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: Spoilers or what!

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Spoilers or what! Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 12:55:04 PM   
Dirk Miggler


Posts: 1106
Joined: 14/1/2009
Just read a review where reviewer take issue against the film because it didn't scare him enough. Was this meant to be a horror film ?

< Message edited by Dirk Miggler -- 31/5/2012 12:58:05 PM >

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 151
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:00:16 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000



Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.



No, there's not. Film reviewing is film criticism. That's why they're called critics.


Yes of course film reviews are film criticism, but surely you accept the difference between film reviews and film analysis? Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not. They are part of the film release process. Film criticism can be at any point in time, 50 years after a film.



And I think that's a horrible dumbing down of the review process. You're basically suggesting that film reviewing should have no purpose beyond helping the muddled make up their minds. And these are the kind of idiots that then come screaming in these threads about how dare the reviewer give a film five stars when it clearly only deserved four and a quarter.

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 152
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:02:12 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirk Miggler

Just read a review where reviewer take issue against the film because it didn't scare him enough. Was this meant to be a horror film ?


A sci-fi thriller with elements of horror.

_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Dirk Miggler)
Post #: 153
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:07:12 PM   
Jaybee79

 

Posts: 52
Joined: 2/11/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000

A disappointing review. As a rule of thumb, reviews should NEVER have to come with a spoiler warning. The point of a review is to help the public decide whether or not to see the movie. They are not for film analysis - many reviewers get this wrong, and it annoys the hell out of me.



If you think a review is just a shopping guide, just look at the star rating and decide based on that. Although I have the feeling that pretty much everyone will have decided if they want to see this film or not before they even got near a review. If you really wanted to be completely unspoiled then you wouldn't have gone near reading it. Film reviews are meant to be film criticism, not just "I LIKED IT! FUN FOR ALL THE FAMILY!" Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


And the revised version does I feel successfully review the film with an acceptable amount of spoilers. The first version did not. It contained way too many spoilers (hence why it was shortly after altered and a warning placed at the front). The first version with regards to the level of spoilers in it was nothing like any other review of a new cinema release film I have ever read in empire and caught me completely off guard.

That aside I feel the review is perfectly fair. It may or may not match my view of the film once I've seen it but even if it doesn't I will not be taking issue with Ian Nathan's opinion of the movie as it is a perfectly valid one.

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 154
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:10:41 PM   
jrewing1000


Posts: 486
Joined: 23/11/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000



Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.



No, there's not. Film reviewing is film criticism. That's why they're called critics.


Yes of course film reviews are film criticism, but surely you accept the difference between film reviews and film analysis? Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not. They are part of the film release process. Film criticism can be at any point in time, 50 years after a film.



And I think that's a horrible dumbing down of the review process. You're basically suggesting that film reviewing should have no purpose beyond helping the muddled make up their minds. And these are the kind of idiots that then come screaming in these threads about how dare the reviewer give a film five stars when it clearly only deserved four and a quarter.



I couldn't care less what the review actually says (you're right - people are getting far too worked up about the review). But a film review IS part of a process. I'm not suggesting for one moment they should be bad reviews. But they are written specifically for the public when a film is released!

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 155
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:12:28 PM   
blackduck


Posts: 1604
Joined: 1/10/2005
Not seen the movie not read the review (I only ever glance at the star rating before seeing a film), but as far as spoilers go, hasn't Ridley already done that with the stupidly long trailers that have been all over the telly?

_____________________________

I am but an egg.

(in reply to Jaybee79)
Post #: 156
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:15:21 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000



Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.



No, there's not. Film reviewing is film criticism. That's why they're called critics.


Yes of course film reviews are film criticism, but surely you accept the difference between film reviews and film analysis? Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not. They are part of the film release process. Film criticism can be at any point in time, 50 years after a film.



And I think that's a horrible dumbing down of the review process. You're basically suggesting that film reviewing should have no purpose beyond helping the muddled make up their minds. And these are the kind of idiots that then come screaming in these threads about how dare the reviewer give a film five stars when it clearly only deserved four and a quarter.



I couldn't care less what the review actually says (you're right - people are getting far too worked up about the review). But a film review IS part of a process. I'm not suggesting for one moment they should be bad reviews. But they are written specifically for the public when a film is released!


Yes, it's written for the public, but that doesn't mean it's restricted to simply telling people if they should see it or not. And it doesn't mean all reviews should aim for that audience. Film criticism doesn't just happen 50 years after the fact, it's an immediate process, and part of film criticism sometimes involves spoilers.

