RE: The Predictables

Follow @empiremagazine

Forum Home

Register for Free!

Log In

Moderator Tickets

FAQ

Users Online

RE: The Predictables

Logged in as: Guest

Printable Version

All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: The Predictables

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

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 12:23:30 PM

elab49

Posts: 51590
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: clownfoot

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

For the rest - the film opens tomorrow so we can let this thread get back on topic and strictly avoid gratuitous reference to Canadian hipsters 'k?

He's a schmuck. Not a hipster...

I'm still operating on some confusion over what a hipster actually is so I thought I'd use this as it seems to be the insult Expendables 'fans' throw out

_____________________________

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

Films watched 2012

What are your top 10/25 films of 2012? Vote in the forum Annual Poll now! Deadline is Sunday.

(in reply to clownfoot)

Post #: 61

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 12:23:31 PM

Rgirvan44

Posts: 18886
Joined: 10/3/2006
From: Punishment Park

quote:

ORIGINAL: clownfoot

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

For the rest - the film opens tomorrow so we can let this thread get back on topic and strictly avoid gratuitous reference to Canadian hipsters 'k?

He's a schmuck. Not a hipster...

INDEED - I was about to say the same thing.

_____________________________

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 clownfoot)

Post #: 62

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 12:40:24 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rebel scum

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj
Point being how many of these films deserve the rating they were given and have stood the test of time to be remembered and revered as a classic? -
King Kong
Cloverfield
Attack of the clones
Intolerable cruelty
Moulin Rouge
Or some 4 star -
War of the worlds
X-men
Indiana Jones And The Kingdom Of The Crystal Skull

Those ones do, in my opinion. Cloverfield and Intolerable Cruelty onto got 4 stars by the way. Plenty of others are pushing it-I know Moulin Rouge and King Kong still have a vocal fanbase.

And everyone gets blinded by hype. Don't tell me you've never seen a film, thought it was awesome, then seen it later and realised it's not as good divorced from the buildup and excitement. I know I have.

http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/5star/
Lists all of them, they're on there.
The Coens are a good example
O Brother, Where Art Thou?, 5, Intolerable cruelty, 5, The ladykillers, 3, Burn after reading, 4, all films with a similar tone, only the first and the last of those probably got the rating they deserve.
You can literally see them giving stars based on prior reviews, and not on merit, the middle two films are 2 star or 3 at best. As they actually said in the attack of the clones review- 'we gave the last one 4, so this being better must be a 5...' (which interestingly has now been downgraded to 3 stars) but in this case you can imagine them sitting in the office saying 'we gave the last one a 5 and this is not much worse, so lets give it a 3...'

This is rubbish. Not a grey area - but rubbish. Did you read your link?

About 6 down from the top of your link - The Raid. 5 stars. Any Nolan or Coen in sight? No. Some long-standing revered director at all? No. Is it anything other than an all-out action movie? No.

So can we please can the dishonest attacks on the rating and admit just admit you just want to slam anyone who doesn't agree with your hope for how good the film will be?

For the rest - the film opens tomorrow so we can let this thread get back on topic and strictly avoid gratuitous reference to Canadian hipsters 'k?

I'm surprised he mentioned Moulin Rouge more than anything, I hate that film immensely but if anyone can't see how it got the accliam or how loved it is, then he is clearly a fool.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to elab49)

Post #: 63

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 12:49:59 PM

homersimpson_esq

Posts: 19969
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Springfield

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj

You can literally see them giving stars based on prior reviews, and not on merit, the middle two films are 2 star or 3 at best. As they actually said in the attack of the clones review- 'we gave the last one 4, so this being better must be a 5...' (which interestingly has now been downgraded to 3 stars) but in this case you can imagine them sitting in the office saying 'we gave the last one a 5 and this is not much worse, so lets give it a 3...'

http://www.empireonline.com/forum/tm.asp?m=3127568

_____________________________

That deep-browed Homer ruled as his demesne.

