max314
Posts: 2707
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: London
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: KnightofZyryab
How can you accuse their arguments of lack of substance when they have at this point seem 100 % more of the film than you ? I think you've missed my point as well : there doesn't need to be consensus as to exactly what made the film negative, merely that they all discerned elements that worked against the film, and hence rendered it, well, not good. I'm only looking at the holistic viewpoint - they all saw something negative about the film, and to reiterate it doesn't matter if they're opinions accorded. I may love a film for its cinematography say, but someone else may loathe it, love the script, and I may hate the script - our criticisms converge because we have both devalued a film's worth because it has flaws, and not because we can't make up our minds.
That's fine, but when two points as blatantly contradictory as "the plot was too simple" and "the plot was too complicated" are voiced, they are both at such extreme opposite ends of the spectrum that it clearly casts a shadow of doubt over the substance of the negativity. And me not having seen it yet doesn't change that fact.
quote:
ORIGNAL: Mojo
Max, why does a film have to push the boundries to be any good? Speed Racer may well be presenting a new form of filmmaking not seen before, but it could still end up being a pile of wank. Sure Crystal Skull is the fourth film in a series, and won't feature any groundbreaking new effects, but it will no doubt an incredibly fun adventure movie. Pretty much what cinema was made for. It doesn't have to take cinema to new places, at all.
Anyway, I hope you enjoy the film today and I look forwardto your honest review!
I never said films have to take cinema to new places.
I merely stated that Speed Racer's groundbreaking visuals and stylistic experimentalism excited me about this film's potential more than any other big film this Summer.
And yeah, I'll come back with a review for you later today 
quote:
ORIGINAL: porntrooper
The 7 minute preview hasn't really done anything for me, I honestly don't see what is so visually groundbreaking here. It looks to me to be just a CG overload like so many other movies, designed to be a kind of live action anime, how is this pushing visual cinema? How is this pioneering? It looks good I agree, it's impressive and it looks fast, but so did the Pod Race. The first thought that popped into my head when Speed is in school and then runs out to meet his brother, was Cat In The Hat. A similar kitsch, stylised, primary colour look. The CG racing does look nice, but I'm not sure I'd want to watch that for 2 hours. I'm trying and failing to get exited about it. The stilted dialogue and delivery is also a bit off putting.
Well, it's "groundbreaking" for a number of reasons. One of which is the fact that they are using a new camera that allows you to have infinite depth of field. Just like a cartoon. A lot of the outdoor location shots are real outdoor locations that have been captured on this new camera. They've then been digitally enhanced to fit into the Speed Racer world.
I haven't seen those seven minutes myself yet, but I should be back with a full review later today.
quote:
Also, that guy who gave it a five star review? Is he serious? "The Smartest Film Critic In The World" What the fuck?! The review itself is terrible, its just a paragraph telling us a bit about the story and nothing else we couldn't guess from the trailers. Maybe this is one of those critics who hasn't really seen the film yet, eh Max? Plus he can't seem to decide what reviewing scale to use, some are B, B- whilst others are 1 star, 3 star etc. Odd reviewing style. Plus he gave Son Of Rambow 1 star, which immediately makes him a fool in my opinion.
They sound like silly things to pick up on, if you ask me.
I remember an episode of Newsnight Review where at least one of the critics really, really did not like Son of Rambow. It's a legitimate view, and I'm sure they have their reasons.
But it takes a special something for a film to be a five star spectacular.
quote:
And Max, give it a rest, I'm not having a go or 'talking shit' about you, I'm simply stating that I find your posts an infuriating read, not that that is necessarily a bad thing. Why do I want Speed Racer to tank? It certainly isn't out of some petty spite, it's because I know it would draw out some more interesting chat. What I do see as annoying though is that when you refer to positive reviews and say that Speed Racer 'rocks' before you've even seen it, you claim you're talking about your hopes and aspirations for the movie, and it's part of your anticipation of it. Fine, no problem with that. But when other people refer to more negative reviews it's all a case of 'well maybe that reviewer hasn't seen it' or that he's 'old and it was a bit much'. C'mon Max, that's just being biased and makes it hard for people on here to take your entusiasm seriously.
Until I see the film, I'm going to remain positive about it. And I'll look for flaws in negative reviews and assets in the positive ones out of that sense of positivity about the film. That's just part of anticipating a movie. I mean, just take a peek at the Indy 4 thread. It's only natural.
But once I have seen the film, then I'll be able to make an informed opinion. Then all the speculation and hope (which is all it's been so far) can then be put to one side, and I can create a fully formed opinion of the thing.
quote:
Still, the first 7 minutes look pretty gash to me. One for Blu Ray.
You got that from the first 7 minutes? Even on a purely visual level, I'd have thought this would be something you'd want to see on the big screen. Oh well.
< Message edited by max314 -- 9/5/2008 10:14:23 AM >
_____________________________
MAX
Laying the 314 on your candy ass.
|
Printable Version
RE: Speed Racer - 
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