At 3/25/10 01:54 AM, GreenLanturn wrote:
At 3/24/10 03:08 AM, EclecticEnnui wrote:
There's actually been studies for films in 2007 and 2003 that prove ones that are praised generally make more money than ones that aren't. I don't know which critics dwell on camera angles and lighting, unless they're used in a bad way, like the constant tilted angles in Battlefield Earth. Camera and lighting are crucial, nevertheless, when it comes to filming. They might go over your head when you watch a film, but if they're used badly, you'll notice them.No I get that but I mean (and I don't know maybe it's me) but critics will take something overboard ro completely out of perspective. For some of these things I can even understand when it's something based off a book or there is some underlying or blatant moral, lesson, etc. However, when it's just some out the blue concept or movie that gets through simply for the purpose of entertainment and a story they still dissect as if it HAS to be some deep sentimental or visually beautiful in every aspect piece of art.
Shoot'em Up. Completely over the top movie. I didn't even like it however I can separate it from some film with depth and accept it's a bang bang movie, special effects, and killing. Action show me something cool basically movie tied together with some type of story period. Now read they're reviews. They'll go one about how droll it is or it's lacking in whatever.
I'm like...geniuses I'm pretty sure they weren't by any means expecting to get an oscar out of it. They simply picked actors to bring the characters to life, wanted to visuals that stood out, and was hoping to bring in some $$$ at the box office.
But critics always take it to another level. My friend said it perfect the other day "I just wanna watch some brain dead tv" Sometimes people aren't trying to think, get a moral, etc...they just wanna see some shit. I don't even like it and had I reviewed it I would have said "Not my cup of tea, but there is plenty of killing and some nice shoot outs for fans of action movies." Done. I think they have to rate or review a movie off what it's worth and going for but for the most part (and again could be me) I've only seen them go on like the same rating system like everything has to be some visual spectacle or deep drama.
Shoot 'Em Up actually got mostly good reviews. Now, I can't speak for the critics who didn't like it, but I'd like you to point out which ones expected Oscar material and deep drama. Richard Roeper just didn't find it entertaining and funny. He said after awhile he got it and wanted something more. As you can see, the other critic on the show disagreed with him. Here's what two other critics had to say about art vs. entertainment while responding to hate mail:
"For mainstream movies: 'Don't you ever just go to the movies for fun, you heartless ass!?' Paradoxical corollary for art movies: 'You aren't supposed to enjoy this movie! You're just supposed to think about it! It's life-changing!'
CN: Sure we do, I just find it hard to have fun in the presence of cheeseball mediocrity like Goldmember. You see, jokes have to be funny or else we can't laugh. A fat suit and a couple of sex jokes just don't cut it.
JK: It's too bad most films have a limited idea of what 'fun' is. I mean, 'Wow, when the kid kicked that fat guy in the balls, that sure was fun!' Give me a break. Yes, not every movie has to be a grand philosophical achievement. But what folks need to remember is it takes a brain to be entertained! You're actively involved when you laugh. The idea that you have to shut your mind off to have fun is a popular, and stupid, fallacy. I had boatloads of fun with the creative, really audacious vulgarity of Blazing Saddles and Kingpin.
CN: As for the other side, some readers confuse a director's desire to make a life-changing movie with his ability to do so. Just because a movie aspires to be profound doesn't make it so. I humbly suggest that your closeness to subjects like the plight of the Kurds (A Time for Drunken Horses) and the Armenian holocaust (Ararat) might be coloring your opinion of the quality of the films."