cozmeesah Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 already see some HP fans laughing at the fact that BD1 fell 70%, ignoring that their own film fell 72% this very year. Hypocrisy at its finest. What's the next excuse they will pull out? This "late legs" BS? lolUm ... enlighten me here ... where exactly is this laughing going on? I don't see a single person saying anything like that in here. You have said several things like this in attacking HP fans yet you never give actual quoted examples. I called you out before and you pulled out the "oh, maybe not here but on other forums" crap. If no one is doing it here, then don't accuse the HP fans on HERE of doing such things.You seem to be here just to bitch about Potter fans, look at your post history, man. Yet you never can back it up with quotes FROM this site. 3 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MrWhoopee Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I agree Baumer and I judge my favorite movies based on what I loved most but for the sake of arguing on online forums reviews/boxoffice numbers are grounds for fact... I felt like BD1 deserved better reviews, but the critics mostly had a distaste for it. I doubt there genuinely anyone out there who allows people to manipulate their tastes... That's sick psychological inversion Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bacon Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 You are completely entitled to your opinion, baumer, and I'm not announcing my taste as end-all-be-all, that's what you did and I called you out on. You can think whatever you want about any movie, as inane and ridiculous as I or anyone else may find it, but you can't dismiss critics because they're more qualified to determine what is a good movie or not than me or you are. I disagree with them all of the time. Why you were jumped on is, let's rewind:You said that many other blockbuster movies were garbage this year, and Breaking Dawn was far better than much of it.Somebody posted a list of blockbusters with critic consensuses next to them, showing the professional school of thought contrasted sharply with what you had just proposed as fact.You call them sheep because they can't think for themselves.You are all okay in thinking whatever you want, as am I and anyone else, but you can't insult one's individuality because they used popular opinion to dismiss your opinion, which was stated as fact. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 That's where you're wrong Sick. I said in my opinion, BD1 is better than many of the blockbusters out this year. And because I have seen all the films I criticize, I have the right to say that. I'm not exactly sure what it means to be a good film anyway. If being a good film is pandering to the people who get paid to watch your movies instead of the people who pay to watch them, then imo, the film industry is doomed. It really doesn;t matter if I don't like Potter, I'm not a fan of the books the way the masses seem to be. But I am a fan of Twilight and it the movies please me and other fans that's all that should matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchumacherFTW Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 I hold absolutely no stock in what critics say, i'll watch anything. I've seen in excess of 150 movies over the last 2 years, and only 5 have disappointed me (The Last Airbender, Predators, Brighton Rock, Shark Night and Arthur Christmas). Generally because I have little expectation from most stuff, i'm generally entertained. Scoff all you like with the abhorent reviews etc, but I loved The Smurfs this summer. I'm curious to see if many others hold a similar opinion to me. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Totem Posted November 29, 2011 Author Share Posted November 29, 2011 A friend of mine who is studing film at Uni said Breaking Dawn was a great film, he was really impressed, 25 year old man btw, take that for what it is worth but he said it impressed him. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BK007 Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Don't expect me to change who I am because I am a moderator. That's ridiculous. If I think you are a sheep I'll tell you so. I'm not stepping outside of any boundaries or breaking any rules by telling you that I think you don't know how to think for yourself if all you go by is reviews. My point about BD1 and critics is that just because they hate something that doesn't mean its a bad movie. It's all about opinon. The only opinion that should matter here is the fans of the series. Did they make a good movie based on what we the fans want? And imo, yes, they did. I thought it was faithful to the source material and it was what i wanted to see. Conversely, films like Cars 2 and Captain America were abominations in my eyes. They were so void of any passion that it was like watching a cardboard box on screen for two hours. And here's the other thing, I see as many as 100 movies at the theater a year, so when i give you my opinion, it's based on what I've seen, not what i read from someone who gets paid to see movies. Big difference. Change who you are? So being a rude, presumptuous and overly sensitive are positive character attributes that need be ignored? If you think I'm a sheep, you get to point it out, but no one else can point out anything, Christ you're the biggest hypocrite on here. Only the fans of the series matters, yeah, sure did you say the same thing about Harry Potter? About Pixar? About Adam Sandler, about all the other movies you dislike? Of course hardly anyone liked Cars 2, but I'm pretty sure quite a number of fans liked Captain America. But, then, they don't apply, only you do, yeah? That's what you're saying, being a walking contradiction. Just because they get paid doesn't mean they are all mindless twats without opinions, again, you can dismiss them when they are just other people, so what makes you so high and mighty? They've seen more films than you as well since that is your basis for judging if a person has a qualified opinion. Right, so