'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

A subforum to discuss film culture and criticism both old and new, as well as memorializing public figures we've lost.
Post Reply
Message
Author
User avatar
furbicide
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3851 Post by furbicide » Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:06 am

dustybooks wrote:
Sun Jan 20, 2019 2:09 pm
I was just checking showtimes for The Favourite and want to announce that the "Google audience reviews" for it are a terrible goldmine.
SpoilerShow
a google reviewer wrote:I watched the previews at least 4 times. Thought it was a comedy. Never once did it indicate that he Queen and her 1st Lady Mogal were lesbians and even showed them in bed together. And them Emma stone jumps in bed with her also 15 minutes later. If you like being entertained by a lesbian move that’s your choice. I think that there should at least be some indication of the nature of the movie as to sexual preference in the previews. That’s the problem with the whole Gay and Lesbian movement, no matter how you cut up the pie they are still a MINORITY. They just have a loud voice and that’s all. Needless to say we walked out before Emma Stone did her thing with the Queen.
Shame on Emma Stone for doing this movie. I have always loved Emma Stome acting abilities. But this is the second movie she has done that displayed the Lesbian life style as something normal. She played in a move about Billy Jean King ..... walked out of that one too. That’s my choice! Do you want your children growing up with thinking that there’s an alternative lifestyle, I think not.
(Spoiler tagged just in case, but not before accidentally hitting "quote" instead of "edit" for the 100th time.)
The irony is that the real – and loudest – minority here are the homophobes (at least, if national polls on support for issues like same-sex marriage are anything to go by). Not that there would be anything wrong with this film if that weren't the case!

Maybe these types should stop whinging about the "gay agenda" and spend their time more usefully – like, say, looking up some of the details of the film they're going to see so that they can be sure they won't be unexpectedly offended by anything """alternative""".

User avatar
Monterey Jack
Joined: Fri Jan 12, 2018 1:27 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3852 Post by Monterey Jack » Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:24 am

Some people can't pick out the CONTINENT THEY LIVE ON off a map.

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3853 Post by Big Ben » Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:30 am

Phobic responses in reviews are still very much a thing. I have quite a few friends in Brazil and there was some backlash from more conservative Brazilians upon their "revelation" that Freddie Mercury was Bisexual after they saw Bohemian Rhapsody. Although I'm unsure about his online presence outside of this site but Cremilo could possibly explain more clearly than I could if he saw any of it on any other social media. It wasn't exactly a national scandal but it was certainly enough for hilariously angry rants from individuals who thought the frontman for Queen was straight.

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3854 Post by MichaelB » Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:28 am

I’m sure I’ve mentioned this elsewhere in this thread, but there was a hilarious review of Borowczyk’s Immoral Tales in which the reviewer was so disgusted that the women in it looked completely normal that he couldn’t stop banging on about it.

He didn’t use the phrase “completely normal”, of course, but he seemed to have some obsession with the idea that shaving pubic hair should be compulsory for all women. Quite aside from anything else, this wouldn’t have been historically accurate - indeed, if Borowczyk had pandered to his weird fetish, the film would have looked a lot more peculiar.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3855 Post by tenia » Tue Jan 22, 2019 5:28 am

Cremildo wrote:
Mon Jan 21, 2019 9:10 pm
What hits me hard is how some people are oblivious to notorious facts that have worldwide reach. Not knowing the Titanic sank? Not knowing Gandhi was murdered? Please.
You wouldn't know. Some studies in the UK showed that a non-negligible amount of people believed Sherlock Holmes to be a real historical figure, and the same kind of amount of people (though I don't if these were the same people) believed Winston Churchill to be a fiction character.

