Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

You are here: MacNN Forums > Community > MacNN Lounge > Movie reviews, your opinion

Movie reviews, your opinion
Thread Tools
Sijmen
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 07:04 AM
 
I was thinking about why they exist. All I need to know when I want to go see a movie is what it's about, which actors it features and what kind of genre it is. I don't care much for the opinion of the reviewer, maybe after I have seen the movie. Reviewers look at completely different things than I do so we mostly disagree.
What is your opinion about reviews?
Apple Powerbook 17" 1,67 GHz, 2 gig RAM, 100 gig HDD, ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128MB, Superdrive 8X
     
Railroader
Banned
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Indy.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 07:28 AM
 
I find that if Roger Ebert enjoyed it, then I will probably enjoy it. He's the only reviewer I agree with so much. So, I usually find out what he thinks before seeing a movie. That is why I read his reviews. Plus, he rarely gives spoilers. I don't really like knowing what a movie is about before I see it.
     
Doofy
Clinically Insane
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vacation.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 07:44 AM
 
I don't trust movie reviews at all.
I like knowing the genre and where the film was made (I detest British films - they're all so depressing and mundane) before I see it, but that's it.
Been inclined to wander... off the beaten track.
That's where there's thunder... and the wind shouts back.
     
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 08:18 AM
 
If the guy in the local paper hated it, then I'll like it. If he loved it, it's either Disney or one of those movies they wrote as an Oscar chaser.
     
Cubeoid
Baninated
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Dead whale
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 08:48 AM
 
Well I like going to RT to see what other people thought of the films. So I think reviews are cool. I used to be a film critic myself a few years back.
     
Sijmen  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 12:35 PM
 
Originally Posted by Cubeoid
Well I like going to RT to see what other people thought of the films. So I think reviews are cool. I used to be a film critic myself a few years back.

Reviews from 'normal' viewers are more appreciated by me than, let's say the authorised critic. What gave him his spores to claim that title anyway? Websites on which you can write your own review is a more reliable source than those from the critic.
Apple Powerbook 17" 1,67 GHz, 2 gig RAM, 100 gig HDD, ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128MB, Superdrive 8X
     
Eug Wanker
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Dangling something in the water… of the Arabian Sea
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 01:08 PM
 
If the reviewer for my local news radio station liked a movie, chances are I'll probably hate it, and vice versa. I dunno what it is, but it's pretty consistent.

However I do find Rotten Tomatoes useful.

If a movie gets 80% or above there, I'll usually either like it a lot or at least think it's OK.
If a movie gets between 60-80%, I may or may not like it, probably the former.
If a movie gets between 30-60%, I may or may not like it, probably the latter.
If a movie gets below 30%, I usually won't like it.
     
SirCastor
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 23, 2005, 01:15 PM
 
I've done a little work for a film critic, I find often that he'll like a movie, and I won't. It's kind of strange. But I think film reviews can be good. Knowing what a movie is about does not qualify necessarily to be a good film. There are a lot of movies that sounded really good seeing the trailer, but ended up being a waste of money.

So I think if you can find a reviewer you agree with, then it's a positive thing. Potential problems with Reviewers are the wide range of offerings. A lot of reviewers will analyze a film on a technical level. This is great for a person who wants to know why a film sucked, but not always useful to the average layman.
2008 iMac 3.06 Ghz, 2GB Memory, GeForce 8800, 500GB HD, SuperDrive
8gb iPhone on Tmobile
     
Sijmen  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 02:28 PM
 
Originally Posted by SirCastor
I've done a little work for a film critic, I find often that he'll like a movie, and I won't. It's kind of strange. But I think film reviews can be good. Knowing what a movie is about does not qualify necessarily to be a good film. There are a lot of movies that sounded really good seeing the trailer, but ended up being a waste of money.

So I think if you can find a reviewer you agree with, then it's a positive thing. Potential problems with Reviewers are the wide range of offerings. A lot of reviewers will analyze a film on a technical level. This is great for a person who wants to know why a film sucked, but not always useful to the average layman.
Why is it that critics look at a movie with a technical eye, and not as an experience? Viewing movies as an achievement instead of a technical failure will make a better review.
Apple Powerbook 17" 1,67 GHz, 2 gig RAM, 100 gig HDD, ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128MB, Superdrive 8X
     
andreas_g4
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 03:03 PM
 
I don't take advice from reviews, but I still enjoy to read them. Reading a review of a so called blockbuster movie often makes me think whether the author is under 14 yrs old or drunk, since I usually don't like them due to flat stories/acting. Reviews of independent films on the other hand seem to be a lot more in line with my opinion in general…
     
