WELCOME to the Messageboard for the Boston Science Fiction Film Festival and Marathon!!
Plans for SF/49 in February 2024 are happening! A partial theme has been announced: PARTY LIKE IT'S 1999! More to come
SF MARATHON INFO LINKS
Suggestions for SF/49? Click here
Reactions to 2023's SF/48 lineup? POST here
>List of ALL Films that have played the Marathon. Click below
Click here for The History Of The Marathon/Festival

The Next Marathon will be held Presidents' Day Weekend 2024 at the Somerville Theater.
It will be preceded by the Boston Science Fiction Film Festival. For ticket info: www.Bostonsci-fi.com


  Welcome, Guest. Please Login or Register
   
  HomeHelpSearchLoginRegister  
 
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 20
Re: Today's News Stories (Read 253165 times)
Reply #60 - Dec 29th, 2011 at 9:14pm

Frank   Offline
God Member
SF Rocks

Posts: 541
*****
 
L.A. Connection wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 5:07pm:
kirok wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 4:01pm:
i get suckered by these quote whores all the time. most recently "horrible bosses"....


Finally, Kirok admits to getting taken in by Whores!

I don't understand how folks will spend hours, if not days, going over consumer reports before buying a toaster, but don't spend the time to scout out Film Reviewers. Over the course of a single year - not to mention, many years - most of us spend hundreds and thousands of dollars on movie tickets. With sites like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, it is easier than ever to see over time those critics who's taste most closely mirrors your own.

Quote Whores feed the studios these dummy quotes, because so many filmgoers are dummies themselves who don't distinguish between a Ben Lyons or a Shawn Edwards and someone consistently brilliant in his reviews like that guy from L.A.! Lips Sealed Roll Eyes


Because critics are for the most part just some guys and gals with modest writing skills, an opinion and an axe to grind. Nothing special there. Also, most of us don't pour over consumer reports and when we do it's hopefully to learn something objective about an item, HP, gas mileage, etc.  Movie critique is subjective.  You can help me out with a brief synopsis, or cast and production notes but that is about all.  The opinion of a critic means precious little to me.  I hit way more often than miss without the help of croitics.  Our experiences should teach us as we walk through life. Sorry, don't see the need for movie critics. Way too many of them and with the internet, more and more evey day. Is that how you determine what you are going to see? You let someone else decide for you?
 

I bring you peace. It may be the peace of plenty and content or the peace of unburied death.
IP Logged
 
Reply #61 - Dec 29th, 2011 at 11:31pm

L.A. Connection   Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender: male
Posts: 1736
*****
 
Frank wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 9:14pm:
Because critics are for the most part just some guys and gals with modest writing skills, an opinion and an axe to grind. Nothing special there. Also, most of us don't pour over consumer reports and when we do it's hopefully to learn something objective about an item, HP, gas mileage, etc. Movie critique is subjective. You can help me out with a brief synopsis, or cast and production notes but that is about all. The opinion of a critic means precious little to me. I hit way more often than miss without the help of croitics. Our experiences should teach us as we walk through life.


By that standard, we don't need Teachers or Historians either. To each his own. Sure, we all need to make our own way at a certain point, but Teachers, Historians and Critics serve a function. They can point out aspects of a subject one might not have seen. A learnered practitioner of those crafts has seen, read and experienced things that we may not have.

Frank wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 9:14pm:
Sorry, don't see the need for movie critics. Way too many of them and with the internet, more and more evey day. Is that how you determine what you are going to see? You let someone else decide for you?


Of course, I don't slavishly follow a certain critic (or group of them for that matter). But, if I see that a film gets an unusually high amount of praise from folks I respect, I will delve deeper into whether I should check it out. Ed's mention of LA QUATTRO VOLTE is a good example. Although I didn't read Ed's review at the time, I did hear some interesting things about it from writers I admire. It's not a GREEN LANTERN or TRANSFORMERS Part Trois, so reviews do matter in a case like that.

As to there being "way too many" critics on the internets, you are actually making my point: You have to do your homework a bit in order to separate the genuine critics and the Shawn Edwards and Ben Lyons.


 
IP Logged
 
Reply #62 - Dec 30th, 2011 at 2:16pm

David the Projectionist   Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender: male
Posts: 326
****
 
These people arent critics, theyre reviewers. A true critic is a very rare bird these days. I doubt a real one would even be able to get published.
Dwight Macdonald was a critic. James Agee was a critic. John Simon -- whatever else you might think of him -- is a critic. The now all-but-forgotten Charles Thomas Samuels & William Pechter were critics. These people were cultured, they spoke other languages, they were interested in the other arts, & they brought a true critical mentality to bear when they wrote, and they all wrote well.
Just about everyone else you can name is a reviewer, of the "I like this but not that" variety. As Truman Capote once quipped (not about reviewers), "Thats not writing, thats typewriting."
 

