The Movie Thread Returns

[ShadySands]

I'm not familiar with him or his work

[Bartimaeus]

I'm not familiar with him or his work

He's considered a joke for being perpetually (and painfully) contrarian.

 

 

A somewhat contrarian review from non-joke(?) reviewers.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Bartimaeus

[ShadySands]

^I somewhat agree with that review

Edited February 23, 2018 by ShadySands

[Volourn]

"Armond White lol"

 

His pic is  of  a black man.  Is he fake news and actually white?  I'm guessing he's 'contrarian' because he doesn't mumnbl;e what is expect from the Left. L0L People knocking down others because they have differing opinions. Next you'll be referring to him as Uncle Tom.

 

 

P.S. If ihe is using a fake picture and is actually white then for shame. But, if he isn't.. shame on you for   trying to discredit him  him b/c he has a different opinion so you bash him and make people doubt.

 

 

 

Doesn't matter though. BP is a Marvel film. Automatically makes it worthy of a tv viewing but no go for theatres.

[Bartimaeus]

No, he's just considered a joke for being an awful critic of little use to anybody. He called Man of Steel "the Godfather of superhero movies", he loved Jack & Jill and Grown Ups, says various beloved movies like Pulp Fiction, Up, the Toy Storys, the recent Batman movies, etc. are all bad (...even though the Man of Steel movie basically tried to copycat the Batman movies and super misguidedly turn Superman into Christopher Nolan's dark and tortured Batman). He does, however, have good entertainment value for his wacky reviews. He has a pretty consistent track record of just being a really bad (or at the very least incredibly bizarre) critic.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Bartimaeus

[ShadySands]

You might want to look him up before you come to his defense

 

He really does seem to like bad movies and dislike good ones and sure everyone's taste is not the same but in about 7 minutes of research he does seem like a contrarian, or according to Roger Ebert, a troll. 

 

PS not sure what his race has to do with it

Edited February 23, 2018 by ShadySands

[Volourn]

"No, he's just considered a joke for being an awful critic of little use to anybody. He called Man of Steel "the Godfather of superhero movies", he loved Jack & Jill and Grown Ups, says various beloved movies like Pulp Fiction, Up, the Toy Storys, the recent Batman movies, etc. are all bad (...even though the Man of Steel movie basically tried to copycat the Batman movies and super misguidedly turn Superman into Christopher Nolan's dark and tortured Batman). He does, however, have good entertainment value for his wacky reviews. He has a pretty consistent track record of just being a really bad (or at the very least incredibly bizarre) critic.       "

 

And?

 

I agree with some of those opinions. I disagree with others. Your point?   

[Bartimaeus]

Didn't I say my point?

[algroth]

Armond White's well known for his troll antics, and he uses his forced contrarianism as a means to constantly bait for controversy. Which is to say, his reviews are rarely ever about the films, and more a mediatic stunt to bring attention on himself instead. If you take his reviews as a serious source of criticism, you may as well read The Onion as a legitimate, non-satirical news site.

 

Seriously though, he's been around for ages and has kept to his shtick for just as long. He's a joke amidst cinephile communities and it's very amusing to see people unaware of his existence reading him seriously.

Edited February 23, 2018 by algroth

[Bartimaeus]

I don't read his reviews enough to know whether or not he's actually a joke. The thing I look for in a critic is a consistent voice. Every critic has their own tastes, and their logic and rational for what they like or don't like is highly slanted from those tastes. Naturally, you aren't going to always agree with a critic. That's okay - as long as you understand where the critic is coming from, and they're consistent with their body of work. I don't always agree with Jay and Mike on Half in the Bag, because we value a lot of different things, but I usually have a pretty good feeling as to whether or not they'll like something because I feel I have a good grip on their character and the things they value vs. what they don't (and when they surprise me, they usually have decent explanations as to why). I also find them to be pretty insightful and rational, as well as analytical and amusing. Pretty much everything I look for in a critic!

