'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

#51 Post by colinr0380 » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:15 pm

miless wrote:here's one for Mulholland Dr.:
if I wanted to see a nice rack I'll take my top off and look in the mirror. Who needs Mulholland Drive?
oh, Dallas, where they belittled everyone's intelligence by negating an entire season... instead of provoking thought, right...
I guess this might have been written by a lady, who obviously didn't get the deep significance and necessary nature of the lesbian sequence :wink:

But then if she has a 'rack' as great as Laura Harring had, who am I to argue!

(It would be worrying if this was written by an overweight man though :shock: )

I wonder what that person will make of Inland Empire? ("If I wanted to see a fluffy rabbit I'd look in the hutch in my back garden. Who needs Inland Empire?"). Will the DVD of the three hour film also have no chapter stops?

Was it Dallas or Dynasty where Joan Collins took a plunge off a balcony to her death, dragging four or five extras to their doom with her? I often get those two shows mixed up.

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

#52 Post by miless » Wed Mar 14, 2007 12:52 pm

colinr0380 wrote:I wonder what that person will make of Inland Empire? ("If I wanted to see a fluffy rabbit I'd look in the hutch in my back garden. Who needs Inland Empire?"). Will the DVD of the three hour film also have no chapter stops?
Lynch is, apparently, okay with chapter stops now (supposedly the French disc of MD has chapter stops for every time a lamp is in the frame... which sounds pretty awesome!... an absurdist/surrealist way to apply it.)

User avatar
Tommaso
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:09 am

#53 Post by Tommaso » Wed Mar 14, 2007 1:24 pm

Another one from amazon.co.uk:

on Murnau's "Nosferatu":
I know it was filmed over 80 years ago, but this is pure and utter bore! How on earth can people say this is the best scary movie ever made and briliantly filmed and acted i dont know!

The caharcters can NOT ACT! its worse then a 5 year olds christmad concert at school, the movements are corny and its all sooooooooooooooooooooooooo terrible!

User avatar
John Cope
Joined: Thu Dec 15, 2005 5:40 pm
Location: where the simulacrum is true

#54 Post by John Cope » Fri Mar 16, 2007 4:05 am

I just found this while looking for comments on Ferrara's The Blackout (I really should have known better):
ONE OF THE WORST MOVIES- MAYBE THE WORST!, December 3, 2001
Reviewer: A viewer
I rented this film not expecting too much because it looked sleazy on the video cover. What an understatement! There is nudity throughout especially with the scenes with Dennis Hopper, but this is not the kind of nudity I find attractive in the least with women degrading themselves and most of the scenes seems out of place and unnecessary (trust me on this). Well, I have sat through many a "bad movie" on HBO late at night and found the movie satisfactory because of certain actors I enjoy
watching (Hopper comes to mind)or some type of interesting plot devices. Well, the actors are all shallow individuals and not worth the time to watch WITH THE EXCEPTION of Claudia Shiffer who is both beautiful AND a caring person (MY dream come true!), and what makes this picture deserving of LESS than 1 star is the character of Matthew Modine (the actor I like) who repeatedly fails to take control of his life EVEN WHEN HE HAS SOMEONE AS WONDERFUL AS CLAUDIA'S character helping him! (...). Anyway, this movie depressed me for days and left me feeling sad and empty- don't say you weren't warned!
What really depressed me is the fact that this person uses parentheses almost as much as I do.

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

#55 Post by miless » Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:48 am

for Rumor Has It:
Movie to make you think!
I loved this movie! Jennifer Aniston's character is forced to rethink her relationship and life as a whole when she discovers things about her family's past. This movie is thought provoking. It will make you laugh & cry as you're taken on a rollar coast of emotions throughout the movie. Great actors & actresses in this movie too and they really play up their charactors. I highly recommend this movie!
Has Jennifer Aniston ever been associated with something that "makes you think"?

oh, and here's another for the same film:
What is everyone's problem?
I loved this movie! Shirley MacKlain was wonderful, Jennifer Aniston even better. I love the regular romantic comedy and found this one to have a unique twist. The plot was inventive, I noticed nothing about "scene mishaps", ie hats and hair issues. Maybe I don't watch enough movies to put my opinions on this list but I found it charming and wonderful. P.S. Must you write your reviews with PhD register? Hello, reviewing a movie!
yeah, I'm sorry that I review with PhD register about hats and hair issues.

