CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › What happened to Harry Knowles?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

What happened to Harry Knowles? - Page 2  

post #51 of 276
12/6/10 at 1:40pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan S~ View Post
Pretty sure that's just wishful thinking. Did his letter get brought up at Fox meetings? Possibly. Did it change minds? Not as likely as listening to the directors and writers who actually made Fox money in the past.

And, honestly, has Fox really changed that much that it's worth crowing about?
Look, that's what I heard. I don't really care if you believe me as I have no reason to lie or spin and your skepticism, while well-meaning, has no basis in fact (or does it?)

I'm sure that looking back on the library of shit they've produced over the past few years was alone a pretty big reason to get them to change their ways. I mean, when all you work towards is a big opening weekend, with no regard to quality, you better believe that impacts all the secondary markets (like DVD, cable, streaming, etc.) No one wants to buy/rent/license crap. Once fooled, twice shy after all.

Then again, we've yet to really see the fruits of this so-called turnaround at FOX, so I won't rush to any conclusions. I know I'm just speculating.
post #52 of 276
12/6/10 at 1:51pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pop Zeus View Post
Look, that's what I heard. I don't really care if you believe me as I have no reason to lie or spin and your skepticism, while well-meaning, has no basis in fact (or does it?)

I'm sure that looking back on the library of shit they've produced over the past few years was alone a pretty big reason to get them to change their ways. I mean, when all you work towards is a big opening weekend, with no regard to quality, you better believe that impacts all the secondary markets (like DVD, cable, streaming, etc.) No one wants to buy/rent/license crap. Once fooled, twice shy after all.

Then again, we've yet to really see the fruits of this so-called turnaround at FOX, so I won't rush to any conclusions. I know I'm just speculating.
Calm down, Pop. I'm not attacking you. I'm just saying that Fox has a large number of good-to-great filmmakers/producers/writers at their disposal and are way more likely to listen to them then to listen to a guy with little to no experience in working on film.
post #53 of 276
12/6/10 at 1:52pm
I think he has no filter when it comes to decision-making - what to put on the site, what to accept from studios, what to include in a review. And like most people probably would if they became the recognised face of an entire cultural movement, he probably lets his "guru" status go to his head a little too often.

He's passionate and he knows a shitload, so it's pretty unfair to compare him to some whiny little stain like Alex Billington. But he's his own worst enemy when it comes to maintaining his credibility as a source of opinion/information.
post #54 of 276
12/6/10 at 1:55pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingcujoI View Post
I don't think anyone has questioned the guy's enthusiasm...
Nordling's response is great, and it does help remind of some of the less-showy things Harry's done. Getting attention drawn to the Alamo alone is fantastic.

I do think his reviews are pretty awful, by about any measure, and that he's done a lot to hurt his own credibility. From Nordling's post and what we know, maybe his enthusiasm is just better suited to events and consciousness-raising, rather than attempting reviews. It's my impression that he's not doing many of the reviews these days, anyway.
post #55 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:01pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan "Nordling" Cerny View Post
Gonna dive in here, and yeah, I'm going to defend Harry, so feel free to skip this if you want.

Harry's online persona and his real-life persona aren't exactly the same.
Is it unfair to judge a person based on what they give you? Most of us only know Mr. Knowles from what he presents on his site.

I find the guy's written output to be terrible. I don't think that makes him a horrible person, but it does lead me to question whether any of his reviews should be given any credibility whatsoever, which is a fair question considering the kind of site he's running. And given the site's prominence, I think it's also a fair question to ask why he hasn't tried to be a better writer. After all these years I think it's fairly apparent he hasn't tried to improve because he either a) doesn't care or b) doesn't want to. That's a fairly damning indictment in my opinion.