 

So the worst kind of critic, to me, is someone you can't figure out, someone you can read one review and go, "Yeah, what they're saying makes total sense," while another review you go, "WTF are they on about? Are they high/drunk/insane/biased/bought? Nothing they're saying follows their previous review(s)!". The lack of consistency makes them useless for determining whether you want to try something or not. I don't know if Armond White falls more into that category, because I don't read his reviews or care enough to do so, but I get the feeling from other people that that's the case.

Edited February 23, 2018 by Bartimaeus

[algroth]

I've read a few of his reviews, and they have pretty consistently fell on the latter side of what you describe above. Mostly though, I find that what he often does is to spin a yarn about nothing at all connected with the film in question, or to anything at all - his reviews very often come across as almost Cantinflas-like exercises in pointless verbosity, concerned with building the appearance of an argument but not actually sustaining one at all. They are amusing reads sometimes, but he's a con artist through and through.

[SonicMage117]

In regards to Black Panther...

 

Black Panther is pretty good movie, not phenomenal by any means but all the political/racial bs surrounding it is pointless and annoying. It's like repubs and demos need to make drama out of anything to feed ego or breathe.

 

I mean, there are movies in the past that have had far more political messages and agendas but Black Panther is getting it's arse wrecked. Then again, it's made more money than some other Marvel flicks and if Norbit or Big Mama's House made more money than Mrs. Doubtfire, then it that movie would have probably gotten flakk'd too.

 

 

Aside from that,

 

 

I saw Braven and it was great. Pretty Tomb-Raiderish but with Jason Momoa instead of a female lead.

 

 

https://youtu.be/hOwIQNA9A8I

[Bartimaeus]

Spirited Away. It was really...disappointing. First twenty, twenty-five minutes made me think it was going to be amazing...but everything sort of just kept falling apart with very unsatisfyingly used cliches and underdeveloped plot and characters. I think I consciously realized about 2/3rds of the way through that something seemed terribly off, and that there just hadn't been enough time to do or setup things right. Too many instant or convenient solutions, too much corny and also kind of phony-sounding dialogue (in terms of writing), and characters that I just didn't care that much for (which is really weird, because it's usually very easy for me to like characters in these sorts of films - I thought the main character was fine, but besides that...). I think this is the most famous of the Ghibli movies, but by the halfway mark, I was the least into it of all of the ones I've seen so far. I'm not sure what happened - maybe I missed something and need to give it another go some other time.

[kirottu]

Spirited Away. It was really...disappointing. First twenty, twenty-five minutes made me think it was going to be amazing...but everything sort of just kept falling apart with very unsatisfyingly used cliches and underdeveloped plot and characters. I think I consciously realized about 2/3rds of the way through that something seemed terribly off, and that there just hadn't been enough time to do or setup things right. Too many instant or convenient solutions, too much corny and also kind of phony-sounding dialogue (in terms of writing), and characters that I just didn't care that much for (which is really weird, because it's usually very easy for me to like characters in these sorts of films - I thought the main character was fine, but besides that...). I think this is the most famous of the Ghibli movies, but by the halfway mark, I was the least into it of all of the ones I've seen so far. I'm not sure what happened - maybe I missed something and need to give it another go some other time.

Hayao Miyazaki usually doesn't have a full story in mind when he starts doing a movie. He has scenes and then the story is supposed to grow from there. I don't think he always succeeds in doing that.

 

I saw What We Do in the Shadows. It was an amusing movie.

[Raithe]

Murder on the Orient Express.

 

Crisp and glossy, but still quite subtle, with a firmly poignant ending. Although the moustache is fairly over the top ridiculous.

 

Kenneth Branagh directs and stars as Hercule Poirot, alongside a fairly stellar cast : Daisy Ridley, Lesle Odom Jr,  Penelope Cruz, Josh Gad, Derek Jacobi, Michelle Pfeiffer, Judi Dench, Olivia Colman and Willem Dafoe.

[Lexx]

Finally watched the latest Blade Runner yesterday. I was hesitant for a long time, because honestly, the first one is good, but it never truly kicked with me. Also it's just so damn long...

 

... turns out, Blade Runner 2049 is pretty awesome. Plenty folks said it was long winded and boring, but watching it, time went by like nothing. Heck, the movie was suddenly at the end and I enjoyed nearly every minute of it.

