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: WOW

 
Logged in as: Guest
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: WOW Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
RE: WOW - 5/12/2012 6:43:04 PM   
mikekell

 

Posts: 8
Joined: 18/11/2006
LMAO...Twitter generation I'm NOT !

Trouble with the 'love' generation....they make assumptions !!

My point is....it's a review Jim....but not as we know it !


(in reply to OPEN YOUR EYES)
Post #: 31
RE: Faint praise? - 5/12/2012 9:20:27 PM   
Qwerty Norris


Posts: 3971
Joined: 26/10/2005
From: Edinburgh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Rgirvan44

Ten years ago this thread will already have been at ten pages.

Truly we are in a lesser age.


Did this forum even exist 10 years ago?

_____________________________

Qwerty's Top 10 of 2013 (so far)

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

(in reply to Rgirvan44)
Post #: 32
RE: Faint praise? - 5/12/2012 9:45:33 PM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
I think it did, hence the ED versus LOTR thread (cries in nostalgia). It used to be orange though.

_____________________________

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 Qwerty Norris)
Post #: 33
RE: Faint praise? - 6/12/2012 12:58:36 AM   
Beetlejuice!


Posts: 6760
Joined: 24/11/2005
I think I'm rembering correctly in that Two Towers was given a 4 star review online before the magazine edition upped the rating to 5 stars. That caused some controversy and I wouldn't be surprised if it wasn't repeated here. The original reviewer was too hard on TTT, it is a 5 star film if slightly lesser than FOTR is but if The Hobbit is as well, then that remains to be seen.

(in reply to Deviation)
Post #: 34
RE: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - 6/12/2012 1:06:49 AM   
demoncleaner


Posts: 2376
Joined: 3/10/2005
From: Belfast
Oh yeah, I like the way that the dickhead posts above mine are now gone, making my rather lovely, zen and optimistic post look like the prick at the top of an unreasonable pile

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 35
RE: WOW - 6/12/2012 12:44:14 PM   
shool


Posts: 10062
Joined: 24/3/2006
From: In The Pipe, Five by Five.

quote:

ORIGINAL: Hood_Man

quote:

ORIGINAL: OPEN YOUR EYES


quote:

ORIGINAL: shool


quote:

ORIGINAL: OPEN YOUR EYES

give it next Thursday then Boom!!


I believe he was commenting on the below post.


quote:

ORIGINAL: mikekell

For the first time EVER I got halfway through a review and stopped reading as I had lost interest !
Never good when the running time of the review is the same as the film it relates to !



I was commenting on your post

Yeah Shool!!



Doh!

_____________________________

Invisio Text for Spoilers
[ color=#F1F1F1 ] Spoiler text [ /color ] , remove spaces between square brackets

"No one knows what it means, but it's provocative... It gets the people going!"

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 36
- 6/12/2012 3:37:44 PM   
The Red Avenger

 

Posts: 36
Joined: 20/12/2005
I'm quite pleased with this review - As it's only 6 chapters of the book I think 4 Stars is about fair - the meat of the story will come in the second - infact I can see the second film being the busiest in term of plot, action and storytelling - wheas the three LOTR films got bigger as they went, as will these - and thats by sticking to the structure of the bok - I am so pleased they are adding in the appendices and stuff merely hinted at in the book and expanding on the history - unlike TPM where we went into it blind only to find a story about taxing trade routes - the Hobbit story is well known and all the beats appear to be there and in the right places. I've heard some complain about "bloat" but this is setting up the rest of the story - laughably one reviewer said the White Council and Radagast stuff should be left to DVD extra's - if only he knew the significance and why they are in this film in the first place. So a solid 4 Star Review is exactly what I'd hoped for - maybe by the end of the third film when the story is judged as a whole that it becomes a 5 Star experience just like LOTR became.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 37
48fps - the fatal flaw! - 6/12/2012 7:30:33 PM   
Gigolo Joe


Posts: 24
Joined: 30/9/2005
Creative implications of making it into 3 films aside, the aesthetics of increasing the frame rate is the most worrying sign of cinema's future, much more so than 3D.

It's already difficult to find a 2D showing of new releases, the inferior and cheaper brand of digital projection is also becoming the norm. But 48 frames per second is a fundamental departure from the the established language of cinema. The 'film look' which used to be the holy grail of independent filmmakers and is what we've all grown up regarding as a mark of quality (contrasted with tacky TV soap opera video etc) - is all of a sudden being sacrificed by an industry scrambling to make up for the creative deficit ingrained in the vertically-integrated movie franchise "product".

The multi-national corporate structure of today's Hollywood realises that they are running a production line with a business model centred around high short term sales and repeat business coming from a marketable range of products (movie sequels/prequels/spinoffs). It's a risk averse approach to maximise profits as quickly as possible before the punters realise no-one will be watching these products 10 years from now. Transformers anyone?