Never, ever, underestimate mankind's ignorance.
furbicide wrote:
Tue Jan 22, 2019 12:06 am
The irony is that the real – and loudest – minority here are the homophobes (at least, if national polls on support for issues like same-sex marriage are anything to go by). Not that there would be anything wrong with this film if that weren't the case!
Maybe these types should stop whinging about the "gay agenda" and spend their time more usefully – like, say, looking up some of the details of the film they're going to see so that they can be sure they won't be unexpectedly offended by anything """alternative""".
Even better : they could stop having problems with homosexual people and their depictions in movies. That'd probably be even better for everyone than just avoiding these movies. It'd be like some continuous improvement and all.
Because to me, that's the issue at heart here (though I know I'll sound naive writing this), and that's what bothers me more. OK, this person obviously has issues with homosexual depictions, most certainly because of homophobia, and yeah, maybe taking 5 minutes to read about what you're about to spend 2 hours watching seems like a good use of your time. But that's not really the core issue.

User avatar
furbicide
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3856 Post by furbicide » Tue Jan 22, 2019 8:37 pm

^ Well, yes, I agree that that would be a much bigger net positive for society. But I do belong to the school of thought that people can believe what they want so long as it doesn't hurt others – and if you quietly disapprove of homosexuality but are nonetheless committed to treating others with respect and not imposing your intolerance on others, then that's – in the scheme of the many harmful things that exist in the world and happen every day – not so bad. Being educated enough to avoid things that you would know perfectly well are going to offend you is probably a crucial part of that self-regulation.
MichaelB wrote:
Tue Jan 22, 2019 3:28 am
I’m sure I’ve mentioned this elsewhere in this thread, but there was a hilarious review of Borowczyk’s Immoral Tales in which the reviewer was so disgusted that the women in it looked completely normal that he couldn’t stop banging on about it.

He didn’t use the phrase “completely normal”, of course, but he seemed to have some obsession with the idea that shaving pubic hair should be compulsory for all women. Quite aside from anything else, this wouldn’t have been historically accurate - indeed, if Borowczyk had pandered to his weird fetish, the film would have looked a lot more peculiar.
God, how jaded must someone be to react that way? Talk about casting pearls before swine... :P

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3857 Post by tenia » Wed Jan 23, 2019 6:11 am

I understand your point, and true enough, if you quietly disagree and keep being respectful with others, it's probably not so bad.

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3858 Post by domino harvey » Thu Jan 31, 2019 4:26 am

Remember when your parents told you that reading comic books would rot your brain?

Well, that’s not true anymore. In fact, in the very near future reading comic books might well become almost a prerequisite for admission to any reputable college or university which offers advanced degrees in theoretical physics or any of the related sciences. Just ask the guys on television’s “The Big Bang Theory.”

User avatar
Cremildo
Joined: Sun Jan 22, 2012 8:19 pm
Location: Brazil
Contact:

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3859 Post by Cremildo » Sat Feb 09, 2019 5:59 pm

Apropos of Diamonds of the Night, on Amazon.uk:
you are too good with me many thanks

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3860 Post by domino harvey » Sun Feb 10, 2019 4:32 am

If you don't want your children to see blood magic on a pentagram to raise the dead, or Azazel the demon making a blood covenant with a warlock in "black forest". The demon cuts the warlocks hand and licks the wound with his forked tongue. Tons of occult symbology.
Obviously Hollywood thinks demons from hell (they use that terminology) and satanic symbolism is suitable for children. Unbelievable. Then again, what else should we expect in a nation that threw God out decades ago.

User avatar
Mr Sausage
Not PETA approved
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 9:02 pm
Location: Canada

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3861 Post by Mr Sausage » Sun Feb 10, 2019 6:18 am

I give up. What's the movie?

