Bob's going to be in New Hampshire? The back-woods New England state that no one really cares about? The one I just so happen to live in? SWEET!
You can very easily see something as good, but find it difficult to enjoy. After all, I don't think people are watching a movie like Schindler's List because it's such an easy, fluffy, lighthearted movie to sit down and tune out to with the family on the couch with some popcorn and chips. Some elements of the movie may make the viewers uncomfortable about its content but still find the movie a good one.Mossberg Shotty said:Toilet said:I didn't like District 9, I appreciate that it was a fantastic movie but I found it very unpleasant to watch.I'm a bit confused here. If you consider something "good" that implies that you have the inclination to enjoy that something. I certainly thought it was a good movie, even though being difficult to watch was kinda the point. I think y'all are missing the forest for the trees, so to speak.Red X said:District 9 was good but it didn't sit right with me, maybe this'll be better.
I think that in Elysium (and here I'm basing myself on the review and trailers just like you), is not that Rich people leaving earth caused the world to go hell, is more like, when those people left, they took everything that made the world "work" with them. Or maybe the world was already fucked up enough before they did, and the problem really lies in rich people making this huge space colony where everything is better but leaving everyone else who can't afford it to deal with a broken planet Earth.Steve the Pocket said:You know -- and this is just based on the information presented in the review -- if "the one percent" can just up and move to a space colony removed from the rest of humanity where they never have to work again, and the result is that everything goes to hell down below... doesn't that kind of validate the ideas presented in, of all things, Atlas Shrugged? You know, where all the rich people pack up and move toRaptureGalt's Gulch and everyone else is like "Oh noes, the people who actually knew how to run things are all gone, whatever shall we do?" because apparently "the 99 percent" are all idiots who need to be led by the hand by their, ahem, intellectual superiors.
What I'm getting is that this is a really obnoxious viewpoint no matter whose "side" of the conflict you claim to be on.
Exactly where does Bob imply you're scum of the Earth for not supporting this movie?mad825 said:So bob, support this indy film with it's embracing ideas or you're the scum of the earth?
Let's just put it this way: Time is written by, and generally appeals to, the class of people this movie talks down about. Consider that when you look at their score for the movie.Copper Zen said:Funny. Bob's cheering this movie on while other reviews I've read are canning it. Time gave it 2+1/2 stars out of 5 and it only gets a 47% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Uh...is this another case where Bob's inner fanboy leaves him giddy and oblivious to problems? You may recall how he said the Captain America might be "the best movie ever". Bob has as much of a track record for going overboard liking certain directors or movies as he does for reflexively hating others (I never listen to Bob when he talks about JJ Abrahm's work, anymore).
Has anyone else seen this movie? If so I'd appreciate your opinion on it.
Maybe you missed the part of the review where Bob points-out how all of the Earthbound characters all seem to be Hispanic and mostly speak Spanish, followed by a very loud and sarcastic "Gee, I wonder what that's a metaphor of". He made little effort to hide the fact that the story basically slaps you in the face with its message, just that the rest of the movie is so awesome, it's forgivable. Compared to other movies that are boring, AND slap you in the face with heavy morality messages on top of that. It's like the case of an average student getting a C grade and no one cares, but when his brother who usually gets straight A's gets a C, his parents damn-near murder him for it. Not a perfect analogy, but you get the idea. Different standards for different movies. That and, you know, opinion.axlryder said:I don't mind Bob downplaying how ham-fisted this movie clearly is as a negative point. I do mind the fact that he never even seems to fault the movie for it. I mind even more due to Bob criticizing other films for very similar levels of blatant metaphor.