Films like Lawrence of Arabia are treasured and re-released 50 years later continually making a profit, this risk taking approach to epic filmmaking probably ended 10 years ago - Lord of the Rings being the final example of the old Hollywood.

Now we have a media industry so deeply integrated - one division buys advertising from another division of the same company - promoted on their own TV networks and creativity disintegrates.

The marketing 'experts' are so important that the story/script cannot proceed without extensive market analysis.

The art of Filmmaking is reduced to a brochure of cinematography, editing, music and design styles, so much that every genre, every story, has the same colour template, applied to it - ever notice the orange and blue look nearly every movie has? - not to mention the shaky cam etc..

Add to the mix the obsessive paranoia of piracy and you have an industry that will continue to clamp our eyelids open with 3D 48fps HFR technologies - desperately trying to convince us that it will blow your mind. Clearly with some morons this approach works.. Not to mention the casual film goers who don't know or don't care about the aesthetic implications.

The fact is though - a great many people cannot stand 3D - it does cause visual problems in a significant number of people. Also many people already hate the look produced from 100hz or 'pure motion' or whatever crap is shoved into most TVs but marketed as an essential new feature - just so they can sell the latest model. Fortunately in most cases you can turn these things off. But it is depressing to see Directors such as Peter Jackson falling into such an obvious trap and implementing these gimmicks at the production stage.

This demonstrates an ignorance - or a contempt for the cinema language we all know and love. You don't hear anyone complaining about a properly filmed movie projected in the way perfected over a hundred years - so why are these filmmakers alienating a huge percentage of people, potentially forcing them out of cinemas for good? My guess is that they're only really counting on teenage boys to flock to blockbusters aimed squarely at them. Particularly James Cameron, Peter Jackson, Michael Bay have all but given up on adults anyway. The rest of Hollywood will follow..

24 frames per second is part of film's visual language and it's beauty - you subconsciously register this as familiar to how we see the world (motion blur, judder from eye and head movements) but slightly removed from reality - almost like a dream. This elementally helps you suspend your disbelief at what you're seeing, blending perfectly with narrative storytelling.

48 frames per second breaks this illusion in the same way as nearly every TV show ever made looks hyper-real which, in the same way that digital effects tend to render everything in focus, ignoring depth of field, draws attention to itself - breaking the illusion. Of course, many US shows, despite the TV signal being 50/60 frames per second, 24fps is still chosen because of it's aesthetic superiority. The alternative is everything looking like a soap opera.

Most of the Hobbit will look like a behind the scenes feature - or a live broadcast version of a movie, but it's guaranteed that a chunk of the audience will convince themselves that they don't need to adjust their eyes - what they're seeing is not a shameless gimmick but spectacle.. Surely this is the intended effect, because when you throw away your creative voice, spectacle is all you have left!

Maybe we'll only have the art-house scene tempting anyone over 25 back but personally I'm still waiting for another great Die Hard, grown up sci-fi or even another Star Wars or Spielbergian adventure (Star Trek is the closest there's been for years)

_____________________________

We are drifting into the arena of the unwell

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 38
RE: 48fps - the fatal flaw! - 6/12/2012 8:12:16 PM   
directorscut


Posts: 10881
Joined: 30/9/2005
quote:

It may deal in part with a (literal) phantom menace, but this is thankfully not The Phantom Menace


LOL. How are we supposed to believe that? You guys gave that 4 stars too!

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to Gigolo Joe)
Post #: 39
RE: 48fps - the fatal flaw! - 7/12/2012 2:33:47 AM   
NeoBrowser

 

Posts: 180
Joined: 1/5/2012
quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut
quote:

It may deal in part with a (literal) phantom menace, but this is thankfully not The Phantom Menace

LOL. How are we supposed to believe that? You guys gave that 4 stars too!


Most of the original reviews for The Phantom Menace (and all the Star Wars Prequels) were actually positive. Only some really cranky old-timers didn't like it. It wasn't until RedLetterMedia's bullshit that suddenly everyone started pretending they were terrible films.

(in reply to directorscut)
Post #: 40
RE: 48fps - the fatal flaw! - 7/12/2012 2:56:08 AM   
directorscut


Posts: 10881
Joined: 30/9/2005

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeoBrowser

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut
quote:

It may deal in part with a (literal) phantom menace, but this is thankfully not The Phantom Menace

LOL. How are we supposed to believe that? You guys gave that 4 stars too!


Most of the original reviews for The Phantom Menace (and all the Star Wars Prequels) were actually positive. Only some really cranky old-timers didn't like it. It wasn't until RedLetterMedia's bullshit that suddenly everyone started pretending they were terrible films.