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 157
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:15:33 PM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4381
Joined: 5/2/2012
Sorry but I feel its a sh/t review on Ian Nathans part.
He spends the whole time being critical and sniffy about Prometheus and then gives it a reasonable good score (3/5).
I mean,wtf?

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 158
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:16:16 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54597
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000



Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.



No, there's not. Film reviewing is film criticism. That's why they're called critics.


Yes of course film reviews are film criticism, but surely you accept the difference between film reviews and film analysis? Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not. They are part of the film release process. Film criticism can be at any point in time, 50 years after a film.



And I think that's a horrible dumbing down of the review process. You're basically suggesting that film reviewing should have no purpose beyond helping the muddled make up their minds. And these are the kind of idiots that then come screaming in these threads about how dare the reviewer give a film five stars when it clearly only deserved four and a quarter.



I really don't think they are. It can be used to decide if it sounds like something you want to see, but your suggestion takes the review entirely away from being a comment on the film to being an advert and recommendation house for potential viewers. While there might be something of a balance, I think you're way skewing it in the wrong direction. What you're suggesting is what, say, a tabloid might do with it's limited repertoire of superlatives thrown at a paragraph on a film. I think the balance is to cover both options - and actually critiquing the film is exactly what a proper review should do. If it doesn't it may as well just tick a box option -

go,
don't go,
maybe it'll be for you.


< Message edited by elab49 -- 31/5/2012 1:17:15 PM >


_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 159
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:16:40 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park
Ten pages before five?

Can we do it?


_____________________________

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 OPEN YOUR EYES)
Post #: 160
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:17:21 PM   
Dirk Miggler


Posts: 1106
Joined: 14/1/2009
So if you going in expecting horror your gonna be disappointed then. I'm starting to get the impression that preconceptions of what the movie is/should is guiding a few of the reviews i've seen. Rather than reviewing it as what it is, some seem to be analysing it as to what they think it should be. Not criticising just making an observation. And to be honest I partly blame the marketing if that's the case.

Could be that as usual we won't get a true perspective of this film until after multiple viewings. Fine by me, if it's good !

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 161
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:20:02 PM   
jrewing1000


Posts: 486
Joined: 23/11/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000



Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.



No, there's not. Film reviewing is film criticism. That's why they're called critics.


Yes of course film reviews are film criticism, but surely you accept the difference between film reviews and film analysis? Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not. They are part of the film release process. Film criticism can be at any point in time, 50 years after a film.



And I think that's a horrible dumbing down of the review process. You're basically suggesting that film reviewing should have no purpose beyond helping the muddled make up their minds. And these are the kind of idiots that then come screaming in these threads about how dare the reviewer give a film five stars when it clearly only deserved four and a quarter.



I couldn't care less what the review actually says (you're right - people are getting far too worked up about the review). But a film review IS part of a process. I'm not suggesting for one moment they should be bad reviews. But they are written specifically for the public when a film is released!


Yes, it's written for the public, but that doesn't mean it's restricted to simply telling people if they should see it or not. And it doesn't mean all reviews should aim for that audience. Film criticism doesn't just happen 50 years after the fact, it's an immediate process, and part of film criticism sometimes involves spoilers.


So in an extreme example, why shouldn't a review tell the viewer exactly what happens in the film? After all, any argument made in the review will be backed up?

No, of course that shouldn't happen. A review has a specific purpose, it's a TYPE of film criticism that is used during the release process of a film. Yes, you are right - that good reviews go beyond just saying 'see it' or 'dont see it'. Good reviews explain the experience gained from seeing the film, how the players do, how the crew do, highlights, lowlights etc. But the difference between a good review and a GREAT review in my opinion, would lie in how much is given away.

Please, i'm not dumbing down the review process, i'm just calling out for greater care and respect for people who don't want their storytelling experience ruined.

FYI - i do avoid reviews of films I'm certain to see.

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 162
RE: - 31/5/2012 1:20:33 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54597
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: TolkenHobbitGuy

Well this is disappointing, considering Empire is usually right, very disappointing. I guess thats what you get when you mess with a classic, even if its by the original director albeit with a script from a 'Lost' writer so i guess i should've known better.


Yeah - there's your likely problem right there. Lost/The Darkest Hour/Cowboys and Aliens/Nash Bridges - that's the writing talent bringing you this film. Seriously - Cowboys and Aliens. Unless you got a mea culpa from the writer acknowledging how badly that went wrong (as you did from the studio) you just don't believe he gets his mistakes and will likely repeat them.