I should "get it through my thick skull" that your taste in movies is the one and only taste in film? I hereby decree that from now on when people go to the movies, all of you must ask Sick/Kevin if it is okay that you liked said movie. If he gives you HIS approval, then you may continue liking said film. If he doesn't, then it is best to get it through your thick skull that you are wrong and he is right and you should apologize profusely and make a donation to his favourite charity. Sick, after all, is the be all and end all of people, critics and other sentient beings. You're saying exactly the same thing, so don't call him out on what you're guilty of yourself. You seemed to be implying that your opinion was the end-all, be-all when you claimed that Breaking Dawn was objectively better than the other blockbusters this year. Exactly. No, I'm claiming that my opinion is valid because I have seen it. If after you have seen it and don't like it, then your opinion is valid as well. This is another bullshit statement. So, only when we've seen something can we have an opinion. I don't get to judge "Jack & Jill" or "Mirror, Mirror" or "Yogi Bear" for the evidence in their trailers, I haven't an opinion if I don't actually use my LIMITED and PRECIOUS time to watch crap and call them crap. Great reasoning. But who are critics and why do they matter? If you are making a film from material that has a fan base already, then you better be faithful to that fanbase. This is why there will always be such a disconnect between critics and fans. A critic will tell you how brilliant the cinematography is in a movie like the American, people like me will tell you it bored the shit out of me. Critics will tell you that a vampire baby that grows exponentially inside of a woman is absolutely terrible movie wise. Fans of the book, the ones paying $10 a pop, will tell you that was brilliant. Movies are never made for critics, or at least they shouldn't be. Except you're generalizing with every single statement. I agree with what you're saying about pleasing the fanbase, but then, the people involved try to make a good movie every time not to please critics. I mean, FFS, who do you think you are to judge the people making the films? So every person involved in Cars 2, Green Lantern and whatnot all decided early on to try and please critics? But since you hate them, everyone involved in Harry Potter and Bridesmaids decided to do this, hence they've got critical acclaim whereas Just Go With It and Hop didn't. That's incredibly offensive, implying that people don't want to do things for their own goals. And that;s your opinion and you are entitled to it. I respect your opinion of the movie because you actually saw it. It's people that judge something without seeing that I have issues with. I'm not judging anything. I pointed out those MC scores because they're a factual representation of critical opinion and they've seen the movie. You can say you said IMO all you want but if you don't mean it, then don't keep falling back on it. I posted to counter your usual high and mighty. Otherwise we should never, ever post an opinion again about any movie if we've only seen their trailers. Stop being so narrow-minded. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted November 29, 2011 Share Posted November 29, 2011 Yes, that is correct, you cannot judge a film until you've seen it. How can you? You can't possibly know it's any good until you have. I'm not narrow minded. It's not my fault that i can express myself better than you can. I'm sorry that offends you. As for the rest of your post, it's not worth commenting on. But thanks for taking the time to write a novel. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bacon Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 That's where you're wrong Sick. I said in my opinion, BD1 is better than many of the blockbusters out this year. And because I have seen all the films I criticize, I have the right to say that. I'm not exactly sure what it means to be a good film anyway. If being a good film is pandering to the people who get paid to watch your movies instead of the people who pay to watch them, then imo, the film industry is doomed. It really doesn;t matter if I don't like Potter, I'm not a fan of the books the way the masses seem to be. But I am a fan of Twilight and it the movies please me and other fans that's all that should matter.You're not supposed to pander to anybody, you're supposed to make the best movie possible, that should be the goal of any filmmaker. Critics are only reacting to what they see, analyzing objectively. You didn't say in your opinion, you said "Breaking Dawn is Oscar material compared to some other 'blockbusters' this year". The problem is, you seem to think quality is entirely subjective. And that apparently filmmakers are supposed to be making movies for an audience rather than to make a good film. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 No one likes to stop? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) Yes, that is correct, you cannot judge a film until you've seen it. How can you? You can't possibly know it's any good until you have.Yes, you can. If you have preconceived notions about a film, there's not much reason to doubt them if the reviews support those notions. That's what the purpose of pro film criticism is. "We see films so you don't have to" and all that.It's great that you have the time and money to see every single film that comes out, but it's not fair to impose that same demand on us, who have other obligations like school, work, and saving for more important things. Its the studio's job to make the film look appealing to us, and if they fail at that, that's not our problem.I don't think I should have to put myself through the misery of Bucky Larson or any of Seltzerberg's movies just so I can have the right to trash them. That's like saying you have to stick your hand in the fire to know if it's hot. Edited November 30, 2011 by tribefan695 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 You're not supposed to pander to