I'm sure he's a real sweet guy in real life and yeah, he's done a lot of good works when it comes to expanding exposure and awareness of indie films and lesser known films. That's a good thing. But AICN, with certain exceptions, is dreck.
post #56 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:03pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
Compare them to the current group here at CHUD - especially Nick's and Renn's - or Devin's; it's clear Harry hasn't a fucking clue about the mechanics of storytelling, a good, easily articulated sense of film history, or the ability to step away from the emotional strings the filmmakers try to pull.
That may be, but then again, are Harry's readers looking for any of that?
post #57 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:06pm
I'm sure Harry's different in person. It would be kind of frightening if he weren't. But the problem is, 99.9% of us will only have interaction with him through AICN, so that's what we're going to judge him on. And if he acts like a giggling hit-whoring mental patient then who's to blame us for saying that sucks? But what does he care? His site probably crushes others in terms of hits, mainly because on the internet, who wouldn't want to watch an idiot hit himself in the face with hammer as opposed to read some serious thoughts about movies.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Blank View Post
I would like to add some Outlaw Vern love. As I never get tired of saying, his review of Chaos is, as McWeeny rightly said, the best review anyone has ever written.* I also miss Patton Oswalt's moonlighting as Neill Cumpston; his assessment of the elf scenes in one LOTR flick or another being like "being in a candle shop for twenty minutes"** made me hurt myself laughing.
See also: "The Battle of Shit Your Pants". That was great.
post #58 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:07pm
My thanks to those who reminded me about "Scriptgirl"-- she provoked the most entertaining talkbacks in AICN history.
post #59 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jeb View Post
My thanks to those who reminded me about "Scriptgirl"-- she provoked the most entertaining talkbacks in AICN history.
Whatever happened to her?
post #60 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:11pm
She's likely hiding out in an undisclosed location to avoid the inevitable surprise masturbation attacks of obsessed talkbackers.
post #61 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andrew Merriweather View Post
She's likely hiding out in an undisclosed location to avoid the inevitable surprise masturbation attacks of obsessed talkbackers.
Thank you for that wonderful image. I shall now go pour bleach into my eyes.
post #62 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:13pm
"Remember, you can't sell it, if you don't--EWWW IT'S IN MY HAIR"
post #63 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:18pm
Forgotten all about Scriptgirl....although now im remembering her little impass with Devin, of all things.
post #64 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Blank View Post
I also miss Patton Oswalt's moonlighting as Neill Cumpston; his assessment of the elf scenes in one LOTR flick or another being like "being in a candle shop for twenty minutes"** made me hurt myself laughing.
Holy shit, Neill Cumpston was Patton Oswalt? Now I feel infinitely less guilty about how much that hyperbolic son of a bitch made me laugh.
post #65 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:31pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Richard Dickson View Post
That may be, but then again, are Harry's readers looking for any of that?
Might have a point there.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Justin Clark View Post
Holy shit, Neill Cumpston was Patton Oswalt? Now I feel infinitely less guilty about how much that hyperbolic son of a bitch made me laugh.
Oswalt's/Cumpston's review of MATRIX RELOADED is a thing of beauty.
post #66 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:38pm
Ah yeah. "This movie is tits".

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1F9vRVyV914#t=00m10s
post #67 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan C.B. View Post
See also: "The Battle of Shit Your Pants". That was great.
Neill Cumpston's LOTR: ROTK review
post #68 of 276
12/6/10 at 2:55pm
Here's the thing. Harry, through hard work, timing and luck has built a brand that any other movie website is envious of. The site hasn't changed, and from Harry's perspective...why would he change it? Why would he change what he's doing? To some degree he has to be aware of the lightning in a bottle he's captured and it's hard to blame him for being hesitant to change things up.

From what Nordling says, it sounds like he's using the site to forward other interests, and that's great. There's a lot to be said for being in the right place at the right time, and Harry hit that huge with his site. Weight jokes, jokes about how he writes all feel like just so much sour grapes to me. The site isn't for me, and hasn't been for years, but it attracts a lot of people so it's doing something right. Jumping all over it just seems pointless, if it's not for you then go to one of the dozens of other similar sites (including this one) which might be more in line with your personal tastes.
post #69 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:01pm
Thanks to Nordling, I now know what a big sloppy blowjob in post form looks like. I bet Harry bet him front row seats at BNAT and a case of Dr. Pepper that he couldn't do it, too.

Good job bro.
post #70 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:07pm
How is criticizing someone who writes for a living being a categorically shitty writer "sour grapes"?
post #71 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:12pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
Thanks to Nordling, I now know what a big sloppy blowjob in post form looks like. I bet Harry bet him front row seats at BNAT and a case of Dr. Pepper that he couldn't do it, too.

