- get that OUT of my face
- Feb 10, 2007
-
|
Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).
Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.
The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.
I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.
Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.
If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.
And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!
This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:
Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?
I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.
How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.
How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions
There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!
Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin
Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).
And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever
DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:28
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 04:57
|
|
- Effectronica
- May 31, 2011
-
-
Fallen Rib
|
Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).
Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.
The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.
I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.
Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.
If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.
And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!
This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:
Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?
I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.
How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.
How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions
There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!
Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin
Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).
And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever
DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen
I read through all of this, and I was impoverished by the experience. I think you should take the advice people are giving you to heart.
Oh, wait, that's a "low effort insult", so let me put it to you this way: the sum total of your mental powers comes out to one part nonsense, one part especially inane conspiracy theories, one part weaksauce anger, and one part bathos, and these all produce zero meaning when put together.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:33
|
|
- Nostalgic Pushead
- Jul 31, 2013
-
.
|
Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).
Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.
The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.
I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.
Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.
If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.
And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!
This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:
Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?
I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.
How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.
How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions
There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!
Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin
Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).
And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever
DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen
Thank you for providing further insight into the audience of Current Releases, Black Bones.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:34
|
|
- Keg
- Sep 22, 2014
-
|
Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).
Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.
The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.
I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.
Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.
If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.
And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!
This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:
Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?
I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.
How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.
How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions
There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!
Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin
Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).
And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever
DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen
If I wrote several 1000+ word posts trying to show off to goons that I'm rather smart and also a very good writer, I would not use parentheses every few sentences.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:34
|
|
- sexpig by night
- Sep 8, 2011
-
by Azathoth
|
'Reading' only looks difficult friends, it's actually pretty easy once you get some practice at it. Good luck!
People don't read your posts because they literally lack the ability, it's because you never have anything worth reading to say. Like, all I read in your post was where you quoted me and it was real dumb, I can't imagine how people who read the entire one felt.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:37
|
|
- Effectronica
- May 31, 2011
-
-
Fallen Rib
|
'Reading' only looks difficult friends, it's actually pretty easy once you get some practice at it. Good luck!
I read every bit of your nonsense. It took me a while because every time I started something new would lead me to make pained expressions, but eventually I read all the way through it, and I concluded that there was literally nothing in there that had any meaning whatsoever, and I would have been better as a human being and a reader not to read through it, and instead just tell you to gently caress off.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:38
|
|
- Chilled Cactus
- Nov 15, 2011
-
-
College Slice
|
'Reading' only looks difficult friends, it's actually pretty easy once you get some practice at it. Good luck!
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IwrCEX1ElJ8
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:46
|
|
- curious lump
- Sep 13, 2014
-
by zen death robot
|
it's pretty sad when you get called out as a bad poster by effectronica
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:48
|
|
- woozle wuzzle
- Mar 10, 2012
-
|
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5hfYJsQAhl0
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:50
|
|
- In Training
- Jun 28, 2008
-
|
I think Black Bones is an extremely high level troll
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 05:05
|
|
- ArfJason
- Sep 5, 2011
-
|
Fair enough, I won't break up individual posts anymore, although I do worry about some of y'alls ability to figure out what I am responding to, since a common complaint seems to be that CR is allegedly unclear or duplicitous (while simultaneously being too dumb or basic, even to the point of being childlike).
Meh, it was a quick idea off the top of my head meant to serve as an example. It's certainly not a strong one.
The target audience is anyone who interested in what movies are coming out and what some goons thought about them. It is the same audience that reads other front page material, the same that reads the forums. You and me and any other terrible nerd.
I have not noticed a “marked” difference between CR and other features. The reviews are usually straight, with the occasional experiment (like the Gone Girl one) and some that outright mock the film without any attempt at review. But even the serious ones still fall within the general dorky point-of-view that is Something Awful. Sometimes they are good and I agree, other times they are good yet I disagree, and yes sometimes they are bad (like the Gone Girl one), but those aren't often enough to elicit much emotion from me. WTF D&D is pretty consistently creative and funny imo, but some of them are boring too. It happens.
Don't forget, if you don't like the CR review about it, there is usually a thread in CD where other people with widely different opinions and notions are talking about the movie.
