| Author |
Message |
|
torrino
College Boy T
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:52 pm
Posts: 16020
|
 Goldie wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: torrino wrote: Um, way to respect those who might want to read the poster reviews before seeing the movie... I think some people get a some weird sense of power from spoiling movies for others... Ok Torrino - just another reason you are a bad MOD. No surprise that you or another MOD takes a hit at Goldie when I did nothing wrong. *Everyone's A Critic This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside. Take to Eagle if you have a problem with this. * Anyway, too bad you read incorrectly into my post, anyway who has seen the movie knows the joke that I am playing out. I didn't even place it like a spoiler. * Surprised that you didn't comment on other people's post as others posted things that they wouldn't know if they hadn't seen the movie - thus a spoiler. * Also as I said and I think MOD Z has agreed. The MOvie section is suppose to be spoiler free. Here people are analyzing the movie so spoilers should be expected. * Also speaking about spoilers, maybe you should check out the crowd report section - people sometimes in their posts / reviews say spoilers - which shouldn't happened in the crowd section. * And lastly instead of deleting it - you could have used you MOD powers to whiten it out - which I think have I seen some do - maybe Libs was one. But No. Buit I think you more wanted to bash me, incorrectly of course, than make the situation better. ETC. Excuse me, but I think you missed a pivotal part of the forum description: Eagle wrote: This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on the movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside, but please give an adequate spoiler warning for those just lookinf for reviews. (white text or *Spoiler* wil do fine.) You didn't.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:10 pm |
|
|
|
zingy
College Boy Z
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 8:40 pm
Posts: 36662
|
PWNED.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:13 pm |
|
|
|
Goldie
Forum General
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:38 pm
Posts: 7286
Location: TOP*SECRET ******************** ******************** ******************** ********************
|
torrino wrote: Goldie wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: torrino wrote: Um, way to respect those who might want to read the poster reviews before seeing the movie... I think some people get a some weird sense of power from spoiling movies for others... Ok Torrino - just another reason you are a bad MOD. No surprise that you or another MOD takes a hit at Goldie when I did nothing wrong. *Everyone's A Critic This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside. Take to Eagle if you have a problem with this. * Anyway, too bad you read incorrectly into my post, anyway who has seen the movie knows the joke that I am playing out. I didn't even place it like a spoiler. * Surprised that you didn't comment on other people's post as others posted things that they wouldn't know if they hadn't seen the movie - thus a spoiler. * Also as I said and I think MOD Z has agreed. The MOvie section is suppose to be spoiler free. Here people are analyzing the movie so spoilers should be expected. * Also speaking about spoilers, maybe you should check out the crowd report section - people sometimes in their posts / reviews say spoilers - which shouldn't happened in the crowd section. * And lastly instead of deleting it - you could have used you MOD powers to whiten it out - which I think have I seen some do - maybe Libs was one. But No. Buit I think you more wanted to bash me, incorrectly of course, than make the situation better. ETC. Excuse me, but I think you missed a pivotal part of the forum description: Eagle wrote: This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on the movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside, but please give an adequate spoiler warning for those just lookinf for reviews. (white text or *Spoiler* wil do fine.) You didn't. Hey Torrino - check the site as this was added after.
Sorry but you have to get up pretty early, or just earlier, to get one on Goldie.
Better luck next time.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:13 pm |
|
|
|
torrino
College Boy T
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 7:52 pm
Posts: 16020
|
Goldie wrote: torrino wrote: Goldie wrote: bradley witherberry wrote: torrino wrote: Um, way to respect those who might want to read the poster reviews before seeing the movie... I think some people get a some weird sense of power from spoiling movies for others... Ok Torrino - just another reason you are a bad MOD. No surprise that you or another MOD takes a hit at Goldie when I did nothing wrong. *Everyone's A Critic This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside. Take to Eagle if you have a problem with this. * Anyway, too bad you read incorrectly into my post, anyway who has seen the movie knows the joke that I am playing out. I didn't even place it like a spoiler. * Surprised that you didn't comment on other people's post as others posted things that they wouldn't know if they hadn't seen the movie - thus a spoiler. * Also as I said and I think MOD Z has agreed. The MOvie section is suppose to be spoiler free. Here people are analyzing the movie so spoilers should be expected. * Also speaking about spoilers, maybe you should check out the crowd report section - people sometimes in their posts / reviews say spoilers - which shouldn't happened in the crowd section. * And lastly instead of deleting it - you could have used you MOD powers to whiten it out - which I think have I seen some do - maybe Libs was one. But No. Buit I think you more wanted to bash me, incorrectly of course, than make the situation better. ETC. Excuse me, but I think you missed a pivotal part of the forum description: Eagle wrote: This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on the movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside, but please give an adequate spoiler warning for those just lookinf for reviews. (white text or *Spoiler* wil do fine.) You didn't. Hey Torrino - check the site as this was added after. Sorry but you have to get up pretty early, or just earlier, to get one on Goldie. Better luck next time. Okay.