I'm amazed I want to see this film so much tbh!

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome
Post #: 163
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:22:19 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49


quote:

ORIGINAL: TolkenHobbitGuy

Well this is disappointing, considering Empire is usually right, very disappointing. I guess thats what you get when you mess with a classic, even if its by the original director albeit with a script from a 'Lost' writer so i guess i should've known better.


Yeah - there's your likely problem right there. Lost/The Darkest Hour/Cowboys and Aliens/Nash Bridges - that's the writing talent bringing you this film. Seriously - Cowboys and Aliens. Unless you got a mea culpa from the writer acknowledging how badly that went wrong (as you did from the studio) you just don't believe he gets his mistakes and will likely repeat them.

I'm amazed I want to see this film so much tbh!


You know whats going to happen now, right? Everyone will hate it and you will love it.

_____________________________

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 elab49)
Post #: 164
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:26:01 PM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4381
Joined: 5/2/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49


quote:

ORIGINAL: TolkenHobbitGuy

Well this is disappointing, considering Empire is usually right, very disappointing. I guess thats what you get when you mess with a classic, even if its by the original director albeit with a script from a 'Lost' writer so i guess i should've known better.


Yeah - there's your likely problem right there. Lost/The Darkest Hour/Cowboys and Aliens/Nash Bridges - that's the writing talent bringing you this film. Seriously - Cowboys and Aliens. Unless you got a mea culpa from the writer acknowledging how badly that went wrong (as you did from the studio) you just don't believe he gets his mistakes and will likely repeat them.

I'm amazed I want to see this film so much tbh!


I didnt mind Cowboys and Aliens personally but I wouldnt rate it as an outstanding film.
Just a typical sci-fi cliched ridden film with a some decent set pieces and acting.Typical 'sunday evening' type relax film where you've drunk abit to much bubbly and the film flys right over your head.

Hopefully Lindelof (or Lindy-lou) isnt involved in Ridleys next Sci-fi adventure ie Blade Runner 2.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 165
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:26:34 PM   
Russ Whitfield

 

Posts: 425
Joined: 10/4/2012
s

< Message edited by Russ Whitfield -- 31/5/2012 1:27:38 PM >


_____________________________

www.soldiergirlsmovie.com/
www.i-spimovie.com/

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 166
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:27:34 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54597
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000

So in an extreme example, why shouldn't a review tell the viewer exactly what happens in the film? After all, any argument made in the review will be backed up?

No, of course that shouldn't happen. A review has a specific purpose, it's a TYPE of film criticism that is used during the release process of a film. Yes, you are right - that good reviews go beyond just saying 'see it' or 'dont see it'. Good reviews explain the experience gained from seeing the film, how the players do, how the crew do, highlights, lowlights etc. But the difference between a good review and a GREAT review in my opinion, would lie in how much is given away.

Please, i'm not dumbing down the review process, i'm just calling out for greater care and respect for people who don't want their storytelling experience ruined.

FYI - i do avoid reviews of films I'm certain to see.



You're kind of changing the point with the analogy you use though - there's no suggestion of that. The opposite actually - just listing what happens isn't any use if you don't know if it's down effectively.

The difference between a good review and a great review, for me, has really very little to do with what it synopsises from the film (made up word?) - it's down to the quality of the writing, the engagement with the material, the knowledge base the reviewer is speaking from. And other things.



_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 167
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:27:52 PM   
rawlinson

 

Posts: 45002
Joined: 13/6/2008
From: Timbuktu. Chinese or Fictional.

quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000


quote:

ORIGINAL: rawlinson


quote:

ORIGINAL: jrewing1000



Good film criticism requires actually interacting with the film in question, in order for the critic to explain exactly why it did or didn't work for them, and that sometimes does require spoilers.


There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.



No, there's not. Film reviewing is film criticism. That's why they're called critics.


Yes of course film reviews are film criticism, but surely you accept the difference between film reviews and film analysis? Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not. They are part of the film release process. Film criticism can be at any point in time, 50 years after a film.



And I think that's a horrible dumbing down of the review process. You're basically suggesting that film reviewing should have no purpose beyond helping the muddled make up their minds. And these are the kind of idiots that then come screaming in these threads about how dare the reviewer give a film five stars when it clearly only deserved four and a quarter.



