Author |
Message |
Dr. Lecter
You must have big rats
Joined: Sat Oct 16, 2004 4:28 pm Posts: 92093 Location: Bonn, Germany
|
Maverikk wrote: The coming soon review doesn't surprise me with the way he's been kissing David Poland's ass. He made it priority #1 to go to Poland's blog to support him and declare "it sucked" as soon as he saw it.
I can't recall ever seeing this kind of divide. The major/important critics have been raving, yet the bloggers and unimportant critics are very critical. Who's right?
Maybe not THIS kind, but if you look at RT scores, Match Point and Cold Mountain are somewhat similar.
_________________The greatest thing on earth is to love and to be loved in return!
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:48 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Flags begins to rise.
Marie Antoinette starts stumbling a bit.
Infamous checks in at the BFCA with an 80.
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:31 pm |
|
 |
Anonymous
|
Maverikk wrote: Infamous checks in at the BFCA with an 80.
That guy in your avatar, was INCREDIBLE in Infamous.
Changes nothing about my feelings towards Casino Royale but man, he sung, made gay love, and killed people in Infamous.
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:39 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
loyalfromlondon wrote: Maverikk wrote: Infamous checks in at the BFCA with an 80. That guy in your avatar, was INCREDIBLE in Infamous. Changes nothing about my feelings towards Casino Royale but man, he sung, made gay love, and killed people in Infamous.
His Bond contract states he's not allowed to wear a tux in anything but a Bond film, but gay love is ok.
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:45 pm |
|
 |
Anonymous
|
Maverikk wrote: loyalfromlondon wrote: Maverikk wrote: Infamous checks in at the BFCA with an 80. That guy in your avatar, was INCREDIBLE in Infamous. Changes nothing about my feelings towards Casino Royale but man, he sung, made gay love, and killed people in Infamous. His Bond contract states he's not allowed to wear a tux in anything but a Bond film, but gay love is ok.
he carried a great country tune.
Who'd a thunk.
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 7:51 pm |
|
 |
xiayun
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:41 pm Posts: 25109 Location: San Mateo, CA
|
From Sasha Stone, posted on OW forum:
Quote: This whole Flags business is the weirdest thing I've ever seen. First off, I can't believe Poland shot his wad like he did so early. First of all, lame of him (like big picture lame) but secondly, only an extreme egotist would shoot off like that, pretending they already know it's not an Oscar player, before the major reviews are in. AMPAS is a whole different animal from these film geeks getting their reviews on RT. And Clint belongs on the island with AMPAS. For Poland not to recognize that is crazy. When I saw Flags I sat next to Kris Tapley - Poland behind me, Jeff Wells in front of me, Drew from AICN in front of him. I cried throughout the film even with Tapley drumming his pen on his shoe and acting visably bored (checking his cell phone). Afterwards, both Wells and Drew talked about how they thought it was eh...Kris didn't like it. It was the weirdest thing, like I'd suddenly stepped into the twilight zone and here's why. To me, Flags takes on subject matter for two kinds of people and if you aren't one of those kinds you might not like it - one is a fan of Clint's. To appreciate what he's trying to do with these two movies, to appreciate his anti-establishment, anti-Bush message - you gotta love Clint. The second type is someone who knows a lot about WWII enough to give a crap about what happened after they raised the flag. If you don't give two shits about WWII history you aren't going to be moved by Flags. Me, I'm obsessed with WWII -- it hooked me years ago and I'm still going strong on it so every second of Flags fascinated me. What moved me about it I can't say without a huge spoiler but the long and short of it is that you really have to have raised children to appreciate the ultimate message in the film, the major punch at the end.
Sorry that was so long-winded - I have to run out but wanted to get this out there. I'm nauseated by the bad reviews of this film I see trickling out. It seems mean to me. Poland's a cool dude and all but I maintain what he did was just plain wrong, wrong for any journalist with access to the public to spew such bad press about a movie that has so much to offer.
Ah well. Win some, lose some. As I said in a different post, Manohla Dargis will probably hate it and Kenneth Turan will give a respectful review, perhaps not a rave. My prediction...
