World of KJ
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/

Bias in BOM reaches all-time high
http://www.worldofkj.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=10&t=3691		 Page 1 of 1
Author:  Tyler [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 9:57 pm ]
Post subject:  Bias in BOM reaches all-time high
http://boxofficemojo.com/commentary/?id=1660&p=.htm

'Liberal dogmatists flocked to see blowhard Michael Moore's anti-war tract, Fahrenheit 9/11, while the resurgence of religious fundamentalism was evident both in the grosses for cross-clutcher Mel Gibson's latest display of blood, sweat and self-sacrifice (The Passion of the Christ) and in the re-election of a religious president. It is tempting to deem 2004 the year "Let's Roll" gave way to "Let's Pray," and two bearded saviors appeared to satisfy the demand."'

:mad: Sad to see a once mighty site fall on it's ass like this. I'm not trying to attack BOM, but man, this is the trudge they come up with now?
Author:  Groucho [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:01 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Bias in BOM reaches all-time high
Jon Lyrik wrote:
http://boxofficemojo.com/commentary/?id=1660&p=.htm

'Liberal dogmatists flocked to see blowhard Michael Moore's anti-war tract, Fahrenheit 9/11, while the resurgence of religious fundamentalism was evident both in the grosses for cross-clutcher Mel Gibson's latest display of blood, sweat and self-sacrifice (The Passion of the Christ) and in the re-election of a religious president. It is tempting to deem 2004 the year "Let's Roll" gave way to "Let's Pray," and two bearded saviors appeared to satisfy the demand."'

:mad: Sad to see a once mighty site fall on it's ass like this. I'm not trying to attack BOM, but man, this is the trudge they come up with now?


Nah, they were always like that. I still use BOM for stats and things, but I never paid any attention to their reviews or editorials.
Author:  El Maskado [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:01 pm ]
Post subject: 
Whats funny is that Scott Holleran trashed POTC in his column and arrogantly said he does not need to see it or review it. So now he using the movie as a vehicle to excercise his views since mostly christian conservatives flocked to the movie. I bet he would do the same thing for any critically trashed Bruce Willis action flick
Author:  Tyler [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:03 pm ]
Post subject:  Re: Bias in BOM reaches all-time high
Mike Ventrella wrote:
Nah, they were always like that. I still use BOM for stats and things, but I never paid any attention to their reviews or editorials.


Yeah, but they've never gone as outright as this.

The decay of the forum is, indeed, spreading to the rest of the site.
Author:  bABA [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:04 pm ]
Post subject: 
Meh ... we speak the same way on these forums .. don't see a difference.

Scotty boy always had an agenda .... sadly, none of us seem to understand it nor have any idea where hes going with it.
Author:  Tyler [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:05 pm ]
Post subject: 
bABA wrote:
Meh ... we speak the same way on these forums .. don't see a difference.


We're not professional writers, that's the difference.
Author:  bABA [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:10 pm ]
Post subject: 
Ehem .. pray .. tell me .....

Exactly when was the last time Scott came off as a professional writer to you?
Author:  Maverikk [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:32 pm ]
Post subject: 
Jon Lyrik wrote:
bABA wrote:
Meh ... we speak the same way on these forums .. don't see a difference.


We're not professional writers, that's the difference.


He is nowhere near being at the level of a professional writer. He's a pal of Sean's , not a writer. Unprofessional is very accepted at that site.
Author:  A. G. [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 10:47 pm ]
Post subject: 
I'm so glad I left that place.
Author:  Jeff [ Mon Jan 24, 2005 11:03 pm ]
Post subject: 
The reviews at BOM almost always are terrible. Hence the reason I rarely read them.
Author:  dolcevita [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 12:59 am ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:
Jon Lyrik wrote:

We're not professional writers, that's the difference.


He is nowhere near being at the level of a professional writer. He's a pal of Sean's , not a writer. Unprofessional is very accepted at that site.


I'm not passing judgement on the reviewers per se, its a site more well known for its statistics and box office numbers, people looking for reviews usually go to rt don't they?

I'm just a friend of Eagle's, not a writer, and so unprofessional is very accepted at this site as well apparently. And yeah, I have an agenda in my articles as well.

*dashes off to gush over yet another Fellini*

*Shameless plug...My Mississippi Burning review will be up shortly...still feel bad I didn't get it in by the 17th*
Author:  bABA [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:02 am ]
Post subject: 
dolcevita wrote:
Maverikk wrote:
Jon Lyrik wrote:

We're not professional writers, that's the difference.


He is nowhere near being at the level of a professional writer. He's a pal of Sean's , not a writer. Unprofessional is very accepted at that site.


I'm not passing judgement on the reviewers per se, its a site more well known for its statistics and box office numbers, people looking for reviews usually go to rt don't they?

I'm just a friend of Eagle's, not a writer, and so unprofessional is very accepted at this site as well apparently. And yeah, I have an agenda in my articles as well.

*dashes off to gush over yet another Fellini*

*Shameless plug...My Mississippi Burning review will be up shortly...still feel bad I didn't get it in by the 17th*


yea .. but Scotty boy is like .. exceptionally bad!!
Author:  dolcevita [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:19 am ]
Post subject: 
bABA wrote:

yea .. but Scotty boy is like .. exceptionally bad!!


:lol: Alrighty then. I guess there goes my whole arguement! I hadn't realized, thanks for the refreshingly blunt yet honest response. :lol:
Author:  Dr. Lecter [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:28 am ]
Post subject: 
bABA wrote:
Ehem .. pray .. tell me .....

Exactly when was the last time Scott came off as a professional writer to you?


Good point :)

He gave Garfield and Raise Your Voice B+. I guess that says it all.
Author:  Maverikk [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:46 am ]
Post subject: 
dolcevita wrote:
I'm just a friend of Eagle's, not a writer, and so unprofessional is very accepted at this site as well apparently. And yeah, I have an agenda in my articles as well.


He sucks, though. If you sucked, it wouldn't neccesarily be a bad thing.


OOOOOH...I did not just say that out loud. :shock: #-o :-#

*runs like hell*
Author:  dolcevita [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:53 am ]
Post subject: 
Maverikk wrote:

He sucks, though. If you sucked, it wouldn't neccesarily be a bad thing.


:sad: You don't like my reviews? That was a kinda harsh way of breaking it to me...excuse me while I go cry in the corner. :cry:

j/k

Do you like any of the other reviewers though? Like Jeff just put up a few good ones, and Zingy and bABA? I get a kick out of Zingy's they're about as energetic as I envision him being in real life. That and he is such a fan of films that I think he's a case study in grade inflation, but its part of why I like them.
Author:  Maverikk [ Tue Jan 25, 2005 1:58 am ]
Post subject: 
dolcevita wrote:
Maverikk wrote:

He sucks, though. If you sucked, it wouldn't neccesarily be a bad thing.


:sad: You don't like my reviews? That was a kinda harsh way of breaking it to me...excuse me while I go cry in the corner. :cry:

j/k

Do you like any of the other reviewers though? Like Jeff just put up a few good ones, and Zingy and bABA? I get a kick out of Zingy's they're about as energetic as I envision him being in real life. That and he is such a fan of films that I think he's a case study in grade inflation, but its part of why I like them.


Yes, I have read them, and I like all of you guys. You do a good job.

And I'm sorry about my little joke. I was just teasing, and I like you tons, so anything you write is done in an interesting way. You do a good job on your reviews, and they are actually my favorite ones of all of them. No disrespect toward the others, of course.
Page 1 of 1 All times are UTC - 5 hours [ DST ]
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group
http://www.phpbb.com/