{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
7/18/2017 7:44:32 PM
15
La Jetée - N/A
Fight Club - 66
In The Mood For Love - 85
Spirited Away - 96
Oldboy - 76
Playtime - N/A
F is for Fake - N/A
Rubber - 59
The Shining - 60
Donnie Darko - 70
Would it be pretentious to say that it seems directors sacrifice rave reviews to be avant-garde and esoteric?
I suppose "metacritic" is, naturally, geared towards the meta, rather than towards a genuine appreciation of film. [i]The Shining[/i] deserves so much more. The issue I have is that the critics who reviewed the film negatively tend to provide similar explanations, lack of action and lack of main character. But Kubrick did that intentionally to invoke confusion and uncertainty; you would think people whose jobs are to review movies would recognize that, right?
I have a similar qualm with [i]Rubber[/i]. These people are paid to watch, analyze, and review movies, and almost none of them recognized that the film wasn't actually about a killer tire? The thing I love about that movie so much is that it literally makes a joke out of people who take films like that at face value. It directly mocks the movie industry for influencing this mentality, in a ridiculously obvious manner. The punchline of a joke will never understand the purpose of comedy, it seems.
It reminds me of the misinterpretations of Robert Frost's "Stopping By The Woods On A Snowy Evening." You find that shit on calendars, when it's about a man contemplating suicide.
English
-
I understand that scale, and how it's composed. It's not that I'm upset that my favorite films scored low. I am a fan of films which execute themselves through a more esoteric perspective of film theory; movies which are made to be pieces of art that entertain, rather than simply pieces of entertainment. There is a distinct difference between movies in which the director is diligent to the point that everything that is shown on screen has a purpose, and movies in which the director is focusing on what will entertain the largest body of people. While these are not mutually exclusive, the most common denominator will generally not seek purpose out of everything on the screen, and as such this invites a distinction between well crafted movies, and popular movies. (That is not to say a well crafted movie cannot be popular either) My contention is with the fact that the movies which scored low, did so because the critics weren't concerned with how well the director constructed the "mise-en-scène," or how the cinematography was executed to invoke certain emotions and attitudes from the audience. These are basic tenets of film theory, so to me, I would think film critics would at least pay attention to them. The general consensus of The Shining was low because critics argued that the lack of action clashed with the pacing of the film, and that there wasn't a clear protagonist for the audience to respond to. However, Kubrick intentionally paced his movie in this manner because it achieved a greater level of suspense over a longer period of time, and his strategy of scaring the audience has had a huge influence on the horror genre. So while it may not have been conventional, it was intentional, and it produced a memorable film experience, as evidenced by the film's legacy. I just believe that someone getting paid to review a film should be able to recognize this.
-
[quote]Fight Club - 66 Spirited Away - 96 The Shining - 60 Donnie Darko - 70[/quote] This is insane. Fight Club, The Shining, and Donnie Darko are some of the most favourite movies ever, and had immensely low scores, and a much lesser known film got 96? The Shining should be on the same level, with Fight Club and Donnie Darko about 80.
-
由DecidingReaper編輯： 7/19/2017 2:07:42 PMIt's funny that horror movies have almost universally bad metacritic scores. It's like critics don't take into account the social commentary the best ones embody. Similar problem with films that revolve around the theme of the afterlife. What Dreams May Come 44 The Fountain 51 The Lovely Bones 42 The Discovery 55 Hereafter 56 Seems like if a film makes a critic think in anyway they're going to give it a bad score.
-
由Catty_Wampus22編輯： 7/19/2017 11:39:46 PM[quote]There are horror movies with good reviews that came out recently, the witch, don't Breath, ouijja Orgin of evil. The issue isn't with critics. It's with the quality of the films[/quote] No way the witch or don't breathe were better than the evil dead (either the original or remake) didn't see Ouija
-
[quote][quote]There are horror movies with good reviews that came out recently, the witch, don't Breath, ouijja Orgin of evil. The issue isn't with critics. It's with the quality of the films[/quote] No way the witch or don't breathe were better than the evil dead (either the original or remake) didn't see Ouija[/quote] I said recent horror films not all horror films
-
[quote][quote][quote]There are horror movies with good reviews that came out recently, the witch, don't Breath, ouijja Orgin of evil. The issue isn't with critics. It's with the quality of the films[/quote] No way the witch or don't breathe were better than the evil dead (either the original or remake) didn't see Ouija[/quote] I said recent horror films not all horror films[/quote] The remake is maybe 4 years old.....