 

I agree, though, that you need a great TV and sound system for it. Watching it on some old junk hardware likely doesn't give the same experience at all.

[Amentep]

Annihilation (2018) - The kind of science fiction tale that presents a cognizant story but leaves it to the audience to try to understand what it meant rather than beating you over the head with a particular solution.  Spends a lot of time with the characters, has some great visuals and the occasional tense moments of suspense.  I rather liked it.

[algroth]

 

Spirited Away. It was really...disappointing. First twenty, twenty-five minutes made me think it was going to be amazing...but everything sort of just kept falling apart with very unsatisfyingly used cliches and underdeveloped plot and characters. I think I consciously realized about 2/3rds of the way through that something seemed terribly off, and that there just hadn't been enough time to do or setup things right. Too many instant or convenient solutions, too much corny and also kind of phony-sounding dialogue (in terms of writing), and characters that I just didn't care that much for (which is really weird, because it's usually very easy for me to like characters in these sorts of films - I thought the main character was fine, but besides that...). I think this is the most famous of the Ghibli movies, but by the halfway mark, I was the least into it of all of the ones I've seen so far. I'm not sure what happened - maybe I missed something and need to give it another go some other time.

Hayao Miyazaki usually doesn't have a full story in mind when he starts doing a movie. He has scenes and then the story is supposed to grow from there. I don't think he always succeeds in doing that.

 

 

Far as I'm concerned that's never been an issue with his films - it might be noticed a bit more in some of his more recent work since it's a little more freeform or open to a surrealist logic, but with the possible exception of Howl's Moving Castle and Ponyo aside these always feel the result of a deliberate decision more than any lack of direction at play. Funny enough, in my experience with the anime scene I think one of the things Miyazaki excels at head and shoulder above the rest of the filmmakers is that he has a very clear understanding of storytelling and narrative structure, and hardly ever seem to run away from his hands or meander in weird tangents that only serve to obfuscate instead (which is a far too common problem with many anime films in my opinion). For Spirited Away I cannot really agree at all with the above, I greatly enjoyed it and found it a rather wonderful "down the rabbit hole" style of story, with fantastic characters and really memorable sequences throughout. But I would have to give it another watch to properly defend it as it's been easily a full decade since I've last seen it.

Edited February 26, 2018 by algroth

[Sarex]

Molly's Game. Pretty good movie, I recommend it.

[injurai]

Annihilation (2018) - The kind of science fiction tale that presents a cognizant story but leaves it to the audience to try to understand what it meant rather than beating you over the head with a particular solution.  Spends a lot of time with the characters, has some great visuals and the occasional tense moments of suspense.  I rather liked it.

 

That's good news, I probably won't get to see it for another two weeks, but I'm really excited for it.

[Fiach]

Saw Back Panther with the kids last night.

 

Enjoyed it while watching, but afterwards, considered it a bit meh.

 

Alot of people are praising the bad guy, I thought he was a bit **** tbh.

 

The guy who is the son of the main characters uncle (Michael B Jordan) was very good, as was the main guy Chadwick Boseman.

 

Decent movie all 'round I guess, 2:14 passed really quickly, but when the credits rolled I was expecting more story, which wasn't forthcoming unfortunately.

[Bartimaeus]

When Marnie Was There. I had trouble with this one. Whoever was directing the English voice-acting really screwed up with the titular character - I watched the movie in half Japanese, half English. I'm not sure why they thought having the voice actress constantly simpering was a good idea - it was very grating. Hmm. Anna's character hit much too close to home (painfully so at times), and I think this would've been a bit harder to like if not for that, so it's fortuitous that it did, as I think it helped carry the film for me.

[Raithe]

Highlander Reboot script done and set for a 2019 release date

[ShadySands]

I love Highlander but I'm not sure it's a movie in need of a remake

[Raithe]

I love Highlander but I'm not sure it's a movie in need of a remake

 

Indeed. Of course, I actually quite liked the tv show that ran for about 6 years (once you got past the slightly ropey 1st season).

Ah well, like so many things, we shall see when it appears.