The "Critique The Critics!" Thread (MAJOR SPOILERS, ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK)

[Retroman]

HARRY, I WEIGH MORE THAN GALACTUS, KNOWLES ACTUALY LIKED THE MOVIE??? WELL WAD YA KNOW, MIRACLES DO HAPPEN!!!up:

Yup, especially after the whole Memflix review ordeal.

 

[Spider - Man]

Just saw it. Better than the first. Fewer plot holes. Thing looked much better. Reed much more leaderly and intelligent. Johnny more sympathetic. Sue more of a "woman". Doom, though far from what he should be, was waaayy better than in the first movie.
Just a few gripes: When Ben hit the table in the bar, it shoulda been crushed and then he coulda said "He'll pay for it." pointing at Johnny. Don't even begin to know how SS beat Galactus. And HATED the F-car splitting at the end to make the 4. Minor stuff. Much room for improvement but I actually enjoyed it more than I did Spider-Man 3. Maybe because I wasn't expecting as much? Don't know. But I liked it. Oh, and the Surfer was great!

 

[Retroman]

From FirstShowing.net:

Jaq's Review: Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer
June 16, 2007
by Jaq Greenspon

US Release Date: June 15, 2007
Genre: Action, Adventure, Fantasy
MPAA: Rated PG (for sequences of action violence, some mild language and innuendo)
Running Time: 92 minutes
Directed by: Tim Story
Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer on IMDb

7/10

Do you ever get the feeling that people making superhero movies have never read a comic book? With the exception of Sam Raimi, it seems to me that all these directors and writers being hired to bring the men and women in tights to life on the big screen treat the job offer as a paycheck assignment and entry into a big budget world as opposed to the sacred trust it really is. When you are brought on board to make a film based on a spandex-clad icon, you have a responsibility to the fans, to the people who grew up with these characters. Director Tim Story, in his second go around with these characters, almost gets it right.

Slimming down this production to a mere 92 minutes, you’d think there would be no wasted time on screen. You’d be wrong. Story and Don Payne and Mark Frost, his writers, could still have tightened things up, or, better yet, added a bit more depth to the story of the super-powered team fighting off a threat from outer space. Maybe some of that time could have been used to build a deeper connection between the characters or possibly to explain Doctor Doom’s return from his destruction in the last film. Hey, maybe there’s a reason we get Doctor Doom back instead of a new terrestrial villain (the Fantastic Four did fight more than one earth-bound bad guy).

What we do get is a very nice re-imagining of Galactus, eaters of worlds (although, I will freely admit, I was waiting for the huge humanoid in the purple helmet) and an amazing take on the Silver Surfer himself. Ignore anything you might read to the contrary, if you grew up with the character, you couldn’t picture him coming to life on the big screen any other way.

The effects are top notch - no doubt about it. Ten years ago, the characters in this film wouldn’t have been possible and today they are perfectly plausible. We believe Johnny Storm can “flame on" and Sue Storm can vanish before our eyes. It’s a shame, then, that the effects overtake the performances of the actual flesh and blood actors. Ioan Gruffudd and Jessica Alba as Mr. Fantastic and The Invisible Girl, the first couple of fandom, are both as stiff as store mannequins. They walk through their roles as if they are afraid of letting any real emotion show through. Even during the big set piece wedding scene, Alba’s facial reactions look like something out of an old “I Love Lucy" episode and Gruffudd shows more love for his gadgets than for his fiancé, the “hottest woman on the planet" (his words, not mine).

When all is said and done, though, despite the silly dialogue and the poor acting, it could have been worse (it was, see the first Fantastic Four). So, instead of the dark justice of a Batman or the teenage angst of Spider-Man, we get the homogenized and bland of The Thing and company. It’s harmless fun, even if it is a bit vanilla.

http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/06/16/jaqs-review-fantastic-four-rise-of-the-silver-surfer/

 

[Retroman]

From Movie Exchange Philippines:

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer

Fantastic Four: Rise of the Silver Surfer, is the kind of movie that reminds me why I’ve decided at some point, to establish standards in my choice of movies. Not that it’s earth - shattering mind you. Far from it. Rather, Fantastic Four II is the kind of movie that’ll make you answer, when someone asks if you like it, that ‘it’s ok..‘, or ‘it’s entertaining..‘, with your voice trailing off, or some response to that effect.

And since you can’t really pinpoint why you don’t like it, but find it a stretch to call it a bad movie either, you just smile, shake your head or shrug your shoulders, and forget about it. Proof of it? The day after you’ve forgotten you’ve watched it, and by next week any memory of it is completely erased altogether.

Which is, you see, the exact opposite of two of the best most entertaining movies I’ve ever watched, which happen to both be based on superheroes. And that is Superman, the first one with Christopher Reeve and Margot Kidder, and Batman Returns, with Michael Keaton and Michelle Pfeiffer.

And here’s the part where you sit back for a moment, if you’ve happened to be around at the time they were released (1978 and 1992 respectively), where, you will likely nod your head in agreement, and appreciate along with me, the sheer entertainment these two provided.

