Posted on 01/17/2005 12:40:51 PM PST by pabianice
With some time on my hands today I caught the flick "White Noise." The critics hated it. They are wrong. It's a tight, scary, fast-moving film with a lot of surprises.
I have no connection with the film and just wanted to set the record straight, especially after seeing part of the "Golden Globes" show last night, at which European critics (hah!) wet themselves over some really terrible films.
We need to start licensing movie critics! How much longer can this epidemic of bad reviews go unchecked?? We owe it to the children!
LOL. You poor souls. I was unfortunate enough to buy it used, sight unseen, thinking it would be decent. I like Alan Moore, the guy who wrote the comic book, I mean, graphic novel, so I figured why not. Now I own it, but have only forced myself to watch it once.
Speaking of bad movie experiences- I went to see Solaris, yes, I admit it. I recall watching the red EXIT light in the movie house, thinking that was much more entertaining than the movie. Funny thing is that I forced myself to watch the entire flick. I guess I thought something cool was going to happen to make up for all the suckiness. Which brings me to SAW, a movie that I didn't decided I liked until the very end.
Harold and Kumar looks like it would be mindless fun. I'd probably like it.
I agree that Solaris sucked, big time. Then I heard that the Russian version was much better. That sucked too. Then, I gave Lem's book, on which the movies were based, a read. Better than the movies, but can not recomend it.
I have to disagree that questionable material makes for a bad movie, or a movie is automatically bad because characters make morally questionable choices. Sometimes diffulcult material makes for a hard film to watch. Requiem for a Dream is an excellent film, not one that I have any desire to see again. In fact I would say anyone who wants to see it more than once is a little off. But that doesn't take away from the performances or the skill involved in directing. It is for this reason, and the fact that I almost without fail enjoy Clint Eastwood movies that I will see Million Dollar Baby.
Critics hated Alexander for what it is worth.
For an overall picture of what critics think of movies check out www.rottentomatoes.com
I think "Unforgiven" is one of the five greatest movies ever made.
All films should be technically accomplished. That's a given with $100 million budgets.
Ultimately, a movie is story. And a story worth $10.50/ticket should do two things:
1) Take us to a place we haven't been before.
2) Be morally uplifting, either by the assertion of the narrative (good example) or by the antithesis of the narrative (learning from a bad example.)
Eastwood's latest movie, MDB, celebrates euthanasia. I was appalled at the film's conclusion. No amount of technical proficiency or maudlin sentiment makes up for a lousy final act.
And because Eastwood's melodramatic, pedantic story couldn't even support its own conclusion on the merits of the girl being paralyzed from the neck down, he has to throw in the cheesy plot point that her leg needs to be amputated. We, the audience, is being manipulated mightily to the point where we're supposed to jump up from our seats and yell, "Stop! I can't take it anymore! Kill her now and make my suffering stop!!!"
Eastwood should be ashamed of himself. It is not a good nor Godly thing to take another's life in this manner. We're supposed to think he "sacrificed" his own salvation in order to end her temporal suffering. But IMO they're both damned.
It's a satanic film. Christopher Reeve would have hated it.
I can't comment on the specific details of Million Dollar Baby because I have yet to see it. As I said I can only compare it to other movies where the characters are morally bankrupt. As I said Requiem for a Dream is my prime example of this because each character is a drug addict. Of course in the end it is very much an anti-drug film.
When I said the tecnical skill, some films are presented in a method to make us feel more "in" the film. Sometimes low budget films are more successful at this than the 100 mil epics.
I actually like JFK. I thought the movie was good regardless of political leanings or facts overlooked.
I liked it so much I bought it on DVHS.
Chariots of Fire is already out... in FS. Its being released in WS.
"As for Christian Bale ..."
Empire of the Sun was his best. I loved Equilibrium and Reign of Fire too though.
"They also said The Stepford Wives was bad, and it was horrible."
I thought it was great. I'm a proud DVD owner of that title.
I already have Unforgiven, although not the SE.
Advance warning Requiem is not for the weak stomached. It also has a lot of questionable material. As I said I won't be watching it again, but it is good to watch at least once. You will wonder why Marlon Wayans hasn't pulled a Jamie Foxx and gone on to more serious fare.
"Watched The Village this weekend. Yawn"
I liked it.
Do you mean "The Ring" (Japanese horror movie/American remake of same) or "Lord of the Rings: Fellowship of the Ring" (hobbits, dwarf, elf, wizard, horsemen, etc.)?
Which movie? The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen...or King Arthur?
American Indians have recently benefitted from a combination of political correctness and an ingorance of history of the public. Almost without exception, the Indians the Europeans found upon coming to America had occupied their land by killing everyone who had been there first. Indians were hardly gentle beings in touch eith their feminine side and stewards of the land. Am,erican I(ndians hunted to extinction every large mammal in both North and South America, except for the bison, and the bison escaped extinction only by virtue of their high birth rate and ability to run in large herds.
Yeah, except if you don't clear your browser's cache before the preview, it will use the cached image, leaving a guy hanging in the breeze. :-/
There's more to it then mere technical proficiency. Through framing and editing a director can be critical of a character's actions without having anyone on screen say anything. That said, Eastwood is not that director. He is as forthright as they come.
Both
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.