anybody, you're supposed to make the best movie possible, that should be the goal of any filmmaker. Critics are only reacting to what they see, analyzing objectively. You didn't say in your opinion, you said "Breaking Dawn is Oscar material compared to some other 'blockbusters' this year". The problem is, you seem to think quality is entirely subjective. And that apparently filmmakers are supposed to be making movies for an audience rather than to make a good film.That's exactly why films are made. They entertain. Why should they worry about what the minority thinks in terms of quality. If the people they are making it for like it, that's all that should matter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Yes, you can. If you have preconceived notions about a film, there's not much reason to doubt them if the reviews support those notions. That's what the purpose of pro film criticism is. "We see films so you don't have to" and all that.It's great that you have the time and money to see every single film that comes out, but it's not fair to impose that same demand on us, who have other obligations like school, work, and saving for more important things. Its the studio's job to make the film look appealing to us, and if they fail at that, that's not our problem.I don't think I should have to put myself through the misery of Bucky Larson or any of Seltzerberg's movies just so I can have the right to trash them. That's like saying you have to stick your hand in the fire to know if it's hot. Yes, you can. If you have preconceived notions about a film, there's not much reason to doubt them if the reviews support those notions. That's what the purpose of pro film criticism is. "We see films so you don't have to" and all that.It's great that you have the time and money to see every single film that comes out, but it's not fair to impose that same demand on us, who have other obligations like school, work, and saving for more important things. Its the studio's job to make the film look appealing to us, and if they fail at that, that's not our problem.I don't think I should have to put myself through the misery of Bucky Larson or any of Seltzerberg's movies just so I can have the right to trash them. That's like saying you have to stick your hand in the fire to know if it's hot.I think you need to see a movie first before you trash it. You can say that you don't want to see it because you heard it was crap, but until you actually verify it for yourself, you really don't know. I've had preconceived notions about many films. But until i see it, I don't have the right to say if it is any good or not. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Phil in the Blank Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 (edited) I don't need to see Uwe Boll's far cry to know i would find it a a shit film as I have seen many of his films and reviews confirm that it of a similar quality to the ones that I have seen.Likewise I find twilight a really shit series. Not just on plot but in the technical department as well and I don't need to see BD1 to know I'm not going to like it. Edited November 30, 2011 by Phil in the Blank Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ball Lightning Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 I hold absolutely no stock in what critics say, i'll watch anything. I've seen in excess of 150 movies over the last 2 years, and only 5 have disappointed me (The Last Airbender, Predators, Brighton Rock, Shark Night and Arthur Christmas). Generally because I have little expectation from most stuff, i'm generally entertained. Scoff all you like with the abhorent reviews etc, but I loved The Smurfs this summer. I'm curious to see if many others hold a similar opinion to me.I fully agree with you! I have probably also seen 100+ movies over the last two years, and only a few films I left the cinema less happy then when i walked in. T:NM was one of those, yet T:E wasn't. It was bad, but it still was entertaining.I really liked the smurfs, very entertaining and Neil Patrick Harris made it all the better!Probably the only film so far this year which has really disappointed me was Sucker Punch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 I don't need to see Uwe Boll's far cry to know i would find it a a shit film as I have seen many of his films and reviews confirm that it of a similar quality to the ones that I have seen.Likewise I find twilight a really shit series. Not just on plot but in the technical department as well and I don't need to see BD1 to know I'm not going to like it.That's fine. If you are using previous films as a point of reference then that makes a bit more sense. I have done that with Malick films. I have seen his previous films and pretty much hated them. I have no idea if Tree of Life is any good though because I haven't seen it. And I probably never will. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Someone should lock this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tawasal Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 No, this thread shouldn't be locked because it's perfect example of how some certain group of members freak out if someone has an opinion on film they love. baumer simply said that BD1 was better than other movies and he is entitled to that opinion, because it's his opinion. I don't know why some members freak out and pull BS on his face so they can satisfy themselves. Movies are not made for critics, they are made for moviegoers like baumer, who judge a movie based on what they see and not what others tell them. Twilight movies are not made for everyone on the globe to love them, but rather a group of audience who proof 4 times already that the marketing and movies succeeded to satisfy them and they will comeback for a 7th film if possible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 Wait, critics are moviegoers too. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 30, 2011 Share Posted November 30, 2011 The thread will still be 'the perfect example' even if it's locked. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
