case: (Default)
Case ([personal profile] case) wrote in [community profile] fandomsecrets2017-05-27 03:47 pm

[ SECRET POST #3797 ]


⌈ Secret Post #3797 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.



__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.












Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 00 pages, 00 secrets from Secret Submission Post #544.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 0 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.
morieris: http://iconography.dreamwidth.org/32982.html (Default)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] morieris 2017-05-27 08:30 pm (UTC)(link)
There's a growing dislike and scorn of movie critics these days and I'm just kind of ... they're not telling you WHAT to like. They're looking at movies on a technical level and a personal one. Hence "It was trash but I liked it."

Re: Vent thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-27 08:32 pm (UTC)(link)
Ehhh. I agree in principle, but at the same time, I think movie critics in general are pretty bad at doing that stuff. They kinda deserve a lot of the criticism.
morieris: http://iconography.dreamwidth.org/32982.html (Default)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] morieris 2017-05-27 08:33 pm (UTC)(link)
By "that stuff", do you mean making it clear where the judging of technicals ends and where personal opinion comes in? If so, I can agree there. Their word is not law and should not be treated as such.
type_wild: (Tea - Masako)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] type_wild 2017-05-27 08:50 pm (UTC)(link)
The funny thing is that the two film critics I trust the most (the late Roger Ebert and someone who doesn't review in English) both can take pretty lightly on the technical side of things - and yet, almost always have verbalised my feelings on films I've watched.

But outside of the two of them, I'd agree.
greghousesgf: (House Wilson Embrace)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] greghousesgf 2017-05-27 10:51 pm (UTC)(link)
I miss Roger Ebert. I got to meet him once. Fascinating guy. We had a really interesting conversation about Buster Keaton.

Re: Vent thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-27 11:11 pm (UTC)(link)
I liked Ebert because he tended to try to consider what a movie was trying to do and then evaluate how successful it was in that regard. He wasn't automatically dismissive of action, animation, scifi, kids' movies, and so on. He was aslo fucking hilarious sometimes (see: his review of North).

Siskel and Roper came off as critics who mostly only like certain types of movies and judge films based on whether they fit into those types.

Re: Vent thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-27 08:35 pm (UTC)(link)
Is this about the Batman fans throwing a paddie because Batfleck vs Murderman got poor reviews?
morieris: http://iconography.dreamwidth.org/32982.html (Default)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] morieris 2017-05-27 08:37 pm (UTC)(link)
No - though that's a good marking point to maybe see where the tide began to turn - more about Baywatch.

Re: Vent thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-27 08:45 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh god that is a shit movie. I am so fucking sic of these parody remakes of tv shows that were meant to be a campy. Why are moviemakers so ashamed of just unapologetically making a campy but fun movie. Why do they insist on always going OTT with it? They don't always have to make it a parody of the original property. I'm just sick of it.
sadiesockmonkey: (Default)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] sadiesockmonkey 2017-05-28 03:45 am (UTC)(link)
You & me both, anon. You & me both.

Re: Vent thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-27 08:39 pm (UTC)(link)
I think people take the criticism too seriously. I like a lot of movies, but I'm not under the impression that enjoying a movie means it must be a flawless work of art beyond reproach. I don't take offense when critics point out issues in the film. Sometimes I agree, sometimes I don't. Either way, it doesn't spoil my enjoyment of it and I don't take it personally.

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] mrs_don_draper 2017-05-27 09:41 pm (UTC)(link)
I just feel like every review is negative, often to the point of just being mean. Like when A Dog's Purpose came out, it was panned for being predictable and sugary sweet. As if that were a bad thing! Sometimes people go to movies to feel good. Not every movie is trying for an Oscar, but I feel like some movies are held to that standard.

On the other hand, I feel like there are some movies that aren't panned hard enough. Like, I am so fucking sick of reboots, remakes, and sequels! Not a goddamn original idea in anyone's head anymore!
greghousesgf: (Hugh Blue Eyes)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] greghousesgf 2017-05-27 10:52 pm (UTC)(link)
IMHO there are way too many movies based on comic books, TV shows and video games, or ripoffs of other movies.
sarillia: (Default)

Re: Vent thread

[personal profile] sarillia 2017-05-27 09:41 pm (UTC)(link)
I think a lot of people in general just have very different views on the difference between "good/bad" and "I liked it/I didn't like it". To me, those are completely separate things (and frankly I'm much more interested in talking about the latter and sometimes get frustrated by people only asking me the former), but obviously they aren't to a lot of others.

Re: Vent thread

(Anonymous) 2017-05-27 10:45 pm (UTC)(link)
This. A lot of people seem to think "I liked it" = good and "I didn't like it" = bad. So when they're talking about a movie they liked and someone didn't like it, they take personal offense because it's as though someone's telling them their favorite movie is crappy... which is not necessarily what's being said at all.