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....
IP Logged
 
Reply #63 - Dec 30th, 2011 at 3:01pm

kirok   Offline
God Member

Posts: 692
*****
 
David the Projectionist wrote on Dec 30th, 2011 at 2:16pm:
Dwight Macdonald was a critic. James Agee was a critic. John Simon -- whatever else you might think of him -- is a critic. The now all-but-forgotten Charles Thomas Samuels & William Pechter were critics.

never hoid of em.
 

PANTS UP. DON'T LOOT.
IP Logged
 
Reply #64 - Dec 30th, 2011 at 3:45pm

L.A. Connection   Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender: male
Posts: 1736
*****
 
kirok wrote on Dec 30th, 2011 at 3:01pm:
David the Projectionist wrote on Dec 30th, 2011 at 2:16pm:
Dwight Macdonald was a critic. James Agee was a critic. John Simon -- whatever else you might think of him -- is a critic. The now all-but-forgotten Charles Thomas Samuels & William Pechter were critics.

never hoid of em.


Because they ain't whores, Kirok! Cheesy

Seriously, there are still a few bonafide critics out there (along with a good number of solid reviewers).

Some I read include: Stanley Kauffmann & David Thompson at the New Republic. Anthony Lane of the New Yorker. A.O. Scott of the New York Times. Richard Corliss of Time Magazine. Dana Stevens of Slate. There are others, but these are a few to consider....
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #65 - Dec 30th, 2011 at 4:22pm

kirok   Offline
God Member

Posts: 692
*****
 
if not for pickpockets and the occasional screwing by quote whores, l.a. would have no sex life at all. Angry
 

PANTS UP. DON'T LOOT.
IP Logged
 
Reply #66 - Dec 30th, 2011 at 7:39pm

Frank   Offline
God Member
SF Rocks

Posts: 541
*****
 
L.A. Connection wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 11:31pm:
Frank wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 9:14pm:
Because critics are for the most part just some guys and gals with modest writing skills, an opinion and an axe to grind. Nothing special there. Also, most of us don't pour over consumer reports and when we do it's hopefully to learn something objective about an item, HP, gas mileage, etc. Movie critique is subjective. You can help me out with a brief synopsis, or cast and production notes but that is about all. The opinion of a critic means precious little to me. I hit way more often than miss without the help of croitics. Our experiences should teach us as we walk through life.


By that standard, we don't need Teachers or Historians either. To each his own. Sure, we all need to make our own way at a certain point, but Teachers, Historians and Critics serve a function. They can point out aspects of a subject one might not have seen. A learnered practitioner of those crafts has seen, read and experienced things that we may not have.

Frank wrote on Dec 29th, 2011 at 9:14pm:
Sorry, don't see the need for movie critics. Way too many of them and with the internet, more and more evey day. Is that how you determine what you are going to see? You let someone else decide for you?


Of course, I don't slavishly follow a certain critic (or group of them for that matter). But, if I see that a film gets an unusually high amount of praise from folks I respect, I will delve deeper into whether I should check it out. Ed's mention of LA QUATTRO VOLTE is a good example. Although I didn't read Ed's review at the time, I did hear some interesting things about it from writers I admire. It's not a GREEN LANTERN or TRANSFORMERS Part Trois, so reviews do matter in a case like that.

As to there being "way too many" critics on the internets, you are actually making my point: You have to do your homework a bit in order to separate the genuine critics and the Shawn Edwards and Ben Lyons.




Many teachers and historians are indeed hacks.  You should avoid them like the plague.  Also, watching film is not learning science.  Teach me film theory if you like but don't tell me to avoid directors or actors because you have no tolerance for them or maybe it's that you don't like a certain genre.
   
Also, by that reasooning I we should have our kids study reviewers.  Puh-Leese.

See you are telling me that I have to do my homework shopping for something I DON'T NEED! 

David makes my point there are way too many hacks calling themselves critics.  These people are not objective.  If I have to find a critic I like then I really don't need him or her because all they are doing is confirming my opinion.  Don't need em, don't want em, don;t wate my time on them.
 