TREK WARS

(in reply to bbobeckyj)

Post #: 64

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 12:55:16 PM

adambatman82

Posts: 11156
Joined: 15/12/2005
From: Sheffield

quote:

ORIGINAL: chris kilby
Or is that Cashiers du Cinema you're thinking of?)

Cashiers du Cineama...

[image]http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Archive/Search/2011/8/24/1314201924957/Trailblazers-full-version-001.jpg[/image]

EDIT - Forgot that images don't work in here. Here's a link.

http://static.guim.co.uk/sys-images/Guardian/Archive/Search/2011/8/24/1314201924957/Trailblazers-full-version-001.jpg

< Message edited by adambatman82 -- 15/8/2012 12:56:40 PM >

(in reply to chris kilby)

Post #: 65

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 1:23:17 PM

bbobeckyj

Posts: 18
Joined: 16/8/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj
http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/5star/
Lists all of them, they're on there.
The Coens are a good example
O Brother, Where Art Thou?, 5, Intolerable cruelty, 5, The ladykillers, 3, Burn after reading, 4, all films with a similar tone, only the first and the last of those probably got the rating they deserve.
You can literally see them giving stars based on prior reviews, and not on merit, the middle two films are 2 star or 3 at best. As they actually said in the attack of the clones review- 'we gave the last one 4, so this being better must be a 5...' (which interestingly has now been downgraded to 3 stars) but in this case you can imagine them sitting in the office saying 'we gave the last one a 5 and this is not much worse, so lets give it a 3...'

This is rubbish. Not a grey area - but rubbish. Did you read your link?

About 6 down from the top of your link - The Raid. 5 stars. Any Nolan or Coen in sight? No. Some long-standing revered director at all? No. Is it anything other than an all-out action movie? No.

So can we please can the dishonest attacks on the rating and admit just admit you just want to slam anyone who doesn't agree with your hope for how good the film will be?

There is more than one page to the 5 stars section, I just linked the first page.
I'm not attacking anyone, I couldn't care less about the review for this film but someone made a comment that the best way to get a 5 star review from Empire was to make a 5 star film. I simply stated that that is not always correct. Intolerable Cruelty
link for example.

(in reply to elab49)

Post #: 66

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 1:29:24 PM

Rebel scum

Posts: 3025
Joined: 2/1/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj
http://www.empireonline.com/reviews/5star/
Lists all of them, they're on there.
The Coens are a good example
O Brother, Where Art Thou?, 5, Intolerable cruelty, 5, The ladykillers, 3, Burn after reading, 4, all films with a similar tone, only the first and the last of those probably got the rating they deserve.
You can literally see them giving stars based on prior reviews, and not on merit, the middle two films are 2 star or 3 at best. As they actually said in the attack of the clones review- 'we gave the last one 4, so this being better must be a 5...' (which interestingly has now been downgraded to 3 stars) but in this case you can imagine them sitting in the office saying 'we gave the last one a 5 and this is not much worse, so lets give it a 3...'

This is rubbish. Not a grey area - but rubbish. Did you read your link?

About 6 down from the top of your link - The Raid. 5 stars. Any Nolan or Coen in sight? No. Some long-standing revered director at all? No. Is it anything other than an all-out action movie? No.

So can we please can the dishonest attacks on the rating and admit just admit you just want to slam anyone who doesn't agree with your hope for how good the film will be?

There is more than one page to the 5 stars section, I just linked the first page.
I'm not attacking anyone, I couldn't care less about the review for this film but someone made a comment that the best way to get a 5 star review from Empire was to make a 5 star film. I simply stated that that is not always correct. Intolerable Cruelty
link for example.

You rang?

I'm not saying the system's foolproof, I said that the EASIEST way to get ***** is my making a ***** film. Sure, there have been films given five stars that don't deserve them, but no system is foolproof and nobody is immune from hype and excitement over an anticipated blockbuster or the latest from an exciting director. More recently, ***** for films that don't deserve them have dropped off, the rating itself comes up rarer than in some past years, and they tend to go to genuinely great movies, such as The Raid or TDKR (Which a lot of people genuinely love but others don't, before all the madness of THAT thread comes in 'ere).