Good job bro.
As expected. You attack unprovoked, every damn time. People hack on Princess Kate or duke fleed as the worst posters on CHUD, but you have them trumped. At last, on ignore. Just like God does to you every single day.
post #72 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:29pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
How is criticizing who writes for a living being a categorically shitty writer "sour grapes"?
Exact-a-fucking-mundo
post #73 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:46pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan "Nordling" Cerny View Post
As expected. You attack unprovoked, every damn time. People hack on Princess Kate or duke fleed as the worst posters on CHUD, but you have them trumped. At last, on ignore. Just like God does to you every single day.
I feel like this Rath-Nordling feud is going to end with someone buying a plane ticket and sneaking a ceramic knife through TSA.

But as for your post, Nordling, it was a bit fellatioesque. But I get it, he's your friend. Your friend, who is a pretty poor film critic with many conflicts of interest. But still a friend.
post #74 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:51pm
There's a fair and reasonable way to disagree with Nordling's post, and "we evaluate a guy we don't know based on how he presents himself to the public" is it. Rath's post was snotty, and the accusation that he attacks with no provocation is a fair one.
post #75 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:56pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post
There's a fair and reasonable way to disagree with Nordling's post, and "we evaluate a guy we don't know based on how he presents himself to the public" is it.
And that's fair. My perceptions of Harry are almost all personal, and I admit that. I also admit that as writers go he tends to gush. I'm as guilty of that as anyone (there's only so many times you can call a movie or performance amazing before it sounds trite, and I do it all the time).
post #76 of 276
12/6/10 at 4:59pm
I like that you defend your friend, Nordling, but it wasn't much of a defense. I've got a friend who is one of the nicest guys in the world but he's truly horrible at his job. Doesn't mean I don't love him like a brother and I'll happily defend him as a human being but me saying he's a good guy doesn't detract from the fact that he is a terrible worker.
post #77 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:05pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ryan S~ View Post
I like that you defend your friend, Nordling, but it wasn't much of a defense. I've got a friend who is one of the nicest guys in the world but he's truly horrible at his job. Doesn't mean I don't love him like a brother and I'll happily defend him as a human being but me saying he's a good guy doesn't detract from the fact that he is a terrible worker.
Agreed that Nordling's defense/explanation of Harry's awful reviews is weak...but that's just one aspect of the job. Whether we like it or not, Harry's been wildly successful in making AICN a profitable, sustainable venture. Reviews are just a small part of it.

And "gushing" is the least of Harry's issues in his reviews. I can handle gushing. Hell, Devin does it for the films he loves. Harry's reviews are awful for other, more damning reasons.
post #78 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:09pm
Nordling,

Your post came off (hah came) as a huge BJ because it seemed to defend against attacks that weren't being made. Plus as I remember, whenever he has popped on this board you've gone into full sycophant mode. He's your friend though, so maybe it just reads differently than it should.

No one disputes the guy's general enthusiasm for film, no one is saying he's a bad guy.

But his "journalistic ethics" are pretty questionable, have been for years. Most all of the previous negative factors that have been brought up, I agree with.

This Doesn't mean he hasn't provided a valuable service.

I think right now if you put a gun to my head and asked me whether I agreed that the overall effect of his work is positive, I'd say yes. I can't dispute that in the late 90's and early 2000's I was stoked to read most everything he ran about LOTR, for example.
post #79 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:09pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
Agreed that Nordling's defense/explanation of Harry's awful reviews is weak...but that's just one aspect of the job. Whether we like it or not, Harry's been wildly successful in making AICN a profitable, sustainable venture. Reviews are just a small part of it.
Of all the places to make this argument, a movie website is probably the worst because movie fans understand the difference between art and commerce, as well as the difference between success and quality. If I were to make a similar defense of Tyler Perry so far as it related to movies, it wouldn't hold up very well in this crowd.
post #80 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:10pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by kingcujoI View Post
Nordling,

Your post came off (hah came) as a huge BJ because it seemed to defend against attacks that weren't being made. Plus as I remember, whenever he has popped on this board you've gone into full sycophant mode. He's your friend though, so maybe it just reads differently than it should.

No one disputes the guy's general enthusiasm for film, no one is saying he's a bad guy.

But his "journalistic ethics" are pretty questionable, have been for years. Most all of the previous negative factors that have been brought up, I agree with.

This Doesn't mean he hasn't provided a valuable service.

I think right now if you put a gun to my head and asked me whether I agreed that his overall effect of his work is positive, I'd say yes. I can't dispute that in the late 90's and early 2000's I was stoked to read most everything he ran about LOTR, for example.
Well, a BNAT ticket is on the line here. A dedicated BNATTER who wants to go to his 8th BNAT needs to ensure his place in the line. For BNAT. Which Nordling attends, you see.
post #81 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:10pm
I don't like this idea that Harry gets a pass because his site is successful. Two and A Half Men is successful for the same reason: pandering to the lowest common denominator. He writes for thirteen year old boys and people with the emotional lives of thirteen year old boys.