I bring you peace. It may be the peace of plenty and content or the peace of unburied death.
IP Logged
 
Reply #67 - Dec 30th, 2011 at 10:23pm

L.A. Connection   Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender: male
Posts: 1736
*****
 
kirok wrote on Dec 30th, 2011 at 4:22pm:
if not for pickpockets and the occasional screwing by quote whores, l.a. would have no sex life at all. Angry


Whoa, whoa, whoa. I would NEVER sanction that Whores be banned from Kirok's life!

Wink


Here, are some more for ya............


...

...


...
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #68 - Dec 31st, 2011 at 8:25am

kirok   Offline
God Member

Posts: 692
*****
 
which one is your mom and which one is your sister?
...
 

PANTS UP. DON'T LOOT.
IP Logged
 
Reply #69 - Dec 31st, 2011 at 1:00pm

L.A. Connection   Offline
YaBB Administrator
SF Rocks

Gender: male
Posts: 1736
*****
 
I try to be helpful and I get that..........tsk tsk.................
 
IP Logged
 
Reply #70 - Dec 31st, 2011 at 1:31pm

Frank   Offline
God Member
SF Rocks

Posts: 541
*****
 
L.A. Connection wrote on Dec 31st, 2011 at 1:00pm:
I try to be helpful and I get that..........tsk tsk.................



You are NOT being helpful, get over it.  Critics aren't helpful they just want to be heard.....
 

I bring you peace. It may be the peace of plenty and content or the peace of unburied death.
IP Logged
 
Reply #71 - Jan 1st, 2012 at 2:56pm

David the Projectionist   Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender: male
Posts: 326
****
 
L.A. Connection wrote on Dec 30th, 2011 at 3:45pm:
Stanley Kauffmann & David Thompson at the New Republic. Anthony Lane of the New Yorker. A.O. Scott of the New York Times. Richard Corliss of Time Magazine. Dana Stevens of Slate.


I will grant you that Kaufmann is a critic, albeit one with whom I am never in agreement: I think his judgement is unsound, so I stopped reading him.
David Thompson is a bloviating idiot: besides writing books filled with misinformation, wasnt he the dope that said The Truman Show was the best movie of the 90s? Dont have room in my life for dummies like that!
Lane is intermittently amusing, but I think calling him a true critic would be an upgrade from what he actually is.
Scott is a hack; as if the NYT would ever hire someone who wasnt.
Corliss is a pretentious, drooling fanboy.
Never read Stevens, so nothing to say.
 

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....
IP Logged
 
Reply #72 - Jan 1st, 2012 at 3:09pm

David the Projectionist   Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender: male
Posts: 326
****
 
Frank wrote on Dec 30th, 2011 at 7:39pm:
David makes my point there are way too many hacks calling themselves critics. These people are not objective. If I have to find a critic I like then I really don't need him or her because all they are doing is confirming my opinion. Don't need em, don't want em, don't waste my time on them.


Well, you cant be a critic & be "objective." The whole idea of a critic is to bring your personal understanding & cultural acumen to the work at hand!
But the other point David would like to make is that a true critic can open doors of understanding which reviewers dont even know are there. A true critic can give you insight & perspective, not only on what a film is doing right, but also on what it's doing wrong. A true critic can get you to see things in a way you never thought of before.
As an example, the critic I mentioned above, William Pechter, wrote a review of The Wild Bunch, & he pointed out something that never occurred to me, even though I'd seen the movie well over a hundred times.
John Simon wrote major essays on Godard & his admirers, Fellini & his later films, and Kael & Sarris & the auteur theory, & these essays are brilliantly written, wonderfully reasoned, & none too kind. Wonderful stuff!
Reviewers, on the other hand (if I may paraphrase Fellini), leave you in the same darkness with which you entered. You learn nothing about the movie, but plenty about the reviewer. Thats the difference.
 

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....
IP Logged
 
Reply #73 - Jan 1st, 2012 at 4:07pm

kirok   Offline
God Member

Posts: 692
*****
 
dave. do you consider yourself to be a critic of critics?
 

PANTS UP. DON'T LOOT.
IP Logged
 
Reply #74 - Jan 3rd, 2012 at 1:19pm

David the Projectionist   Offline
Senior Member
The Living Dinosaur at
the Somerville Theatre

Gender: male
Posts: 326
****
 
kirok wrote on Jan 1st, 2012 at 4:07pm:
dave. do you consider yourself to be a critic of critics?


     Nope.  Just spent waaaaaay too much time watching & reading about movies!
 

I have seen the future, and it is sucky digital....
IP Logged
 
Pages: 1 ... 3 4 5 6 7 ... 20