Even if that's true, you've read enough threads to know that spoilers without warnings are not wanted. You've been posting long enough to know that. The rule isn't necessary, as most every other poster except yourself follows it.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:25 pm |
|
|
|
Goldie
Forum General
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:38 pm
Posts: 7286
Location: TOP*SECRET ******************** ******************** ******************** ********************
|
baumer72 wrote: I loved it. It did go on a bit long...we all knew that Wilson and McAdams would end up together, but it was funny, charming and very well written. And McAdams is such a site to look at. I will write more later, but I had a great time at the film and thi sis a solid A from me.
A Ok Torrino since you continue to pick on me - everyone but yourself from your above post.
This has to be considered a spoilerand is much worse than mine.
Just picked the first I saw but I bet I can find others.
*************
Can't wait to see how you try to spin this
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:32 pm |
|
|
|
movies35
Forum General
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm
Posts: 8627
Location: Syracuse, NY
|
Goldie wrote: baumer72 wrote: I loved it. It did go on a bit long...we all knew that Wilson and McAdams would end up together, but it was funny, charming and very well written. And McAdams is such a site to look at. I will write more later, but I had a great time at the film and thi sis a solid A from me.
A Ok Torrino since you continue to pick on me - everyone but yourself from your above post.This has to be considered a spoilerand is much worse than mine. Just picked the first I saw but I bet I can find others. ************* Can't wait to see how you try to spin this Very nice work Goldie, I'm impressed =D>
_________________
Top 10 Films of 2016
1. La La Land
2. Other People
3. Nocturnal Animals
4. Swiss Army Man
5. Manchester by the Sea
6. The Edge of Seventeen
7. Sing Street
8. Indignation
9. The Lobster
10. Hell or High Water
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 1:34 pm |
|
|
|
tombraider17
Mr. and Mrs. Smith
Joined: Thu Oct 21, 2004 7:21 pm
Posts: 457
|
Runs out of steam towards the end, but it's still quite funny and entertaining. Oh, and Isla Fischer (Gloria) is gorgeous.
B
_________________
The Skeleton Key: Best Horror Thriller of the Year
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 4:06 pm |
|
|
|
baumer72
Mod Team Leader
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 11:00 pm
Posts: 7087
Location: Crystal Lake
|
You guys have to be kidding me. You really thought that Wilson would not get the girl? How many movies have you seen? First one?  
_________________
Brick Tamland: Yeah, there were horses, and a man on fire, and I killed a guy with a trident.
Ron Burgundy: Brick, I've been meaning to talk to you about that. You should find yourself a safehouse or a relative close by. Lay low for a while, because you're probably wanted for murder.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 5:41 pm |
|
|
|
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm
Posts: 28301
Location: ... siiiigh...
|
I loved this film from start to finish. Loved every second of it! I don't care if it wasn't funny at all times, because I never expected it to be! It had everything that I wanted, and then some! Great performances, great comedy, great story. Totally great! My biggest problem would be Owen Wilson's bender, of sorts, after (spoilers in white, since people are a little edgy about it now)being kicked out of the engagement party, up to the cameo appearance/funeral crashing. Aside from that, I loved the movie. I don't give a damn that the ending and much of the love story is unoriginal. It's what the film is able to bring to it that counts, and I felt there was plenty that kept me entertained. Grade: A
I'm fairly certain I loved it as much as Baumer.
_________________
Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:27 pm |
|
|
|
Maximus
Hot Fuss
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:46 am
Posts: 8427
Location: floridaaa
|
I_Was_Your_Sam wrote: Maximus wrote: Great, great movie. Laughed my ass off. I would give it an A-, but it dragged way too much towards the end. A good five minutes could have been chopped. Wasn't a huge fan of Will Farrel's cameo, but it was okay.