_________________Recent watched movies: American Hustle - B+ Inside Llewyn Davis - B Before Midnight - A 12 Years a Slave - A- The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - A- My thoughts on box office
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 8:53 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
xiayun wrote: From Sasha Stone, posted on OW forum: Quote: This whole Flags business is the weirdest thing I've ever seen. First off, I can't believe Poland shot his wad like he did so early. First of all, lame of him (like big picture lame) but secondly, only an extreme egotist would shoot off like that, pretending they already know it's not an Oscar player, before the major reviews are in. AMPAS is a whole different animal from these film geeks getting their reviews on RT. And Clint belongs on the island with AMPAS. For Poland not to recognize that is crazy. When I saw Flags I sat next to Kris Tapley - Poland behind me, Jeff Wells in front of me, Drew from AICN in front of him. I cried throughout the film even with Tapley drumming his pen on his shoe and acting visably bored (checking his cell phone). Afterwards, both Wells and Drew talked about how they thought it was eh...Kris didn't like it. It was the weirdest thing, like I'd suddenly stepped into the twilight zone and here's why. To me, Flags takes on subject matter for two kinds of people and if you aren't one of those kinds you might not like it - one is a fan of Clint's. To appreciate what he's trying to do with these two movies, to appreciate his anti-establishment, anti-Bush message - you gotta love Clint. The second type is someone who knows a lot about WWII enough to give a crap about what happened after they raised the flag. If you don't give two shits about WWII history you aren't going to be moved by Flags. Me, I'm obsessed with WWII -- it hooked me years ago and I'm still going strong on it so every second of Flags fascinated me. What moved me about it I can't say without a huge spoiler but the long and short of it is that you really have to have raised children to appreciate the ultimate message in the film, the major punch at the end.
Sorry that was so long-winded - I have to run out but wanted to get this out there. I'm nauseated by the bad reviews of this film I see trickling out. It seems mean to me. Poland's a cool dude and all but I maintain what he did was just plain wrong, wrong for any journalist with access to the public to spew such bad press about a movie that has so much to offer.
Ah well. Win some, lose some. As I said in a different post, Manohla Dargis will probably hate it and Kenneth Turan will give a respectful review, perhaps not a rave. My prediction...
haha...I've infected Sasha!
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 9:00 pm |
|
 |
MovieDude
Where will you be?
Joined: Tue Dec 21, 2004 4:50 am Posts: 11675
|
Maverikk wrote: The coming soon review doesn't surprise me with the way he's been kissing David Poland's ass. He made it priority #1 to go to Poland's blog to support him and declare "it sucked" as soon as he saw it.
I can't recall ever seeing this kind of divide. The major/important critics have been raving, yet the bloggers and unimportant critics are very critical. Who's right?
I think a more important question is, which one will audiences side with?
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:16 pm |
|
 |
xiayun
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:41 pm Posts: 25109 Location: San Mateo, CA
|
The huge divide continues: CHUD gave FOOF a negative, and The Film Experience, if/once it is counted, scored only a C/C+.
I don't think it'll be all that unanimous among big name critics. We're four days from its release, and some top COTC reviews are not out yet, not an encouraging sign. The Departed had seen like 15 positives by now. Look like NY Times will be a pan, and LA Times will only be mild positive. James Berardinelli will print the review tomorrow, so probably not going to be a 4-star (normally he put those up on Monday, like for The Departed).
_________________Recent watched movies: American Hustle - B+ Inside Llewyn Davis - B Before Midnight - A 12 Years a Slave - A- The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - A- My thoughts on box office
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:05 am |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
xiayun wrote: The huge divide continues: CHUD gave FOOF a negative, and The Film Experience, if/once it is counted, scored only a C/C+.
I don't think it'll be all that unanimous among big name critics. We're four days from its release, and some top COTC reviews are not out yet, not an encouraging sign. The Departed had seen like 15 positives by now. Look like NY Times will be a pan, and LA Times will only be mild positive. James Berardinelli will print the review tomorrow, so probably not going to be a 4-star (normally he put those up on Monday, like for The Departed).
Well, I don't know if it's a bad sign. Somebody at RT could be being lazy, maybe they're sick, etc... There have been quite a few raves from top critics, and they haven't been posted yet.
