Skip to comments.
Michael Medved: Top-money makers explode myths
Jewish World Review ^
| 1/10/06
| Michael Medved
Posted on 01/10/2006 1:35:43 PM PST by Caleb1411
click here to read article
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-84 next last
To: steve-b
A meaningless argument. Popularity is not equivalent to quality -- and there is good reason to suspect that the two are inversely correlated.
I say, how very elitist of you, Nigel.
21
posted on
01/10/2006 1:58:14 PM PST
by
Antoninus
(Jesus Christ is Lord. Alleluia!)
To: JeeperFreeper
> Most moviegoers don't want lectures; they want to enjoy themselves for a an hour or so.
And then bored out of their minds for the other hour.
22
posted on
01/10/2006 1:59:09 PM PST
by
orionblamblam
(A furore Normannorum libra nos, Domine)
To: Caleb1411
One of my favorite movies this year was "Three Iron", a Korean movie...absolutely amazing!
23
posted on
01/10/2006 1:59:38 PM PST
by
mozarky2
(Ya never stand so tall as when ya stoop to stomp a statist!)
To: Caleb1411
The Academy Awards and Oscars have never reflected how popular a movie is or how much money it's making. While some huge movies have received awards, the point is that these movies are considered the best among the industry itself. The point is for movie critics to honor their favorite films, not the ones that were the most successful financially.
I don't much care for Medved as a movie critic. He's okay as a pundit, I guess.
24
posted on
01/10/2006 1:59:42 PM PST
by
pcottraux
(It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
To: Caleb1411
Medved has been saying this for more than 15 years. In the culture war it is difficult to hold Hollywood accountable to that bottom line.
25
posted on
01/10/2006 2:00:36 PM PST
by
rjp2005
To: highlander_UW
As for these movies, Brokeback Mountain - Gay shepards...I thought they were cow pokes. Are they sheep pokes???
26
posted on
01/10/2006 2:01:28 PM PST
by
JoeGar
To: JeeperFreeper
Most moviegoers don't want lectures; they want to enjoy themselves for a an hour or so.
But there's nothing wrong with movies trying to actually be smart, interesting, topical, and make statements. There is certainly a place at least to me for films that actually have something to say or try to be thought-provoking. Otherwise, all we would have would be shlocky garbage and maybe a few okay action movies. What kind of a world would that be?
27
posted on
01/10/2006 2:02:52 PM PST
by
pcottraux
(It's pronounced "P. Coe-troe.")
To: Ciexyz
Don't be so sure. Despite the "big name", Star Wars was a potent potrayal of a man's fall from grace and the reasons behind it. I knew it was going to happen, but it still punched me in the gut when he took his first few respirator-breaths.
To: Huck
I want to rent narnia, so I can see the beavers. Basic Instinct is already available for rent, if you're in a hurry.
29
posted on
01/10/2006 2:07:14 PM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: Finny
My only complaint, and one of the things that makes me turn him off now and then, is that he lets stupid liberals have a little too much time on his show. A little bit of them goes a l-o-n-g way, and IMO, Michael overdoes it.
I couldn't agree with you more. Recently he had on a female member of the Fred Phelps family (Westboro Baptist Church). This individual was a vile thing and deserved no airtime whatsoever. We all know fecal matter stinks but we don't wipe it on everything to drive the point home. Yes, Medved can way overdo the liberal exposure thing.
30
posted on
01/10/2006 2:07:26 PM PST
by
SpaceBar
To: Alien Gunfighter
I saw the first Star Wars (now #4 in the series) when it first came out circa 1977. I saw it 26 times in the theater.
All movie-going experiences since that time have been a downhill.
31
posted on
01/10/2006 2:09:09 PM PST
by
Ciexyz
(Let us always remember, the Lord is in control.)
To: Racehorse
Think I'll skip the Oscars Show this year. This year?
I stopped watching that waste of time in the late seventies.
Haven't missed it at all. Not even a tiny bit.
32
posted on
01/10/2006 2:10:18 PM PST
by
Publius6961
(The IQ of California voters is about 420........... .............cumulatively)
To: Caleb1411
Popularity of a movie is less a measure of its artistic merit than a measure of its commercial appeal. Not that the two are mutually exclusive; some artistic movies do well at the box office, and some successful movies are artistically vapid.
My question would be this: what is it about Brokedick Mountain that makes it an ARTISTIC gem? Is it the cinematography? Is it the skillful direction? The brilliant mise en scene? The innovative camera work?
Commercially, it's tepid at best. So what is the industry so "abuzz" about? The answer is obvious: if we peasants out in flyover country hate it, it must be good, because we are the repository of bourgeois tastes. We should shut up and see the movies our betters tell us to see.
33
posted on
01/10/2006 2:11:31 PM PST
by
IronJack
To: Caleb1411
An old friend of mine has an animated film opening nationwide this Friday, and it is something adults can feel comfortable about taking the kiddies to see, and even enjoy themselves without guilt! The film is
HOODWINKED!, and it was produced by a bunch of nice, middle-American boys on a ultra-low budget (by Hollywood standards). The film was bought for nationwide distribution by the Weinstein Company.
Take your families and tell your friends. I'd like to see these guys making more family-friendly films (on an even bigger budget!).
http://www.hoodwinkedthemovie.com/
34
posted on
01/10/2006 2:12:53 PM PST
by
kidkosmic1
(www.InterviewwithGod.com)
To: dead
I knew SOMEONE was gonna make a crack. I stopped short of pointing out that I like beavers. lol. the chubby, tree eating rodents. (not that I have a problem with..oh..nevermind!)
And anyway, Sharon Stone skeeves me out. blech.
35
posted on
01/10/2006 2:15:03 PM PST
by
Huck
(Don't Vote: It only encourages them.)
To: BenLurkin
"Bareback Mountain" and "Capote" would be an appropriate double-feature.
36
posted on
01/10/2006 2:16:12 PM PST
by
LS
To: Huck
And anyway, Sharon Stone skeeves me out. blech.Me too. One of those rare actresses you can smell through your television.
37
posted on
01/10/2006 2:17:13 PM PST
by
dead
(I've got my eye out for Mullah Omar.)
To: Pookyhead
Last time I watched the Oscars was the year The Unforgiven won best picture and Clint won best director. I think that was '93. I was a huge Clint western fan ever since I was like 8 years old, and I was so psyched. I usually don't care about that stuff at all, but ppl used to always make fun of Clint and I felt personally vindicated when he won! I remember I actually bought a big steak and made a big old steak dinner that night and celebrated as if I'd won. When you are a fan for that long, you feel a part of it, I guess. But I don't recall watching the Oscars once since then.
38
posted on
01/10/2006 2:17:32 PM PST
by
Huck
(Don't Vote: It only encourages them.)
To: dead
39
posted on
01/10/2006 2:17:51 PM PST
by
Huck
(Don't Vote: It only encourages them.)
To: Ciexyz
My wife and I have a few general rules when renting movies: The more awards it has, the less likely we are to like it.
Overseas film festival awards multiply the above rule by 1.5
A Cannes Film festival award guarantees we won't understand it.
Never rent a move which has a recommendation by a TV station reviewer on the box.
Ignore any Oscar given after 1980 as meaningless
Never rent a move that has "Thought Provoking" as an advertising blurb
40
posted on
01/10/2006 2:19:47 PM PST
by
lOKKI
(You can ignore reality until it bites you in the ass.)
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-20, 21-40, 41-60, 61-80, 81-84 next last
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.
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson