Register  |   Log In  |  
Sign up to our weekly newsletter    
Follow us on   
Search   
Forum Home Register for Free! Log In Moderator Tickets FAQ Users Online

RE: Empire - kings of the back track

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Feedback] >> Empire Magazine >> RE: Empire - kings of the back track Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 2:18:41 PM   
MohadGlub


Posts: 51
Joined: 15/4/2007
And just for the record, I posted my thread first.

(Read page 1)


And I'll happily edit out the word 'moron' from the thread title...

< Message edited by MohadGlub -- 28/4/2007 2:28:52 PM >

(in reply to MohadGlub)
Post #: 31
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 3:07:49 PM   
Felix

 

Posts: 15692
Joined: 29/9/2005
From: Brighton
quote:

ORIGINAL: MohadGlub

And just for the record, I posted my thread first.



No you didnt.

_____________________________

[This space for rent] -

(in reply to MohadGlub)
Post #: 32
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 3:31:54 PM   
MohadGlub


Posts: 51
Joined: 15/4/2007
quote:

To Ian Nathan... The moron that reviewed The Fountain - 27/4/2007 8:56:28 PM
 

quote:

Empire - kings of the back track - 27/4/2007 12:10:02 PM 

 

I urm... got muddled up with AM/PM when it comes to 12 o'clock....
Didnt see the first one or else I would have posted my comments there

(in reply to MohadGlub)
Post #: 33
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 3:32:57 PM   
Felix

 

Posts: 15692
Joined: 29/9/2005
From: Brighton
You could still manage to be civil.

You do realise its one person's opinion dont you? You can still enjoy the film.

_____________________________

[This space for rent] -

(in reply to MohadGlub)
Post #: 34
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 4:33:41 PM   
MohadGlub


Posts: 51
Joined: 15/4/2007
The only thing I did which I feel can be regarded as un-civil was by calling Ian Nathan a moron- which is clearly not fair and was only meant as a provocative statement to get some responce.


Everything else that I wrote is fair critisism which deserves to be raised.

No, the review doesnt affect my enjoyment of the film, it just angers me that such a petulant commentary is being published,  possibly at the effect of swaying other readers to not see the film- which is a real shame, because the film is great. What I really wanted to see was fair critisism and a grounded argument against the film- one shouldnt give a 1 star review without any actual reason as to why theyve done so.

< Message edited by MohadGlub -- 28/4/2007 4:35:47 PM >

(in reply to Felix)
Post #: 35
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 4:44:35 PM   
Cethan

 

Posts: 107
Joined: 30/9/2005
I have not seen The Fountain, but I thought the review was pretty badly written, it had an IMDb rant quality to it. Also it is a bit too injokey. I don't expect or want dry lectures for reviews but I'd rather read about the film than the turmoil it caused in "Planet Empire".

_____________________________

Do I know where hell is? Hell is in hello.
Heaven is "Goodbye forever. It's time for me to go."

(in reply to MohadGlub)
Post #: 36
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 4:49:32 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
I just didn't feel it actully gave the reader any insight into the film, why it didn't work. It almost felt like someone writing a review of Serenity and spending half the review having a go at the Browncoat fans. Its not needed. It really stands out because I enjoyed Mr Nathans review of Bobby - a movie I did not like but felt the his arguemnt was put across well - although he does mention pretension and high art in regards to Babel.  

I'm not really bothered by the score - it really does seem to be a film you really love or you really hate, just wish it was a bit more indepth and focused on the film itself. Could it not have been given a full page review?

_____________________________

It is a far, far better thing that I do, than I have ever done; it is a far, far better rest that I go to, than I have ever known.


(in reply to MohadGlub)
Post #: 37
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 4:51:32 PM   
TheManWithNoShame


Posts: 6767
Joined: 1/8/2006
I dont have any objection to Empire changing the rating, infact I welcome it when editors give a totally different opinion on a film, but I too thought the review was badly written and came off as a rant against a film rather than a reasoned review.

_____________________________

sorry jbg :( i promise to stop being such a silly boy.

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 38
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 28/4/2007 5:14:13 PM   
MohadGlub


Posts: 51
Joined: 15/4/2007
I agree totally with TheManWithNoShame.

Having differing opinions is great- it's healthy- and giving the film one star is absolutely fine by me if you explain why in a fair critisism.