I think it was inevitable for it not to be universally loved. There are agendas at work, of course, plus the unrealistic expectations. There seems to be too many 4 star reviews from credible sources to dismiss the quality, and too many obvious agendas that the academy won't be paying any attention to.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:17 am |
|
 |
Raffiki
Forum General
Joined: Fri Oct 22, 2004 12:14 am Posts: 9966
|
Even with the accompanying negative responses, I think Flags will still be a big player and will have a more than decent shot to get nominated... if only for the fact that there really aren't that many high-profile and strong contenders this year.
Little Children isn't shaping up to be the critical darling of the year so unless a few of the smaller films like Babel and Good German get unanimous praise, we don't have too much to worry about. Then again, it is still pretty early and there is still audience reaction to take into consideration.
_________________ Top Movies of 2009 1. Hurt Locker / 2. (500) Days of Summer / 3. Sunshine Cleaning / 4. Up / 5. I Love You, Man
Top Anticipated 2009 1. Nine
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:36 am |
|
 |
Joker's Thug #3
Extraordinary
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:36 am Posts: 11130 Location: Waiting for the Dark Knight to kick my ass
|
Devins a bitch, his first word on the film was that it's good not great then he gives it a negative.
_________________ "People always want to tear you down when you're on top, like Napoleon back in the Roman Empire" - Dirk Diggler
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:56 am |
|
 |
Jonathan
Begging Naked
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:07 pm Posts: 14737 Location: The Present (Duh)
|
Maverikk wrote: xiayun wrote: The huge divide continues: CHUD gave FOOF a negative, and The Film Experience, if/once it is counted, scored only a C/C+.
I don't think it'll be all that unanimous among big name critics. We're four days from its release, and some top COTC reviews are not out yet, not an encouraging sign. The Departed had seen like 15 positives by now. Look like NY Times will be a pan, and LA Times will only be mild positive. James Berardinelli will print the review tomorrow, so probably not going to be a 4-star (normally he put those up on Monday, like for The Departed). Well, I don't know if it's a bad sign. Somebody at RT could be being lazy, maybe they're sick, etc... There have been quite a few raves from top critics, and they haven't been posted yet.
Weren't those articles that just hinted at great praise for the film, like the Washington Post article?
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:23 am |
|
 |
the limey
Speed Racer
Joined: Wed Dec 14, 2005 8:53 pm Posts: 135
|
Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Weren't those articles that just hinted at great praise for the film, like the Washington Post article?
No.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:40 am |
|
 |
Jonathan
Begging Naked
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:07 pm Posts: 14737 Location: The Present (Duh)
|
the limey wrote: Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Weren't those articles that just hinted at great praise for the film, like the Washington Post article? No.
Really? Then what is Mav talking about? I was talking about This piece written by the WP film critic, which is pretty much a Pro-FOOF interview/article about Eastwood, referring to the film as "the biggest, grandest, most tragic, most complex of his career." That's not a review, but it hints at great priase if Hunter reviews it.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 9:51 am |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Really? Then what is Mav talking about? I was talking about This piece written by the WP film critic, which is pretty much a Pro-FOOF interview/article about Eastwood, referring to the film as "the biggest, grandest, most tragic, most complex of his career." That's not a review, but it hints at great priase if Hunter reviews it.
Both Entertainment Weekly and the NY Times have raving quotes that are used in one of the TV spots, The Chicago Tribune is a rave, the Boston Herald is a rave, L.A. Weekly is a rave, Newsweek is a rave, Time is a rave, and Seattle Weekly is positive.
None of those are posted at RT.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 11:49 am |
|
 |
Jonathan
Begging Naked
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:07 pm Posts: 14737 Location: The Present (Duh)
|
Maverikk wrote: Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Really? Then what is Mav talking about? I was talking about This piece written by the WP film critic, which is pretty much a Pro-FOOF interview/article about Eastwood, referring to the film as "the biggest, grandest, most tragic, most complex of his career." That's not a review, but it hints at great priase if Hunter reviews it. Both Entertainment Weekly and the NY Times have raving quotes that are used in one of the TV spots, The Chicago Tribune is a rave, the Boston Herald is a rave, L.A. Weekly is a rave, Newsweek is a rave, Time is a rave, and Seattle Weekly is positive. None of those are posted at RT.
Do you have the links to these reviews?
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:40 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Do you have the links to these reviews?
