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: Stupid fool!

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Stupid fool! Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: Stupid fool! - 21/6/2012 1:14:03 PM   
elab49


Posts: 54677
Joined: 1/10/2005
quote:

ORIGINAL: Dirk Miggler

Spoilers

My last point on this. I understand that the reviewer is just trying emphasise how he cared for the characters and I don't think he's that stupid to write the end of the film in his review. Letting us know it does happen however and in doing so implying that the film does inevitably fall into the genre cliches coupled with everyone banging the drum that it isn't really spoiler only makes it more obvious that they do "get there" in the end. So yeah the film is spoiled....... I think.


An entirely fair point although, unfortunately, the only way to address the complaint, and it was a complaint, was to suggest a misreading. Catch 22 kind of.

Which is partly why, being something of a spoilerphobe, I rarely read reviews before seeing a film.

_____________________________

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 Dirk Miggler)
Post #: 31
RE: Stupid fool! - 21/6/2012 11:45:29 PM   
Evil_Bob


Posts: 2870
Joined: 1/5/2006
From: GGGAAAHHH!!!
I should really have let Dirk make that point for me

_____________________________

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


(in reply to elab49)
Post #: 32
The film is not spoiled by this review! - 23/6/2012 2:23:29 PM   
Bighousewill

 

Posts: 244
Joined: 5/12/2009
Just want to give some advice to these humpty numptys, to avoid possible spoilers try seeing the film before you read any type of review so you can have your own free opinions about it. But if you just want to gage if the film is worth a watch just perhaps look at the star rating and the verdict without reading the review. After you have viewed the film come back and read the review then post a comment if you want to. This what I thought about the five year engagement...Bridesmaids was brilliant, The Five Year Engagement was better than Bridemaids nuff said I'm happy and the Empire review is good.

(in reply to Evil_Bob)
Post #: 33
Brilliant - 23/6/2012 4:55:23 PM   
ryanchallenger

 

Posts: 30
Joined: 2/3/2010
This film was fantastic, at times lacked comedy but in the whole 2 hour film, 95% of it lived up to it's critics, brilliant film !!!

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 34
RE: The Five-Year Engagement - 23/6/2012 10:22:48 PM   
TheMightyBlackout


Posts: 272
Joined: 28/4/2012
From: Oxford, UK
Wow. I think I'm one of the few people who disliked this film. With that in mind, the following is my humble opinion, obviously...

The film's about an hour too long, and isn't funny, charming or (ironically) engaging enough to justify that runtime. Entire scenes go by with apparently nothing to contribute to the story and are of no comedic value.
There are snort-out-loud moments, but no real laughs. Jason Segel and Emily Blunt are capable of (and have starred in) so much better, that it's embarrassing. Almost as embarrassing as the way they kept shoehorning the donut analogy into this film.

I went in wanting to like it, but just *couldn't*.

_____________________________

More reviews and rambling like that ^^^ at: >>>WorldOfBlackout.co.uk <<<

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 35
RE: The Five-Year Engagement - 24/6/2012 8:34:35 AM   
BelfastBoy

 

Posts: 599
Joined: 30/11/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: TheMightyBlackout

Wow. I think I'm one of the few people who disliked this film. With that in mind, the following is my humble opinion, obviously...

The film's about an hour too long, and isn't funny, charming or (ironically) engaging enough to justify that runtime. Entire scenes go by with apparently nothing to contribute to the story and are of no comedic value.
There are snort-out-loud moments, but no real laughs. Jason Segel and Emily Blunt are capable of (and have starred in) so much better, that it's embarrassing. Almost as embarrassing as the way they kept shoehorning the donut analogy into this film.

I went in wanting to like it, but just *couldn't*.


I've seen the film, and will keep this spoiler-free.

My wife and I both disliked this film. At one point I even turned to her and said: "This is shit". I only say that because, having not read any reviews beforehand, I was sucked in by the reputation of the writing / producing / directing talent, and also a misleading promo campaign that strongly implied this would be a laugh out loud, slapsticky romcom. That's not what it is at all. There's a lot more drama than comedy, and while the script is full of witty one-liners, as a whole it's a bit like Segel's TV show How I Met Your Mother - smart, sharply written and observed, but only intermittently funny.

Segel and Blunt act very well, and are very convincing as a couple, but the film was trying to make serious points in a humorous way, and ends up falling between two stools. Occasionally there are broad moments of slapstick and surrealism that seem to come from other films entirely (or other, tonally different, script drafts?) - Blunt running into an open car door features in all the trailers and is such a cheap way to get a laugh, for instance. Then, in the same scene, Rhys Ifans displays bizarre martial arts and free running / parkour skills for no obvious reason. It's funny because it's so odd, yet it's also out of place within a film that could've been very good, even great, as a serious drama. As a comedy, it fails, which is a shame as there was a great deal of potential.