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3862 Post by domino harvey » Sun Feb 10, 2019 10:56 am

SpoilerShow
the House With a Clock in its Walls

User avatar
furbicide
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3863 Post by furbicide » Thu Feb 14, 2019 12:12 am

I know The Guardian's op-ed section is a trainwreck generally, but I'm glad that they still have space to publish this kind of hard-hitting film criticism:

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... -favourite
Like everyone else in the world, I have now seen The Favourite and, well, I have some opinions. Namely, what is all the fuss about? Why on earth did this fairly mediocre film sweep the board at the Baftas, and why has it been nominated for 10 Oscars? I mean, it wasn’t bad: the acting was brilliant and there were some hilarious moments. It was fun; it just wasn’t amazing. The weirdness everyone was raving about seemed rather self-indulgent. And while I’m sure there was a deep and meaningful reason for using the fisheye lens so much, it felt as if the director had got a fisheye lens for Christmas and couldn’t stop playing with it. As for the weird rabbit stuff … well, actually, I liked the rabbits. The rabbits were good. I wouldn’t mind if the rabbits got an Oscar.

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3864 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:07 am

Hey, when you're right you're right


User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3866 Post by mfunk9786 » Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:52 am

Woody Allen is a creep and he hasn't made a good movie since Bananas

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

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3867 Post by MichaelB » Thu Feb 14, 2019 3:38 am

furbicide wrote:I know The Guardian's op-ed section is a trainwreck generally, but I'm glad that they still have space to publish this kind of hard-hitting film criticism:
Interestingly, the paper doesn’t seem to have enabled comments on the piece.

Probably wisely.

User avatar
tenia
Ask Me About My Bassoon
Joined: Wed Apr 29, 2009 11:13 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3868 Post by tenia » Thu Feb 14, 2019 5:14 am

Man, that title and opening paragraph.
"Why even lesbianism and bunnies couldn’t make me love The Favourite" I didn't know lesbianism and bunnies were equating cinema masterpieces.
But I guess what this op-ed really taught me is that Fast & Furious 6 and 7 are "both objectively excellent movies".

This being written, the question about "Do you think anyone would be raving about The Favourite if it had involved a demented heterosexual love triangle?" is interesting, though I tend to believe people actually would be.

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3869 Post by colinr0380 » Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:13 pm

I used to get rather irritated by these kinds of articles in the Guardian (and presumably other newspaper's websites have similar pieces) but less so recently as I have started to wonder if a lot of these things get to the heart of the problem that 'traditional media' have on adapting to the internet. Setting aside whether it was a good piece or not (its not) it looks like something with an intended function of filling up space on a page of a print paper one day, skimmed over (if that) and forgotten the next. A lot of what I found to be the more frustrating Guardian articles play like tiny 'provocation pieces of the day' that are weirdly similar to any other tabloid, including the Daily Mail. But along with occupying a place in the paper they are all put up onto their website under their own separate links to click onto that almost unintentionally provides them with just as much weight and importance as some of the more important news stories (or actual journalism that makes an interesting use of the internet with live rolling coverage of a story, even if it is just the BAFTA awards!). I presume this is what people mean when they talk about the internet 'flattening context' and putting everything on a level playing field - I used to think it was about 'legacy brands' feeling under siege from upstart new media blogs, but I am starting to think that it might be just as much about the way that certain papers get undermined from within when their fluff pieces achieve more prominence than say an actual film review, especially when they have the more click-baity title!
tenia wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 5:14 am
This being written, the question about "Do you think anyone would be raving about The Favourite if it had involved a demented heterosexual love triangle?" is interesting, though I tend to believe people actually would be.
Which makes me think that the author forgot about the Twilight series and its heroine being torn between vampire and werewolf beaus for multiple films.

User avatar
furbicide
Joined: Thu Dec 29, 2011 4:52 am

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3870 Post by furbicide » Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:30 pm

Those are really fascinating points, colin – I’ve long despaired of the inanity of these brain-fart op-ed columns, but it’s very true that the shift from print to online alters our relationship to them and the way we read them.

Alternatively, is it possible that some people actually realy dig this stuff, and find it laugh-out-loud funny, or something? I just struggle to imagine what the intended reader reaction is. Ir are they, in some of these cases, effectively trolling their readers in order to deliberately cultivate hate-clicks?

