CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Film Critic Catch-All
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Film Critic Catch-All - Page 2

post #51 of 9333

Eh nevermind, just pointless vitrol int his post. I'll just stop reading AVclub if I don't like it, haha.


Edited by Kyle Reese - 6/29/14 at 1:27am
post #52 of 9333
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post
 

What do you guys think of Film Crit Hulk?

 

He's insightful. But he's so long winded and the CAPS shtick lost its appeal long ago.

post #53 of 9333

I will be forever thankful to Nathan Rabin for putting the correct words in my mouth to warn people not to watch Sucker Punch.

post #54 of 9333
I wasn't sure whether to post this in this thread or in the Room 237 thread, since it's a perfect compliment to that movie's running-The Shining-forwards-and-backwards-simultaneously thing.

The guys at Red Letter Media (Mike, Jay, and Rich) ran the first three Bayformers movies side-by-side simultaneously, and came to some startling conclusions. Check this shit out:

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-the-transformers-series/#more-4399
post #55 of 9333
The Josh Duhamel revelation just about had me doubled over.
post #56 of 9333

There is a recent tweet from our fav critic about his heritage that has me convinced he now operates on a majority output of troll baiting just to block and ban people.  Maybe I am paranoid but I do not believe anything comes out of his cakehole with any form of sincerity anymore.

post #57 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Curiosity Cosby View Post

I wasn't sure whether to post this in this thread or in the Room 237 thread, since it's a perfect compliment to that movie's running-The Shining-forwards-and-backwards-simultaneously thing.

The guys at Red Letter Media (Mike, Jay, and Rich) ran the first three Bayformers movies side-by-side simultaneously, and came to some startling conclusions. Check this shit out:

http://redlettermedia.com/half-in-the-bag-the-transformers-series/#more-4399


I'm pretty sure you can do that with many sequels and get the same results.  No?

post #58 of 9333

Ignatiy Vishnevetsky at the AV Club wrote the following line in his review of "Sex Tape":
 

Quote:

Making a movie audience laugh is easy, which is why laughter tends to be a poor metric for comedies.

 


wut

post #59 of 9333
That guy is smugness personified. He somehow accomplished the astonishing task of making Christy LeMire tolerable.
post #60 of 9333

while he DID say that in the most arrogant possible wording, I think I get where he's coming from.

 

on the 19th issue of "Sandman", which concerns William Shakespeare showing "A Midsummer Night's Dream" to the very beings that are depicted in the play, there's a conversation that touches on this. I don't have the book at hand's reach right now, but at a certain point, Shakespeare's son (I think - it might be someone else) shows up with a simplistic suggestion. after being turned down, he says: "but it would make them laugh!"

 

Shakespeare (Gaiman, really, but still) replies: "they'd laugh if you passed gas in front of them. it would still not make it good storytelling". (paraphrasing, not quoting!!!)

 

I think that's what he tried to get at. but it just came off as the most pedantic thing he has (probably - I don't know who he/she is) ever written.

post #61 of 9333

His "I Killed Roger Ebert presents: At the Movies on PBS" on the AVClub was full of smug, but was interesting enough to read all the way through.

post #62 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by andrevellozo View Post
 

while he DID say that in the most arrogant possible wording, I think I get where he's coming from.

 

on the 19th issue of "Sandman", which concerns William Shakespeare showing "A Midsummer Night's Dream" to the very beings that are depicted in the play, there's a conversation that touches on this. I don't have the book at hand's reach right now, but at a certain point, Shakespeare's son (I think - it might be someone else) shows up with a simplistic suggestion. after being turned down, he says: "but it would make them laugh!"

 

Shakespeare (Gaiman, really, but still) replies: "they'd laugh if you passed gas in front of them. it would still not make it good storytelling". (paraphrasing, not quoting!!!)

 

I think that's what he tried to get at. but it just came off as the most pedantic thing he has (probably - I don't know who he/she is) ever written.

Yeah, after that line I quoted, he explains himselft a bit, but tha tline still strikes me as myopic and ridiculous.

 

I did like his like column on At the Movies, though.

post #63 of 9333
He wrote it, but an editor let that line go unmodified, exposing him to a ton of ridicule (including mine) in Twitter. It really is a landmine of a pull quote, and you know if he actually matures into a full time critic it's going to haunt him.

Edit: so he is a real critic. From his ham fisted prose I thought he was 22 years old, max.
Edited by Lightning Slim - 7/18/14 at 5:51am
post #64 of 9333

Honestly I stopped reading anybody's reviews about 4 years ago and I am much happier for it, I found hyperbole and critical 'consensus' on friends films was setting me up for a fall every time and decided I would be much happier going in cold to everything. I'm definitely in a place where I enjoy film much more than ever before now and love discovering things for myself.