Everythin else was just super. B+
PS, Ross- I didn't find that gay character offensive. I mean, as in stereotypical. He was interesting, and pretty funny. I don't think that many people laughed at the thought of him being homosexual, but rather the obnoxious grandmother. And besides that, his other scenes didn't really bother me as being hateful. Everyone got stereotyped. It was pretty damn hilarious, too. \:D/ i did!!! Realluy? I can honestly say it didn't offend me. What was so bad about it?
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:39 pm |
|
|
|
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm
Posts: 28301
Location: ... siiiigh...
|
In Goldie's defense (I do believe he gets treated unfairly a lot), Box Office Mojo spoiled the cameo in their page on Wedding Crashers. Now, anyone who has a slight interest in the box office might click on the movie pages to check out actors pages, budgets, etc. and they're spoiled because of that. His/her name is right there, with (Cameo) next to it. I was spoiled before I saw the damn movie because of a DAMN box office site. At least in here, I expect to be spoiled because it's a review section.
_________________
Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 7:45 pm |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
Goldie wrote: This has to be considered a spoilerand is much worse than mine. Part of the problem with your spoiler was that it was in that giant flashing billboard sign for emphasis, and worse, followed a couple of pages of other reviewers respectfully and playfully concealing the cameo's identity. It did seem a little blatant, but I guess now that you've been called out so publicly, a simple apology is out of the question?
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:01 pm |
|
|
|
movies35
Forum General
Joined: Thu Nov 11, 2004 1:53 pm
Posts: 8627
Location: Syracuse, NY
|
Maximus wrote: I_Was_Your_Sam wrote: Maximus wrote: Great, great movie. Laughed my ass off. I would give it an A-, but it dragged way too much towards the end. A good five minutes could have been chopped. Wasn't a huge fan of Will Farrel's cameo, but it was okay.
Everythin else was just super. B+
PS, Ross- I didn't find that gay character offensive. I mean, as in stereotypical. He was interesting, and pretty funny. I don't think that many people laughed at the thought of him being homosexual, but rather the obnoxious grandmother. And besides that, his other scenes didn't really bother me as being hateful. Everyone got stereotyped. It was pretty damn hilarious, too. \:D/ i did!!! Realluy? I can honestly say it didn't offend me. What was so bad about it? I don't understand people saying it offended them. First of all, if something is really bad with homosexuality, it probably will offend me. WEDDING CRASHERS made laugh my ass off, the gay son and the grandmother also made me laugh, they were hilarious!
_________________
Top 10 Films of 2016
1. La La Land
2. Other People
3. Nocturnal Animals
4. Swiss Army Man
5. Manchester by the Sea
6. The Edge of Seventeen
7. Sing Street
8. Indignation
9. The Lobster
10. Hell or High Water
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:23 pm |
|
|
|
Mister Ecks
New Server, Same X
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 7:07 pm
Posts: 28301
Location: ... siiiigh...
|
The gay guy was just oddball funny. Although, his haircut and small height reminded me of Thom Yorke (lead singer of Radiohead). That was unsettling.
_________________
Ecks Factor: Cancelled too soon
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 9:45 pm |
|
|
|
Christian
Team Kris
Joined: Thu Oct 28, 2004 5:02 pm
Posts: 27584
Location: The Damage Control Table
|
movies35 wrote: Maximus wrote: I_Was_Your_Sam wrote: Maximus wrote: Great, great movie. Laughed my ass off. I would give it an A-, but it dragged way too much towards the end. A good five minutes could have been chopped. Wasn't a huge fan of Will Farrel's cameo, but it was okay.