LOL. Nice revisionist history.

_____________________________



Member of the TMNT 1000 Club.

(in reply to NeoBrowser)
Post #: 41
RE: 48fps - the fatal flaw! - 7/12/2012 3:52:43 AM   
Deviation


Posts: 27284
Joined: 2/6/2006
From: Enemies of Film HQ
The Phantom Menace always had mixed reviews, there was even hatred for it during the time Attack of the Clones was released. So yeah, no NeoBrowser.

Btw, I don't think I'm watching this immediatly btw, The Master is being released here around the same film and that has a more reasonable running and hasn't been directed by the guy whose last two films were a decent but overlong remake of King Kong and The Lovely Bones.

_____________________________

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 directorscut)
Post #: 42
Good review - 7/12/2012 9:16:09 AM   
dfooster

 

Posts: 24
Joined: 13/8/2008
Easily the most informed review of the movie on the Internet. The journalist clearly understands the source material and the differences between a hobbit movie and a LOTR movie and has crafted a review that involves real thought and care and not just jumped on the 48 fps bandwagon and the fact it's tonaly different to the rings therefore its inferior.

Bravo sir, and four stars sounds about right to me

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 43
Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars shocker! - 7/12/2012 12:02:28 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
Really am surprised that they didnt give this an automatic five stars like they did for those other Hobbit movies Jackson did years ago.That must mean this movie is even worse than the original trilogy

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 44
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 7/12/2012 1:59:50 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5059
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Really am surprised that they didnt give this an automatic five stars like they did for those other Hobbit movies Jackson did years ago.That must mean this movie is even worse than the original trilogy


How do you know they were automatic?
Oh and you're wasting your time - S******* got banned months ago

_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 45
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 7/12/2012 2:10:57 PM   
DancingClown


Posts: 4204
Joined: 8/1/2006
From: The Lot

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Really am surprised that they didnt give this an automatic five stars like they did for those other Hobbit movies Jackson did years ago.That must mean this movie is even worse than the original trilogy


Tedious twat.

_____________________________

Astronomic Tune Boy

'The town knew darkness, and darkness was enough.'

"Storm just bleeewwww me away..."

(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 46
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 7/12/2012 2:18:11 PM   
horribleives

 

Posts: 5059
Joined: 12/6/2009
From: The North
Also, it can't be that much of a 'shocker' as his last film only got four stars too.

_____________________________

www.hollywoodunbound.co.uk - some nonsense about alien film directors and musclebound man-children.

(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 47
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 7/12/2012 3:14:28 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 14549
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.

quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Really am surprised that they didnt give this an automatic five stars like they did for those other Hobbit movies Jackson did years ago.That must mean this movie is even worse than the original trilogy


Tedious twat.


I like the way he pretends he's so disdainful of them that he can't even bring himself to say their names, yet is so obsessed with them that he has to jump into a review thread you'd think he wouldn't even look twice at.

HE IS A CAVE TROLL!

_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to DancingClown)
Post #: 48
RE: 48fps - the fatal flaw! - 7/12/2012 4:10:08 PM   
superdan


Posts: 8222
Joined: 31/7/2008

quote:

ORIGINAL: NeoBrowser

quote:

ORIGINAL: directorscut
quote:

It may deal in part with a (literal) phantom menace, but this is thankfully not The Phantom Menace

LOL. How are we supposed to believe that? You guys gave that 4 stars too!


Most of the original reviews for The Phantom Menace (and all the Star Wars Prequels) were actually positive. Only some really cranky old-timers didn't like it. It wasn't until RedLetterMedia's bullshit that suddenly everyone started pretending they were terrible films.


Yeah, everyone liked TPM until a few years ago

(in reply to NeoBrowser)
Post #: 49
RE: The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey - 8/12/2012 11:20:51 AM   
helgawmrs

 

Posts: 1
Joined: 8/12/2012
Thats a bullshit review

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 50
- 9/12/2012 11:05:49 PM   
Ethanial


Posts: 2923
Joined: 30/9/2005
From: Perpendicular Universe London
Mostly agree with the review, found the HFR to be at times glorious, often off-putting, but the 3D sparkled.
Whilst it's a long film, the adventure seemed much more entertaining than the perilous struggles of the original trilogy, and the fun, vibrant nature was a pleasant shift. Certain Del Toro elements in the script and set-pieces were most welcome.

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 51
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 10/12/2012 12:46:10 PM   
waltham1979


Posts: 1179
Joined: 18/3/2008
From: San-Diago, which is German for 'Whales virgina'...

quote:

ORIGINAL: matty_b


quote:

ORIGINAL: DancingClown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Really am surprised that they didnt give this an automatic five stars like they did for those other Hobbit movies Jackson did years ago.That must mean this movie is even worse than the original trilogy


Tedious twat.