_____________________________

"We are not safe! A dark menace rises to the east! Duckies go quack! Cows go moo! I want ice cream. Verily, will you two hobbits join my quest?"

(in reply to bbobeckyj)

Post #: 67

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 1:29:36 PM

elab49

Posts: 51590
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rebel scum
The best way to get five stars from Empire is to, I dunno, make a good film?

Or just be a film made by Jackson, Whedon, Nolan, Spielberg, Coen, Boyle, Lucas, Abrams, Singer etc etc. They have all made films which get an extra star than they deserve. Empire reviews are far from impartial. t

quote:

Empire are not often starstruck/blinded by their love of their favourite people.

The point is that you're cherry-picking to make a point. The Raid, all by itself, completely negates that point - the point apparently being that Empire aren't judging films on merit and the reviewer's opinion of same. A point seemingly being made based solely on your hopes of what a film you haven't seen, but they have, might be like. You might not realise this, but nearly every review thread in here has someone turning up eventually claiming Empire doesn't get some genre or other, or is too excessively fond of one genre or other and all because they like/don't like a film someone else does/doesn't.

The Raid is also a particularly good example because of the last Expendables thread is anything to go by we have pages of idiocy about Empire not getting action movies to come.

(in reply to bbobeckyj)

Post #: 68

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 2:04:26 PM

bbobeckyj

Posts: 18
Joined: 16/8/2010

Rebel scum, elab49, et al, This has obviously got out of control. I have no agenda or opinion of this film, or interest in it other than I would quite like to see Arnie and Li doing something decent.
My original comment wasn't meant to be read into any great deal. I'm well aware that there are films without 'pedigree', such as The Raid that Empire gives good reviews to. All I am and was saying is that The reviewers do often give better ratings to the people they like. And The Raid doesn't negate this, and I'm basing this on films that I have seen and read the original magazine review.

From the review pages-
"STAR RATINGS EXPLAINED
***** Classic"
The information about the star ratings in homersimpson_esq's link is not shown in reviews, and I did not see it in the last magazine I read.
With a quick Google definition search of 'classic' gives "Judged over a period of time to be of the highest quality and outstanding of its kind." So maybe the ratings should be pedantically titled 'A potential future classic' instead, but it's not, and a 5* review says to me that I should be able to go into a film and expect a near flawless experience whatever the style or theme of the production.

< Message edited by bbobeckyj -- 15/8/2012 2:07:40 PM >

(in reply to elab49)

Post #: 69

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 2:09:02 PM

Rebel scum

Posts: 3025
Joined: 2/1/2006

That's fine, it's just to imply that various people get a free pass isn't really the case-Ladykillers, for instance, got a *** in the cinema at ** on DVD, so to imply some directors get a free ride isn't really the case-Unless, of course, the film's been hyped up to oblivion, as is the case with some of the examples you've mentioned.

I know what you mean about the star ratings though, I tend to look at the review text instead, that tends to give a much better overview as to whether or not I should see the film. Star ratings are tricky bastards to use, but I reckon Empire usually does well.

_____________________________

"We are not safe! A dark menace rises to the east! Duckies go quack! Cows go moo! I want ice cream. Verily, will you two hobbits join my quest?"

(in reply to bbobeckyj)

Post #: 70

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 2:18:26 PM

Qwerty Norris

Posts: 3149
Joined: 26/10/2005
From: Edinburgh

Personally, I just avoid all reviews of a film I'm interested in & I don't read them until I've seen the film itself (and that includes this one).

Not even a 2 star review here will change that.(Because as some of you have pointed out, it's all about opinions, innit?)