(in reply to TheManWithNoShame)
Post #: 39
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 29/4/2007 1:36:31 PM   
Norton/Bale


Posts: 95
Joined: 24/4/2007
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mikey C

The Fountain is pretty divisive, though. I went to see it with a friend who told me it was the best thing ever and amazing etc... I hated it. 


yep thats the truth of it really. i hated, my boyfriend loved it. we argued- a lot. then never spoke of it again

(in reply to Mikey C)
Post #: 40
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 30/4/2007 12:13:25 PM   
Jasper


Posts: 424
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Olly Richards

It's not a backtrack. As another poster said, the film was divisive and that was reflected in the Empire office, so it was fair to represent the opposing view.



Theoretically this makes sense. In reality -- to those who couldn't care less about opinions of individual Empire reviewers but instead desire one sound Empire opinion -- it looks like you're unable or unwilling to make up your mind.

In my opinion the The Fountain reviews show Empire at its most inconsistent. Not only because Ian's rating differs so much from Helen's -- but mostly because the cinema review was a reasoned critique and the DVD review just plain irrational.

_____________________________

"Some people will offer you their hand and some won't

Last night I knew ya, tonight I don't

I need something strong, to distract my mind

I'm gonna look at you, till my eyes go blind"

(in reply to Olly Richards)
Post #: 41
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 30/4/2007 12:17:54 PM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jasper

Theoretically this makes sense. In reality -- to those who couldn't care less about opinions of individual Empire reviewers but instead desire one sound Empire opinion -- it looks like you're unable or unwilling to make up your mind.


On the other hand readers ask us on a regular basis to provide alternative viewpoints even in cinemas, which we have consistently drawn the line at. As a general rule, the cinema review stands as Empire's verdict, with the At home review as an alternative opinion. If you need to cling to one opinion, cling to that. If you can handle two points of view, read both.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to Jasper)
Post #: 42
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 30/4/2007 12:32:08 PM   
Evil_Bob


Posts: 2870
Joined: 1/5/2006
From: GGGAAAHHH!!!
I agree with the previous posters point about Nathan not giving it a fair go.
The review was amateurish and childish. Instead of being objective about it he decided to merely trash it because of the fact that he didn't like it and couldn't understand how others did. Objectivity would not have given the movie 1 star because although I can see where people who don't like the movie are coming from it clear that even if you leave the plot out of it there's at least enough good stuff in it to give it better than one star. Technically it looks lovely and the acting is NOT shit as he says it is. Thats enough to give it 2 stars even if the plot is as shit as he says it is (which its not but we can agree todiffer on that one). Thats why I will now take every opinion by this guy with a large pinch of salt especially as elsewhere in the issue he compares Bobby to Babel purely on the fact that they are ensemble piece. What a genius.

_____________________________

How dare you call me inhumane. Right you fucker. I'm going to do the washing up.


(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 43
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 30/4/2007 12:48:03 PM   
david mcgroarty


Posts: 282
Joined: 29/11/2006
quote:

ORIGINAL: Jasper

Theoretically this makes sense. In reality -- to those who couldn't care less about opinions of individual Empire reviewers but instead desire one sound Empire opinion -- it looks like you're unable or unwilling to make up your mind.

In my opinion the The Fountain reviews show Empire at its most inconsistent. Not only because Ian's rating differs so much from Helen's -- but mostly because the cinema review was a reasoned critique and the DVD review just plain irrational.


I have to say, I like the irrational reviews. I'd like to see more of 'em. I agree that writing the cinema reviews in this style would be a big turn-off, but there's certainly room for this sort of appraisal in the magazine and the DVD section is as good a place as any to have that, especially given that the original, more objective cinema review is still available to read if you want it. The way I see it, Empire is like your mate who really knows his films, whom you may not always agree with but whose opinion you value. It's not just there to give you a verdict. It also provides a jumping-off point for debate, and I think this sort of review does just that.

_____________________________

I am the Juggler. See me toss.

(in reply to Jasper)
Post #: 44
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 30/4/2007 8:03:51 PM   
TheRonin


Posts: 22
Joined: 15/4/2007
quote:

The way I see it, Empire is like your mate who really knows his films, whom you may not always agree with but whose opinion you value. It's not just there to give you a verdict. It also provides a jumping-off point for debate, and I think this sort of review does just that.