here's one for Children of Men
Nice to finally see cinematic originality again, but...
There is a bit more to complain about than the excessive swearing. The ending felt pretty incomplete. I mean, it showed enough for viewers to guess what happened. But it was pretty disatisfying to not get to see the "Human Project". And did the ENTIRE movie have to be about nothing but the trip there? This was a story with much more potential than what was used. And WHY was the world-wide infertility not explained? Or was it? I don't know for sure since I find the British accent difficult to understand. Too bad they don't use subtitles or closed captioning in the theatre.
The vivid cinematography and attention to detail can be appreciated since it successfully pulls the viewer in and makes you feel like you are actually there in this grim, futuristic version of our world.
A special kudos for how the action scenes were handled. Who would have thought the idea of using only one camera and no music would work so well. But why not do it that way? That's just how it would look, sound, and feel if you were actually there. During the action scenes, the camera stays right next to the main character (can't remember his name). This truly helps us feel the severity of the situations he is in. You gotta love that first action scene where the car is ambushed in the woods. Very exciting, despite the fact that the camera remains inside the car the entire time.
god-damned excessive swearing...
and what's with them not telling you what happens at the end?
Last edited by miless on Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:57 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
sevenarts
Joined: Tue May 09, 2006 7:22 pm
Contact:

#56 Post by sevenarts » Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:54 am

what makes this picture deserving of LESS than 1 star is the character of Matthew Modine (the actor I like) who repeatedly fails to take control of his life EVEN WHEN HE HAS SOMEONE AS WONDERFUL AS CLAUDIA'S character helping him! (...). Anyway, this movie depressed me for days and left me feeling sad and empty- don't say you weren't warned!
I love reviews that seem to confuse not liking the characters with not liking the movie. This movie sux becos he's a bad guy!!

User avatar
arsonfilms
Joined: Wed Nov 02, 2005 12:53 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA
Contact:

#57 Post by arsonfilms » Fri Mar 16, 2007 11:54 am

miless wrote:for Rumor Has It:
Movie to make you think!
I loved this movie! Jennifer Aniston's character is forced to rethink her relationship and life as a whole when she discovers things about her family's past. This movie is thought provoking. It will make you laugh & cry as you're taken on a rollar coast of emotions throughout the movie. Great actors & actresses in this movie too and they really play up their charactors. I highly recommend this movie!
Has Jennifer Aniston ever been associated with something that "makes you think"?
Um, hello? Of course!

"Why was Friends on the air for a decade?" Also, "How did The Good Girl get funding?"

User avatar
domino harvey
Dot Com Dom
Joined: Wed Jan 11, 2006 2:42 pm

#58 Post by domino harvey » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:04 pm

Her role in Leprechaun really made me stop and consider the consequences of stealing gold from a leprechaun.

Napoleon
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:55 am

#59 Post by Napoleon » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:26 pm

Finding idiotic reviews of Tarkovsky movies is like shooting fish in a bucket. But I'm lazy so here is a good one for Solaris:
Chipboard, 25 Jan 2006

Reviewer: "finalreminder" - See all my reviews

2hrs of gut wrenching, mind numbing, head melting boredom.
If you value two hours of your life then do not watch this film.
The only people I've found who actually watched this and say they liked it is people who thought Razorhead and films of that ilk was good cinema.
2 stars simply for the eye candy.
Go and paint the garden fence, you'll have way more fun, trust me!
Good job he only watched the shorter cut(!) and so only wasted two hours of his life.

User avatar
miless
Joined: Sat Apr 01, 2006 9:45 pm

#60 Post by miless » Fri Mar 16, 2007 12:38 pm

here's one for Andrei Rublev:
That's what you'll get if you purchase the extended version. I am interested in just about any film that is in Russian, with English Subtitles. I loved Burnt By the Sun, and House of Fools. They were mildy stimulating intellectually, and very entertaining. Even if they had been considerably less artistic, I would still be interested in watching them because of my desire to learn Russian. Andrei Rublev on the other hand, is horribly boring, totally mindnumbing, and I cannot even force myself to watch it, as an exercise, and for the sake of learning Russian.
Burnt By The Sun was a piece of crap, btw... there's a reason why Mikhalkov is called "the Russian Spielberg" (because he makes sentimentalist junk)

oh, and another:
One of the worst best movies ever made
Slow moving, ponderous, little character development, with chaotic plot detours to what little plot there is, and the final payoff after 3 hours of this is that you get the "reward" of viewing some static images of Russian orthodox icon art.