I like the way he pretends he's so disdainful of them that he can't even bring himself to say their names, yet is so obsessed with them that he has to jump into a review thread you'd think he wouldn't even look twice at.

HE IS A CAVE TROLL!


I miss BatSpider...

_____________________________

I just wish stuff like, I don't know, the slow & systemic CRATERING of this country could inspire the same call-to-arms as Batman casting

(in reply to matty_b)
Post #: 52
RE: WOW - 10/12/2012 1:26:56 PM   
Dannybohy


Posts: 1374
Joined: 7/1/2009
The trailers look like Fraggle Rock HD!. But I`ll be giving it a whirl when comes to DVD.

_____________________________

'Man of Steel!,Man of Shit!' -fairyprincess

(in reply to Hood_Man)
Post #: 53
RE: WOW - 10/12/2012 6:49:46 PM   
Cool Breeze


Posts: 2351
Joined: 9/11/2011
From: The Internet
This film will probably be worth seeing.....for the first 9 mins of Star Trek Into Darkness footage.

_____________________________

'' Iv played Oskar Schindler, Michael Collins, Rob Roy Mcgregor, even ZEUS for gods sake! No one is going to believe me to be a green grocer! ''

(in reply to Dannybohy)
Post #: 54
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 10/12/2012 7:02:32 PM   
MonsterCat


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

ORIGINAL: DancingClown


quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

Really am surprised that they didnt give this an automatic five stars like they did for those other Hobbit movies Jackson did years ago.That must mean this movie is even worse than the original trilogy


Tedious twat.


Normally I try to refrain from using such harsh language, but it's hard not to agree with this sentiment.

< Message edited by MonsterCat -- 10/12/2012 7:38:51 PM >


_____________________________

"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 DancingClown)
Post #: 55
RE: WOW - 10/12/2012 8:38:42 PM   
matty_b


Posts: 14549
Joined: 19/10/2005
From: Outpost 31 calling McMurtle.
quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze

This film will probably be worth seeing.....for the first 9 mins of Star Trek Into Darkness footage.


So you're just out and out trolling now?

Good to have that confirmed.


_____________________________

quote:

ORIGINAL: Cool Breeze
Mattyb is a shining example of what the perfect Empire Forum member is.


(in reply to Cool Breeze)
Post #: 56
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 10/12/2012 8:38:53 PM   
Qwerty Norris


Posts: 3971
Joined: 26/10/2005
From: Edinburgh
Anyway, moving on from twattery...

Tickets booked for Thursday night in glorious 2D. I'm not ruling out giving it a shot in 3D (I'll wait & see what the general feedback is like first) but I'd rather concentrate on the actual film itself before having to potentially contend with sore eyes.

This 48FPS malarkey sounds intriguing though...

_____________________________

Qwerty's Top 10 of 2013 (so far)

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

(in reply to MonsterCat)
Post #: 57
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 10/12/2012 11:44:20 PM   
Coyleone


Posts: 567
Joined: 13/10/2008
Not really looking forward to it that much yet, but I'm expecting a fun adventure/fantasy film, even if it's not on the level of the previous trilogy.

(in reply to Qwerty Norris)
Post #: 58
RE: Empire give a Peter Jackson less than five stars sh... - 10/12/2012 11:53:02 PM   
Qwerty Norris


Posts: 3971
Joined: 26/10/2005
From: Edinburgh

quote:

ORIGINAL: Coyleone

Not really looking forward to it that much yet, but I'm expecting a fun adventure/fantasy film, even if it's not on the level of the previous trilogy.


That's my feelings about it really. I'm looking forward to it, but I'm certainly not psyched. Partially because I haven't actually read the Hobbit (only the LOTR), but also because my main attraction to the film departed the initial process (Guillermo Del Toro). I'm sure there'll be elements of his work in there, but obviously it's not the same.

And as someone else alluded to in the thread, the Lovely Bones & King Kong somewhat diluted my appreciation of Jackson.

Fingers crossed though...

_____________________________

Qwerty's Top 10 of 2013 (so far)

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

(in reply to Coyleone)
Post #: 59
" E P I C " - 13/12/2012 9:22:31 AM   
abegley95488

 

Posts: 2
Joined: 23/9/2007
going the whole hog and bought tickets for 48 fps 3d imax screening for monday in birminghams new screen at cineworld , intrigued to know how all this tech will add or detract from experience !

(in reply to Empire Admin)
Post #: 60
Page:   <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Film Forums] >> Film Reviews >> RE: WOW Page: <<   < prev  1 [2] 3 4 5   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

0.141