The debate a review should jump start should NOT revolve around the reviewer's competence or lack thereof as it has clearly been the case here. What exactly is one to debate on starting from a half-arsed review? Give me some critical grounds for dismissing a film and I will agree or disagree. Act like the 'friendly' neighbourhood brat and start saying: "Boo! you suck!" without providing any form of reference as to why you are saying that and you will be regarded as such.


After all that has been said in this thread, I realise that a great many people disagree with the idea of writing a review for a film, completely trashing IT and its PUBLIC whilst not giving any valid reasons for said trashing except a list of bitter metaphors sprung from some sense of personal annoyance. That violates every guideline a professional film critic should follow.

Is there any way that mr. Nathan could be... informed of our little manifesto against his take on film criticism? I mean, in some way, the feedback forum should permit some sort of interaction between the magazine's public and the writers...





< Message edited by TheRonin -- 30/4/2007 8:11:21 PM >


_____________________________

It's hard to tell whether the world we live in is either reality or a dream.

(in reply to david mcgroarty)
Post #: 45
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 8:11:43 AM   
Mock Tudor

 

Posts: 324
Joined: 15/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Helen OHara
On the other hand readers ask us on a regular basis to provide alternative viewpoints even in cinemas, which we have consistently drawn the line at. As a general rule, the cinema review stands as Empire's verdict, with the At home review as an alternative opinion. If you need to cling to one opinion, cling to that. If you can handle two points of view, read both.

Fair enough, but couldn't you make it clear in the magazine that this is the case? Currently there's nothing to indicate when a DVD review represents the "losing" side of an internal debate at Empire.
If the At Home reviews are deliberatly chosen to be as far away from the original ones as possible then I think they need to be seen in that context.

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 46
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 9:01:21 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Mock Tudor
Fair enough, but couldn't you make it clear in the magazine that this is the case? Currently there's nothing to indicate when a DVD review represents the "losing" side of an internal debate at Empire.
If the At Home reviews are deliberatly chosen to be as far away from the original ones as possible then I think they need to be seen in that context.


But if a review is different in at home, then it's generally because we've given someone else a chance to express their view. I don't see how that isn't obvious.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to Mock Tudor)
Post #: 47
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 9:16:37 AM   
homersimpson_esq


Posts: 20117
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Springfield
If the review for At Home is going to be different to the In Cinema reviews to show a different opinion of a different reviewer at Empire, then it removes the ability to comment effectively on how the film itself differs on the small screen. Many films view one way at the cinema, but differently on the small screen. Blair Witch Project, for instance, I felt worked better on the small screen, it being more atmospheric than at the cinema. Giving differing opinions based on individual reviewers means that the review is based upon that differing opinion, not the effect the film has on the different medium - tv, rather than cinema.

I'm not saying that it's wrong to give individual reviewers a say, but I generally thought that Empire's reviews reflected the majority of the staff, and was in-keeping with the Empire House Style. By providing separate reviews, that House Style is lost. To be fair to Mr Nathan, it was made specifically clear that the review offered a differing opinion. Regarding the above, I would imagine a film with the cinematography of The Fountain would have worked better at the cinema, but this wasn't mentioned.


_____________________________

That deep-browed Homer ruled as his demesne.


Bristol Bad Film Club
A place where movie fans can come and behold some of the most awful films ever put to celluloid.

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 48
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 9:23:20 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
That can be a factor, and is sometimes discussed, but arguably with the increasing size of TVs, the growing popularity of widescreen formats and the improvements in home cinema generally it's less of a subject of comment than once it was. We do comment occasionally on things like that, but generally it'd make for a pretty boring reviews section to just discuss what still works on the small screen. Often it's a reassessment rather than a completely new opinion, in which case the small screen is more often discussed, but I don't think we're doing the readers a disservice by offering them a different point of view instead.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to homersimpson_esq)
Post #: 49
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 9:36:09 AM   
Mock Tudor

 

Posts: 324
Joined: 15/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Helen OHara

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mock Tudor
Fair enough, but couldn't you make it clear in the magazine that this is the case? Currently there's nothing to indicate when a DVD review represents the "losing" side of an internal debate at Empire.
If the At Home reviews are deliberatly chosen to be as far away from the original ones as possible then I think they need to be seen in that context.


But if a review is different in at home, then it's generally because we've given someone else a chance to express their view. I don't see how that isn't obvious.