_____________________________

Qwerty's Top 10 of 2013 (so far)

1. Zero Dark Thirty
2. No
3. In The Fog
4. Good Vibrations
5. McCullin
6. Beyond the Hills
7. The Place Beyond the Pines
8. Wreck-it Ralph
9. Shell
10. In The House

(in reply to Rebel scum)

Post #: 71

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 2:32:44 PM

Russ Whitfield

Posts: 425
Joined: 10/4/2012

To be fair, "The Raid" has subtitles.

I hope they have Mr T in Ex3. And Seagal.

_____________________________

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

(in reply to Qwerty Norris)

Post #: 72

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 2:41:09 PM

jonson

Posts: 8067
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Qwerty Norris

Personally, I just avoid all reviews of a film I'm interested in & I don't read them until I've seen the film itself (and that includes this one).

That's what I do, the downside is by the time I've seen the film, The Reviews Thread is just full is spam from the usual suspects.

_____________________________

I've got all the Barbie ones!!!

Yeah but you're old. Really old. Old. Old. Old. Old.

(in reply to Qwerty Norris)

Post #: 73

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:14:05 PM

elab49

Posts: 51590
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: j.p82@hotmail.com

I think the problem with the person who reviewed this actually thought he was going to watch an actual serious movie! He wasn't and someone should of told him! It is a movie which is a toungue in cheek film made in the style of the 80's for the fans, not the critics, so who cares what they think! I say bring on Expendables 3!!!

No, no he didn't - this is standard accusation no. 1 - ;you lot just like your art shit and stuff' (actually, that did come up upthread tbh, so this isn't the first). He's probably seen more movies of this type than you, he just didn't like it as much as you're absolutely sure you will, although you've not seen it yet so you can't actually judge whether he's right or wrong anyway.

By any chance did you read Helen O'Hara's excellent blog piece and that kind of response? It was on the release of Transformers 3

I'm just going to programme that para into one of my function keys now.

Post #: 74

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:15:00 PM

homersimpson_esq

Posts: 19969
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Springfield

quote:

ORIGINAL: j.p82@hotmail.com

I think the problem with the person who reviewed this actually thought he was going to watch an actual serious movie! He wasn't and someone should of told him! It is a movie which is a toungue in cheek film made in the style of the 80's for the fans, not the critics, so who cares what they think! I say bring on Expendables 3!!!

Are you saying that the film isn't Citizen Kane?

_____________________________

That deep-browed Homer ruled as his demesne.

TREK WARS

Post #: 75

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:17:08 PM

Harry Tuttle

Posts: 7508
Joined: 12/11/2005
From: Sometime in the future.

Plus if it's anything at all like the first one then I'd find it hard to class as tongue in cheek whatsoever. Where the first film fell down for me was that it took itself far too seriously. There was no feeling that tongue was in cheek at any point in the film.

_____________________________

Acting...Naturaaal

Your knowledge of scientific biological transmogrification is only outmatched by your zest for kung-fu treachery!

Blood Island. So called because it's the exact shape of some blood

(in reply to elab49)

Post #: 76

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 3:19:08 PM

elab49

Posts: 51590
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: bbobeckyj

All I am and was saying is that The reviewers do often give better ratings to the people they like.

Proof, facts and numbers please rather than belief and hearsay based on them not liking a film you want to like? And a list of 5 star films doesn't cut it - not when most people like directors or films because they're good directors and films. What you've suggested goes far beyond that, you just maybe don't realise that's the rather insulting implication. It's a causal connection not a corrupt one.

And I give you Prometheus - a film Mr Nathan, on your accusation, would have been pre-programmed to like. And just look at that thread. All sorts of different accusations levelled there.

_____________________________

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

Films watched 2012

What are your top 10/25 films of 2012? Vote in the forum Annual Poll now! Deadline is Sunday.

(in reply to bbobeckyj)

Post #: 77

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:20:27 PM

elab49

Posts: 51590
Joined: 1/10/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: Harry Tuttle

Plus if it's anything at all like the first one then I'd find it hard to class as tongue in cheek whatsoever. Where the first film fell down for me was that it took itself far too seriously. There was no feeling that tongue was in cheek at any point in the film.