 

I still read the odd opinion piece here and there and appreciate Drew McWeeny and Mark Kermode with their insights on the biz etc.

 

What I cannot abide however and what angers the shit out of me is the recent trend with film bloggers standing on a soapbox and attacking things like lack of women in a film that hadn't finished casting and Zach Braff using kickstarter (didn't see any whining about Spike Lee doing this) I'm not going to name names as I think you can probably guess who is this is aimed at but you simply can't present yourself as some sort of beacon of political correctness and free speech in film geekdom and then on your twitter feed tell women to fuck off when they ask a question, insult every fan of Japanese culture and any other fandom you care to mention and then block people when they either call you on your hypocrisy or present a dissenting opinion. What sucks is this guy is actually a good writer but his overwhelming assholiness is at the point now where it is almost self parody. I don't really understand why anyone reads him at this point because everything about how they carry on indicates that they actually HATE their audience. So why read a guy who hates you and is self sabotaging hypocrite?

 

Interestingly enough this morning I came across this blog post written by B movie fave actor AJ Bowen http://ajbowen.me/2014/07/18/life-in-these-modern-social-media-times/

 

He seems to have some of the same problems as I have with it and honestly people will get wise and move on, much as they might like to label them trolls and all that noise, people are not stupid and they will get tired of you.

 

That said, when the current trend of hate fucking as film criticism dies down I would love to discover some fresh new voice and I am open to suggestions.

post #65 of 9333
Agreed, Lloyd. I'm exhausted by reviews that attempt to be referendums on how society should be, especially when delivered by people who have yet to show any discernible ability to interact cordially with other members of society.
post #66 of 9333

I have stopped reading reviews before I see films. I definitely read them afterwards, if only to better focus my own opinion in response to or in light of criticism.

post #67 of 9333

If the character was re-written BECAUSE of the uproar that is NOT

Quote:
bravely and progressively[...] cast[ing] the best actor, regardless of gender

THAT IS THE DEFINITION OF DIVERSITY FOR DIVERSITIES SAKE!!!!

post #68 of 9333

With the death of Ebert, I simply don't follow critics anymore. Without at all wanting to dig that pit any deeper, I enjoy Devin's reviews while thinking he's a pretty big asshole. And his tastes run heavily contrary to mine as well.

 

Devin, and CHUD's erstwhile Patrick Ripoll and Evan Saathoff (Sam Strange)....all have done some excellent and interesting writing about films, but all (Devin to a much lesser extent) seem to have watched so many films that the only things that really get their attention and praise is experimental or nontraditional films and stories. In some ways, I'm reminded of art critics who can't take one more still life and start glomming onto canvases with a single, flat color and exuberantly declaring it groundbreaking, etc. etc.

 

I like Drew's reviews simply because his taste seems to coincide with my own a lot, but his writing is pretty flat. 

 

Kenneth Turan and Elvis Mitchell also get some love from me, but I don't follow them closely (or hardly at all). I read their stuff mostly when I find it linked from other sources.

 

Really, CHUD (and former Chewers, via Facebook) have become my own critical mass. I know whose tastes I tend to line up with and those I don't, and I find that pretty handy.

post #69 of 9333

Vern's take on action films is usually on the mark. His reviews tend to have some Spoilers though.

post #70 of 9333

I don't need to read a review to know I have zero interest in seeing Age of Extinction, or that I really want to see Guardians of the Galaxy.  I'm much more interested in re-appraisals of or new slants on older films than someone telling me if a new movie is good or not.

post #71 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by MichaelM View Post

 

Devin, and CHUD's erstwhile Patrick Ripoll and Evan Saathoff (Sam Strange)....all have done some excellent and interesting writing about films, but all (Devin to a much lesser extent) seem to have watched so many films that the only things that really get their attention and praise is experimental or nontraditional films and stories. In some ways, I'm reminded of art critics who can't take one more still life and start glomming onto canvases with a single, flat color and exuberantly declaring it groundbreaking, etc. etc.

I think that's why I like The Dissolve, because they do as many reviews of genre stuff as art stuff, without the douchey snark. Any site that considers "Sleepaway Camp" AND "L'Eclisse" essential viewing is okay with me.

 

I love Vern's writing as well. My favorite place to discuss movies remains CHUD, without question.

post #72 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mangy View Post
 

I think that's why I like The Dissolve, because they do as many reviews of genre stuff as art stuff, without the douchey snark. Any site that considers "Sleepaway Camp" AND "L'Eclisse" essential viewing is okay with me.

 

The Dissolve is the first site in a long time that makes me feel like I'm actually reading the writing of adults.

post #73 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post
 

Vern's take on action films is usually on the mark. His reviews tend to have some Spoilers though.