Everythin else was just super. B+
PS, Ross- I didn't find that gay character offensive. I mean, as in stereotypical. He was interesting, and pretty funny. I don't think that many people laughed at the thought of him being homosexual, but rather the obnoxious grandmother. And besides that, his other scenes didn't really bother me as being hateful. Everyone got stereotyped. It was pretty damn hilarious, too. \:D/ i did!!! Realluy? I can honestly say it didn't offend me. What was so bad about it? I don't understand people saying it offended them. First of all, if something is really bad with homosexuality, it probably will offend me. WEDDING CRASHERS made laugh my ass off, the gay son and the grandmother also made me laugh, they were hilarious! Well you can never really understand it because people have different reactions/attitudes to certain subjects. Let's leave it at that. :wink: _________________A hot man once wrote: Urgh, I have to throw out half my underwear because it's too tight.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:09 pm |
|
|
|
Maximus
Hot Fuss
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 10:46 am
Posts: 8427
Location: floridaaa
|
Yeah, I talked to some friends on the phone who thought it could be offensive the some people. Everyone reacts differently. No big deal. One thing I didn't like was the fact that a few cracked up just because he was gay. That was lame. But the grandma making fun of him was kinda funny. The rest was kinda nasty, yeah, but you gotta just relax and enjoy it. Ton's of people are stereotyped and mocked. I didn't think it was so bad, but that's just me.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:14 pm |
|
|
|
Goldie
Forum General
Joined: Wed Oct 20, 2004 12:38 pm
Posts: 7286
Location: TOP*SECRET ******************** ******************** ******************** ********************
|
baumer72 wrote: You guys have to be kidding me. You really thought that Wilson would not get the girl? How many movies have you seen? First one?
Instead of your response trying to deflect it.
Was it or wasn't a spoiler?
*****************************
And to Torrino and Bradley, not sure why you started with me but
how is it a spoiler when he is listed in the IMDB credits.
Will Ferrell .... Chaz Reingold
****************************
Unfortunately, I only had 10 minutes at home this morning but as soon as I walked out the door this popped into my head.
****************************
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:30 pm |
|
|
|
bABA
Commander and Chef
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 12:56 am
Posts: 30505
Location: Tonight ... YOU!
|
the matter i believe was resolved in the site .. everyone .. get back to reviewing and discussing the movie.
|
| Sat Jul 23, 2005 11:31 pm |
|
|
|
misutaa
je vois l'avenir
Joined: Thu Jun 30, 2005 3:33 pm
Posts: 3841
Location: Hollywood/Berkeley, CA
|
This was such a funny movie, The best of the year probably. I think that they made the film great, it was soo funny in the beginning, and kindof slowed down, like most comedies. But overall I had a blast. there was tons of laughter and clapping at the end.
A- from me.
_________________
"Voici mon secret. Il est très simple: on ne voit bien qu'avec le cœur. L'essentiel est invisible pour les yeux."
----Antoine de Saint-Exupéry (Le Petit Prince)
A Lonely Person is at Home Everywhere.
|
| Sun Jul 24, 2005 12:08 am |
|
|
|
makeshift
Teenage Dream
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 12:20 am
Posts: 9247
|
Personally, the problem that I had with the gay son in the movie is that the ONLY reason his character was gay was too hopefully get a gross out reaction from people. It's supposed to be gross when he kisses Vince Vaughn. It's supposed to be gross when he looks at Chaz at the end. If you don't think it was, tell that to half the audience that went "ewwwww" everytime he was on screen after it was revealed he was gay. The character's sole purpose was to provide apparent gross out humor simply through him acting homosexual. It was cashing in on some people's gut reaction to be disgusted by homosexuals.
Even still, I saw it again, and I thought it was funnier and worked better the second time around. I moved my grade up to a solid B.
|
| Sun Jul 24, 2005 3:22 am |
|
|
|
Bradley Witherberry
Extraordinary
Joined: Sat Oct 30, 2004 1:13 pm
Posts: 15197
Location: Planet Xatar
|
makeshift wrote: Personally, the problem that I had with the gay son in the movie is that the ONLY reason his character was gay was too hopefully get a gross out reaction from people. It's supposed to be gross when he kisses Vince Vaughn. It's supposed to be gross when he looks at Chaz at the end. If you don't think it was, tell that to half the audience that went "ewwwww" everytime he was on screen after it was revealed he was gay. The character's sole purpose was to provide apparent gross out humor simply through him acting homosexual. It was cashing in on some people's gut reaction to be disgusted by homosexuals.
Even still, I saw it again, and I thought it was funnier and worked better the second time around. I moved my grade up to a solid B. The gay character was almost certainly there for the reasons you cited above, but I think an additional reason was to define the edges of Vince Vaughn's character. Even though Vaughn was overtly "chasing bridesmaids", I think there's a definite subtext that he leans a little towards the gay side himself. As the title character in the recent movie Kinsey discovered, homosexuality is not an either/or condition - he devised the Kinsey Scale to measure it:
0 exclusively heterosexual
1 predominantly heterosexual, incidentally homosexual
2 predominantly heterosexual, but more than incidentally homosexual
3 equally heterosexual and homosexual
4 predominantly homosexual, but more than incidentally heterosexual
5 predominantly homosexual, incidentally heterosexual
6 exclusively homosexual
(This is what drove conservatives in the 1950's into a fury, especially those who realized they were at least a 1 or 2 on the scale...)
