231–240 of 421 posts
I feel like the mass of people are ossifying around the familiar. People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Even when it comes to something like online forums, something like reddit is mostly a wasteland of the same 50…
Were they ever in sync? I've always seen critics as a "negative recommendation" -- if a critic recommends a movie, it's usually bad and vice versa (and like all rules there notable exceptions like Thor Ragnarok, which both critics and normal people loved). And this is true not just in movies but books as well. Critics in both domains love the "ooh lala, fancy pancy hard to understand arty farty" book/movie that doesn…
I feel like the mass of people are ossifying around the familiar. People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Even when it comes to something like online forums, something like reddit is mostly a wasteland of the same 50…
removed
Can I TL;DR this into "shhhh.... Let people have fun."?
I feel like the mass of people are ossifying around the familiar. People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Even when it comes to something like online forums, something like reddit is mostly a wasteland of the same 50…
You’ve already read the “fifty or so jokes.” And, you’ve already had your fill of big-budget special effects. It now seems tiresome and dull…
In short, perhaps you are just becoming a grumpy old man. ;)
I feel like the mass of people are ossifying around the familiar. People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Even when it comes to something like online forums, something like reddit is mostly a wasteland of the same 50…
I think it has always been this way. I worked in a video rental store in the 90's, and every movie was either a military story (Vietnam: bad, Russians: bad, current US military: good), courtroom drama, divorce drama, or high school / college comedy. A few decent psychological thrillers and campy horror flicks too. Basically a never-ending stream of the same movie with different actors. Hollywood has never been accuse…
I didn't even notice this inflation in movie length until I went back to try to watch older 90 minute movies. They feel short now, almost unfulfilling. Gladiator (2000) at 2h35m feels like the right pace.
I think after Game of Thrones (ex the last 2 seasons), I'm used to more drawn out scenes and development
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Any movie that does well with critics or at a film festival has “a strong message” or “teaches us something”. If you find that every time you watch a film festival movie you are being lectured too, I think it has more to do with your wife's film choices, not the indie circuit. Nicolas Cage's Pig was a very well received movie at plenty of film festivals last year, and it's just about a chef searching for a pig.
Yes, I’m sure there is a movie here and there. Honestly, I don’t care enough to even compare the list anymore, that’s how we came up with the rule. Edit: and I think we’ll all try to forgive you for recommending anything with Nicholas Cage…
https://www.reddit.com/r/movies/comments/tzxev3/hello_im_nic...
For my whole life, I've learned and then observed that critics evaluate primarily the cinematic quality of a film, i.e. does the film as a piece of art work as a whole when considering acting, directing, screenwriting... This is generally a different axis from entertainment which is what people often care about when looking for something to see.
If a critic likes a film it's because it is good cinema. If you're in the film-watching mood you would likely appreciate that film if it has high critical scores. But if you want something easy or you want to see a guaranteed uplifting film with your friends before going out to a pub round, you want entertainment and then you don't want to look at the critics scores.
You might want to infer something from the review text because often critics do tell you if the film is entertaining and a good watch. The film still got 1 star out of 5 because it was not good cinema.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I think another acceptable explanation is that movies are marketed not to everyone but to certain people. So say the latest horror flick that comes around is marketed to teens and 20-somethings. The over-30 crowd gets turned off by violence and gore. But that particular demographic loves it, and the more gore the more they like it. There's a certain group of people that loved Human Centipede, e.g. But it got terrible…
On the other hand, Ebert followed the critical consensus and gave Freddy Got Fingered (my personal pick for funniest movie of all time) a zero star rating. This is a gross-out comedy that succeeds spectacularly at what it set out to do, but very few critics were willing to judge it by the standards of the genre. The audience scores are very polarized (currently 56% positive on RT), but critic's reviews are only at 11…