I realize the film is from a different era, and about a different era and culture. Since there is an authentic feel
to some of the scenes, the film has value in capturing a way of life that has become extinct. And yes, some of the film is quite artfully done. But the reviews saying that this is one of the best movies ever made left me expecting a whole lot more. I was
disappointed spending 3 hours watching this movie from the local Blockbuster (VHS).
god, I hate it when films don't follow the strict form film is supposed to take.

User avatar
Lino
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 6:18 am
Location: Sitting End
Contact:

#61 Post by Lino » Fri Mar 16, 2007 5:10 pm


Cinesimilitude
Joined: Tue Jul 09, 2013 12:43 am

#62 Post by Cinesimilitude » Fri Mar 16, 2007 5:35 pm

I agree on I am Curious, and I would also nominate Schizopolis and Mona Lisa for my list of films that Criterion shouldn't have touched.

This line gave me a giggle: "I love Art house movies, this should have been in the outhouse!"

User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm

#63 Post by Matt » Fri Mar 16, 2007 9:08 pm

Lino wrote:This Amazon Customer List is a riot!
"DVD Cancer, Times Two!" is my new all-purpose catchphrase.

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

#64 Post by skuhn8 » Sat Mar 17, 2007 5:00 am

His take on Cries and Whispers was pretty funny:
Wayne Burgess says:
"I would rather get stabbed in the face then watch this piece of crap again!"

User avatar
Kinsayder
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: UK

#65 Post by Kinsayder » Sat Mar 17, 2007 5:17 am

skuhn8 wrote:His take on Cries and Whispers was pretty funny:
Wayne Burgess says:
"I would rather get stabbed in the face then watch this piece of crap again!"
At least he does want to see it again.

User avatar
MichaelB
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2006 6:20 pm
Location: Worthing
Contact:

#66 Post by MichaelB » Sat Mar 17, 2007 9:47 am

Here's a particularly idiotic one - a woman who ordered the wrong DVD because she was clearly too stupid to read the attached info, and then went back to Amazon to give it a one-star slagging for no apparent reason other than that she felt the need to lash out at someone, and it might as well be the makers of the film she inadvertently ordered.

I particularly like the "very disgusting" header. Was she actually physically nauseated by having to watch something in Hungarian? ("The actual DVD is in a language I do not know.")

UPDATE: Proof that Amazon does have some idea of quality control - the offending review has been removed, and at the time of writing the only one up there is a highly knowledgeable five-star rave.
Last edited by MichaelB on Sat Jul 14, 2007 6:04 am, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

#67 Post by skuhn8 » Sat Mar 17, 2007 10:36 am

MichaelB wrote:Here's a particularly idiotic one - a woman who ordered the wrong DVD because she was clearly too stupid to read the attached info, and then went back to Amazon to give it a one-star slagging for no apparent reason other than that she felt the need to lash out at someone, and it might as well be the makers of the film she inadvertently ordered.

I particularly like the "very disgusting" header. Was she actually physically nauseated by having to watch something in Hungarian? ("The actual DVD is in a language I do not know.")
You have to wonder how far she got into it before she was absolutely sure that this was in fact the wrong 'Roots'. I also like how one out of three people did actually find her review helpful. She probably helped divert another purchasing disaster...not to mention exposure to this most pernicious language.

Was a pretty bad day for Pauline. Same day she had this to say about a Gospel collection:
wrong choice, March 14, 2007
I don't like to listen to the type of gospel 'yelling and loud cries' from Black groups. it is like missing some of the music and not getting the words in sequence as they should be. THEY look and sound WILD

User avatar
Matt
Joined: Tue Nov 02, 2004 12:58 pm

#68 Post by Matt » Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:04 am

wrong choice, March 14, 2007
I don't like to listen to the type of gospel 'yelling and loud cries' from Black groups. it is like missing some of the music and not getting the words in sequence as they should be. THEY look and sound WILD
I imagine her sitting there listening to the CD draped in a Confederate flag with a shotgun across her lap and a corncob pipe in her mouth. After all, it seems she wanted to see Roots because she's very proud of her slave-owning ancestors.

