|
Pain and Gain is outstanding and anyone who told you otherwise should have their taste on film held in doubt.
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Sion posted:No, see, I haven't seen it but every single review of it I saw basically said 'there's nothing good in this film at all.' Is it worth givin' a look? You should absolutely watch it, it's an amazing film. It felt like most of the criticism it got came from people who couldn't accept the idea that Bay is a competent filmmaker who is a lot smarter than people give him credit for. I don't think it would have gotten such a negative reception if it were released under a pseudonym. "Man, how could you make a film glorifying a real life murder? Michael Bay is a meatheaded jock sociopath, there's no way he could know what satire is!" HorseRenoir fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Feb 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 18:46
|
|
|
I used to love Red Letter Media reviews Half in the Bag, but after seeing their opinion on Pain and Gain where they just blasted it non stop I no longer respected them. They were just so oblivious to what the movie was.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
Yeah, the whole CD circlejerk of "The Transformers are unrealized masterpieces" is a bridge too far, but you really do have to be blinded to not recognize Michael Bay's talent and misanthropy by this point.greatn posted:I used to love Red Letter Media reviews Half in the Bag, but after seeing their opinion on PAIN and Gain where they just boosted it non stop I no longer respected them. They were just so oblivious to what the movie was. I stopped taking their opinion into consideration after the Amazing Spider-Man review, which was literally a half-hour of all the reviewers regressing to the state of sad children while they whined about "not my Spider-man!" I mean christ I've had my bad reactions to superhero flicks too (read my post history about the Watchmen movie!), but you really have to be a blind idiot to pan ASM so totally.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 18:55
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:a half-hour of all the reviewers regressing to the state of sad children while they whined Well, this is the site that gained notoriety through a 90-minute hyper-detailed whine video about Star Wars prequels, so I'm not sure if there's any "regressing" going on for that to happen. Their entire MO is pedantry about things nerds care about.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 19:33
|
|
|
Yeah but the key difference is that with the Star Wars reviews they had the maturity/distance to actually give it a good critiquing, whilst their ASM review is literally just them going "I can't believe it was SO BAD" without really getting into why beyond "it's not my Spider-man."
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 19:35
|
|
|
Honestly the only trailer that gave me any real hype was Cap 2. TASM2's trailer turns me off because there still seems to be a confusion as to what tone it's going to have. As for Transformers well... I've only seen the first movie and I thought that was alright. The original didn't make me want to see more of it though, and this trailer didn't change my mind either.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 20:39
|
|
|
TASM2 looked like a trailer for two completely different movies.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 20:45
|
|
|
TASM2 probably is a script cobbled together from multiple prior scripts. The only thing Sony seems to be sure of when it comes to the ASM movies is that they want them out the door on a regular basis for licensing reasons, everything else is secondary. Honestly I can totally get the criticisms of ASM but I'll be honest, I just love the casting for the movies so much and think they're really nailing the action beats in the trailers. Yes, the plot looks like another mess, but for some reason that's just fine with me as long as we've got Garfield and Stone and even Jaime Fox and Dane DeHaan being so awesome.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 20:50
|
|
|
It just seemed like a film with appropriate escalation? Peter is obnoxious and jokey and not taking his ~responsibility~ seriously which escalates to everybody that hates him ganging up and trying to kill him at once. Plus it looks like such a colorful film in regards to Caps dour greyness.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 20:55
|
|
|
Waterhaul posted:It just seemed like a film with appropriate escalation? I love that a robotic rhinoceros is part of an appropriate escalation.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:13
|
|
|
StumblyWumbly posted:I love that a robotic rhinoceros is part of an appropriate escalation. Look if giant Lizardmen and electric blue dudes isn't doing it you gotta step up your game.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:20
|
|
mind the walrus posted:I stopped taking their opinion into consideration after the Amazing Spider-Man review, which was literally a half-hour of all the reviewers regressing to the state of sad children while they whined about "not my Spider-man!" I mean christ I've had my bad reactions to superhero flicks too (read my post history about the Watchmen movie!), but you really have to be a blind idiot to pan ASM so totally. I don't even know where to begin addressing this but I'll just point out that you're essentially saying a bunch of non-professional movie critics are blind idiots because they disagree with you about a dumb superhero movie.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:23
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I don't even know where to begin addressing this but I'll just point out that you're essentially saying a bunch of non-professional movie critics are blind idiots because they disagree with you about a dumb superhero movie. Cry me a river.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:31
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Cry me a river. Uh, all right then.