I couldn't care less what the review actually says (you're right - people are getting far too worked up about the review). But a film review IS part of a process. I'm not suggesting for one moment they should be bad reviews. But they are written specifically for the public when a film is released!


Yes, it's written for the public, but that doesn't mean it's restricted to simply telling people if they should see it or not. And it doesn't mean all reviews should aim for that audience. Film criticism doesn't just happen 50 years after the fact, it's an immediate process, and part of film criticism sometimes involves spoilers.


So in an extreme example, why shouldn't a review tell the viewer exactly what happens in the film? After all, any argument made in the review will be backed up?



And I'd have absolutely no problem with that.

quote:

A review has a specific purpose, it's a TYPE of film criticism that is used during the release process of a film.


You seem to be coming at this as if a review is part of the promotional materials for a film. It's not. A film critic is independent from the film and doesn't have to stick to any rigid rules you're inventing for them.

quote:

Good reviews explain the experience gained from seeing the film, how the players do, how the crew do, highlights, lowlights etc. But the difference between a good review and a GREAT review in my opinion, would lie in how much is given away.


Right, in your opinion. In my opinion a great review is one that tackles the film in a stimulating and thought-provoking way. Not one that walks an imaginary tightrope.

quote:

Please, i'm not dumbing down the review process, i'm just calling out for greater care and respect for people who don't want their storytelling experience ruined.


You've made these comments

quote:

As a rule of thumb, reviews should NEVER have to come with a spoiler warning.


quote:

The point of a review is to help the public decide whether or not to see the movie.


quote:

They are not for film analysis - many reviewers get this wrong,


quote:

There's a difference between film criticism and film reviews.


quote:

Reviews are specifically about informing the public about whether a film is something they would want to see or not.


quote:

I'm just trying to specify that film reviews have their own rules to maximise the viewing experience.


All of which is about dumbing down reviews. The rules you want to impose on film reviews would strangle any decent criticism of a film. Your comments suggest they should be used as a see/don't see guide, when they should be more than that.

(in reply to jrewing1000)
Post #: 168
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:29:35 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8279
Joined: 31/7/2008
If Cowboys And Aliens is the level we're dealing with then I'm not sure I want to watch it (nb. not really true.). I didn't know it was written by someone responsible for so many shit films, if I had done I would have dialled down my anticipation. That coupled with Sir Ridley's failing powers means I should have seen this coming.

(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)
Post #: 169
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:32:04 PM   
Mojo


Posts: 6053
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: The CIC, next to the old man.
No Spoilers Here.

I loved it. Absolutely beautiful film, a work of art if you ask me but then expect nothing else from Ridley Scott. It was exactly the kind of film I was expecting. Fassbender is superb, it is suitably horrific in places and the final moments gave me goosebumps. There are a few problems; there's really no need to have so many background characters who rarely get a look in and some of the dialogue is clunky but that aside it was excellent. The 3D was beautiful, especially the extreme wide shots of Prometheus in space.

_____________________________

Let's shove a stick up that wolf's ass.
Post #: 170
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:33:19 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54597
Joined: 1/10/2005
I thought it was a midnight showing tonight. Has somewhere shown it early?

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to Mojo)
Post #: 171
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:35:03 PM   
Mojo


Posts: 6053
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: The CIC, next to the old man.
I work at a Cineworld and we had a staff showing at midnight yesterday. Perks of the job!

_____________________________

Let's shove a stick up that wolf's ass.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 172
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:37:15 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54597
Joined: 1/10/2005
You lucky git! Do they do it with lots of films or just big releases like this?

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to Mojo)
Post #: 173
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:39:07 PM   
jrewing1000


Posts: 486
Joined: 23/11/2005

The rules you want to impose on film reviews would strangle any decent criticism of a film. Your comments suggest they should be used as a see/don't see guide, when they should be more than that.


Well, there's the sticking point. I don't believe avoiding spoilers would strangle any decent criticism of film. It's been managed in the past by Empire quite well.

I agree with you - they should be more than that. I'm just saying they shouldn't include spoilers!

By the way - kudos on ripping my postings to pieces. I am a defeated man :)

(in reply to rawlinson)
Post #: 174
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:40:45 PM   
MonsterCat


Posts: 7934
Joined: 24/3/2011
From: St. Albans, Hertfordshire

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mojo

No Spoilers Here.

