Just saw John Carter...

lol @ der de der..


ok so 21 Jump Street was amazingly funny, but The Lorax was literally a snoozer. I totally fell asleep during some of it. A really slow version of Wall-E except no cool characters. Still passable but same messaging as Wall-E except more blatantly anti-industry

I should have seen John Carter instead of Lorax, I admit it. Next up... Hunger Games on Monday. then on Tuesday...who knows. Maybe Safe House

/runs

Could someone phone Barney's local cinema(s) and convince them to tell him when he arrives that all performances are fully booked except for John Carter. Thank you.

/end public service announcement

Barney - I agree on 21 Jump Street and Lorax.

FWIW, I thought Safe House was good. Denzel did a good job, but could have acted it in his sleep. Pretty blatant Bourne series rip-off, but enjoyable for what it was.

Black Barney wrote: now now, I didn't call the movie dumb. I said that the movie is for dumb people. That's what the trailer is selling at least.

Gee BB, I would have expected by now that you'd be reconsidering your own logic given that the film did poorly down here south of the Wall, and did much better internationally.

At least you didn't say the book was dumb. If you had, I would have smote you mightily with a mere passing reference to time stamp 14:30 here:



For what it is worth, I watched and found that, while it is true that it seemed to lack a bit of soul, it is after all based simply on top shelf pulp of a bygone era, and so that shouldn't surprise us so much. In fact, at times as I was watching I thought they'd done the material real justice. This was NOT cerebral stuff, but rather real Sword and Planet content that could easy be understood as the forerunner to a lot of great SF material to come, and every bit as imaginative. The closest thing I've read to it is Jack Vance's Planet of Adventure written in the 50s. It's a great ride too.

So here's the last bit of prodding, BB. The movie is an official flop. If it turns out it's worth your dime to see it on the big screen, you might want to catch it on the big screen and be able to say you did before they yank it out from under your feet.

Chasch wrote: So here's the last bit of prodding, BB. The movie is an official flop. If it turns out it's worth your dime to see it on the big screen, you might want to catch it on the big screen and be able to say you did before they yank it out from under your feet.

I'm gonna prod just a bit for the last time here as well.

Barney, we can't all get together and go see a movie together in the meat, but we can enjoy talking about them together here. Many of us would like to hear your thoughts on John Carter, but for some reason the pleas of your 'friends' is going unheard, and you'd rather go see some films that no one wants to talk about.

Also, of the list of movies currently out, JC is likely the only one that is best served viewing on the big screen. The others look like home viewing material.

You can spend your cash as you see fit, but I do find it odd that with this much talk about a movie from us, you seem unwilling to go check it out.

I hope you reconsider this weekend. Worst case scenario...it can't be worse than The Lorax.

I begin to suspect that the talk of this movie being a "flop" is just a continuation of the media narritive that began long before the movie was even released.

I would be interested to know if in say a year from now the movie actually turns a profit once overseas, domestic, dvd, and licensing rights are all tabulated.

I'm not saying huge profits, but profits none the less.

The whole media pile on and crowing of how the movie is a "flop" runs counter to the "strong 7" ratings most people that have seen it tend to give it. I distrust news reports of all stripes and this story line has got my Bullshit Radar on high alert.

This reminds me of when the entire world was talking about RE4 and Ken B., big time video-game nut and guru, REFUSED to get it. Then when he finally decided to get it, he REFUSED to open it out of shrinkwrap and would send me weekly photos of the shrink-wrapped game in various places in his house. It ruined me. I was so exhausted trying to convince him to play it.

Did anything like this happen on F:AT when Waterworld came out (assuming F:AT existed or something)? Cuz I regret seeing that.

JW, I submit that JC could actually be worse than The Lorax. I think it's a possibility, i sure hope not. You make a strong case that JC could only be good on the big screen. Strong argument.

I HAVE to see Hunger Games first tho. I rarely get the chance to creep on tweens

I know I won't regret not seeing JC. But yeah at this point it sure sounds interesting to talk about it. I never read the book too which I hear is really good.

SG saying that SafeHouse wasn't bad might bury it for you guys cuz I sort of wanted to see that even though I know it's only passable at best.

Someone should post a pic of Clockwork Orange on what you guys would basically want to do to me to get me to see this. No, not the giant ceramic dick scene.


Repoman, your paranoia of a media conspiracy against JC aside, don't you think the professional movie critics are worth a damn? They don't get together in a secret underground lair and decide to lambast(e) a good movie or anything.

Well, the professional movie critics seem to have The Lorax and Safe House rated about the same as JC (in the 50% area on RT), but you're up for disregarding their opinions and watching those films.

It seems like you've answered your own question on the value of their critiques.

I don't rate a professional movie critic's opinion higher than anyone elses. As one said in a moment of honesty (and I paraphrase here) "I'm not any smarter than you. I just see a lot more movies."

I don't go for "media darling" movies just because they are media darlings. I don't hate low brow movies just because self appointed elites turn their noses up at them. And visa versa too. I don't hate movies just because elites praise them. I don't love all movies made for the masses.

The really interesting thing about Rotten Tomatos and their rankings is when the critics and the audience give wildly different ratings. When critics pan a movie but audience response says its great, I'm willing to bet the movie is actually pretty awesome. When critics praise a movie but audiences say it sucks, I'm willing to bet the movie sucks.

My suspicion of media coverage over John Carter was really triggered when many were saying it was doomed to fail even BEFORE it came out. Media does take cues from itself and once a narritive gets rolling in one direction they are LOATHE to alter it. Also, I am referring to the reporting on the financial success or failure of the movie, not it's content.

I dunno, the hate against movie critics always confuses me. I think it's cuz people think they make them feel stupid?

No of course movie critics are not more intelligent than you. Do they know more about movies than you do? Of course they do. Are they able to better tell if a movie is good or not than you are? Of course they can. Both a relative and absolute basis. They've seen way more movies than you and know, for the most part, what makes a great movie.

The part that people mix up is that they think movie critics are trying to tell you what's entertaining or enjoyable. They are not. Can movie critics tell you if a movie is entertaining or enjoyable? Not really, because they're not you. Drive is an incredible movie but the majority of people will not enjoy it I think. So they can say it's a great movie but they shouldn't say that it's more entertaining that something else. Because that's subjective.

I mean Punisher; War Zone is a terrible movie but MAN is it fun. I loved watching it and I felt very at ease writing a brutal review of it afterwards (i made sure to mention how much fun it was regardless).

The same way that sometimes I see a great movie that I don't like much. I remember tons of people really didn't like No Country for Old Men. I really liked it but I understand the pushback on it. Those make for some great bar conversations when you ask them, "so it was a bad movie then?"

I love talking about movies


I hope lots of people here see Hunger Games because I think that could be a good dicussion. I havent' read the book or anything but I know it's about a running-man type of televised event of teenagers killing each other. The interesting part? The movie is rated "G." That means the violence isn't what is being advertised. I'm anxious to see it. I'll go Sunday night or Monday.