Yes, he made a point to say that it was obvious, and then went right past it and gave the movie a glowing recommendation anyway. It did almost nothing to factor into his recommendation or seriously detract from his opinion of the film. He even made a point to say that his only major gripe was that it didn't spend enough time on certain things, and that the film "something to say" and had a "powerful thesis", and just seemed generally positive in tone towards the story and its message. It's almost like he's saying "yeah, it's ham-fisted, but it works here".WhiteTigerShiro said:Maybe you missed the part of the review where Bob points-out how all of the Earthbound characters all seem to be Hispanic and mostly speak Spanish, followed by a very loud and sarcastic "Gee, I wonder what that's a metaphor of". He made little effort to hide the fact that the story basically slaps you in the face with its message, just that the rest of the movie is so awesome, it's forgivable. Compared to other movies that are boring, AND slap you in the face with heavy morality messages on top of that. It's like the case of an average student getting a C grade and no one cares, but when his brother who usually gets straight A's gets a C, his parents damn-near murder him for it. Not a perfect analogy, but you get the idea. Different standards for different movies. That and, you know, opinion.axlryder said:I don't mind Bob downplaying how ham-fisted this movie clearly is as a negative point. I do mind the fact that he never even seems to fault the movie for it. I mind even more due to Bob criticizing other films for very similar levels of blatant metaphor.
Speaking for nobody but myself, the difference between the shows is the degree that each one is funny. Moviebob doesn't do a whole ton of jokes and comedy, it's not his main thing. It's easier to be annoyed by stated opinions than opinions wrapped in a joke I just snickered at.Strain42 said:Also does anyone else find it incredibly odd that a lot of the things that people seem to just insult MovieBob over are the same thing that Yahtzee does (...)
If you don't want an opinion based show to be covered in personal opinion, than stop watching it. It's not a hard concept.
Darth Sea Bass said:August 21st in the UK?... ************.
NopeCasual Shinji said:We're never gonna get that Battle Angel Alita movie, are we? :'(
Hmmm? Isn't that sorta kinda the entire point to most of Ayn Rand's works? Particularly Atlas Shrugged? Now maybe that would have been an interesting point to explore in parallel with this films heavy handed Occupy Space Habitrail / LaRaza themes. Sadly this is a Hollywood production.Ruisu said:I think that in Elysium (and here I'm basing myself on the review and trailers just like you), is not that Rich people leaving earth caused the world to go hell, is more like, when those people left, they took everything that made the world "work" with them. Or maybe the world was already fucked up enough before they did, and the problem really lies in rich people making this huge space colony where everything is better but leaving everyone else who can't afford it to deal with a broken planet Earth.Steve the Pocket said:You know -- and this is just based on the information presented in the review -- if "the one percent" can just up and move to a space colony removed from the rest of humanity where they never have to work again, and the result is that everything goes to hell down below... doesn't that kind of validate the ideas presented in, of all things, Atlas Shrugged? You know, where all the rich people pack up and move toRaptureGalt's Gulch and everyone else is like "Oh noes, the people who actually knew how to run things are all gone, whatever shall we do?" because apparently "the 99 percent" are all idiots who need to be led by the hand by their, ahem, intellectual superiors.
What I'm getting is that this is a really obnoxious viewpoint no matter whose "side" of the conflict you claim to be on.
It has nothing to do with thinking about how you might "subscribe to their views" or be "brainwashed". It has to do with film-makers with very clear-cut beliefs making movies that take complicated ideas that are chock full of grey areas and reducing them to black-and-white fantasy, where everyone falls into convenient categories of "if you think this way you're smart and righteous and wonderful, and if you think this way you're a vile and disgusting human being". As you can imagine, people don't really like being insulted, and they especially don't like it when you insult them by presuming to understand their views when the film-maker clearly doesn't (or just ignores them).Makabriel said:I have never in my life walked out of a movie thinking "You, know.. that movie made me think of how badly 'x' is being treated by 'y' and how our government is 'z'". I never understood how people get their backs up by "ham fisted" force feeding of today's latest trending problems in a movie. I watch movies to be entertained. I don't care if the movie has ties to real world happenings. Never once did a movie make me question the way I think about things. Never once did I think "Oh, this director is a devout believer of somethingorother, I better not watch it because that means I subscribe to their views". Are people this weak willed that they think they'll be brainwashed by something topical in a sci-fi action movie?
Just boggles my mind..