If you don't like something, you should definitely criticize it, but try to criticize it well. A lot of the previous noise was not good criticism, because they were not attempting to explain what was wrong with the review of a given kid's movie, but just expressing endless incredulity over the fact that a kid's movie was reviewed at all.
And there are several main and sub forums on here for people to blow off steam with low effort insults, if that's all they want to do. This thread as near as I can tell is intended for constructive (or what passes for it) feedback. Now some of y'all are being coaxed into doing so, that's good!
This is what I mean about bad criticism – it appears like you didn't really read any review. The infamous Boxtrolls review (for example) discusses all of these things that I bolded. Feel free to check if you think I'm lying, which brings me to the paranoia:
Tatum Girlparts, you understood the Gone Girl thing correctly. So did I, and I haven't seen the film nor am I interested in doing so. It's one thing to fear being mislead by the reviewers, but don't you even trust yourself?
I don't really think CR is very “leftist”, the reviewers as a group seem to have both progressive and conservative opinions. And in spite of being a crazy gay retard, I'm not the one trying to ascribe weird motivations/inner thoughts to others. You could be right, but it's more likely that we can safely take them at their word. Criticizing anyone's politics is good, but ranting about vague left-wing bias, well, you should know how that comes across as.
How do we know the reviewers have a “perceived social obligation” and are “outraged”, that they decided a movie was “problematic” before they saw it? It's far more likely they enjoy watching and thinking about film, and call problems as they see them.
How do you determine this merit? I hope you don't use “pre-approved” opinions
There's that paranoia again. They are colluding with the “leftist” hivemind! I bet that gamer girl is involved somehow, perhaps she cuckolded the film industry as well!
Your first reading is actually pretty good. The second falls apart, but you did that on purpose.
“Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.” - Freud
“Yeah? And sometimes it's just a big brown dick in your mouth!” - Carlin
Actually, both the psychologist and comedian are wrong (or only half right). It's always both. And that's ok, seriously. Penises are good. Vaginas too for that matter. Fear them not, goons.
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
Masturbating is fun and healthy (don't overdo it though. I shouldn't have to say that, but y'know, nerds).
And I never said the Jungle book was about King Louie (this is what im talking about when I mock reading comprehension). It's about Mowgli becoming a man. Louie is definitely the most interesting villain, as opposed to the tiger and snake, but the story isn't about him. His quest for weapons of mass destruction is a subplot, at best. But it wasn't a strong reading, as I admitted, so whatever
DUDE! Someone should tell the mods/admins! WE CANT THEY'RE PART OF IT! What?! Alas, we did not heed the warning of Nolan's Batmen
I put this post in a txt, changed the file format to .mp4, and when i played it back on vlc it was the entirety of the Brokeback Mountain gay sex scene in the tent.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 05:07
|
|
- Helical Nightmares
- Apr 30, 2009
-
|
An example of a well constructed review with excellent points and nuance.
http://time.com/3472314/gone-girl-movie-book-feminist-misogynist/
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 05:37
|
|
- axeil
- Feb 14, 2006
-
|
'Reading' only looks difficult friends, it's actually pretty easy once you get some practice at it. Good luck!
edit:
I am none of these things.
I could read your novel length posts or I could say "Black Bones just wrote for about half an hour defending movie reviews on the internet" and use my 5 minutes in a more valuable manner.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 05:45
|
|
- got any sevens
- Feb 9, 2013
-
by Cyrano4747
|
Sorry, I wasn't very clear there. I was attempting to provide a quick example of when children's art can be cool and interesting, so I thought I'd read the characters of Jungle Book as representing the underclasses of the inner city. Like, Baloo is obviously homeless, Bagheera is a manic street preacher (a Black Panther!), the wolves/vultures are street punks, Louie is a gangster or lounge singer (jazz? I dunno, some kinda old-timey stuff), Kaa is I guess a pimp, Shere Khan a murderer of some sort, the elephants would be cops. All these groups want to claim the orphan Mowgli in some fashion.
To be clearer, Baloo's culture-gender mixing is good. He is a hero, who successfully seduces Louie and topples his palace, freeing Mowgli.