Sijmen  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 03:21 PM
 
So, if we review the review, what needs to be changed?
For me it is the opinion of the writer, it doesn't add anything to the article, it's something I don't need to know.
Apple Powerbook 17" 1,67 GHz, 2 gig RAM, 100 gig HDD, ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128MB, Superdrive 8X
     
Thorin
Mac Enthusiast
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: UK
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 03:52 PM
 
I enjoy Mark Kermode's review show on Radio Five Live (UK), I listen to the podcast of it, which can be found on iTunes. I don't always agree with him, but he goes off on rants about films that can be very entertaining
12" Rev B PB
     
gradient
Mac Elite
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Vancouver, BC
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 03:59 PM
 
I find reading reviews posted by regular moviegoers pretty informative, even if they are completely offbase. I can generally figure out whether I'm going to like a movie by piecing together what a few different people enjoyed or hated about a movie. I personally tend to like a movie if I find a bunch of people who hated it, claiming that it was slow, boring and generally pointless and another bunch of people who loved it saying it was smartly written, well acted and thought provoking. That combination is GOLD.

i.e. The Weatherman - what a brialliant movie imho but man a lot of people gave it lousy reviews.
     
Monique
Mac Elite
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: back home
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 04:41 PM
 
I listened to it with a grain of salt because I am a cinephile but it gives some insight into the story. Even though they rarely talked about things I love about a movie, the editing, the photography and the directing.

Sometimes Ebert and the other guy discussed things like that so it makes it even more interesting.
     
andreas_g4
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 04:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Monique
Even though they rarely talked about things I love about a movie, the editing, the photography and the directing.
My talking. The first two aspects are very rarely mentioned in reviews, though they can make the whole picture!
     
JoshuaZ
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Yamanashi, Japan
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 08:51 PM
 
ruthlessreviews.com

Its funny, informitive, and did I say funny?
     
nonhuman
Posting Junkie
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Baltimore, MD
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 08:57 PM
 
Originally Posted by Railroader
I find that if Roger Ebert enjoyed it, then I will probably enjoy it. He's the only reviewer I agree with so much. So, I usually find out what he thinks before seeing a movie. That is why I read his reviews. Plus, he rarely gives spoilers. I don't really like knowing what a movie is about before I see it.
Plus he wrote Beyond the Valley of the Dolls, so he must be good.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 24, 2005, 09:10 PM
 
Too many "critics" feel that they must "criticize" rather than "critique" whatever it is that they review. And "reviewers" do it too. I agree with the OP; if I know the basic "in the trailer" idea about the film, and who's in it, I get all that I need to know.

Roger Ebert is a talented screenwriter, but he critiques as if a film were his own project. Or if the film is foreign, he's much more likely to like it than if it's American. And if it is full of angst, psychological trauma and downright emotional drama he'll like it even if it doesn't make a darn bit of sense to me. He's much more likely to highly rate a film from an unknown filmmaker in the South of France that (even if I was fluent in the particular patoís of the reigion) makes absolutely no sense to me, than a solid, well written film from a California filmmaker with a solid body of well received work behind him. That's just the way Roger is, so I read his reviews and draw my own conclusions. More than once I've read his review, seen the movie, and found myself saying "Roger didn't see the same film I did," or "Roger just didn't get it-and that's kind of hard to do with such a straightforward film."

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
andreas_g4
Professional Poster
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: adequate, thanks.
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 25, 2005, 06:57 AM
 
Roger Ebert Should Lay off the Fatty Foods
     
SirCastor
Professional Poster
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Salt Lake City, UT USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2005, 10:09 AM
 
I think the reason that critics end up looking at the technical aspects of a film is because whenb you get that deeply involved in filmmaking, (no matter where you are) you become more aware of the subtlties and less concerned with the overall. After my first year in film school, movies were ruined for me for a couple of years. I automatically looked at films from a production stand-point. It was near unavoidable. That faded after a little while, but came back when I went back to school this fall.

After having exposed myself so much to the process, it's hard not to watch a movie and be aware of the technical pieces. I think that a very good critic is able to take into account the whole of the film and give a good roundup of the thing.

What I think is valid is this: My Band teacher once was talking to us about Marching band, he said, "If something's wrong, people realize it. They may not know what's wrong, but they do know something's wrong."
When there are technical flaws in a film, people are aware of it. They may not know what's wrong, but they know something isn't right. Very very subtle issues may not be as important, but bigger one's people know.

