Why do we need to be "wow"ed?

[mojo1701]

As for the food expense, just do what I do and have your woman sneak in a 20 oz pop and bag of twizzlers in an oversize handbag.

I got that covered. Most of my shorts have leg pockets, and there's a "Bulk Barn" across the mall from the cinema.

I guess, in my mind, going to see films in the theater just encourages Hollywood studios to spend more and more money on movies; I feel like I encourage actors to request a $20 million salary per movie when I go to see a movie just because Soandso is in it. That's primarily why I rent films. And as such, I don't get mad if I'm not "damn well entertained." I shrug and say "meh, 2 stars" and mail it back.

True. I don't see why any actor has to be paid $20 million, unless they're being asked to do say, some dangerous stunts or something disgusting (or a nude scene, but event those actors who do it for a living don't get paid too much, either).

 

[Renton]

And I also tire of the penchant of many to rip every movie that comes out a new one just for not living up to some personal standard they set for it. Why watch movies if so many of them suck so badly? Are you a masochist?

Goodie, a chance to heedlessly provoke the wrath of the irascible Mr. Dyal!

How else is one to judge a film, if not by some personal standard? I mean, surely "they", whomever "they" are, are just comparing the work to some interior aesthetic standard, possibly only on an intuitive, rather than formally defined, level?

A whole lot of movies do suck. 90% of most stuff is crap, if Sturgeon was right.If I pay my money, and give the movie the attention it deserves, I have every right to call out the filmmaker. Rip away, I say! And frankly, my voice is but a tiny peep in the wilderness; if you look on Netflix, say, you get a much broader sense of what people thought about a given film.

Hope, Mr. Dyal. Hope and suprise bring me back into the theatre. You can never tell where the next good film is coming from. I've walked into films with all the apathy of a sloth on benzadrine and come out loving raving about the film. Alas, the opposite also holds true.

 

[evildmguy]

As everyone has said, we all have our personal opinions and take them with us to a movie. I had read the Illiad and wanted to see the movie. My personal opinion? I liked it. I liked that they took what was a myth, probably about a real event, and made it real. I liked that take on it. I thought some of the changes were funny (Patrocles being his cousin) and some worked for me (that there were no gods, that it didn't take ten years). The only way it could have been better, imo, is if instead of doing the literal Trojan Horse, they used the theory that the Trojan Horse represents the first siege tower to breach walls, which is why Troy fell. However, no big deal and it is something I agree with but I am sure not everyone does. The piece de resistance for me, though, was the tie in to the Aenid. LOVED THAT!

I liked Gladiator. I even knew where it got things right and wrong, love most things Roman (from the 20th century perspective) and I still enjoy Gladiator to this day. As people said, it entertains me, and I like that. These also get me thinking and rushing to my books, which is never bad!

I also liked that Hitchhiker's wasn't completely by the book. The story was still there and that's what is important. I can suspend my disbelief (although, only so far as I didn't like Van Helsing when I had to continuously suspend it) for a good drama or story. It happens all the time in TV and I accept that. Having said that, I have NO IDEA how they will do the next Harry Potter movies, because the story might get left behind to fit into two hours or so. That's just me, though.

Have a good one! Take care!

edg

 

[evildmguy]

btw, Hijinks, where in Iowa are you? We are in Des Moines.

Just curious if you were close. You can PM me or email me. Or not! Your choice!

evildmguy @ yahoo . com

Have a good one! Take care!

edg

 

[Desdichado]

Goodie, a chance to heedlessly provoke the wrath of the irascible Mr. Dyal!

Watchit!! Whippersnapper!

How else is one to judge a film, if not by some personal standard? I mean, surely "they", whomever "they" are, are just comparing the work to some interior aesthetic standard, possibly only on an intuitive, rather than formally defined, level?

I suppose I should clarify: by some unreasonable personal standard or expectation was what I meant there. A good example, using Troy again, is ripping the movie for not having all kinds of divine intervention throughout the movie. Yes, I know Homer's Iliad often has the gods intefering directly in events, and that's fine to say that that's what you'd expect. But that's not the movie that got made. If Troy was done from a pseudo-realistic angle, that's certainly a valid film style--after all, most people believe that Homer's epic was based on an actual seige of Troy by Mycenean Greeks at some level. That doesn't mean the movie sucked, it just means it wasn't the movie you were expecting. There's a big difference between "this movie is terrible" and "this movie isn't the movie I wanted to see." Very frequently, folks rip movies for the latter and not the former.

A whole lot of movies do suck. 90% of most stuff is crap, if Sturgeon was right.If I pay my money, and give the movie the attention it deserves, I have every right to call out the filmmaker. Rip away, I say! And frankly, my voice is but a tiny peep in the wilderness; if you look on Netflix, say, you get a much broader sense of what people thought about a given film.

As long as it makes sense. I get a bit annoyed with folks rate movies here with a "0" for instance, and having nothing to say about it other than "it was terrible." Even movies that really do suck are seldom such black holes of entertainment value.

 

[Klaus]

Except for The Avengers. Lost two hours of my life to that.

 

[Elf Witch]

I don't tend to read reviews mainly becuase often I don't think the person doing the review saw the same movies as I did.

I love movies I have a netflix account that gets used a lot and I go the movies almost every week.

How I judge a film is simple there are the WOW films. A WOW film to me is one I want to see again right now and I can't wait until it comes out on DVD. Then there are the good films those entertain me and my mind does not wander while I am watching it.

Okay movies are just that. They were fun I don't feel like I wasted my money or time they just didn't hold my attention very well.

Bad movies are movies that bore me. And some of these bad movies have won Oscars.

It comes down to personal taste. I do get annoyed with people who just know a film is going to suck before they even see it. And I also get super peeved with the purist. The whine of the film is not historically correct or they changed something from the comicbook. Who cares? If you want realistic history watch the history channel or read a book. And you know what sometimes changing things makes a fresh story. It is why I like Smallville.

 

[Aust Diamondew]

I thought troy was 2 1/2 star movie. It was entertaining, I enjoyed the fight scenes and the movie as a whole but it wasn't true to the original literature nor was the movie as a whole spectaular.

I'd like to see it again sometime.

 

[Arnwyn]

I mean, if I went to the theater (which I rarely do), I might perhaps get angrier if I went to see a movie that failed to entertain.

And there you go.

I, for one, certainly have a different reaction when I see a movie in the theatre compared to when I see a movie on TV.

As for the example we're using, Troy - I found it firmly mediocre. It "entertained" me about as much as one of the more dull episodes of CSI (a show which I like). For me, there is no question that there are massively different degrees of "being entertained".

 

[Hijinks]

Hijinks, where in Iowa are you? We are in Des Moines

I'm in Cedar Rapids, but the bf is from Newton so we get down there every now and then.