User avatar
Big Ben
Joined: Mon Feb 08, 2016 12:54 pm
Location: Great Falls, Montana

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3871 Post by Big Ben » Thu Feb 14, 2019 8:02 pm

furbicide wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:30 pm
Alternatively, is it possible that some people actually realy dig this stuff, and find it laugh-out-loud funny, or something? I just struggle to imagine what the intended reader reaction is. Ir are they, in some of these cases, effectively trolling their readers in order to deliberately cultivate hate-clicks?
The high I imagine is the rush they feel from positing an opinion they feel to be unique which is why the language is always so inflammatory. I imagine it's the same way someone who believes the Earth is flat feels validated because they feel they have "secret" knowledge and that asinine delusion validates them. All these articles tend to be is shitposting on a bigger stage than Twitter comments. I don't mind a well written article disagreeing with something popular but I do very much mind one constructed to get a rise out of people because it's intentionally buffoonish.

User avatar
Michael Kerpan
Spelling Bee Champeen
Joined: Wed Nov 03, 2004 1:20 pm
Location: New England
Contact:

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3872 Post by Michael Kerpan » Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:01 pm

domino harvey wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 2:13 am
Man, this op-ed is even worse
Link not working (for me, at least)

User avatar
swo17
Joined: Tue Apr 15, 2008 10:25 am
Location: SLC, UT

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3873 Post by swo17 » Thu Feb 14, 2019 11:17 pm

It was a link to the post directly preceding it (a dig at mfunk)

User avatar
colinr0380
Joined: Mon Nov 08, 2004 4:30 pm
Location: Chapel-en-le-Frith, Derbyshire, UK

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3874 Post by colinr0380 » Fri Feb 15, 2019 8:01 pm

furbicide wrote:
Thu Feb 14, 2019 6:30 pm
I’ve long despaired of the inanity of these brain-fart op-ed columns, but it’s very true that the shift from print to online alters our relationship to them and the way we read them.
A related issue to the 'provocation posting' but on the opposite end of this, where I feel a little more sympathetic to the Guardian, is that sometimes when they have a really brief paragraph or two on an issue, or a quick twenty questions article with an actor or suchlike, and if comments have been allowed on that page there are often one or two along the lines of "Well, that was pointless and rather superficial. What happened to modern journalism?". Those pieces also seem much more intended to work in the context of the actual newspaper rather than online but because they are existing as individual 'articles' on the site that people have to choose to click on that sometimes creates irritation in those leaving comments that they have been 'duped' into looking at them. I think an awareness of context is probably necessary on both sides, from the Guardian deciding whether it is really necessary to put up certain 'padding' pieces from the paper just to put out a complete daily cycle of the paper online (because it risks undermining their more in depth journalism); and from commenters understanding that a lot of the content on a newspaper's web site has generally been repurposed from pieces tailored towards the print edition rather than specifically intended to work in an online environment. Of course neither party really needs to care about this aspect, but I think it would avoid a lot of almost wilful misunderstandings about the motives of each other coming from both sides if they did!

User avatar
mfunk9786
Under Chris' Protection
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 4:43 pm
Location: Philadelphia, PA

Re: 'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

#3875 Post by mfunk9786 » Mon Feb 25, 2019 11:22 am

Martin Liebman's Green Book review is something else. indulge me in a lengthy quote:
Green Book star Viggo Mortensen ran afoul of controversy when the actor used the "N" word during a Q&A session following a screening. The word was certainly not spoken in a hateful or derogatory manner but rather within the film's narrative and historical contexts during a discussion of how racism has evolved in today's society. Nevertheless, its utterance sparked outrage. Co-Star Mahershala Ali was understandably offended, but Mortensen was quick to apologize and Ali was quick to accept the apology. Hopefully, there's no long-term tainting of Mortensen's character or damage to the film's legacy, a film of purpose, profoundness, and, yes, quality entertainment value at the same time. It's a terrific film from every angle. It does not shy away from the harsh realities of the racial strife in its time while painting a picture of bonding between two very disparate individuals who both change for the better on their journey not just through the heart of the American South but through their own own hearts and souls.

Post Reply