The thing I like about Vern is you get the sense he's trying to give every movie a chance whether its Speed 2 or 12 Years a Slave. There's no pre-determined agenda and he can be funny without the douchey snark.

post #74 of 9333

I used to like Evan Saathoff but that time is passed. His whole "*Giggley giggley what a load of crap and here I am writing about it giggley giggley!" schtick has worn incredibly thin with me, especially as he now uses that attitude for everything he writes about, no matter whether it deserves a snark attack or not. He's like that guy whose joke you laughed at once and so he uses the same joke every time you see him. This week, he even admitted that his two 'hilarious' articles ripping apart Universal Soldier: Day Of Reckoning were completely wrong. 

 

Thank God you guys have introduced me to The DIssolve. 

post #75 of 9333

The thing that makes Evan's schtick work for me is the sense (really reinforced if you've heard him on the podcast) that he doesn't hold himself above the movies he's making fun of.  It's not straight up snark, it's an all-encompassing, but genuine, goofy sensibility.

 

The Dissolve is pretty great, but can be just a touch dry for my taste, and (as could be said for most sites) would benefit from Nathan Rabin being a stronger voice.  I'll still read it and the AVClub, but think both are weaker for that split. 

post #76 of 9333

I admire Evan's ability to appreciate and seriously consider films that I just consider crap or not interesting....but his sensibilities are (for the most part) so different from mine that I just don't get much out of his writing. 

 

(And I don't mean this in terms of only wanting to read people I agree with; it's more a matter than Evan watches films so differently from me that I often can't relate at all.)

post #77 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post
 

The Dissolve is pretty great, but can be just a touch dry for my taste, and (as could be said for most sites) would benefit from Nathan Rabin being a stronger voice.  I'll still read it and the AVClub, but think both are weaker for that split. 

 

The split has not only relieved The AvClub of its best writers but also of its best commenters. The place has become in shitshow in record time.

post #78 of 9333

What about the writers of empire?

 

Not only are they a smart bunch who haven't let the mantra of cynicism overtake them, they also produce a podcast that is as good natured as it is packed with content (two interviews each week, as well as reviews, news etc).

 

As for Badass Digest, I really do enjoy it's distinct individual voices. Devin Faraci may sometimes have a bizarre "get-off-my-lawn" attitude, and some of his work is often slanted specifically to provoke a certain contingent of fans (who honestly, allow themselves to be provoked), but he has a true talent for crafting prose that is engaging, witty and truly gets to the heart of certain issues in a film, either positive or negative.

 

FILM CRIT HULK, like Devin, seems to get a lot of flack around here, but I'd love to see more truly long-form analyisis like his (if anyone knows of any writers who also do longform essays on films, then I'd love to hear about it). He has his lens upon which he views films, the focus being on story principles, and he's correct on the hammering down of the singular point that it is a lack of thought about story and rigid attempts at structure that hobbles many big budget films. However, I do sympathise with those who have tired of him, his tone, though friendly and welcoming, often does come across as elitist, I'm not sure if it's intentional, but he often does lean on his professional experience (which is ambiguous) as a catch-all baton in order to smash the concept of subjectivity. But I always look forward to reading his work.

 

But over-all, the writing which I most enjoy is Franchise Me, I miss it. It was the bomb.  

post #79 of 9333
I don't mind gimmicks like Hulk's, I just mind poorly executed gimmicks like Hulk's. The layers of contrivance in which he feels he has to couch his thoughts are just too exhausting to plow through. It's baffling that his articles are the work of a professional communicator.

And yes, I have written more words on CHUD about my frustration with that guy than he did in his latest megascreed.


Quote:
Originally Posted by Schwartz View Post

The thing that makes Evan's schtick work for me is the sense (really reinforced if you've heard him on the podcast) that he doesn't hold himself above the movies he's making fun of.  It's not straight up snark, it's an all-encompassing, but genuine, goofy sensibility.

I like him too. He's too good-natured and enthusiastic for a word like "snark" to make sense in regards to what he does.
post #80 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jokezilla View Post

 

But over-all, the writing which I most enjoy is Franchise Me, I miss it. It was the bomb.  

 

This. I would've loved to read Joshua's take on Man Of Steel.

post #81 of 9333
Quote:
 (if anyone knows of any writers who also do longform essays on films, then I'd love to hear about it)

 

Sorry to keep mentioning The Dissolve, but Matt Dessem has written several good longform essays there. The ones on film preservation, Brackett and Wilder, and Clyde Bruckman are all great.
 