I loved it. Absolutely beautiful film, a work of art if you ask me but then expect nothing else from Ridley Scott. It was exactly the kind of film I was expecting. Fassbender is superb, it is suitably horrific in places and the final moments gave me goosebumps. There are a few problems; there's really no need to have so many background characters who rarely get a look in and some of the dialogue is clunky but that aside it was excellent. The 3D was beautiful, especially the extreme wide shots of Prometheus in space.


So it doesn't suffer too much from the light loss?

_____________________________

"I am a writer, a doctor, a nuclear physicist and a theoretical philosopher. But above all, I am a man, a hopelessly inquisitive man, just like you."

Films watched in 2013

(in reply to Mojo)
Post #: 175
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:42:08 PM   
OPEN YOUR EYES

 

Posts: 4381
Joined: 5/2/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

You lucky git! Do they do it with lots of films or just big releases like this?


You trying to get a new job?

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 176
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:42:09 PM   
Mojo


Posts: 6053
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: The CIC, next to the old man.
We do it with quite a lot of films really, the manager is quite laid back about it and as long as we've got the password that unlocks the film then he'll usually put it on. It is mainly the big ones though, John Carter, Avengers, MiB3, Dictator to name a few. Its usually only a day or so before the actual release (Avengers was the Tuesday so bragging rights were mine!) but it just means no annoying customers there to ruin it!

But yeah, for me Prometheus is a hit so I hope you won't be disappointed. It could have benefited from a top, top screenwriter to iron out the stereotypical background characters but the leads are all fleshed out. And as I said, Fassbender's David is a revelation.

_____________________________

Let's shove a stick up that wolf's ass.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 177
RE: Spoilers or what! - 31/5/2012 1:44:26 PM   
makins

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 15/12/2011
ridleys films rarely get very good initial reviews, the critics are always sniffy about him, "lack of character, style over substance" etc. his films are slow burners anyway, you cant take them all in with one sitting, they reveal more with repeated viewings and are always so rich in detail. and lets face it most film critics are merely frustrated film makers anyway, who never had the talent to go out and be a success making their own films and can only stand from the sidelines looking in and throwing in their little comments at others efforts. at the end of the day their views are no more relevant than those of regular audience members like us, and whatever the critics say this film is going to be huge with audiences, it is critic-proof.

(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 178
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:45:20 PM   
Rgirvan44


Posts: 19049
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mojo

We do it with quite a lot of films really, the manager is quite laid back about it and as long as we've got the password that unlocks the film then he'll usually put it on. It is mainly the big ones though, John Carter, Avengers, MiB3, Dictator to name a few. Its usually only a day or so before the actual release (Avengers was the Tuesday so bragging rights were mine!) but it just means no annoying customers there to ruin it!

But yeah, for me Prometheus is a hit so I hope you won't be disappointed. It could have benefited from a top, top screenwriter to iron out the stereotypical background characters but the leads are all fleshed out. And as I said, Fassbender's David is a revelation.


Where do you rank on Alien series.

_____________________________

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 Mojo)
Post #: 179
RE: RE: - 31/5/2012 1:45:43 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54597
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Mojo

We do it with quite a lot of films really, the manager is quite laid back about it and as long as we've got the password that unlocks the film then he'll usually put it on. It is mainly the big ones though, John Carter, Avengers, MiB3, Dictator to name a few. Its usually only a day or so before the actual release (Avengers was the Tuesday so bragging rights were mine!) but it just means no annoying customers there to ruin it!

But yeah, for me Prometheus is a hit so I hope you won't be disappointed. It could have benefited from a top, top screenwriter to iron out the stereotypical background characters but the leads are all fleshed out. And as I said, Fassbender's David is a revelation.


O/T We actually saw Avengers in a cinema by ourselves on Monday. I'd happily give up some atmosphere to be able to enjoy a film in peace. It sounds a great perk

On-Topic - I'll be interested to see how Fassbender does. I've seen a couple of good performances and some so bland it's difficult to see a person on screen. I think he needs a strong director - and Ridley never struck me as an actors' director.

_____________________________

Lips Together and Blow - blogtasticness and Glasgow Film Festival GFF13!

quote:

ORIGINAL: Deviation] LIKE AMERICA'S SWEETHEARTS TOO. IT MADE ME LAUGH A LOT AND THOUGHT IT WAS WITTY. ALSO I FEEL SLOWLY DYING INSIDE. I KEEP AGREEING WITH ELAB.


Annual Poll 2013 - All Lists Welcome

(in reply to Mojo)
Post #: 180
Page:   <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Spoilers or what! Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   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

0.109