|
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:34
|
|
|
What do you want me to say? I'm not sure what your point was other than to say "nuh-uh you're wrong" with dismissive language. I stand by what I said, but I'm not going to indulge you with a  defense if that's what you were hoping for.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:37
|
|
|
I generally tend to agree with Red Letter Media's Half in the Bag but their review of Man of Steel was exactly like what you guys said their ASM review was (I haven't watched their ASM review). They shredded it because "That's not the Superman I know." I thought Man of Steel was garbage, don't get me wrong, but their reasoning didn't go beyond "I don't recognize Superman in this, therefore it sucks." edit; I will defend their Star Wars reviews until I die. I absolutely love the fact that they go into such detail about every aspect of that lovely trilogy. Plus, I appreciate a good insult. Happy Hippo fucked around with this message at 22:53 on Feb 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:49
|
|
|
Isn't ASM2 supposed to be three loosely tied together short chapters, each of which could almost be self contained? Like here's Peter doing his recap from ASM. All caught up? Cool. Here's Rhino to mess things up. Spidey defeats him, he swings into his house and has to act like not Spider-man in front of Aunt May. Repeat for Electro and Goblin with peppered appearances by Gwen, Harry, Norman, and maybe MJ to move the "Oscorp is evil" plot line along. Cause I didn't get the impression at any point from any previews, trailers or plot leaks that the villains were even really aware of each other, much less working together (OK, Norman is Goblin and behind everything, but I'm still seeing single file villains rather than a super team-up).
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
Happy Hippo posted:I generally tend to agree with Red Letter Media's Half in the Bag but their review of Man of Steel was exactly like what you guys said their ASM review was (I haven't watched their ASM review). They shredded it because "That's not the Superman I know." I thought Man of Steel was garbage, don't get me wrong, but their reasoning didn't go beyond "I don't recognize Superman in this, therefore it sucks." Exactly. I had a genuine respect for those guys up until the ASM review. It was completely beneath their standard to drop to the level of shameful nerds that their detractors always said they were. I still watch them sometimes, but I respect their opinions a lot less and as time has gone by the amateur level of their expertise has become more and more noticeable. I will also still defend their Star Wars (and Star Trek) reviews as well, they are excellent.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:53
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:Isn't ASM2 supposed to be three loosely tied together short chapters, each of which could almost be self contained? Like here's Peter doing his recap from ASM. All caught up? Cool. Here's Rhino to mess things up. Spidey defeats him, he swings into his house and has to act like not Spider-man in front of Aunt May. Repeat for Electro and Goblin with peppered appearances by Gwen, Harry, Norman, and maybe MJ to move the "Oscorp is evil" plot line along. Or its tied in by they are all made by Oscorp.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 22:55
|
|
|
CzarChasm posted:Isn't ASM2 supposed to be three loosely tied together short chapters, each of which could almost be self contained? Like here's Peter doing his recap from ASM. All caught up? Cool. Here's Rhino to mess things up. Spidey defeats him, he swings into his house and has to act like not Spider-man in front of Aunt May. Repeat for Electro and Goblin with peppered appearances by Gwen, Harry, Norman, and maybe MJ to move the "Oscorp is evil" plot line along. Footage of Electro in what appeared to be after his initial Times Square encounter with Spidey tells me that he works with Norman and/or Harry, and by extension Oscorp. I'm still not sure how it's all going to fit together though, and I'm honestly excited to see how, even if there's a high probability it ends up a convoluted and/or poorly paced mess. It's a different kind of excitement from Cap, where I'm fairly certain I can guess the plot structure completely and am more excited to see how they realize it.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:00
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I don't even know where to begin addressing this but I'll just point out that you're essentially saying a bunch of non-professional movie critics are blind idiots because they disagree with you about a dumb superhero movie. Are you in the right thread??!!?? EDIT - and regarding the 'That's not the Superman I know' garbage. I am a DCer (never liked Marvel so much as a kid), and MoS to me was loving fantastic. It was just the reboot needed for that character at this time. gently caress, all the mainstreamers have to go on regarding Supes of late is Superman Returns which was a half assed sequel to a 40 year old franchise that made him a dead beat/creepy stalker of an ex. MoS regenerated the mytho and it was an awesome thing! For those that haven't, watch it again now your Christopher Reeve comparisons are out of your system and you will see a different film that you originally saw. And I suspect you may actually like it. Myrddin_Emrys fucked around with this message at 23:07 on Feb 3, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:01
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:Are you in the right thread??!!?? Still butthurt that you got Gwen Stacy's 40 year-old death spoiled?