This completely.

_____________________________

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

Films watched 2012

What are your top 10/25 films of 2012? Vote in the forum Annual Poll now! Deadline is Sunday.

(in reply to Harry Tuttle)

Post #: 78

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:23:00 PM

Rebel scum

Posts: 3025
Joined: 2/1/2006

quote:

ORIGINAL: j.p82@hotmail.com

I think the problem with the person who reviewed this actually thought he was going to watch an actual serious movie! He wasn't and someone should of told him! It is a movie which is a toungue in cheek film made in the style of the 80's for the fans, not the critics, so who cares what they think! I say bring on Expendables 3!!!

So if they released a film that's just two hours of the cast of Expendables II dicking around, then said it was for THE FANS, that would automatically make it okay?

_____________________________

"We are not safe! A dark menace rises to the east! Duckies go quack! Cows go moo! I want ice cream. Verily, will you two hobbits join my quest?"

Post #: 79

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:27:33 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: j.p82@hotmail.com

I think the problem with the person who reviewed this actually thought he was going to watch an actual serious movie! He wasn't and someone should of told him! It is a movie which is a toungue in cheek film made in the style of the 80's for the fans, not the critics, so who cares what they think! I say bring on Expendables 3!!!

Or he wanted an 80s style actioneer and he didn't like what he got, which fits what some people thought of the first one. There's something awesome like Predator and Commando, then you have something mediocre like the first Expendables.

Also, being made FOR THE FANS or not does not disqualify the film for being piss.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 15/8/2012 3:28:50 PM >

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

Post #: 80

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:28:15 PM

AxlReznor

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain

Some movie critics I think are just pretentious snobs... but I've always gotten the impression that Empire reviewers are just as big movie fans themselves. It's certainly not a snooty magazine that writes off anything but art movies. There are some reviewers I tend to agree with more than others, but I've never thought of them as anything other than part of "the fans". They get excited like the rest of us. And they get disappointed like the rest of us.

Now if I found out Mark Kermode has ever written a review for Empire I may just have to reassess that opinion...

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Rebel scum)

Post #: 81

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:29:35 PM

Cool Breeze

Posts: 1625
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet

My problem with the review is that he gives away some of the best lines of dialogue but doesnt actually tell us important stuff that wed like to know.I mean are the action sequences any good? Are they shot well and edited well? Have they got rid of the shaky cam? Is there a good degree of carnage,violence,and swearing?

I just got the impression that Nick doesnt like action movies in general.

(in reply to Rebel scum)

Post #: 82

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:32:46 PM

AxlReznor

Posts: 1095
Joined: 2/12/2010
From: Great Britain

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

My problem with the review is that he gives away some of the best lines of dialogue but doesnt actually tell us important stuff that wed like to know.I mean are the action sequences any good? Are they shot well and edited well? Have they got rid of the shaky cam? Is there a good degree of carnage,violence,and swearing?
I just got the impression that Nick doesnt like action movies in general.

It's a 12A. What do you think?

Not that I think that a movie has to be 15 to be good. Some of my favourite movies are 12A... but I do hate it when someone comes in *cough*Chuck Norris*cough* and fucks with the movie as intended. As much as I think the first one failed to deliver on its promise, I have no problem believing that this will fail even more.

_____________________________

"It's amazing how many supposed 'plot holes' turn out to now be plot holes if you'd just pay attention", Me

(in reply to Cool Breeze)

Post #: 83

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:35:07 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

My problem with the review is that he gives away some of the best lines of dialogue but doesnt actually tell us important stuff that wed like to know.I mean are the action sequences any good? Are they shot well and edited well? Have they got rid of the shaky cam? Is there a good degree of carnage,violence,and swearing?

I just got the impression that Nick doesnt like action movies in general.

He liked Fast Five, Planet Terror and Crank (4 stars).

And questionably, Transformers 2.