That would be a sweet movie. Sort of like Rashomon, where he plays different gangs against each other, except the protagonist is a kid and the gangs are vying to recruit him. Then at the end he walks away from it all for a farmer's daughter.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 05:50
|
|
- Sagabal
- Apr 24, 2010
-
|
The opposite reading is true! THE OPPOSITE READING IS TRUE!
Instead of reading that long post, please repost the SMG/Koos post, as I would like to read that post again, instead of the long post.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 06:09
|
|
- Top Bunk Wanker
- Jan 31, 2005
-
Top Trump Anger
|
'Reading' only looks difficult friends, it's actually pretty easy once you get some practice at it. Good luck!
edit:
I am none of these things.
Whatever point you think you're making with these huge garbage dumps of meaningless sentences, it's definitely not what you're actually communicating.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 06:12
|
|
- qnqnx
- Nov 14, 2010
-
|
'Reading' only looks difficult friends, it's actually pretty easy once you get some practice at it. Good luck!
edit:
I am none of these things.
It's only easy if the writer is not mentally insane.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 06:23
|
|
- DarksydePhilFish
- Dec 31, 2004
-
tabarnak ack ack
|
Instead of reading that long post, please repost the SMG/Koos post, as I would like to read that post again, instead of the long post.
This is a good suggestion, and sends up the kind of overwrought analyses that a lot of us have taken exception to in this thread, so here you go 
Triticum Guzzler posted:
INT. DANK TORTURE BASEMENT - NIGHT
The sound of metal chains whipping against bare flesh hang heavy in the air, like a bird
flying into a headwind. The room is damp and sparsely lit. SUPERMECHAGODZILLA's scarred
jowls are illuminated by a desk lamp laying sideways on the floor
SUPERMECHAGODZILA
Which reading is true? Which reading is true? WHICH READING IS TRUE!?
KOOS
[Spits mouthful of blood] The words are used specifically for their
literal intention, the events are straightforward so as to be easily
understood by an audience of children.
The beating begins again, with a furious vigour, until SUPERMECHAGODZILLA can barely
stand. He rests one hand against a dirty wall, sweat marring his 1993 Nebraska Film
Festival hypercolor t-shirt.
SUPERMECHAGODZILA
The opposite reading is true... The opposite reading is true. I've
been to college.
KOOS straightens his posture, his pride and dignity unscathed by the days long assault
of a fat, stupid man.
KOOS
Any perceived allusions to facism in A Goofy Movie are a wholesale
invention of a misguided viewer.
SUPERMECHAGODZILLA adopts the look of a man who has been defeated. Wearily, he grabs a
shotgun that had been resting in the corner, and cocks it loudly.
KOOS
Goofy simply wishes to bond with his son through fishing, a traditional
pastime, as he had done with his own father. It is neither parable nor
allegory. Neither dog was molested, the material does not support this.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 06:29
|
|
- Bloody Hedgehog
- Dec 12, 2003
-
💥💥🤯💥💥
Gotta nuke something
|
Yo, alls I'm sayin' is, why the bones gotta be black?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 07:55
|
|
- theflyingorc
- Jun 28, 2008
-
ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS
-
Young Orc
|
More paranoia. If someone is actually saying they are the end-all be-all of anything, that's life giving you a big hint: ignore this person. Your silly Speed analysis is great, and not dumb at all. Of course you are free to say that it is, as I am free to say that it isn't. No one is silenced, unless they silence themselves. Don't give in to weakness.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 08:09
|
|
- Corridor
- Oct 19, 2006
-
|
wait is black bones 'jay dub' or whomever was behind the current releases? i've been thinking he was some unrelated nut who was super defensive about the front page for some reason.
I recall Professor Clumsy being so offended by Redline, an animated film about cool car racing, that he dedicated the entire review to talking about penises. Even Zorak called him out on it.
when i read this, i legit thought this was a funny parody of a person outraged by the cartoon, and didn't understand how none of my friends could see that it was a parody
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 08:18
|
|
- 100YrsofAttitude
- Apr 29, 2013
-
|
Trust me, I agree with you; it's okay when they do it with a film that might have been intended to have alternate meanings, like Frances Ha, but like you said, sticking it to The Wolverine or any other blockbuster film is ridiculous.
I mean, I think they should do three kinds of reviews: reviews for movies their audience likely would not watch, but they think they SHOULD watch; reviews for movies their audience is likely to go watch, but they think they SHOULDN'T; and take downs of ridiculous films regardless of audience intent.