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:03
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Footage of Electro in what appeared to be after his initial Times Square encounter with Spidey tells me that he works with Norman and/or Harry, and by extension Oscorp. He had an ID card that said "Oscorp".
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:07
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Still butthurt that you got Gwen Stacy's 40 year-old death spoiled? Shucks 'yukyuk' I shure do feel stoopid over that one 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:09
|
|
|
Myrddin_Emrys posted:Are you in the right thread??!!?? I have't seen the Reeve movies and I still didn't like Man of Steel. Fake edit: I probably saw them as a kid but I don't really remember them.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:19
|
|
|
Lurdiak posted:I don't even know where to begin addressing this but I'll just point out that you're essentially saying a bunch of non-professional movie critics are blind idiots because they disagree with you about a dumb superhero movie. Anyone who makes money doing reviews is a pro. It's not a real profession, if you get paid for it you're in.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:21
|
|
|
mind the walrus posted:Yeah but the key difference is that with the Star Wars reviews they had the maturity/distance to actually give it a good critiquing, whilst their ASM review is literally just them going "I can't believe it was SO BAD" without really getting into why beyond "it's not my Spider-man."
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:22
|
|
|
I didn't take "not my ****" from those reviews so much as "it was a bad movie in general and you could do better with the property given" 
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:23
|
|
|
bobkatt013 posted:Or its tied in by they are all made by Oscorp. mind the walrus posted:Footage of Electro in what appeared to be after his initial Times Square encounter with Spidey tells me that he works with Norman and/or Harry, and by extension Oscorp. Right, that's what I'm expecting from the plot. But the impression I'm getting isn't that ASM2 is Spiderman vs Rhino & Electro & Goblin, but three separate but related stories. And if that's the case, I think that is perhaps the better way to do it. Imagine taking the average superhero movie and condensing it down into more or less a pure distilled form. Instead of trying to shoehorn three villains into one 2 hour movie, split a 2 hour movie into three smaller movies. Focus on the action, the quips, the stunts, the fighting. Sure, weave the overall plot threads into it (Oscorp is making super villains by blending people, technology and animals) and the ever present Peter Parker's highschool drama. But make the bigger picture better by focusing on the smaller pictures that built it. And make that smaller picture the best it can be. Focus, focus, focus. If Rhyno is beaten in act 1, don't bring him back in act 3. Show that he was an Oscorp creation, but let his part end there. Electro is a separate threat. Sure, he was created by Oscorp and may be working for them still, but focus on him for his part of the movie. Acknowledge that the other things happened (Rhino went on a rampage) but close that chapter and move on, if only a little bit. Same with Goblin for what I assume is the third act. Don't bring Electro to Goblin's fight. Now, if at the end of the movie, any of the villains are still alive, and you want to show the three of them in neighboring prison cells, that's great (if a little cliche).
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:34
|
|
|
fatherboxx posted:I can't believe trailers for loving Transformers and Amazing Spider-Man hyped me up more than Cap. I have no hope in Marvel movies at this point aside from Guardians, but it is still disappointing as hell that they did not try to pick even a slice of superspy aesthetics from Brubaker/Epting comics. Ironically, electric eels were Electro's origin in the Spectacular cartoon.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:42
|
|
|
Rita Repulsa posted:I didn't take "not my ****" from those reviews so much as "it was a bad movie in general and you could do better with the property given" This is pretty much the long and the short of it. Mike and Jay are good guys doing good work, both behind and in front of the camera. There's no reason to get flustered just because they didn't like a superhero movie.
|
|
#
?