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Cool Breeze)

Post #: 84

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:38:30 PM

giggity

Posts: 240
Joined: 4/3/2012

quote:

ORIGINAL: AxlReznor

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

My problem with the review is that he gives away some of the best lines of dialogue but doesnt actually tell us important stuff that wed like to know.I mean are the action sequences any good? Are they shot well and edited well? Have they got rid of the shaky cam? Is there a good degree of carnage,violence,and swearing?
I just got the impression that Nick doesnt like action movies in general.

It's a 12A. What do you think?

Not that I think that a movie has to be 15 to be good. Some of my favourite movies are 12A... but I do hate it when someone comes in *cough*Chuck Norris*cough* and fucks with the movie as intended. As much as I think the first one failed to deliver on its promise, I have no problem believing that this will fail even more.

its not 12a, it's 15. Also in relation to your Mark Kermode 'pretentious snob' remark. The guy's a renowned horror fan (even the trashy ones) and he also gave the Twlight films positive reviews. Just because his opinion is different to yours doesnt make him a pretentious snob.

< Message edited by giggity -- 15/8/2012 3:40:10 PM >

(in reply to AxlReznor)

Post #: 85

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:39:37 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

Seriously, is it possible that Expendables 2 just isn't that fun? The first had some nice things but it was mostly dull, why would a sequel be any certainly different? Stallone for me just isn't a fun action star nor director, and in this case I'd rather watch most things coming from Asia. Like The Raid, Breaking News (ALL THOSE PRETTY LONG TAKES) or if it lives up to its reputation, The Man from Nowhere.

And since the guy who directed it is Simon West, Con Air is rated 4 stars here. The Mechanic is three stars.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 15/8/2012 3:41:49 PM >

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 86

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:40:07 PM

elab49

Posts: 51590
Joined: 1/10/2005

He gave The Grey 4 stars recently - that'd count too?

So we're on to stage two - diss the reviewer and say they're not really qualified to give an opinion? I'd have thought better of you Cool Breeze. You must know how these things go.

_____________________________

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

Films watched 2012

What are your top 10/25 films of 2012? Vote in the forum Annual Poll now! Deadline is Sunday.

(in reply to Deviation)

Post #: 87

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:42:36 PM

Rebel scum

Posts: 3025
Joined: 2/1/2006

EDIT-Oh yeah, you can't have images on this forum.

Well, I'll just say that calling anything "Not for critics" just means that they made a shit film but they know people will see it.

< Message edited by Rebel scum -- 15/8/2012 3:43:35 PM >

_____________________________

"We are not safe! A dark menace rises to the east! Duckies go quack! Cows go moo! I want ice cream. Verily, will you two hobbits join my quest?"

(in reply to elab49)

Post #: 88

RE: 2 Star Review - 15/8/2012 3:42:52 PM

Deviation

Posts: 26908
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ

I wasn't counting that as GRAAAAAAAAAAAAAH MANLY MEN GUNS EVERYTHING FUCK PLOT and EVERYTHING WHO DOESN'T LIKE IT IS A KILLJOY HOW DARE YOU NOT ENJOY IT GO WATCH MELANCHOLIA OR TREE OF LIFE sort of action films.

< Message edited by Deviation -- 15/8/2012 3:46:37 PM >

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Dpp1978
There are certainly times where calling a person a cunt is not only reasonable, it is a gross understatement.

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49
I really wish I could go down to see Privates

(in reply to elab49)

Post #: 89

RE: The Predictables - 15/8/2012 3:46:01 PM

chris kilby

Posts: 1189
Joined: 31/3/2010

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

quote:

ORIGINAL: clownfoot

quote:

ORIGINAL: elab49

For the rest - the film opens tomorrow so we can let this thread get back on topic and strictly avoid gratuitous reference to Canadian hipsters 'k?

He's a schmuck. Not a hipster...

I'm still operating on some confusion over what a hipster actually is so I thought I'd use this as it seems to be the insult Expendables 'fans' throw out