User avatar
Schkura
Joined: Sat Sep 17, 2005 1:48 pm
Location: Mississippi

#69 Post by Schkura » Sat Mar 17, 2007 11:34 am

Was this review helpful to you?

Yes, I wish more Amazon customer reviews were from brain-dead crackers who refer to the antebellum South as "the good ol' days". Also, why ain't there any art houses down herrrrre?

Signed,
A brain-dead cracker

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

#70 Post by Mr Sausage » Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:07 pm

skuhn8 wrote:His take on Cries and Whispers was pretty funny:
Wayne Burgess says:
"I would rather get stabbed in the face then watch this piece of crap again!"
Not that I condone threatening people with sharp objects (usually), but just once I would like to see someone actually held to their hyperbolic claims. Maybe show up at their door, butcher knife in one hand, Cries and Whispers in the other, and say "what's it going to be then, eh?"

User avatar
Tommaso
Joined: Fri May 19, 2006 10:09 am

#71 Post by Tommaso » Sat Mar 17, 2007 12:31 pm

Matt wrote: After all, it seems she wanted to see Roots because she's very proud of her slave-owning ancestors.
She probably thought Bartok was an African name.

User avatar
HerrSchreck
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2005 11:46 am

#72 Post by HerrSchreck » Sun Mar 18, 2007 7:36 am

Here ya go. RASHOMON--
11 of 41 people found the following review helpful:

Pretty good but overrated, July 30, 2006
Reviewer: LF "Keep your feedback to yourself, these are my opinions, not yours" (USA) - See all my reviews
This is a fairly good movie, ridiculously overrated. It is the story of a bandit's assault on a couple in the woods. Perhaps he rapes the woman. Perhaps he kills the man. Perhaps the woman prefers the rapist to her husband. Perhaps not.

The most annoying thing about the analysis of this movie is that people come to the conclusion that there is no such thing as absolute truth, that it all depends on who is telling the story. Baloney. There is such a thing as absolute truth. It doesn't all depend on who is telling the story. The opposing view is just a bunch of over-intellectualized garbage. Either the bandit killed the man or he didn't. Either the woman asked him to kill her husband or she didn't. Those who take an opposing view are just being silly and stupid. They are over-intellectualizing. Keep it simple, stupid.

How about this. I punch you in the head. Then I say I didn't do it, it all depends on who is telling the story. Make sense to you? That's the argument being used by fools who draw idiotic conclusions after seeing this movie.

It is the quantum theory of movies. There is no truth. It is one of the stupidest positions that Stephen Hawking ever took. You can't just say that one thing happened. Every possible thing happened. Gimme a break. Would a grain of common sense be inappropriate?

It seems clear that the overly heroic version told by the bandit, about his daring swordfight, about the woman begging to be his wife after she was raped by him, is a bunch of bull, because he has a motive to tell things this way. His motive is to paint himself as the kind of hero he admires.

Nobody really tells a convincing story here. One thing I like about the movie is that one of the witnesses is a trance medium who channels the dead man. He should know what happened, and he should have no motive to lie. What was his story anyway? You hear so many stories, you forget who told what. Did he say it was suicide? If the movie had more emotional power, I'd care more what happened to the characters. It is emotionless. That is its biggest weakness.

It is a bit of a comedy. The acting is overdone. The duels are overdone. The director was consciously making fun of the genre, of the Japanese movies that stage stupid duels with the same stock things happening, the sword getting stuck, the men chasing each other around a tree, one guy falling, sort of like old cowboy movies that keep showing you similar fight scenes. The woman getting blamed for her own rape. So many cliches pulled out for us. A lot of "in" jokes for the viewer, making fun of the same old same old in Japanese films.

In the end, they pull a baby out of a hat. The baby has absolutely nothing to do with the film. Nothing. It isn't the raped woman's baby. It is so completely incongruous to the rest of the movie that I thought it must be the raped woman's baby somehow, but it isn't. It's just a baby pulled out of a hat.