And then you realize as well, how Fantastic Four II completely pales in comparison to those two. So much so, one might argue, that it shouldn’t even be mentioned in the same movie review as the other two.

And I am getting closer to the point I am trying to make.


See, I realized at some point, that after having experienced both the terrific Superman and Batman Returns were, that any other superhero movie effort, no matter how grand or expensive or star studded, will have to be compared to those two.

And so no matter how amazing the effects, no matter how many millions was spent on design and artists salaries, no matter who starred in it, and least of all how many servers were used rendering each frame, if I left the theatre with any less of an impression as that I had gotten with those two, then it qualifies as a disappointment. And any more resources spent on it is only more of a waste than whatever would have been enough to make it comparable to the two.

Overly simplistic? Maybe. Too optimistic to ask that it be as entertaining as those I mentioned? No. No, I don’t think so at all.

Those two movies were made decades ago, in a time of blue screens and effects that only just hid plastic string that kept things ‘flying’ on the screen, so it’s obviously not a matter of CGI.

Yet Superman and Batman Returns are absolute classics. Christopher Reeve is a man born to play Superman. One look at him and you are sold to pursuing ‘Truth, justice and the American Way‘. The flying scene with Lois Lane with the music of ‘Can You Read My Mind’ is one for the ages - a scene I can’t even think of a comparison to, superhero movie or otherwise.

Then there is the absolutely sizzling chemistry between Michael Keaton and Michelle Pfeiffer - the figure of which, cutting into her cat suit, is to me, what Hollywood cinema is all about. She absolutely purrs and claws her way into your imagination, oozing with appeal and dripping with sexual energy without so much as showing off an inch of inappropriate flesh, along with it bringing to life the conflicted character of Catwoman, in such a way that made future attempts, namely those of Halle Berry, desperately pedestrian.

Which is a pity, of course, since so much effort and money has been invested in it, and so much history is behind it - especially to comic book junkies like myself.

The woeful life of the Silver Surfer, trapped forever on Earth, was a childhood influence. This character was likely the first ever time I had ever encountered drama and frustration in literature. The Fantastic Four are distant heroes to me, along with the various characters that occasionally popped up in those series, such as Prince Namor aka the Submariner, the terrible Doctor Doom, (whom occasionally batlled everyone in Marvel, including Spiderman). Daredevil, trained by ‘the Stick’, aka ‘The Man Without Fear’, and across town, who can discount The Ultimate Avengers, with Captain America, Iron Man, Thor, and everyone else.

I can still feel the excitement of peeling off the plastic from a new comic book, and the smell of never before read ink.

Which is all the more reason to discount these current superhero movies - only very few of which, save for a few Spiderman movies of late, have managed to bring to life the magic I felt way back then. The Fantasticar as a Dodge?! Unthinkable! My heroes were beyond anything of the Earth. Especially that of a brand of a car. My heroes leapt up from the pages of a cheap, sometimes badly printed comic book, taking me to a world filled with adventure, and characters larger than life.

Fantastic Four II doesn’t bring me to that world. And until that time comes when superhero movies knocks me off my feet as Superman and Batman Returns does, or even, at the very least, excite the 11 year old still lurking in me, it’s just another product of a - to date - consistently disappointing Hollywood genre.

Source:http://movie.exchange.ph/index.php/2007/06/16/fantastic-four-rise-of-the-silver-surfer/

 

[The Guardian]

From FirstShowing.net:


http://www.firstshowing.net/2007/06/16/jaqs-review-fantastic-four-rise-of-the-silver-surfer/

NICE RETRO!!!up:

 

[Spider - Man]

OMG, LMAO, I just saw these......that is hysterical.......I was referring to the #2 option

Mmm hmm. Thought so. LOL!

and I would look like a total fool in #1...lmao

Well, there's only one way we'll know for sure...


Anyway, my aunt was a school teacher in Texas as well, in Port Arthur. I was in Round Rock last year. A good military friend of mine got married and I had the honor of giving away the bride. Some of our other military friends drove down from Houston to do the "honor guard" finale to the ceremony. Met a lot of very nice people from there and had a great time, but it's too hot down there for me!

 

[Cyrusbales]

The daily star gave it 4/5, however, they mentioned the running time as 120 mins, mispelled the word 'our' and commented on jessica alba being hot as a key point to the movie....

I think that sums out the nature of the 'good' reviews.

 

[tedw]

I can see why you might write off a review with misspellings and mentions of Jessica's attractiveness, but it is unfair to label every good review - either from critics or fans - as shallow or uneducated people. You need only to read them to see otherwise.

 

[Cyrusbales]

Well i spent some time reading through papers today for reviews, good ratings - Star, Mirror, Sun.

Bad reviews - Telegraph, independant, guardian.

Knowing the target audience for the papers, it makes sense, presumably people reading the star, sun and mirror would not notice pure stereotype and cliche in both cinematograhpy and narrative(script and story). Wheras people more versed in film who are expected to read the the telegraph, guardian and independant, would pick up on the these gaping holes and absence of quality, rather than "cool, it's a surfer" and "Yeah action, woooo"

 

[tedw]

That's still six opinions out of all of the reviews that exist for the film.

