The Big Picture: Stay Classy, San Diego
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
What I took from this week's episode is that Bob had seen Guardians of The Galaxy and it was awesome.
This is why I don't really like Bob. He has decided he likes things before they are out - see any MCU film and overlooks their flaws even when they are actually very average films - as well as disliking things before they are out, see the new Spider-Man film and also now any DC film that is going to be released.mattawbrown said:
He has just got caught up in his own nostalgia and opinions and doesn't think straight any more.
I'm... not actually sure how to respond to this, because I'm not actually sure what you're cross with me about.mattawbrown said:
I mean... YES, I did already form an opinion about Guardians of The Galaxy. Because I've already seen it. Like, the whole thing. At a preview screening last week. For critics. Because that's how that works: Press gets to see the movies before they come out, so the reviews can be ready for the same day the movie comes out. I... well, I guessed I'd assumed we were all aware of that already. Not... really sure how one would imagine any of this gets done, if not like that.
So... yeah. Not really "grasping" what the complaint is here. Sorry.
It happens to everything that is fuelled by that thing companies love the most: money. Same goes for E3, and even sports events like the World Cup. Sometimes we just have to hit the reset button and start over again. How much it pains some people.
I wouldn't say that I'm cross with you Bob, though I admit the tone of my original post does come off more aggressive than I intended. Apologies for that.MovieBob said:
I am also quite aware of what a preview screening is and how they work, so perhaps Guardians of the Galaxy was a poor example, simply the most recent.
The point I was trying to make is that I've been getting the impression that whenever a Marvel movie is announced it's immediately given golden praise and any crimes excused but on the flip side I felt you've been rather harsh towards The Amazing Spider Man series and just about anything put out by J.J. Abrams. My original post was trying to put forth the possibility that your work for The Big Picture, having to saturate yourself in the popular culture of entertainment media may be colouring your opinions and affecting your work in Escape to the Movies. I understand that critics are people too and have certain tastes which also feed into the end results. Personally I've found that the best Escape to the Movie reviews have been on movies that haven't been related to topics you've covered on The Big Picture and it could just be we have different tastes in movies, simple as that.
Cease and desist was to Salt Lake Comic Con, telling them to stop using that name. Probably part of the politics.gigastar said:
http://www.comicbookmovie.com/convention_news/news/?a=104670
Just fyi.
I'm kind of feeling done with Bob acting like he's some paragon of film criticism so if someone doesn't like blockbusters it obviously means they only like one very specific kind of film while dismissing all else (I mean I also think he has some unnatural hatred towards Richard Linklater who I personally adore but I'll try to put that aside). I mean, just checking out The Dissolve's, which seems to follow most of the trends of film criticism at the moment, their essential watchlist this year has included: Under the Skin (A semi-experimental sci-fi film starring Scarlett Johansson as an alien who hunts down men for unknown reasons), Snowpiercer (I think we all pretty much know what this is), Life Itself (A documentary on film critic Roger Ebert), Dawn of the Planet of the Apes (The blockbuster Bob just praised a few weeks ago), Obvious Child (A romantic comedy movie that subverts the genre), Blue Ruin (A Coen-like thriller where murder and revenge isn't as easy as it seems), Bethlehem (An Israeli spy thriller where the lines between what's right and wrong are muddy), and The Grand Budapest Hotel (Wes Anderson's newest film). Hell, they literally just gave Guardian's of the Galaxy a 4/5 review, praising it for being different than the other MCU films. And that's my problem with the MCU, they're all the same. Bob praises them like they are this amazing feat of cinema just because they have references to each other within the film, but they all just seam so samey and boring. He then derides "film snobs" because of the types of films that they like, calling them all the same. I've just had enough with Bob holding up one series of movies as the go to thing for what great films are, while simultaneously bashing anything DC has ever done and anything the "critics" like.
Sorry, I'm rambling, I still can't get over the fact he acted like Boyhood is something you shouldn't be excited about seeing and that Guardians of the Galaxy is the peak cinematic achievement we're going to get this year.
Sorry, I'm rambling, I still can't get over the fact he acted like Boyhood is something you shouldn't be excited about seeing and that Guardians of the Galaxy is the peak cinematic achievement we're going to get this year.
To be upfront, I'm not a regular viewer, but I have a roommate that shows me most of your videos. I've seen a lot of this argument you make in this week's video slowly making it's way to the surface (especially in the "Leave Michael Bay Alone" video and a piece responding to "Are There Too Many Superhero Movies?") but it doesn't make any sense. If you don't care, like you say you do, why does this keep coming up?