They're out there if you look for them, and I've built up enough credibility that people know I don't make things up when I post something like that.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 1:57 pm |
|
 |
Jonathan
Begging Naked
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:07 pm Posts: 14737 Location: The Present (Duh)
|
Maverikk wrote: Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Do you have the links to these reviews? They're out there if you look for them, and I've built up enough credibility that people know I don't make things up when I post something like that.
Well, I've looked for them and nothing. I seached on google '"[publication]" "Flags of Our Fathers" review' with every source you gave me, and nothing. To make sure it was verifiable, I checked with The Departed, and found nothing. The only successful one was Time, which RT is indeed missing. Oh, and the review Metacritic has up is more an article than a review, as most reviews don't feature an interview with the director.
For the review to be on Rotten Tomatoes, there has to be an internet link. For the reviews you mentioned, there are none I can find for now.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:17 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
The LA Times and Atlanta Journal-Constitution also loved it. Newsday is the only COTC critic I've seen so far that doesn't like it.
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:19 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Well, I've looked for them and nothing. I seached on google '"[publication]" "Flags of Our Fathers" review' with every source you gave me, and nothing. To make sure it was verifiable, I checked with The Departed, and found nothing. The only successful one was Time, which RT is indeed missing. Oh, and the review Metacritic has up is more an article than a review, as most reviews don't feature an interview with the director.
For the review to be on Rotten Tomatoes, there has to be an internet link. For the reviews you mentioned, there are none I can find for now.
Are you calling me a liar or just trying to start arguing once again?
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:20 pm |
|
 |
Jonathan
Begging Naked
Joined: Mon Oct 25, 2004 12:07 pm Posts: 14737 Location: The Present (Duh)
|
Maverikk wrote: Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Well, I've looked for them and nothing. I seached on google '"[publication]" "Flags of Our Fathers" review' with every source you gave me, and nothing. To make sure it was verifiable, I checked with The Departed, and found nothing. The only successful one was Time, which RT is indeed missing. Oh, and the review Metacritic has up is more an article than a review, as most reviews don't feature an interview with the director.
For the review to be on Rotten Tomatoes, there has to be an internet link. For the reviews you mentioned, there are none I can find for now. Are you calling me a liar or just trying to start arguing once again?
Hm, I really either need to stop trying talking to you or start PMing others to validate my points to you.
I'm not saying the reviews don't exist. But as of now, they don't appear to be online (Which is why they aren't on RT), unless there are 10 more important pages with '"Boston Herald" "Flags of Our Fathers" review,' which I honestly doubt.
Unless only you have the reviews. May I see them? 
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:29 pm |
|
 |
Maverikk
Award Winning Bastard
Joined: Wed Oct 13, 2004 12:03 am Posts: 15310 Location: Slumming at KJ
|
Mood-Swing Jon wrote: Hm, I really either need to stop trying talking to you or start PMing others to validate my points to you. I'm not saying the reviews don't exist. But as of now, they don't appear to be online (Which is why they aren't on RT), unless there are 10 more important pages with '"Boston Herald" "Flags of Our Fathers" review,' which I honestly doubt. Unless only you have the reviews. May I see them? 
I'll tell you what, instead of trying to start shit with ME (for about the 10th time?), why don't you go ask my buddy Sasha why she's making the same outrageous claims. Call her a liar. Demand that she send you links to prove her claims.
http://www.oscarwatch.com/news/2006/10/ ... wrong.html
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:50 pm |
|
 |
Joker's Thug #3
Extraordinary
Joined: Sun Oct 24, 2004 2:36 am Posts: 11130 Location: Waiting for the Dark Knight to kick my ass
|
_________________ "People always want to tear you down when you're on top, like Napoleon back in the Roman Empire" - Dirk Diggler
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:56 pm |
|
 |
xiayun
Extraordinary
Joined: Tue Oct 12, 2004 3:41 pm Posts: 25109 Location: San Mateo, CA
|
That's a good boost. They're normally pretty tough.
_________________Recent watched movies: American Hustle - B+ Inside Llewyn Davis - B Before Midnight - A 12 Years a Slave - A- The Hunger Games: Catching Fire - A- My thoughts on box office
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:58 pm |
|
|
Who is online |
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 23 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
|
|