It's bad because they "stretched" the script artificially just so they can fit 9 hours of content in it. The Hobbit goes on a quest with some dwarves, gets chased by some goblins and steals a ring during the journey - this is, literally, everything that happened in the first three seemingly never ending hours. Three hours covering 80(?) pages, in which less things happen than the first hour of the Fellowship (Sauron battle, ring corruption, Smeagol's find, hobbits introduction, Aragorn wraith fight) - if that's not BS, I don't know what is.
What is it with movie critics?
- Thread starter Neil79
- Start date
It's bad because they "stretched" the script artificially just so they can fit 9 hours of content in it. The Hobbit goes on a quest with some dwarves, gets chased by some goblins and steals a ring during the journey - this is, literally, everything that happened in the first three seemingly never ending hours. Three hours covering 80(?) pages, in which less things happen than the first hour of the Fellowship (Sauron battle, ring corruption, Smeagol's find, hobbits introduction, Aragorn wraith fight) - if that's not BS, I don't know what is.
Same, just like games pretty much
Nice. Some people do care about how things are shot, edited, etc. If all you want to know is how many explosions and upskirt shots there as then I'm sure the Daily Mirror do film reviews.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Aug 2006
- Posts
- 3,779
- Location
- Wales
I once heard a friend of friend exclaim that you should never criticise any film, as they are so damn hard to make in the first place.
Soldato
- Joined
- 13 Oct 2006
- Posts
- 8,152
- Location
- Surrey
Critics of anything should generally be ignored. Arts are subjective, people like different things. If you listened to what these people said all the time then you'd miss a lot of good material. Just because someone is getting paid to give an opinion doesn't mean that it's worth any more than yours or mine!
Exactly.
Hence my first post saying you need to find critics whose views represent yours...
I think there is a much bigger consensus with film than music. Most people will like what is regarded as a good film, but people's musical tastes tend to be fairly marmite.
Music journalism is almost unbearable. It's so god damn snooty it makes me feel ill.
Music journalism is almost unbearable. It's so god damn snooty it makes me feel ill.
Soldato
- Joined
- 29 Jul 2013
- Posts
- 8,615
I really enjoy Kermodes reviews.
He barely seemed to rave about Boyhood though, and that was outstanding
He barely seemed to rave about Boyhood though, and that was outstanding
Agree that music more diverse (I do despise music snobs who say xyz is cack because of the genre)
But I don't think the critics choice of good generally grosses the highest.
I guess it depends on your criteria of good as marketing has big role in gross
If anything, Kermode is slightly too generous at times. But I find myself agreeing with lots of his reviews.
A lot of us are different. Not for the sake of it - we genuinely don't like the same films you do!
Let me say that I genuinely find a lot of popular films to be utter crap.
It may be a little harsh to say that "Idiocracy" is coming to the real world. But that's certainly how I feel when viewing much of what passes for "entertainment" these days.
Some of us could benefit from adopting higher standards for the things we feed our brain with.
[edit: I should clarify that. I *don't* mean people should stop enjoying action flicks. But they absolutely should expect their action flicks to be internally consistent, logical, with coherent plots and characters that make sense. Well written, in other words. Even action films benefit from good writing, good pacing, and clever characters. What film wouldn't?
If a movie is just 90 mins of explosions, and makes no sense no matter how you look at it, then it's not even worthy of being called an action flick. It's dross. See Die Hard 4.0 as a prime example of dross
]
Last edited:
Kermode is fantastic, lovely man to boot. I might not agree with him all the time, but his film knowledge and understanding (even in an academic capacity) is outstanding 
. A lot of people forget that Kermode might pick faults in films, but will still say they're enjoyable and ~good.
It's the same all over, someone is critical of one or two aspects and people jump to the assumption that that person does not like it. Similarly when people talk about things being ~ok, or average, as if it's a terrible thing.
Kermode and Mayo's Wittertainment film review show is one of my favourite podcasts / radio shows.
There are some good reviewers on the Guardian
, but sometimes I find myself disagreeing with them on a more regular basis.
Whoever in here mentioned music critics, totally right.
. A lot of people forget that Kermode might pick faults in films, but will still say they're enjoyable and ~good.It's the same all over, someone is critical of one or two aspects and people jump to the assumption that that person does not like it. Similarly when people talk about things being ~ok, or average, as if it's a terrible thing.
Kermode and Mayo's Wittertainment film review show is one of my favourite podcasts / radio shows.
There are some good reviewers on the Guardian
, but sometimes I find myself disagreeing with them on a more regular basis.Whoever in here mentioned music critics, totally right
.
Soldato
- Joined
- 22 Feb 2008
- Posts
- 11,114
I used to be a big fan of Kermode, but in recent years it seems a more scathing bent has been applied to his previously healthy cynicism. Like he's now honestly looking down his nose at everybody in a given audience, which I feel disappointed with.
He really is a bloody nice guy, though, as Tummy says. I'll see if I can corner him next week and have him explain why Guardians of the Galaxy was so bad.
When you go through some of the utter, utter dreck that critics like myself do on a weekly basis it's almost impossible to understand how Guardians could be considered anywhere near the pile of worst films of the year.
He really is a bloody nice guy, though, as Tummy says. I'll see if I can corner him next week and have him explain why Guardians of the Galaxy was so bad.
When you go through some of the utter, utter dreck that critics like myself do on a weekly basis it's almost impossible to understand how Guardians could be considered anywhere near the pile of worst films of the year.
This needs a thumbs up or an agree button.
Man of Honour
- Joined
- 27 Sep 2004
- Posts
- 25,821
- Location
- Glasgow
Going to the cinema isn't particularly cheap these days, partly it's down to location but I could easily be spending £12 to see a film. In light of that I don't think it's all that odd for people to try and see whether they're going to be wasting both their time and money. I'd agree that you probably need to work out whether the film reviewer (professional or otherwise) has similar tastes to make it even vaguely worthwhile but I can understand why people might want to get some impression of the film before committing to see it.