I just want to know if a movie I wasn't interested in seeing is actually worth seeing, or if a movie I wanted to see isn't worth seeing, in terms that suit the audience. I don't care that comic book movies don't meet the standards of Schindler's List, I just wanna watch dudes shoot lasers out of their eyes and blow poo poo up and eat over priced hot dogs and nachos. I DO wanna know if the overtly Christian film I was ignoring because it seems like another Lifetime original is actually a good piece of cinema on its own, or if a film whose trailer makes it seem really awesome is actually Drive levels of slow and tedious.
This is a good idea. I would say though for movies you want to see, just go see them! Who cares what they thought of it? You are allowed to make your own opinions. Usually in those cases, when I'm certain I'm seeing a movie, I'll read the review afterwards so I don't go in with a bias. I mean it's lovely when you have a bad time at the movies, but it's nice to be able to make your own opinion about a film.
wait is black bones 'jay dub' or whomever was behind the current releases? i've been thinking he was some unrelated nut who was super defensive about the front page for some reason.
Jay dub is jay dub and no one else I think.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 08:49
|
|
- Nostalgic Pushead
- Jul 31, 2013
-
.
|
wait is black bones 'jay dub' or whomever was behind the current releases? i've been thinking he was some unrelated nut who was super defensive about the front page for some reason.
when i read this, i legit thought this was a funny parody of a person outraged by the cartoon, and didn't understand how none of my friends could see that it was a parody
Jay Dub is the Cinema Discusso mod of the same name. Coincidentally, he also wrote the minority report for the Disney Planes review written by the guy mentioned in the quote in your post.
I vaguely recall Black Bones mentioning that he isn't a front page writer, but there's no way I'm going back over his posts to check. Hopefully he will clarify this for us.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 08:52
|
|
- Beeswax
- Dec 29, 2005
-
-
Grimey Drawer
|
I've read this reply. I've actually read all of your posts in here (despite it clearly not being a Cool Thing to do, going by how many people feel the need to proclaim just HOW HARD they didn't read your posts). I appreciate someone from CD actually engaging with the criticism in this thread.
With that said, it is really painful to read your attempts at justifying the absolute garbage that is CR. Let's use Gone Girl as an example, since it has already been brought up in here. I haven't read the book, seen the film or even followed the debate about the movie. What could I possibly get from reading the CR review of it? What could anyone get from it? It's pointless ideological grandstanding in lieu of an actual review.
And while it's funny that you respond by implying that there is some paranoid conspiracy at work, where people who complain about CR's inane analyses only do so because they disagree with the politics behind it, I'm pretty sure the people in here are pretty uniformly left-wing. It's not that people dislike leftist analysis (although they could be forgiven for being fed up with it at this point). It's that they dislike incredibly poorly conducted analysis, slathered on top of what is ostensibly a movie review. While you clearly try really hard to make your replies come off as playful and non-confrontational, it only makes you seem self-satisfied and unable to take in people's actual points.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 08:55
|
|
- Daikatana Ritsu
- Aug 1, 2008
-
|
Sir, it is not paranoia to not want to be berated with high school level "analysis" on any subject relating to race or gender equality in society in a movie review about Vin Diesel finding treasure or whatever. Especially considering you (general) only do it for the instant praise you will receive online, instead of simply expressing things you truly feel. If the movie pertains to these topics, then have at it. But shoehorning in your instant upvote talking points has grown tired and perhaps a movie review article on a comedy website is not the place for it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 12:35
|
|
- platedlizard
- Aug 31, 2012
-
I like plates and lizards.
|
From what I understand, a lot of the "advice" is stuff that the heroine actually does in the movie.
Would have been nice to have that explained in the review rather than the stupid smug cute poo poo that actually got written. Btw, thank you whoever posted the Time review, it explained a lot about the movie and why it is so controversial, unlike the review here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 14:55
|
|
- SpiderHyphenMan
- Apr 1, 2010
-
by Fluffdaddy
|
What the gently caress happened?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 15:09
|
|
- Nostalgic Pushead
- Jul 31, 2013
-
.
|
What the gently caress happened?