Oddly for an Apatow / Stoller / Segel film, the cast is distinctly star / cameo-free, and without even a depth of recognisable comic talent to brighten up the supporting roles. Mindy Kaling is superb but criminally underused in the US Office, and her film career seems to follow a similar trajectory. Rhys Ifans is actually pretty good in Five Year Engagement, though playing an obvious 'type'; also, his career choices are tremendously unpredictable (up next: The Amazing Spiderman!). Finally, for what it's worth, I personally thought that the depiction of 'Michigan' (anywhere in particular? it's a big state!) was seriously sweeping and cliched, with the film suggesting that Segel's character can only be happy in a place with decent restaurants! (I know it's a bit more complicated than that, but it's depressing to find yet another depiction of midwest America as being a grim, snowy place full of hunting weirdos.)

(in reply to TheMightyBlackout)
Post #: 36
Not THAT funny - 27/6/2012 12:32:54 PM   
zackkilmer

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 27/6/2012
I agree with BelfastBoy , i hardly laughed during the film , yeah its sweet and charming and watchable leads but overlong for me . It boils down to this - women find Apatow films i.e Bridesmaids funny , men dont . Very disappointing and not as funny as the review makes out . Emily Blunt is gorgeous though.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 37
RE: The film is not spoiled by this review! - 27/6/2012 4:49:36 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
Regardless of how obvious the result is or how formulaic or whatever the situation: the review gave away a third act resolution. What if this was the first Rom-Com I had ever seen and I read this review? What if I was hoping that this might be a game changer? What if I was going to throw by that ending regardless?

Presumptions and assumptions should not be made Empire: your job is to advise as to whether the reader should see the film....not tell us what happens in it!


quote:

ORIGINAL: Bighousewill

Just want to give some advice to these humpty numptys, to avoid possible spoilers try seeing the film before you read any type of review so you can have your own free opinions about it. But if you just want to gage if the film is worth a watch just perhaps look at the star rating and the verdict without reading the review. After you have viewed the film come back and read the review then post a comment if you want to. This what I thought about the five year engagement...Bridesmaids was brilliant, The Five Year Engagement was better than Bridemaids nuff said I'm happy and the Empire review is good.


I kind of see your point...but isn't the whole reason that most people read reviews to make their mind up as to whether they should see it in the first place?



< Message edited by st3veebee -- 27/6/2012 4:56:33 PM >


_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to Bighousewill)
Post #: 38
RE: The film is not spoiled by this review! - 12/7/2012 1:58:22 PM   
TragicRomantic


Posts: 77
Joined: 7/7/2012
From: Elysium
This is a strange film.It is not a comedy and is quite bleak.That said,it isnt a serious look at relationships either.It goes on a bit, then goes all cliched.Kind of like The Break Up meets Friends With Benefits.

_____________________________

Life,love and film-enjoy all like fine wine
Silence the doubters
Embrace the lovers
Ignore the haters

(in reply to st3veebee)
Post #: 39
RE: Not THAT funny - 12/7/2012 2:50:14 PM   
kind_cactus


Posts: 16
Joined: 4/8/2009
From: Belfast

quote:

ORIGINAL: zackkilmer
women find Apatow films i.e Bridesmaids funny , men dont .


Not true, neither me or my sister found Bridesmaid particularly funny.


_____________________________

Have a Nice Day

(in reply to zackkilmer)
Post #: 40
RE: Not THAT funny - 12/7/2012 3:46:16 PM   
st3veebee


Posts: 2353
Joined: 3/9/2006
From: 9303 Lyon Drive
quote:

ORIGINAL: kind_cactus


quote:

ORIGINAL: zackkilmer
women find Apatow films i.e Bridesmaids funny , men dont .


Not true, neither me or my sister found Bridesmaid particularly funny.



Also-BBC reviewer Mark Kermode loved Bridesmaids.

_____________________________

Latest Films:

Two days in New York: 4/5

Prometheus: 3.5/5

Abe Lincoln: VH 3/5

Twin Peaks: FWWM 3.5/5

(in reply to kind_cactus)
Post #: 41
- 12/8/2012 5:31:07 AM   
nc_jj


Posts: 664
Joined: 20/2/2008
Yes it was funny, I'll give it that. But, I actually expected more from it (as it had a four-star review from Empire). I felt it a little longer than it should've been. But real (in a way), and somewhat charming. 2.5/5

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 42
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2]
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: Stupid fool! Page: <<   < prev  1 [2]
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

0.078