..if what i said is hard to comprehend....i can not do nothing for those who either choose to or can not comprehend what i meant or said.
also..."action/sci-fi"; however i posed the statement again...is not hard to understand the description...sorry the terminology is not clear enough or (some how) not universally recognized for you, so you could understand...but i'm sure plenty of people could describe TFs to be action, sci-fi, blockbuster type of film...if you need a more precise description, i'm gonna decline to do so, because it seems to be pretty clear.
Firstly, you must me misunderstanding my tone if your condescension here is some sort of response to my posts.
Secondly, that's great that 'alot of people could describe TF to be action/sci-fi' I'm sure alot of people could describe it to be other things, including; light hearted adventure and or toy commercial or cbm. Not sure what that proves..that alot of people could describe it as something?
Again, when the condescension starts that's usually my cue to look to a conclusion to things.
excuse me? "According to me"??. 1. nothing is primarily or solely on my taste in movies at all. I think i share the same views as many, and like i have said before..i'm sure no ones mother wants to explain to their 6 year old child, what he or she seen in reference to robot balls. (for example)
and 2 "what i can accept for comedy" is not the issue, ( even though there's a placement for everything )but knowing you are doing a film that children are gonna watching..you might wanna hold off on having "robot balls" in the film (for ex.) ..i dont know...that is just me..
When I said 'level', I was referring to 'amount', not 'maturity'. You/we were talking about 'how much comedy a film can have before it stops being action(some vs alot...) as I remember. As for this point about acceptable, again, all these films are all of them, regulated by the mpaa. If it's not acceptable they won't allow it. What's more, it's PG-13, which means parents themselves are to exercise discretion, same deal as with Xmen, with all the swearing and sex and bloody violence(suppose I better be careful when referencing some sort of double standard applied to another film). 'If no mother wants to explain something that happens in a pg13 film to their 6 year old then that kid shouldn't be in there.
That being said, I truly wonder how much harder it's going to be for this mother to explain the construction balls(not real ones like in other movies) referred to as scrotum gag vs the fact that several pet dogs have exposed 'real' balls dragged around many a living room in real life. Animal balls(among other things) are something I see on almost every visit I pay to the zoo, I also expect it's no real problem for young boys seeing as they have a fully formed pair of their own, unlike girls and undeveloped breasts having to see mystique walk around naked with things that look alot more like breast flopping around than construction balls on a robotic animal, then there is the butt shot in the last x movie(again double standard) topped off with perhaps this more
egregious example of this very point in a similarly pg13 film that no doubt got far less 'outrage'. What's more and perhaps most significant, is that similar content has been explored/exposed in the source material(beast wars). I digress. Again, I was referring to amount of humor.
and for my "some vs alot" debate. like i said...quite clearly; a tremendous amount of comedy could take the filmmakers intent to what the film should be incorrectly, why you don't understand that...
Probably cause I'm talking about reviewing a film for what it is, not sitting there mulling over the supposed directors intent. You don't know their intent, all you know is what this supposed 'genre label' attached to the film is. Not everyone that sits in front of a movie knows what the 'filmmakers intent' is. Not everyone that changes to channel 47 and tunes in as some unknown movie called TF starts to play knows any of this stuff. Thus I say again, if you are reviewing the film, wouldn't it make sense to do just that and not skew all that with this misguided insight into filmmaker intent? There are enough people that play this game with Edgar Wright films and come out worse for wear. 'I thought this was supposed to be...'
my explanation or statements are pretty clear; For you to not understand like i already said i will let that be your issue. I'm sure these movies get looked at by whomever to be rated and i'm sure whether it's the filmmakers or whomever has to explain the movie to the studio so they would know how to advertise the film to the masses, explain the genre or type of movie -the film is targeting to be.
Studios pay for and thus sell films however they see fit, they even control final edit(for the most part) which can also change things. Wouldn't take much work to find stories about many a filmmaker that has stated the studio sold their film wrong(sucker punch and dark city spring to mind). That's firstly, what's more is that I've still yet to see you tell me where exactly you yourself find
an official genre listing from the studio? I only ask cause I worked at a video store and when we placed the dvd and such, we placed them based on all sorts of things.
-What was popular(see found footage)
-What sold
-What we thought the film was
-The season(valentines) etc...
And that was just the retail store. When netflix/HBO categories their films, they do it at their own discretion based on 'nothing official'....this is my point, what are you basing yours on? What listing exactly and is it readily and officially available for the public prior to entering the film? Or is this another opinion thing(honest question)?
are you the moderator here? Are you some type of teacher, or movie overseer??..as i said before, you are not the end all be all, and you are free to post as you will as well..but do not expect "that line of presented reasoning" to change..so i expect you to be in a constant battle here, so good luck to you, as i stated before, i never said you weren't free to post or reply how you want. I just feel you are searching for an answer or answers you will never find and think you are judging others opinions unfairly.
Nope, not a moderator and not a teacher nor the be/end all anything. I stated that I see what I describe as a clear double standard in film criticism and you decided to try and explain why you think it's acceptable for you and yours to have one. I agree, I'll probably never find the real answers. People will do what they do, make all sorts of statements then hold up the my opinion card. I'm guessing it can't be helped.