EDIT: Or, what The LD (I always imagined it stood for "The Liquid Diet") said.
post #82 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:13pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patrick Ripoll View Post
How is criticizing someone who writes for a living being a categorically shitty writer "sour grapes"?
He doesn't write for a living as far as I can tell. He cultivates a brand, he generates page views, he gives some other voices access to his audience. Taking him to task for his writing is projecting on him what you think you would have done with his opportunity. And yes, it comes across as sour grapes to me because an Internet full of movie geeks wasn't in the right place at the right time and they aim their bile at him for having what they want but not seeming to care about it as much as they would. He attempted to carve his own niche, it worked, that niche now bothers the shit out of people who feel like they could do it so much better.
post #83 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:13pm
This'll be my 10th. Your math sucks.
post #84 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:19pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by A-Pathetic View Post
And yes, it comes across as sour grapes to me because an Internet full of movie geeks wasn't in the right place at the right time and they aim their bile at him for having what they want but not seeming to care about it as much as they would. He attempted to carve his own niche, it worked, that niche now bothers the shit out of people who feel like they could do it so much better.
I have no interest in running a movie news website, I'm willing to bet most people don't either. That isn't a knock at all, btw. just not the business model I'm interested in.
post #85 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:26pm
I like Harry. I think he's just great. Gave me my start, made a lot of great friends through his site, have often been infected by his enthusiasm for filmmaking and, in particular, special effects. But hey, as a fellow Texan and former QT-a-thoner, I'm biased.
post #86 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:29pm
I tend to disagree with Nordling even if I can totally get where he's coming from. The movie business is weird because friendships can get ruined all in the court of public opinion without a direct shot being fired, so it's important to be protective of friends even if you can't agree with them in private. In other words, what's up Rath's butt?
post #87 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:34pm
He and Nordling go back and forth. It's fun.

Actually, I enjoy shitstirring Rath. Keeps people on their toes.
post #88 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:35pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Reasor View Post
Rath's post was snotty, and the accusation that he attacks with no provocation is a fair one.
Please. That was fairly tame, by CHUD standards. And I wouldn't call it "attacking with no provocation" but rather an increasingly low tolerance for the bullshit that passes for conversation around here on a weekly, daily, hourly, minutely basis these days.
post #89 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:36pm
There is some form of irony in Knowles being accused of being friendly with the people he writes about being defended by a friend. Nordling, you could change your name to kindling, as you're just adding more heat to the fire. These threads happen, the best thing is to ignore them.

I don't know why we're having this discussion again at this juncture. Harry now writes about twenty reviews a year it seems, and does his DVD column erratically, but at least twice a month. Other than that, he's more a figurehead than anything.
post #90 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:42pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by RathBandu View Post
Please. That was fairly tame, by CHUD standards. And I wouldn't call it "attacking with no provocation" but rather an increasingly low tolerance for the bullshit that passes for conversation around here on a weekly, daily, hourly, minutely basis these days.
Been a while since I've seen a good old fashioned Rath flameout. Keep playing posting police, it's a sure way to get there.
post #91 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:44pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Alan "Nordling" Cerny View Post
This'll be my 10th. Your math sucks.
But, how are your seats this year?
post #92 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:47pm
re: Dre on Knowles as figurehead. In a way, that was Nick for a stretch of time too. I think there'd be Devin, Beaks, Russ and Dre all year and then Nick would throw out some editorials, participate in the boards, and do a year-end list.

It's also different because Harry's face is all over the AICN site, but that's a given.