People took your advice about reading Current Releases.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 15:13
|
|
- theflyingorc
- Jun 28, 2008
-
ANY GOOD OPINIONS THIS POSTER CLAIMS TO HAVE ARE JUST PROOF THAT BULLYING WORKS
-
Young Orc
|
What the gently caress happened?
Legitimate feedback.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 15:22
|
|
- John Dyne
- Jul 3, 2005
-
Well, fuck. Really?
|
From what I understand, a lot of the "advice" is stuff that the heroine actually does in the movie.
After reading the Wikipedia page on the movie it is apparently 100% everything the heroine does in the movie, and the reactions the rest of the cast has. Even the wine bottle thing. And the movie is getting pretty good press; it's like a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes and none of the reviews mention how stupid some of the plot twists are.
The CR 'review' is an article meant for people who have already seen the movie and dislike the movie and its plot points. As a 'review' it's completely useless because if you didn't KNOW this stuff about it already, it gives no criticism. It's all 'hurr de durr check out this dumb poo poo.' It could've been just another throw-away satirical article if it weren't linked to a movie. It could've been a Daily Dirt.
This is a good idea. I would say though for movies you want to see, just go see them! Who cares what they thought of it? You are allowed to make your own opinions. Usually in those cases, when I'm certain I'm seeing a movie, I'll read the review afterwards so I don't go in with a bias. I mean it's lovely when you have a bad time at the movies, but it's nice to be able to make your own opinion about a film.
Reviews are to help you make up your mind, at least to me. I wanted to go see TMNT cause I'm a big fat nostalgic idiot who went and saw the animated one almost ten years ago and enjoyed it, and I had hoped it'd at least be like the first Transformers where it isn't complete poo poo but also isn't a cinematic masterpiece, but I checked reviews first and saved myself 10 bucks. The opinions of others help when you're on a budget with both time and money. 
It also helps me find something my wife and I can go to. I can't remember which film it was she was interested in seeing here awhile back, but we read the CR review on it and found out it was a complete turd and so we went and saw Magic Mike and were much happier with our new choice, especially after hearing people bitch about the first movie on the way out of the theatre. It's why I used Drive as an example; the trailer for that seemed like it was going to be more action oriented with fights and chase scenes and poo poo, but the film itself was pretty slow paced and more dramatic. I mean it was still really good but I was disappointed about it, cause I was basically expecting Transporter with Ryan Gosling.
Still it only helps if they're actual reviews and not 'hrm yes there are ninety instances in the movie that could be a reference to phalluses and show the deep-seated resentment towards cisnormative society' style over-analytical bullshit. I've got CD I can read for that. I want jokes and an actual down-to-earth review and analysis on the front page. Maybe not so much 'if you like explosions, you'll like this movie!' but at least let me know if the trailer is telling me something different from the movie but, hey, I'll like the movie anyways for these reasons.
John Dyne fucked around with this message at 16:36 on Oct 7, 2014
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 16:34
|
|
- Sagabal
- Apr 24, 2010
-
|
Drive keeps getting mentioned. I want to watch Drive again. Does anyone else want to watch Drive again.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 17:17
|
|
- gwaaargh
- Jul 7, 2010
-
by XyloJW
|
Drive keeps getting mentioned. I want to watch Drive again. Does anyone else want to watch Drive again.
My friend says that when Ryan Gosling stamps on that guy's head it explodes like a melon but maybe now's the time to prove him wrong
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 17:54
|
|
- SpiderHyphenMan
- Apr 1, 2010
-
by Fluffdaddy
|
I have a confession to make: I almost never read Current Releases anymore.
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 17:59
|
|
- Chilled Cactus
- Nov 15, 2011
-
-
College Slice
|
My friend says that when Ryan Gosling stamps on that guy's head it explodes like a melon but maybe now's the time to prove him wrong
your friend is right
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 18:03
|
|
- Adbot
-
ADBOT LOVES YOU
|
|
|
#
?
May 31, 2024 04:57
|
|
- Top Bunk Wanker
- Jan 31, 2005
-
Top Trump Anger
|
I have a confession to make: I almost never read Current Releases anymore.
Why not?
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 18:15
|
|
#
?
Oct 7, 2014 04:28
for not having read Marx's letters.