On the commentary, the speaker makes a big deal about how the baby symbolizes hope, and how great Kurosawa is for thinking of using this baby to symbolize hope. What a bunch of baloney that is. It is over-intellectualized nonsense. The diagonals that are shown on screen, the triangles that are shown on screen, all further the plot, all show the greatness of Kurosawa. No they don't. It is all over-intellectualized nonsense. Diagonals and triangles do not make a great film. They just give lecturers something to flimflam their audiences with. I don't doubt that Kurosawa used these diagonals and triangles purposely. I don't care either. It's just a bunch of baloney. I'm not emotionally moved by a triangle, nor even by a diagonal. The subtlety of it is just a wee bit too subtle to make an impact on me.

To sum up, this is a pretty interesting movie that is ridiculously overrated. To be great, a movie should move us. This one doesn't. It's pretty good. That's about it. Kurosawa fans be damned, I'm not lining up behind him.

If you ever have some spare time dig more from this LF Individual and read some of his reviews (just check out the NIGHTS OF CABIRIA blurb at the top of his Reviewer Page). This guy's a hot steaming quart of roast douche fried rice... and he knows it-- hence his tag line.

Crocky
Joined: Thu Nov 04, 2004 6:59 am

#73 Post by Crocky » Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:25 am

From the IMDB about Fellini's 8½
This film, shot on a video camcorder of some sort, is a testament to the prowess of stupidity. you'll be lucky to find it in your local store, and i believe it received extremely limited distribution. That it got produced in the first place is a small miracle. though i consider myself a fan of the psychotronic b-movie genre, this film goes wrong in the wrong places. Sure, the acting is bad, the plot confounded, the editing nonexistent. But if i wanted to see a film this bad, I'd go watch all the stupid videos I recorded with my friends in elementary school. Eight and a half is about 2 hours and 18 minutes of just that

User avatar
Kinsayder
Joined: Mon Oct 10, 2005 6:22 pm
Location: UK

#74 Post by Kinsayder » Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:50 am

A one-star review for Psycho from Amazon.com:
this is so stupid i could puke!a movie based on the exploits of ed gaines.hes also the inspiration for red dragon and some other silence of the lambs.hes the guy in texas chainsaw massacre.norman bates is only created from ed.norman runs this hotel and kills whoever comes there.his dead mom is in his head encouraging him all the way.he thinks hes a chick and even dresses up like one to kill.not for the kids unless youd like them to have aids.cross dressing and prison can both point you in the right direction if thats something youre interested in.im not.f!2k that!its obviously a horror film.in fact,theres the famous shower scene where he hacks this chick up in a shower.dont get your hopes up,theres no nudity,only a silloutte of the 2 bodies and tiny little spatter of blood.it was the most violent scene in the world at the time.theres a quote that kind of got some recognition.morman says"we all go a little crazy sometimes".thats scary to think about.theres plenty of sequels.the last one i saw showed norman as a child abuse victim as a kid.it just doesnt get any better does it?it is considered by many[not me i think it sucks]to be the greatest horror film ever.well,i can name many way better ones like childs play,a nightmare on elm st,friday the 13th,halloween,hellraiser,the all time greatest-the shining-truckloads of zombie movies.........it just sucks.(...)
The same guy has written over 400 (dear lord!) reviews in the same style, including this 5-starrer for Mein Kampf:
the reason i chose to recomend this book is because i belive it is the only one which tells the truth about nazi germany.its really not "racist propaganda" as the school systems would have you belive but an account of a man who loved his country so much,he tried to perfect it.its basicly just a philosophy book.remember ,hitlers allies in ww2 were a half black man ,mussolini and the japanese leader.so,if you want truth,read this book.if you want a bunch of tree huggin hippie bs,read any other book on the matter.this book was the most widely owned book in the world in its day.if you cant handle the truth,steer clear.if you want the german equivelant of thomas paines's"common sense",then read it.

User avatar
skuhn8
Joined: Tue Dec 14, 2004 4:46 pm
Location: Chico, CA

#75 Post by skuhn8 » Sun Mar 18, 2007 8:56 am

Wow, this guy is pretty special. Mein Kampf for truth; yup, there you have it. Most widely owned book in its day? Huh, would like to know where he got his (mis)info. Who was hitler's half black buddy in ww2?

Post Reply