You claim that these so-called "aging, out-of-touch" film journalists are unfair towards big blockbusters, in particular, the Marvel Universe movies. How so? That they don't pay attention to movies unless it's their "safe, middle-ground" Oscar bait material? Yet, as of now Guardians of the Galaxy is sitting at over 150+ reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, which is more than the other movie opening this week. So it doesn't seem that they're ignoring it. Ah, I know, they must be giving it middling reviews with their tone of "banal dismissal" that you speak of. Oh, the movie also has a 92% aggregate rating. Hmm... I'm not sure where you're getting your argument from then?
Yes, there are critics there that have lambasted the Marvel movies as a way to prove some kind of indie credibility, but they're such a minuscule part of the critic community I don't know why you keep bringing them up or seemingly obsess over them. There have been plenty of well reviewed blockbusters this year. Yes, I'm not a fan of the Marvel movies, but that doesn't mean I hate blockbusters or fun movies. It's egotistical to even insinuate that.
Every weekend in which a new superhero movie debuts, it's basically a black hole of discussion for the film community. It is so incredibly disingenuous to say otherwise with your noting that these critics aren't "engaging" with the culture. Plus, we live in an age where there is so much content for everyone that a general, non-specialized reviewer is becoming more and more meaningless.
Regardless, you're doing the same thing you're complaining about. You can build something up without having to tear the other side down and your unnecessary jab at Boyhood at the end was fairly hypocritical to any sort of message you're trying to deliver. I'm so sick and tired of this tribalism in nerd communities. It's like everything has to fit into these nice neat little categories and you're not allowed to venture outside of your determined grouping. You know what? I loved the Grand Budapest Hotel, Under the Skin, Stranger by the Lake and Life Itself. But that doesn't mean I also didn't greatly enjoy Days of Future Past, Edge of Tomorrow and Lego Movie. Most of the critics I follow are the same way. Also, I've seen you give good reviews to less mainstream fare, such as the Tree of Life, so why are you continuing to espouse this tribalism nonsense?
What this argument really reeks of is more of the fans perceived injustices. Nobody likes seeing things they enjoy attacked, but a lot of the fans of these big blockbusters (especially superhero movies) just don't like any criticism at all. Look at the death threats people received for giving The Dark Knight poor reviews a few years back. Look at the abuse A.O. Scott took for "daring" to give Avengers 2-1/2 stars, or even on the new Guardians movie where some noxious segment of fans decided to abuse a film critic for not liking it [http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2014/07/a_note_to_the_guardians_of_the_galaxy_fans_who_are_calling_our_critic_a_harlot.php]. Now, you're being nowhere remotely as egregious, but it feels like its coming from the same base sentiment. What is the acceptable way to criticize these movies? Because despite all claims of "just don't be a dick about it" are met with the same results: abuse for not liking a f'king movie.
You claim that these so-called "aging, out-of-touch" film journalists are unfair towards big blockbusters, in particular, the Marvel Universe movies. How so? That they don't pay attention to movies unless it's their "safe, middle-ground" Oscar bait material? Yet, as of now Guardians of the Galaxy is sitting at over 150+ reviews on Rotten Tomatoes, which is more than the other movie opening this week. So it doesn't seem that they're ignoring it. Ah, I know, they must be giving it middling reviews with their tone of "banal dismissal" that you speak of. Oh, the movie also has a 92% aggregate rating. Hmm... I'm not sure where you're getting your argument from then?
Yes, there are critics there that have lambasted the Marvel movies as a way to prove some kind of indie credibility, but they're such a minuscule part of the critic community I don't know why you keep bringing them up or seemingly obsess over them. There have been plenty of well reviewed blockbusters this year. Yes, I'm not a fan of the Marvel movies, but that doesn't mean I hate blockbusters or fun movies. It's egotistical to even insinuate that.
Every weekend in which a new superhero movie debuts, it's basically a black hole of discussion for the film community. It is so incredibly disingenuous to say otherwise with your noting that these critics aren't "engaging" with the culture. Plus, we live in an age where there is so much content for everyone that a general, non-specialized reviewer is becoming more and more meaningless.