Feb 3, 2014 23:43
|
|
|
I generally find when someone is bashing a movie that is successful, both financially and critically, there's always an amount of smug "Look at all the sheep shoveling their faces with popcorn while they watch the latest garbage dribbled from the Hollywood rear end in a top hat", either in an obvious way or subtle way. We've talked about this in the Flop House facebook group a bunch of times, its more fun to mock a movie that is made in an attempt to be successful, but its made by people out of touch, incompetent or just bad. Green Lantern to stay on the comic book movie topic, is a good example. Moderately successful films you can rightfully go "wtf?", like seriously, Grown Ups 2 was successful? Did Adam Sandler just buy up all the tickets or something? I'm not saying that everyone who didn't like MoS is some kind of elitist film nerd who won't watch anything that isn't made by a marxist transgender frenchmen who is tripping on absinth 100% of the time, and there are lots of valid complaints, but I just hate the smugness of many internet critics that attack movies that by every metric you can measure thats not subjective as good.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 00:28
|
|
|
Sion posted:So, what you're saying, is that The Departed wasn't enough to take him off that list but Transformers 4 was? A page has gone by about Pain & Gain and NO ONE is going to comment on Sion implying that The Departed is a bad film?!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 00:52
|
|
|
twistedmentat posted:I generally find when someone is bashing a movie that is successful, both financially and critically, there's always an amount of smug "Look at all the sheep shoveling their faces with popcorn while they watch the latest garbage dribbled from the Hollywood rear end in a top hat", either in an obvious way or subtle way. Or maybe not everyone likes the same movies. Is there not an allowance in there for personal opinion? I really liked all three Batman films and thought Man of Steel was smug horseshit. Am I a hipster or a populist hanger-on? Little Mac posted:A page has gone by about Pain & Gain and NO ONE is going to comment on Sion implying that The Departed is a bad film?! There have been so many terrible opinions about film to go unchallenged in the past two pages, what's one more? Sarchasm fucked around with this message at 01:07 on Feb 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 00:59
|
|
|
Sarchasm posted:Or maybe not everyone likes the same movies. Is there not an allowance in there for personal opinion? No, its only the smug "look at all the idiots who don't understand how bad this movie that made tons of money and has really high critical ratings" attitude that many internet critics have, not individuals. You can not like something, but the attitude that ones personal taste is the alpha and omega of whats good is the biggest sperg that ever did spurg. Roger Ebert was always upfront that just because he gave something a bad review, doesn't mean that other people won't like it, and thats fine with him.
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:10
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:A page has gone by about Pain & Gain and NO ONE is going to comment on Sion implying that The Departed is a bad film?! I personally didn't care much for it. It wasn't terrible but I felt it was too blunt with its message (literal rat in the ending cmon Scorsese) That said, Marky Mark was great in it https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mGICutL_4os Happy Noodle Boy fucked around with this message at 01:18 on Feb 4, 2014 |
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:15
|
|
|
I wasn't so keen on MoS myself. When I watched it, I had a hard time shaking the impression that it wasn't so much an attempt to explore a new dimension of Superman as a character as it was a kinda cynical-seeming attempt to cash in on the Nolan Batman movies by copying the whole "grimmer, darker, edgier, grittier" aesthetic without exploring what made those movies effective. Now, I admit that as a criticism, that's pretty shallow and not especially substantive; it's not really the fault of the movie as much as it's a preconception I wasn't able to shake (indeed, the thing I'm not so keen on is probably what a lot of people liked about the movie). I guess it crosses into the "It's not my Superman!" territory discussed up-thread, which wasn't really my intention...
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:21
|
|
|
Little Mac posted:A page has gone by about Pain & Gain and NO ONE is going to comment on Sion implying that The Departed is a bad film?! I was implying that it was a good film though?
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 10, 2024 22:54 |
|
|
Sion posted:I was implying that it was a good film though? Soonmot says that, with Wahlberg in T4, Wahlberg is no longer on his "see anything this actor makes" list (implying he won't see Transformers 4). You said The Departed wasn't enough to take Wahlberg off that list, which implies you think The Departed sucked (it didn't, it's great). I think there's just miscommunication!
|
|
#
?
Feb 4, 2014 01:35
|
|