David Bordwell is pretty much the premiere living film historian, but if you think The Dissolve can be too dry, hoo boy. Still, his longform technical examinations of films are unparalleled. Example: his recent look at "Moonrise Kingdom" and Wes Anderson's style.
 
 
post #82 of 9333
I adore Evan Saathof's work, and have varying degrees of tolerance for Devin and Hulk, but why am I reading anything Meredith Borders writes? She just spoiled a good chunk of Green Inferno to tell me absolutely nothing. I have to start skipping anything with her name in the byline.
post #83 of 9333
Meredith looks great in a Rainbow Brite costume.

Homina.
post #84 of 9333
I like how she ranks horrors such as "suicide, diarrhea and virginal sacrifice" in that order.
post #85 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post
 

 

This. I would've loved to read Joshua's take on Man Of Steel.

Absolutely. Even the Home Alone entry was brilliant.

 

Does anyone know why they have stopped?

post #86 of 9333

I've started moving away from critics that feel the need to spell out a film's entire plot in a review.  It's why Devin (among other reasons) has sunk greatly in my opinion.  I like Drew a lot but as of late there aren't a lot of critics I tend to religiously follow.

 

I'm not sure what (if anything) happened that resulted in Renn leaving but I really miss his reviews.  The guy had a great style that I enjoyed.

post #87 of 9333
What? Where did Renn go?
post #88 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Mike's Pants View Post

What? Where did Renn go?

I'm not sure but he hasn't posted anything in ages.  

post #89 of 9333
post #90 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by Michael Shaver View Post
 

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/386521/across-ungreat-divide-armond-white

 

HAHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!!!

Its like he looked at some film posters, then scribbled down the first thing he could think of.

post #91 of 9333
Those are almost all politically left leaning movies that make their case successfully. That could be Sean Hannity's list. Could it be I've misread White's shtick?
post #92 of 9333

"Conflicted public service" - Armond White's summation of Nixon and Watergate. This fucking guy.

post #93 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by MrSaxon View Post
 

I used to like Evan Saathoff but that time is passed. His whole "*Giggley giggley what a load of crap and here I am writing about it giggley giggley!" schtick has worn incredibly thin with me, especially as he now uses that attitude for everything he writes about, no matter whether it deserves a snark attack or not. He's like that guy whose joke you laughed at once and so he uses the same joke every time you see him. This week, he even admitted that his two 'hilarious' articles ripping apart Universal Soldier: Day Of Reckoning were completely wrong. 

 

Came here to post the exact same thought, only you articulated it much better. Nowadays if there's an interesting article on BAD, I won't read it if Evan's written it. Life's just too short.

post #94 of 9333

Why are so many people leaving the AV Club these days? Even Sonia Saraiya left last week.

 

Writing those Hostages and The Following reviews must have been too much.

post #95 of 9333
I feel like I'm getting into the habit of only catching up with shows via AVClub write-ups. God The Following was so much fun.
post #96 of 9333

Poor Sonia nearly gave 3 F's in a row for that one.

post #97 of 9333
Quote:
Originally Posted by felix View Post
 

Why are so many people leaving the AV Club these days? Even Sonia Saraiya left last week.

 

 

 

I interviewed with them last year(for a non-writing gig), and the HR girl said that all the writers left because they wanted to live in New York and since The Onion is primarily based in Chicago, they felt they would rather move to The Dissolve because they "think they are too cool for Chicago".  Now I am sure there is some embellishment on her part(and not really professional to be discussing such things to an interviewee), but she kept talking about them like they were assholes. 

 

It was interesting to see how their operation worked though.  Didn't get the job because they said the "couldn't afford me" and the guy who interviewed me, and would have been my boss, had only been out of college for a year, which was kind of odd.  Oh well, ended up getting a better, higher paying, job anyways. 

post #98 of 9333

I was just thinking, if anyone needs an antidote for Film Crit Hulk's critical atrocities, they might want to check out Andrew Ellard's tweetnotes. He's a script editor who occasionally dumps script notes for films he's seen on twitter. He has a similar kind of analytical approach, but is kind of the anti-Hulk in that his criticisms are stripped to the bone and absolutely to the point. I don't always agree with his overall judgements but he almost always has sharp insights.

 

He does write about Doctor Who an awful lot, though.

post #99 of 9333

Thanks for the link, Paul C.  Yes, in many ways the anti-FCH. I'd like to read Ellard's comments in a more conventional format, though.

post #100 of 9333
Looks like Badass Digest finally ditched the dorky name:

http://birthmoviesdeath.com

Not sure it rolls off the tongue exactly, but it's definitely classier.

Not sure what's going on with the tiny images, though. They're incomprehensible on a phone.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Movie Miscellany
CHUD.com Community › Forums › THE MAIN SEWER › Movie Miscellany › Film Critic Catch-All