Dark Templar said:
Quiet Stranger said:
Daystar Clarion said:
Quiet Stranger said:
Aura Guardian said:
Loved the special message. I've hated a lot of Tim Burton's movies expect for one. Sweeny Todd. And I've have yet to watch a Nightmare before Christmas and refuse too. Judging by your review, this is crap. Thank you moviebob
I think you mean "Judging by your review, you are crap. Thank you bob"
But in all seriousness, if I WAS to listen to a critic I'll listen to Ebert, a PROFESSIONAL who has spent his whole career (or at least a damn many years) reviewing movies, also don't listen to critics, go see the movie (theater or pirated) and judge for yourself, don't let other people decide for you, that's just fucking stupid
I laughed hard. You do know what a reviewer is right? Someone who gives an unbiased opinion on something after taking into consideration every aspect of something. A professional opinion giver is an oxymoron.
Well at least Ebert has some credentials (as in he's spent years doing it) but it seems bob hates a lot of movies and besides Tim Burton's Alice is the best live adaptation yet
I DISAGREE WITH MOVIEBOB!!! FLAME FLAME FLAME!!!
Seriously, Moviebob's reviews are alwase thoughtful, intelligent, and completely to the point. He provides valid reasons why most people might not like this movie ad he does so in an intelligent manner like a professional. If you don't like him you don't have to watch or post here at all.
Oh and if you honestly thought Tim Burton's horrible movie was the best adaptation yet then you haven't seen American McGee's Alice. Or heck, even the disney movie was better than this.
*Facepalm*
First of all, there's no such thing as an unbiased opinion. We see everything through the lens of our tastes, our experiences, and our personal values. No human being can ever have an objective opinion because opinions are the essence of subjectivity.
Second of all, when judging art, the last thing you want to do is be objective. Judging it with objectivity implies that there is an ideal work that you're comparing it to, and there is no ideal work of art, because art is meant to appeal to the personal tastes of people.
Third of all, Roger Motherfucking Ebert? Really? The only bigger hack than him in the film industry is Michael Bay. He's the type of critic who does try to be objective, and all he succeeds in doing is missing the point of many good movies entirely and coming off a bloated, self-important ass. And just because he's old, has been in the movie business for years, and has written books about movies doesn't mean he's got "credentials." By that same logic Ed Wood was a filmmaking expert when he made "Plan 9", and Uwe Boll was an expert when he made "Alone In The Dark."
Also, in his review for Pulp Fiction, he spoiled one of the greatest scenes in the movie by showing it while speaking loudly over the already lowered audio, pointing out specific filmmaking decisions that Tarentino made. He ruined the gimp scene so he could show off how movie-savvy he is. The man is NOT an expert. He's a pompous ass.