My point was that not everyone is giving the movie a good review just because Jessica is hot or because they're morons with bad grammar.

 

[Cyrusbales]

But the reviews seem to be scaled towards their target audience, the Sun is notoriously designed for the working class etc, who have no understanding of film form etc, and are into looking at ****, rather than reading something.

 

[tedw]

If you're talking about those six - yes. My response to your original post is taking into account the near hundred (or more now?) reviews on a site such as Rotten Tomatoes.

Of course the papers you mentioned might be skewed more, particularly when it comes to something like the Sun or Mirror. But you can't take every film critic who enjoyed the movie and say, "Well you're stupid and you have no taste and that's why you liked this film". I don't think it's true of all 106+ of them.

If you're suggesting that the reviews are written only with the target audience in mind, and that the reviewer is only giving an opinion based on what s/he believes the audience will think about the film, then the reviews themselves don't really matter because that would mean the reviewers aren't giving their own thoughts - just guessing what the target readers of their paper might think.

 

[Cyrusbales]

I haven't read a respectable reviews give this film any praise. Or know of anyone who has a knowledge and understanding of cinema who thought this film was good yet...

 

[chaseter]

I haven't read a respectable reviews give this film any praise. Or know of anyone who has a knowledge and understanding of cinema who thought this film was good yet...

Any body who completely undertands cinema don't give good reviews to comedies with vagina jokes or big action summer movies with CGI out the whazoo, they reserve their A+ reviews for period centered dramas.

 

[Kelly]

I haven't read a respectable reviews give this film any praise. Or know of anyone who has a knowledge and understanding of cinema who thought this film was good yet...

just wow....

 

[Cyrusbales]

Any body who completely undertands cinema don't give good reviews to comedies with vagina jokes or big action summer movies with CGI out the whazoo, they reserve their A+ reviews for period centered dramas.

good CGI doesn't make a good film......

 

[gambitfire]

^That's not what he's saying though.....

 

[WorthyStevens]

I haven't read a respectable reviews give this film any praise. Or know of anyone who has a knowledge and understanding of cinema who thought this film was good yet...

I have a fairly good understanding of it, as I like all kinds of films, and I thought this movie was good. Not perfect, as there were some details/minor nuisances that could've been improved. But overall, this movie wasn't bad at all.

 

[chaseter]

good CGI doesn't make a good film......

Did I say it did? No...

 

[tedw]

I can completely see the point about more tabloidesque newspapers.

I don't agree with the overall point, which is that if a critic enjoyed this film then they are not respectable and might not know what good film is.

 

[C. Lee]

just wow....

Yeah........I love how people can't just have a different opinion that someone else....but that they have to be a blithering idiot to have a seperate opinion.

 

[gambitfire]

I can completely see the point about more tabloidesque newspapers.

I don't agree with the overall point, which is that if a critic enjoyed this film then they are not respectable and might not know what good film is.

I think that's the stereotype falling on this movie, and unfortunatley it seems keeping other critics from giving it a decent review.

It's almost like they've fallen into their own kind of peer preassure and refuse to enjoy the film.

That's what it seems like to ME anyways.

I have yet to see feasable BACKED UP flaws stated in some of these critic reviews.

 

[chaseter]

I think that's the stereotype falling on this movie, and unfortunatley it seems keeping other critics from giving it a decent review.

It's almost like they've fallen into their own kind of peer preassure and refuse to enjoy the film.

That's what it seems like to ME anyways.

I have yet to see feasable BACKED UP flaws stated in some of these critic reviews.

"Galactus was a left over tornado from Twister" so the movie got a 3/10 WTF!? Either critics aren't enjoying a good popcorn action flick anymore or they just are trying to be pompous by giving Oscar worthy movies good scores and tearing to shreds those that don't fit into that category.

 

[gambitfire]

^So psychologically speaking your saying they're holding a grudge because this flicks are sweeping the box office while "Oscar Worthy" films with No big booms and bams are falling short?

*puts on thinking cap*

interesting.



I agree though some of these reviews are over critically harsh for what the FF are both in comics and film.

 

[chaseter]

^So psychologically speaking your saying they're holding a grudge because this flicks are sweeping the box office while "Oscar Worthy" films with No big booms and bams are falling short?

*puts on thinking cap*

interesting.



I agree though some of these reviews are over critically harsh for what the FF are both in comics and film.

Not necessarily holding a grudge but being audacious in their wannabe pompous prowess. Some of these critics are 20-somethings that have an internet site, some are old people that love only the classic drama, and some are just idiots that hire joke writers to put one liners in all their reviews. It seems nowadays that every movie falls short of their expectations if it is not even to be considered Oscar worthy. And some of these critics, in order to gain momentum for their career I believe are reviewing these movies with so much bias, that it is sickening to read half that crap. They want to further their career or they run a review site in their off time when they aren't draining drains for Roto-Rooters.