I think the writers were aiming for Vaughn's character to be a "3" - but a very closeted "3" - his interactions with the gay brother added to the humor of this subtext by matching him up with a "6" - a bizarro "6" for the comedic effect. This combined with Owen Wilson playing it a pure straight "0", add a lot of humor to an already hilarious movie...
|
| Sun Jul 24, 2005 7:58 am |
|
|
|
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
|
C
If you have not seen the film stop reading, b/c I probably wrote spoilers, so move along.
The son was as stupid character, and I found some of his scenes offensive. His character was in such poor taste, and circa some bad 80's film. The only time anythign with his son was funny was Vaughn comments on the picture, they rest of it was just bad.
Vaughn and Wilson looked 10 years to old for their love interests.
The love stories were to predictable and boring.
Vaughn was funny, but his funny scenes were cut up by long stretches of meh.
Given what see about Walken in term sof his son and the comments and his future run for president, his overall, whatever reaction tot his daughter's choices is illogical..we are led to believe that mcAdams goes out with crazy boy to join to families, and that this is what her father and psyho boy wants, and then her father is like, whatever. I found the movie completely unralistic, which would have been ok if the movie was funny, but Vaughna dn the cameo by Ferrell are really the onyl good parts of hte film, and that amounts to maybe 25 minutes. The rest of it is meh.
Last edited by Ripper on Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:21 pm, edited 1 time in total.
|
| Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:18 pm |
|
|
|
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
|
torrino wrote: Excuse me, but I think you missed a pivotal part of the forum description: Eagle wrote: This is the place to give us YOUR reviews on the movies you have seen. Discussion of movies is welcomed, but please do not comment if you have not previously seen the movie! Spoilers are ALLOWED inside, but please give an adequate spoiler warning for those just lookinf for reviews. (white text or *Spoiler* wil do fine.) You didn't. Is this really a rule of the forum, b/c if it well then I can go back to onot visitng this forum. Its a review foruma nd I have to alret peopel to spoilers, I mean c'mon, this is just insane.
I now have to but all my posts here in white, so why bother posting.
|
| Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:20 pm |
|
|
|
dolcevita
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 11:24 pm
Posts: 16061
Location: The Damage Control Table
|
Thanks Ripper.
She makes a fine point. This is a post-viewing review forum. Its been stated over and over again that its for reviews and discussions for people after they've sene the movie. If one doesn't want to know about the movie contents before-ahnd...don't read the thread on it. Read it after watching the movie.
What's the big deal?
People can discuss anything having to do with the movie here.
Apparently, Wedding Crashers is popular enough that it fills seats despite knowing the cameo...so hey, clearly there's more to its style and content than that anyways. I still haven't seen it. Can't wait though. I'll try to squeeze it in tomorrow. Its between it and Charlie, both of which interest me. Maybe I'll do a double header?
|
| Wed Jul 27, 2005 1:58 pm |
|
|
|
Ripper
2.71828183
Joined: Mon Oct 11, 2004 9:16 pm
Posts: 7827
Location: please delete me
|
dolcevita wrote: Thanks Ripper.
She makes a fine point. This is a post-viewing review forum. Its been stated over and over again that its for reviews and discussions for people after they've sene the movie. If one doesn't want to know about the movie contents before-ahnd...don't read the thread on it. Read it after watching the movie.
What's the big deal?
People can discuss anything having to do with the movie here.
Apparently, Wedding Crashers is popular enough that it fills seats despite knowing the cameo...so hey, clearly there's more to its style and content than that anyways. I still haven't seen it. Can't wait though. I'll try to squeeze it in tomorrow. Its between it and Charlie, both of which interest me. Maybe I'll do a double header? Agreed, if they want a feel for how the board feels just read the grades. I don't read the thread till Ia hve seen the film or I have decided I don;t care baout spoilers. Outisde this forum spoiler warnings should be used always, but in here we need to relax the rules.
Posters coudl do a hsort one sentence sum of their reivew at the top of their post near their grade and then start the spoilers after, but to have to place me review in white text, well 95% of the posts here would be white text..it goes against the point of the forum.
|
| Wed Jul 27, 2005 2:19 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 65 guests |
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum
|
|