Regardless, you're doing the same thing you're complaining about. You can build something up without having to tear the other side down and your unnecessary jab at Boyhood at the end was fairly hypocritical to any sort of message you're trying to deliver. I'm so sick and tired of this tribalism in nerd communities. It's like everything has to fit into these nice neat little categories and you're not allowed to venture outside of your determined grouping. You know what? I loved the Grand Budapest Hotel, Under the Skin, Stranger by the Lake and Life Itself. But that doesn't mean I also didn't greatly enjoy Days of Future Past, Edge of Tomorrow and Lego Movie. Most of the critics I follow are the same way. Also, I've seen you give good reviews to less mainstream fare, such as the Tree of Life, so why are you continuing to espouse this tribalism nonsense?
What this argument really reeks of is more of the fans perceived injustices. Nobody likes seeing things they enjoy attacked, but a lot of the fans of these big blockbusters (especially superhero movies) just don't like any criticism at all. Look at the death threats people received for giving The Dark Knight poor reviews a few years back. Look at the abuse A.O. Scott took for "daring" to give Avengers 2-1/2 stars, or even on the new Guardians movie where some noxious segment of fans decided to abuse a film critic for not liking it [http://blogs.villagevoice.com/runninscared/2014/07/a_note_to_the_guardians_of_the_galaxy_fans_who_are_calling_our_critic_a_harlot.php]. Now, you're being nowhere remotely as egregious, but it feels like its coming from the same base sentiment. What is the acceptable way to criticize these movies? Because despite all claims of "just don't be a dick about it" are met with the same results: abuse for not liking a f'king movie.
Ay? I see a heap of movies at film festival and don't really go for the art house ones myself.
It's more that I either do not have the time to see movies at the cinema the rest of the year or do not have the money.
The two movies I have seen at my local film festival so far have been a Japanese cult film and one on Canon Films.
Why Don't You Play in Hell?
http://blog.timchuma.com/?p=308
Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films
http://blog.timchuma.com/?p=310
It's more that I either do not have the time to see movies at the cinema the rest of the year or do not have the money.
The two movies I have seen at my local film festival so far have been a Japanese cult film and one on Canon Films.
Why Don't You Play in Hell?
http://blog.timchuma.com/?p=308
Electric Boogaloo: The Wild, Untold Story of Cannon Films
http://blog.timchuma.com/?p=310
I wish i could share Bobs enthusiasm for all these "Nerd culture movies" (or whatever) but the truth is i´m sick and tired of all of it. The real problem is that when it comes to stupid action movies i really prefer a slow moving cop movie like Black Rain or Lethal Weapon or an old-school 80s thriller. I prefer stuff that takes a little time to set things in motion, movies that establishes characters and cares about building suspense. I think most of these modern high-concept movies are too occupied with quick one-liners and fast paced action, they don´t have time for all the good stuff (With few exceptions, i was surprised by both Edge of Tomorrow and Days of Future Past because they took their time to tell their stories), it´s just like watching one long set-up for the best trailer ever. This is especially a problem with the Marvel movies, obviously that´s also what people want, but maybe that´s also the reason why some critics are so put of by it (Btw, not sure where Bob is getting this idea of snobbery from, i follow a lot of critics and see plenty of enthusiasm for movies like the new Captain America, just check Rottentomatoes)?
It´s not neccesarily about wanting dramas, i thought i hated all action movies and just wanted dramas, until i started rewatching 80s action movies where they take their time to tell their stories, no matter how simplistic they may be. A time where people actually had the patience to watch a movie that uses film language and shit and where the stories made sense^^. That´s one of the major reasons why i don´t give a crap about comic-con, i don´t expect them to announce anything even remotely interesting.
It´s not neccesarily about wanting dramas, i thought i hated all action movies and just wanted dramas, until i started rewatching 80s action movies where they take their time to tell their stories, no matter how simplistic they may be. A time where people actually had the patience to watch a movie that uses film language and shit and where the stories made sense^^. That´s one of the major reasons why i don´t give a crap about comic-con, i don´t expect them to announce anything even remotely interesting.
Is it worth looking forward to? It sounds really interesting, but how does it hold up?Tim Chuma said:
Was an interesting and fun documentary, all the clips of the Canon Films are appreciated. One of the heads of Golan-Globus died recently.MrBaskerville said:
They mentioned John Luc-Goddard's "King Lear" movie but not Norman Mailer's "Tough Men Don't Dance" https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MCXbtYm3HDc
A lot of the films are now coming out on Blu Ray or a very cheap. I already planned to get Ninja III - The Domination.