If you can remember the original review and rating or you've got that issue next to you then it is obvious. If your memory is not that good or if you don't read every issue then you won't have any idea if what you're reading is a radically different opposing point of view or more or less a restatement of the original position.
Adding something like "originally reviewed in issue xxx with a rating of y" would clear it up.


(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 50
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 10:11:24 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
But that would take space away from the review itself, leaving even less room to discuss the change of format or whatever else. The original review is always online - people can check it there, and I think with films that people feel strongly about they tend to remember our original opinion. Witness that little Clones film for example.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to Mock Tudor)
Post #: 51
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 10:40:19 AM   
Mock Tudor

 

Posts: 324
Joined: 15/12/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Helen OHara

But that would take space away from the review itself, leaving even less room to discuss the change of format or whatever else.

Not a lot of space. Something like "#208 / 4*" would suffice.
quote:

The original review is always online - people can check it there, and I think with films that people feel strongly about they tend to remember our original opinion. Witness that little Clones film for example.

You're right that it's not much of an issue for extremely high profile films like AotC.
But I'm not going to look up the online counterpart of every single DVD review just to check if the movie has generated some potentially interesting difference of opinion within Empire.

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 52
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 10:52:15 AM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
Well, such a brief summation would look really ugly and be completely confusing for casual readers, so that's out. And most films don't draw any drastic reassessment - the ones that do tend to be the ones that people remember.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to Mock Tudor)
Post #: 53
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 2:13:31 PM   
xim123


Posts: 546
Joined: 30/9/2005
So which review ends up on the website as the 'definitive' one?


_____________________________

My Film Diary

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 54
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 3:19:13 PM   
tommyjarvis


Posts: 6632
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Caught somewhere in time
quote:

ORIGINAL: xim123

So which review ends up on the website as the 'definitive' one?



Whichever review is the more fashionable at the time.

_____________________________

"I've been too honest with myself, I should have lied like everybody else"

My Top 101 Rock Songs - The first Audiophile list to actually get completed!

(in reply to xim123)
Post #: 55
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 3:53:27 PM   
Jasper


Posts: 424
Joined: 1/10/2005
Maybe Colin Kennedy will resurface with a third, definitive The Fountain review.

_____________________________

"Some people will offer you their hand and some won't

Last night I knew ya, tonight I don't

I need something strong, to distract my mind

I'm gonna look at you, till my eyes go blind"

(in reply to tommyjarvis)
Post #: 56
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 3:57:46 PM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: xim123

So which review ends up on the website as the 'definitive' one?



As I've said a couple of times above, the cinema review generally remains as the definitive one online.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to xim123)
Post #: 57
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 4:02:11 PM   
homersimpson_esq


Posts: 20117
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Springfield
Would this cinema review remain definitive if a different version of a film were only brought out on DVD - a director's cut, for instance? I ask, because I just posted in Movie Musings about Kingdom of Heaven, and it seems to tie in with this topic.

_____________________________

That deep-browed Homer ruled as his demesne.


Bristol Bad Film Club
A place where movie fans can come and behold some of the most awful films ever put to celluloid.

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 58
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 4:15:58 PM   
Helen OHara

 

Posts: 3529
Joined: 15/9/2005
No, course not. Then the review of that version would apply.

_____________________________

"I never understood drinking. It isn't good for your looks, and it cuts down on what you are. I never wanted to cut down on what I am." - Mae West

"Movies are forever, and sex doesn't last" - Mae West.

(in reply to homersimpson_esq)
Post #: 59
RE: Empire - kings of the back track - 1/5/2007 5:55:53 PM   
tommyjarvis


Posts: 6632
Joined: 2/11/2005
From: Caught somewhere in time
quote:

ORIGINAL: Helen OHara

quote:

ORIGINAL: xim123

So which review ends up on the website as the 'definitive' one?



As I've said a couple of times above, the cinema review generally remains as the definitive one online.


But then why are some changed [such as Die Hard With A Vengeance] when they appear to go against the general consensus?

_____________________________

"I've been too honest with myself, I should have lied like everybody else"

My Top 101 Rock Songs - The first Audiophile list to actually get completed!

(in reply to Helen OHara)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Feedback] >> Empire Magazine >> RE: Empire - kings of the back track Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


 
Movie News  |  Empire Blog  |  Movie Reviews  |  Future Films  |  Features  |  Video Interviews  |  Image Gallery  |  Competitions  |  Forum  |  Magazine  |  Resources
 
Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

0.469