I dunno, Dre's right. I'd defend the hell out of friends too but it's a message board, and you just have to have perspective - the aforementioned "court of public opinion", etc.
post #93 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:49pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris Miller View Post
But, how are your seats this year?
Way to the left, where the rest of the non-swallowers sit.
post #94 of 276
12/6/10 at 5:53pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by The LD View Post
Of all the places to make this argument, a movie website is probably the worst because movie fans understand the difference between art and commerce, as well as the difference between success and quality. If I were to make a similar defense of Tyler Perry so far as it related to movies, it wouldn't hold up very well in this crowd.
I'm not arguing one way or another, really. I'm just saying that writing reviews is a really small part of AICN, especially for Harry these days. And I repeated what I've been saying: Harry's an awful writer, but he's successful at his business. I'm not giving him a pass one way or another, and not asking anyone else to do so. I'm simply acknowledging what's true.
post #95 of 276
12/6/10 at 6:00pm
I had an interesting discussion yesterday with Steve/Frosty from Collider. He said he doesn't review movies, but mostly because he thinks of himself as corrupted in that he gets flown places, talks to famous people, etc. But I think he feels that it's better for him - in handling those encounters - not to a have a review track record. I've seen Harry shit on his friends, and seen the aftermath. There are certain things I would recuse myself of, and some things I wouldn't, and there is no real moral police on this stuff. I spent much of this summer hearing arguments about Scott Pilgrim, and that "some critics" like the film because they know Edgar Wright, while at the same time liking the film and knowing the accused. But this sort of discussion is all inside baseball stuff that makes sense cause I live in LA.

I like reading Harry Knowles. I think sometimes he hides the truth in plain sight when he writes certain reviews. Sometimes I think he needs a decoder ring. But the question is do I think he's honest in print? Of course, but I also don't think the movies he reviews are sometimes the movie that was made. And I think that can be great. As to a lot of this stuff, Harry cried watching Armageddon. I don't think you make stuff like that up, so he was being honest. What's the problem?
post #96 of 276
12/6/10 at 6:06pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Dellamorte View Post

I like reading Harry Knowles. I think sometimes he hides the truth in plain sight when he writes certain reviews. Sometimes I think he needs a decoder ring. But the question is do I think he's honest in print? Of course, but I also don't think the movies he reviews are sometimes the movie that was made. And I think that can be great. As to a lot of this stuff, Harry cried watching Armageddon. I don't think you make stuff like that up, so he was being honest. What's the problem?
Well said
post #97 of 276
12/6/10 at 6:18pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by Andre Dellamorte View Post
I like reading Harry Knowles. I think sometimes he hides the truth in plain sight when he writes certain reviews. Sometimes I think he needs a decoder ring. But the question is do I think he's honest in print? Of course, but I also don't think the movies he reviews are sometimes the movie that was made. And I think that can be great. As to a lot of this stuff, Harry cried watching Armageddon. I don't think you make stuff like that up, so he was being honest. What's the problem?
The problem is that he has a track record of letting set visits and initial responses wholly color his reviews. The problem is his reviews are often weirdly about the film he would have made rather than one that was made (see: wishing for werewolves and vampires in Matrix Reloaded). The problem is that he's reviewing films at basically a 12-14 year old's level.

Put it another way: reading Harry's reviews for years taught me virtually nothing about film or the storytelling process. Reading reviewes here at CHUD helped me watch movies more intelligently, with more awareness for the underlying "bones" or parts of the story, as well as educating me on the films that influenced the one being reviewed.

On top of which...he's just a crappy writer. And I don't just mean spelling mistakes. His reviews and such are rife with grammatical and wording errors. When writing is your primary means of communicating with your audience, it behooves you to sharpen your craft.

Harry's enthusiasm for film is great. And as I wrote above, he's parlayed it into success. And I think that enthusiasm lends itself much better to things like BNAT, Fantastic Fest, and getting scoops rather than reviews.
post #98 of 276
12/6/10 at 6:27pm
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post
Put it another way: reading Harry's reviews for years taught me virtually nothing about film or the storytelling process. Reading reviewes here at CHUD helped me watch movies more intelligently, with more awareness for the underlying "bones" or parts of the story, as well as educating me on the films that influenced the one being reviewed.
But again, he's not writing for that audience. He's the Hustler to CHUD's Playboy.
post #99 of 276
12/6/10 at 6:31pm
I don't mind his reviews since I view them as a piece of entertainment and not serious film reviews.

What bugs the shit out of me more than anything is the name dropping. Like when he posts "I got a 12am call from Sly Stallone guess what he told me" or "JJ Abrams called me and we spent 2 hours talking about the creature design for cloverfield" I know everyone/every site does it to an extent. It just seems more blatent on his part.

Even with the Buffy/Whedon fetish and the fact he endlessly pimps Amazon.com sales, I really like Hercules and the TV section.
post #100 of 276
12/6/10 at 6:34pm
What is the best way to do that, though?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
This thread is locked  
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › What happened to Harry Knowles?