without actually having seen the film.

That's fairly common round here too [8|]


I can give a few reasons for Empire's 3* review.

1. The reviewer genuinely didn't think too highly of the film (most likely reason).
2. Its not that good (unlikely giving the other reviews).
3. It was a political decision, specifically referring to the criticism Empire has had on these boards and elsewhere about giving good reviews to their "mates" (ie; Vaughn, Goldman, Pegg, Wright etc). Thus they gave it an average mark to silence that criticism.

In the end the 3* will probably go up to 4* on dvd. Remember they gave Batman Begins 3* on release, only changing it later when they realised how stupidly wrong they were.




elab49 -> RE: More of the same from posters (28/5/2011 5:05:15 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

If you think it's more of the same from Empire how have you managed to miss this being brought up and debunked in virtually every 'big' or fanboy movie review thread in the past 5 or more years? [:D]

A review is an individual opinion, not a committee 'consensus'. And if the committee 'consensus' didn't agree with what you expect, then you'd still just query that anyway.

The only issue here is the review doesn't meet your expectations of what you think it should be. That isn't the reviews fault, and the reviewer doesn't have to agree with you because we're talking about opinions here. And I emphasise the 'think' because, of course, you're choosing to criticise the review without actually having seen the film.

That's fairly common round here too [8|]


I can give a few reasons for Empire's 3* review.

3. It was a political decision, specifically referring to the criticism Empire has had on these boards and elsewhere about giving good reviews to their "mates" (ie; Vaughn, Goldman, Pegg, Wright etc). Thus they gave it an average mark to silence that criticism.



Except point 3 is also poppycock. Empire have repeatedly stated the review is the reviewer's opinion. Stating otherwise is a possibility is little different to calling them liars and the rubbish about giving good reviews to their 'mates' and undeserved scores to promote their mates' films is libel. See your av.

DVD reviews often (in fact generally if Neth's extensive research to debunk another posters idiot nonsense about this) are done by different people, hence different scores. Or are even done by the same person who's seen more in a film on a rewatch - and we have all dont that. And what they did with another random film - where they foolishly found someone who gave it more than it deserved on DVD - has nothing to do with this other completely nothing to do with that one film.




Spaldron -> RE: More of the same from posters (28/5/2011 5:34:47 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron


quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

If you think it's more of the same from Empire how have you managed to miss this being brought up and debunked in virtually every 'big' or fanboy movie review thread in the past 5 or more years? [:D]

A review is an individual opinion, not a committee 'consensus'. And if the committee 'consensus' didn't agree with what you expect, then you'd still just query that anyway.

The only issue here is the review doesn't meet your expectations of what you think it should be. That isn't the reviews fault, and the reviewer doesn't have to agree with you because we're talking about opinions here. And I emphasise the 'think' because, of course, you're choosing to criticise the review without actually having seen the film.

That's fairly common round here too [8|]


I can give a few reasons for Empire's 3* review.

3. It was a political decision, specifically referring to the criticism Empire has had on these boards and elsewhere about giving good reviews to their "mates" (ie; Vaughn, Goldman, Pegg, Wright etc). Thus they gave it an average mark to silence that criticism.



Except point 3 is also poppycock. Empire have repeatedly stated the review is the reviewer's opinion. Stating otherwise is a possibility is little different to calling them liars and the rubbish about giving good reviews to their 'mates' and undeserved scores to promote their mates' films is libel. See your av.

DVD reviews often (in fact generally if Neth's extensive research to debunk another posters idiot nonsense about this) are done by different people, hence different scores. Or are even done by the same person who's seen more in a film on a rewatch - and we have all dont that. And what they did with another random film - where they foolishly found someone who gave it more than it deserved on DVD - has nothing to do with this other completely nothing to do with that one film.


I didn't say Empire had been giving good reviews to their mates, I merely acknowledged that it has been said on these threads from time to time. And I pointed out that the most likely reason for the 3 * was the reviewers opinion, my post was to try and curb the conspiracies posted above.

And I'm more than aware that dvd reviews are done by different people and therefore different opinion. Although it should be pointed out that the 3* Batman Begins review is nowhere to be found on the website. In fact it has inexplicably shot up to 5* now! Going from 3 to 5* is quite a jump in such a short time considering the dvd review gave it 4* if my memory serves me.

Strange.




elab49 -> RE: More of the same from posters (28/5/2011 6:47:10 PM)

Not really no. Reviews are generally done after the press screening - so I'd assume for most it's based on a single viewing of the film. And if that's your opinion there was no need for 'possibility no. 3' - was there? Which suggests a 'fiddled' review just as much as the other suggestions. Empire has shown in the past they have little patience for this BS, and rightly so. Tucking it at the bottom with maybes makes little difference. Your post offered 3 options with an entirely new conspiracy theory tucked in there.

And you're still talking about a random film that has nothing to do with this one. If you wish to continue a discussion on Empire reviewing generally then please take it to the existing thread in Empire Magazine.




Larry of Arabia -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 7:25:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

And I'm more than aware that dvd reviews are done by different people and therefore different opinion. Although it should be pointed out that the 3* Batman Begins review is nowhere to be found on the website. In fact it has inexplicably shot up to 5* now! Going from 3 to 5* is quite a jump in such a short time considering the dvd review gave it 4* if my memory serves me.

Strange.



Batman Begins got 4 stars on release and 5 on DVD, both reviews by Kim Newman I think.




Spaldron -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 8:49:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Larry of Arabia

quote:

ORIGINAL: Spaldron

And I'm more than aware that dvd reviews are done by different people and therefore different opinion. Although it should be pointed out that the 3* Batman Begins review is nowhere to be found on the website. In fact it has inexplicably shot up to 5* now! Going from 3 to 5* is quite a jump in such a short time considering the dvd review gave it 4* if my memory serves me.

Strange.



Batman Begins got 4 stars on release and 5 on DVD, both reviews by Kim Newman I think.




No it got 3* on release and 4* on dvd. I still have the Empire issue and my memory is good on this one.




rich -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 8:52:33 PM)

Begins definately got 4 on release. Since I remember Total Film giving it 5. You can actually trust me on that.




Hood_Man -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 8:55:44 PM)

I'm pretty sure Begins go 4 stars when it was cinemas and 5 stars when it was released on DVD.




adambatman82 -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 9:23:14 PM)

Edit.




Spaldron -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 9:25:41 PM)

It got 3 stars on release. I've got the magazine somewhere in storage but I can't be arsed digging around for it but if someone has a copy to hand then we can clear this up. I distinctly remember a bit of a furore over the score at the time. Unless it was a misprint.




Larry of Arabia -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 9:36:45 PM)

If you go on Rotten Tomatoes, you can see under Begins' reviews that Kim Newman gave it 4 out of 5.




adambatman82 -> RE: X-Men: First Class (28/5/2011 9:43:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Larry of Arabia

If you go on Rotten Tomatoes, you can see under Begins' reviews that Kim Newman gave it 4 out of 5.


I tried to post a photo of that earlier, couldn't in here tho. But yeah, it does say that.

According to wiki BB came second in the magazine's top ten of the year too, which would be odd if it had received such an average review.




Page: <<   < prev  1 2 [3] 4 5   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.1875