Silent Hill: Director's Cut, anyone?

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

...saying our personal opinion of films

Don't froget that forgetful tidbit. So many people forget OTHER PEOPLE have opinions...they just judge from what they say they like and dislike *coughcalvincough*.

 

[Addendum]

I have no problem with someone liking a movie that I don't, or disliking a movie that I happen to enjoy.

Just don't state your opinion as "an unquestionable fact that everyone in the world acknowledges".

In a handful of cases that may be true (i.e. Batman and Robin and Catwoman being horrible movies that deserve to join the 6 million E.T. videogame cartridges that Atari flattened in that cemented over landfill way back in 1982)

 

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

I was just adding apart of something which I have experienced on this board.

 

[GoldGoblin]

People have ADD nowadays,there is no way anyone could just watch movies this long.

 

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Yeah. I hate that with my classmates. "Argh...I hated King Kong beause it was too long."

Well, what do you want? Mindless forgettable fluff that has things blowing up every few minutes, or an emotional story arc that involves EVERY character and makes you apart of the film?

I choose the latter option

 

[Octoberist]

I didn't like King Kong for one reason: It was trying too hard to include everything. It wanted to be a love story, a monster movie, and an epic at the sametime. There WERE parts where they could of cut down (The subplot with the black guy and the kid...went NOWHERE).

I liked King Kong and trust me, I do enjoy long movies. Don't have ADD. But King Kong was long for no reason.

 

[Addendum]

I enjoy long movies.

The Seven Samurai: 206 minutes

Lawrence of Arabia: 227 minutes (restored roadshow version)

The Bridge on the River Kwai: 161 minutes

The Godfather: 175 minutes

The Godfather Part II: 200 minutes


Should I go on, or is that enough films that clearly demonstrate the art of movie-making?

I might get around to Jackson's version of King Kong. However, I'm not into remakes.

 

[Octoberist]

I like long movies as well. I love Godfather part I and II. Seven Samarai is the best.

IN MY OPINION, it wasn't suited for a movie like King Kong.

 

[Darthphere]

I like long movies as well. I love Godfather part I and II. Seven Samarai is the best.

IN MY OPINION, it wasn't suited for a movie like King Kong.

Considering, did we really need 45 minutes of them on the boat before they even got to the island?

 

[Kevin Roegele]

My favourite thing about Silent Hill: it had very strong, memorable characters. I know they come from the video game, but they have been transferred to the screen very well when they could easily have been lame, 2D and cliched.

Debra Unger was damn creepy....and she wasn't even one of the bad guys!

 

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Considering, did we really need 45 minutes of them on the boat before they even got to the island?

I know what you're talking about but I have to disagree. At the moment, I can;t thin of a reason, other than it strengthens our liking for the characters.

 

[Horrorfan]

Tsk. Tsk. Im suspecting a case where you feel the ned to bash something popular just so you look cool or edgy. Either way, youve yet to provide anything to say why it was so boring, what scenes exactly were pointless. So yeah im done.

Silent Hill? Popular? HAHAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHAHAH!

This is the movie that took a HUGE nose dive in it's second week of release down about four places! That only happens to the WORST movies. Good movies have a slow descent down the charts, but this....it bungie jumped faster than any movie in recent memory.

Also, it has a 27% 'rotten' rating on rottentomatoes.com. If you want to read some of the reviews it got, go here http://uk.rottentomatoes.com/m/silent_hill/

I completely agree with all of them. Overblown and souless (one critic even compares it with a Uwe Boll movie!).

Long films I have NO problem with. Long ****ty movies, however...

 

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

No, it's not the critics you trust, it's the users. 70%. Gosh. As if you'd trust the critics anyway.

 

[Horrorfan]

Like you ( I think) said earlier, the users aren't critics...most of them have no clue how to critic a movie beyond 'IT WAS AWESOME OMG!!!!'. Why do you think RT ignores them completely when it comes to the 'main' tomatoe meter?

Most PROFESSIONAL critics agree that it was a bad movie, and that is the end of it. Fanboys may have loved it, doesn't make it a good movie, at all.

 

[Addendum]

And critics don't enter into whether I enjoyed the movie that I bought a ticket for.

The ONLY thing that makes me like or dislike a movie is my answer to the question "Did I like what I just saw"

 

[Horrorfan]

My point was, I can hardly be knocking something for it's popularity if it's hardly popular now, can I?

 

[Addendum]

No one gives a damn about if a movie is popular, unless you're an employee for Variety, Entertainment Weekly, or other movie magazines.

I don't give a **** what some dude on the internet thinks about a movie. Watch the movies you like, and I'll watch the ones I like

 

[The Dark Defender]

Like you ( I think) said earlier, the users aren't critics...most of them have no clue how to critic a movie beyond 'IT WAS AWESOME OMG!!!!'. Why do you think RT ignores them completely when it comes to the 'main' tomatoe meter?

Most PROFESSIONAL critics agree that it was a bad movie, and that is the end of it. Fanboys may have loved it, doesn't make it a good movie, at all.

Most so called "professional" film critics hate horror films to boot, and are biased toward tedious Oscar bait types.

RT can ignore whatever they want, there are plenty of people that ignore them completely too.

And there are no "professionals" merely elitist snobs that choose to believe that certain opinions are up on a pedestal above others.

There are plenty of movie fans that can write lengthy reviews explaining in detail why they loved/hated a film while discussing the writing, direction, acting, music, cinematography, etc... You don't need to be a so called "professional" for that.

Popularity has absolutely nothing to do with quality anyway, it's a subjective issue to the viewer. If you need critics to validate it for you, than you're very insecure. There's noone with less of any idea of how to discuss film quality than those that throw statistics around rather than discussing the actual filmmaking with their own personal viewpoints. What everybody else thinks has nothing to do with film quality whatsoever.

 

[Ultimate Movie-Man]

Like you ( I think) said earlier, the users aren't critics...most of them have no clue how to critic a movie beyond 'IT WAS AWESOME OMG!!!!'. Why do you think RT ignores them completely when it comes to the 'main' tomatoe meter?

Most PROFESSIONAL critics agree that it was a bad movie, and that is the end of it. Fanboys may have loved it, doesn't make it a good movie, at all.

yes it does, because the companies make movies not only to cash in, but if they have a heart, also to entertain and please the fans. Therefore, it's the user's thoughts that count. No one gives a damn about critics.

I didn't say users aren't critics, either...at least I don't think.