So, Technical Analyzation does have some value
2008 iMac 3.06 Ghz, 2GB Memory, GeForce 8800, 500GB HD, SuperDrive
8gb iPhone on Tmobile
     
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2005, 10:35 AM
 
The biggest problem with movie critics is the same problem that critics in all areas have: they fail to recognize the audience for the film. Critics either review the film as if they are the audience or they account for the audience, but they are completely out of touch with the audience.

What kills me is when they pan the high school/college comedies (Scary Movie or Old School). They seem to think that these movies need a gripping plot. They don't. They're about dumb gags that involve getting hit in the nuts. The people that go to see them realize that and are looking for that. I don't know what most critics were expecting out of such a thing.

The other thing that bothers me is that once the Oscar bandwagon starts, very few critics will go against it. I'm sorry, but Titanic was stroking its own ego. It was way too long and ridiculously overdone.

So, Technical Analyzation does have some value
Maybe, but not to the people that are reading reviews.
     
ghporter
Administrator
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: San Antonio TX USA
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2005, 11:21 AM
 
Originally Posted by wallinbl
The biggest problem with movie critics is the same problem that critics in all areas have: they fail to recognize the audience for the film. Critics either review the film as if they are the audience or they account for the audience, but they are completely out of touch with the audience.
Outstanding analysis! I think you hit the nail on the head; it certainly does explain the kinds of reviews people like Ebert have done. It has struck me that sometimes the reviews I read make it obvious that the reviewer just didn't "get it" even though (at least some) reviewers are otherwise intelligent people. Your idea provides a reason for that. Thanks!

Glenn -----OTR/L, MOT, Tx
     
Sijmen  (op)
Dedicated MacNNer
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Netherlands
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2005, 01:47 PM
 
Originally Posted by SirCastor
I think the reason that critics end up looking at the technical aspects of a film is because whenb you get that deeply involved in filmmaking, (no matter where you are) you become more aware of the subtlties and less concerned with the overall. After my first year in film school, movies were ruined for me for a couple of years. I automatically looked at films from a production stand-point. It was near unavoidable. That faded after a little while, but came back when I went back to school this fall.
I know what you mean, I've got that same issue with books, reading them while being a writer can be as annoying as a serious itch.

Originally Posted by SirCastor
After having exposed myself so much to the process, it's hard not to watch a movie and be aware of the technical pieces. I think that a very good critic is able to take into account the whole of the film and give a good roundup of the thing.

So, Technical Analyzation does have some value
Value for a test screening perhaps, but they go for the opinion of the public.

Originally Posted by wallinbl
The biggest problem with movie critics is the same problem that critics in all areas have: they fail to recognize the audience for the film. Critics either review the film as if they are the audience or they account for the audience, but they are completely out of touch with the audience.

Originally Posted by SirCastor
So, Technical Analyzation does have some value
Maybe, but not to the people that are reading reviews.
So why is it that they keep reviewing movies from a production/technical point of view? They could just have other people write opinions and let the critics share their opinions with the production company.
Apple Powerbook 17" 1,67 GHz, 2 gig RAM, 100 gig HDD, ATI Mobility Radeon 9700 128MB, Superdrive 8X
     
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2005, 10:17 PM
 
Originally Posted by Sijmen
So why is it that they keep reviewing movies from a production/technical point of view? They could just have other people write opinions and let the critics share their opinions with the production company.
Because the critics are trying to prove themselves to be experts and insiders. People enjoy talking like they're big stuff.
     
wallinbl
Professional Poster
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: somewhere
Status: Offline
Reply With Quote
Nov 26, 2005, 10:29 PM
 
Originally Posted by ghporter
Outstanding analysis!
Not so much analysis as it was luck. I went to a DMB concert a few years ago and it was fantastic. They were really on that night, and everyone that went to the show seemed to agree on that. I read a review of the concert in the paper a day or two later and the guy completely panned the concert. Perplexed, I looked through recent papers to see what else the guy had written. He was clearly a hip hop fan, and thought all other music was terrible. Not that a music critic can't go outside of his/her own taste, but this was clearly wrong: he wasn't saying they played poorly or had a bad night - he was saying their music sucked, which is a useless review of a muscial act, since only fans of that act are going to the concert.
     
   
Thread Tools
 
Forum Links
Forum Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Top
Privacy Policy
All times are GMT -4. The time now is 12:03 PM.
All contents of these forums © 1995-2017 MacNN. All rights reserved.
Branding + Design: www.gesamtbild.com
vBulletin v.3.8.8 © 2000-2017, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.,