301

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Well, shit. I finally saw Amadeus. And was hugely surprised by its tone and accessibility. I was completely expecting something stuffy and pompous, but it's really just a good story that is solidly executed, with a world and characters that genuinely feel real (and modern). I'm impressed, and I will no doubt be revisiting it at some point in the future.
If you've put off seeing it for one reason or another, give it a go. I think the only complaint is the run-time, so just watch it when you're in the mood for a film of that length. Thumbs up though.

302

(262 replies, posted in Episodes)

303

(1,649 replies, posted in Off Topic)

305

(12 replies, posted in Episodes)

HAH! Excellent find.

307

(2,068 replies, posted in Off Topic)

308

(670 replies, posted in Creations)

309

(10 replies, posted in Off Topic)

310

(538 replies, posted in Creations)

311

(356 replies, posted in Off Topic)

312

(538 replies, posted in Creations)

313

(538 replies, posted in Creations)

Yeah. Sort me like one of your French girls, Teague.

Zarban, if you write anything with a sex scene (so, presumably not the project with 11yo niece/nephew), I have a wah pedal, so that's pretty much the soundtrack sorted.

315

(127 replies, posted in Off Topic)

316

(127 replies, posted in Off Topic)

You know, taking that optimistically, that's a good point. I can live with that.

317

(127 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Okay.

I don't wanna get bogged down in semantics (I just found out that I am older right now than Laura Dern was in Jurassic Park, and I'm having an existential crisis and I don't feel like I have the time for semantics), but:

I think the thing that makes their criticism seem trivial to me, is that they almost-exclusively offer plotholecriticism in a vacuum. Sure, some films are irredeemable messes (Catwoman, UGH), but exclusively catalouging all the faults of a film which does SO many other things right (e.g. Die Hard) just comes across as petty.
But then we come back to the 'it's offered as comedy' thing. Maybe I just don't like certain American ways of presenting things? That loud, brash way (tone of voice is so much, ya know?) which kinda reinforces my perception that they haven't thought very hard beyond the surface of things.

Ergh. Starting to get cyclic. Oops.

318

(127 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I don't know what this thread is about anymore, so I'm looking forward to The Intermission even more than I already was.

Edit: Okay. So.
Film criticism tends to be film analysis. Though plotholecriticism takes this critiquing literally.
It is ostensibly offered as 'comedy', though if that is the case then its level of success is up for debate, as it often veers towards needlessly petty and trivial.
Some people take this as it seems to be intended, as comedy.
Others take this as legitimate criticism, so perpetuating a kneejerk culture of "here are trivial problems that I can use to dismiss the film with so that I don't need to engage in intellectual criticism". This is neither ideal, nor healthy, though people are free to do/interpret as they wish.

We all seem to like movies. But we don't like it when people trivialize what it takes to like a movie.

Is that where we are with this?

Skills: electric guitar, mathemagics and stats, coding, awesome origami, a North-East (mockney) London accent, and uh, ecology.
Interested in: I am probably mostly useful for music stuffs, but will happily lend what skills I have in what way I can.
Availability: pretty flexible.

320

(164 replies, posted in Off Topic)

321

(127 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Maybe it's just Sturgeon's Law for people. 90% of people think no more than 2 minutes ahead when it comes to making tv/movie-viewing choices, and viewed in this light, appear to be idiots.

322

(127 replies, posted in Off Topic)

I get that Fridge Logic / Plot Hole Critiquing / Whatever can come across as really inconsistent and hypocritical at times, but the way I see it, is that each movie has a set of scales. If a film does enough little things right (and at the right times. ebb and flow, rhythm and structure and all that) it can weigh down the scale one way, so that when something ridiculous comes along, it doesn't tip the scale back into "Noooope! I'm OUT."

If Karl had hunted McClane down by following his bloody footprints as soon as that flashbang cleared, bad guys win, end of movie. But Die Hard does almost everything else perfectly, so I don't care.
The ending of Edge of Tomorrow probably has serious issues, but I haven't questioned it yet, 'cause I walked out of the cinema with a smile on my face.
And you're right. People direct a lot of criticisms at Crystal Skull that can be aimed at other films (the raft in Temple of Doom is pretty much the same thing as the fridge, I agree). But! Crystal Skull is almost entirely devoid of all those little moments in the other movies that buy goodwill.
As for Dark Knight Rises, I never really heard people state that the plot holes were why they didn't like it. The other movies had plot holes too. I think the film (for me, anyway) just didn't buy enough goodwill (or would buy goodwill and then lose it) because thematically, it felt inconsistent and not clear about what it was saying.

323

(40 replies, posted in Off Topic)

Yeah!
I used to think William Fichtner was a poor man's James Woods.
Then I got older and realized that James Woods was a poor man's William Fichtner.