It is currently October 16th 2019 1:41 am




  Page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13
Post Posted: May 17th 2005 7:33 pm
 
what

Join: June 17th 2004 8:59 pm
Posts: 239
mverta wrote:
...and its user, who is the sort of low-life, hate-filled, tea-bag-licking human garbage that would use a symbol of such evil to get off a little cutie on a website is goddamn lucky he's not anywhere near me and a woodchipper.


quick off topic history lesson

http://history1900s.about.com/cs/swastika/a/swastikahistory.htm


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 7:33 pm
 

Join: April 2nd 2005 9:01 pm
Posts: 14
Whoever designed that avatar needs to grow a brain too - because it looks like a Hindu Swastika, not the Nazi one which is angled - so in a way, it's a veiled compliment.

(Unless, of course, that's what it was meant to be - in which case, I retract the brain thing)


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 7:36 pm
 

Join: September 6th 2004 7:03 pm
Posts: 41
cod doc wrote:
asshole i have the right to express myself

ps. i'm not anti american. i'm anti ignorant. fuckhead.

Maybe, but your also human trash.


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 7:44 pm
 
I am Jack's bowel cancer

Join: May 2nd 2005 4:19 pm
Posts: 447
Location: NorCal
Thanks for the history lesson aba, I knew a little bit about the history of that symbol but didn't realize it's use went that far back. In regards to the av, that symbol will mean the same thing for who knows how long. Either you want the attention or you're just ignorant, c'mon man you know you're asking for it with something like that


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 8:03 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 10th 2005 6:55 am
Posts: 158
Location: Los Angeles
That's the point. He's either ignorant, insensitive, or hateful.

Fuckin' pillar of humanity.


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 8:12 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 10th 2005 6:55 am
Posts: 158
Location: Los Angeles
Nobody's arguing his right. Go back to school.


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 8:20 pm
 

Join: January 23rd 2005 6:08 pm
Posts: 94
Don't know if this has been posted yet. If so, sorry. The Onion review (they liked it, with qualifications).

http://www.theonionavclub.com/cinema/in ... e=4120&r=1


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 9:26 pm
 

Join: April 11th 2005 3:23 pm
Posts: 38
Location: Rancho Cucamonga, CA
I see the title of the thread in the index, and find something completly different inside. Weird. :weed:


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 9:30 pm
 
User avatar

Join: April 13th 2005 5:14 pm
Posts: 92
Location: Michigan - West Side
I think a "My Political Standpoint is Better Than Yours, Motherfucker" thread should be put in General Dis or Reservation. That'd be fun.


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 9:46 pm
 

Join: November 17th 2003 2:24 pm
Posts: 40
to each critic his or her own...

but some of the negative reviews i read were appalling , i mean , do they even know that Star Wars movies are not Shakespearian plays?

SW is meant to be cheesy , coz Lucas wanted SW to be a Saturday afternoon matinee- like movie, and obviously these non-fan critics didn't know this.

can u imagine cartoon fans reviewing Shawshank Redemption?

i try not to...

btw Star Wars rules!!!!!!


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 10:31 pm
 

Join: April 3rd 2005 7:06 am
Posts: 21
Mike, I'm going to have to disagree with you on your assessment that a 5/5 review is as absurd as a 0/5 review.

The 0/5 review implies that the acting is of the worst kind, the dialogue is unbearable and laughable, there is no redeeming feature of the story that makes it watch able, the special affects are worse than the variety offered by Ed Wood, the editing makes the movie difficult to follow and the film was accompanied by booing and hissing during it's entirety because the film made you dumber watching it.

However, according to your logic the 5/5 review is equally absurd because it requires perfection. But then what is perfection? What is good dialogue, what is poor dialogue, what is good acting, what is poor acting? I don't think it is simple as saying 'the man' denotes what's good and what is not good. Good is reliant on the eye of the beholder, the critical eye who is reviewing a film. To me there is two ways of looking at it.

The first is film as an art form. The reviewer looks at whether this film pushes the boundary in acting, directing, dialogue, editing, framing and visuals. This approach would never result in a 5/5 score simply because no film can ever do this. Not Citizen Kane, not The Godfather, not Schindler’s List. Each film has revolutionary aspects but each film can also be critiqued on areas of the film which are not performed well.

The second is film as what it offers to the reviewer. This offers a way for the 5/5 review because different reviewers and audience members go into the movie with different expectations and different needs. Some will go in to be intellectually stimulated. Star wars is not the answer, hence a poor score i.e. 2/5. Some will go into the movie with the express intent of looking at the film as an art form. Again Star Wars is not the answer, particularly as the visuals are stressed more than the dialogue and the performances which from an art form perspective are sub par. However, some audience members/reviewers will simply watch and critique a film based purely on whether they enjoy the film.

Neither need is wrong or right particularly as film, to be brutually honest, is the common leveller that can be enjoyed by the elites and the peasants. It is not high art but someway in between it and it's low art brethren.


Post Posted: May 17th 2005 11:44 pm
 

Join: November 10th 2003 6:58 am
Posts: 427
I'm going to have to disagree with you on your assessment that a 5/5 review is as absurd as a 0/5 review.

Yes, look at the distribution. Anthony Lane is WAY out of the mainstream and no where near anybody else with his pitiful 10 on Metacritic. Everyone else is at least a 50! But there are three 90's and four 88's, so the 100 is more reasonable than the 10.


Post Posted: May 18th 2005 8:04 am
 
OBGYN
User avatar

Join: August 25th 2004 12:31 pm
Posts: 3545
NPR's Morning Edition ran a piece about Lucas this morning, and also had Kenneth Turan reading his review.

Audio will be available soon at http://www.npr.org/templates/story/stor ... Id=4655787


Post Posted: May 18th 2005 11:10 am
 
I am Jack's bowel cancer

Join: May 2nd 2005 4:19 pm
Posts: 447
Location: NorCal
Don't know if it's been posted yet (and I wasn't able to grab the article) but the SanFranciso chronicle said they saw revenge of the sith and the force was not with it. :roll:


Post Posted: May 18th 2005 12:28 pm
 

Join: April 24th 2005 8:04 pm
Posts: 50
Entertainment Weekly

Grade: B-

At least Lisa Schwartzbitch didn't review it.


Post Posted: May 18th 2005 1:39 pm
 

Join: May 12th 2005 12:40 am
Posts: 35
Baltimore Sun, Michael Sragow:

"In 'Revenge of the Sith,' George Lucas pulls off a cataclysmic 'Star Wars' masterpiece... The movie's sky-high lift comes from its virtuoso kinetics and from the way Obi-Wan's alertness and sensitivity and Anakin's arrogance shape the combat. McGregor's foreshadowing of Alec Guinness' wry, sagacious older Obi-Wan ranks with De Niro's portrayal of Brando's Don Corleone as a young man in The Godfather Part II. McGregor is superb. He gives Obi-Wan's concern for Padme a loving overlay that provides fuel for Anakin/Darth Vader's jealousy."

4/4 stars.


Post Posted: May 18th 2005 3:43 pm
 

Join: December 30th 2004 7:13 am
Posts: 223
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/programmes/n ... 556085.stm

A link to an interview with GL.


Post Posted: May 18th 2005 5:34 pm
 
User avatar

Join: March 28th 2005 3:59 pm
Posts: 59
BET Gives it 3 1/2 of 4

Very positive. His only complaint is the 'birth of vader' scene. If already posted...then ignore.
bet.com review


Post Posted: May 21st 2005 4:18 pm
 
User avatar

Join: May 19th 2004 1:42 am
Posts: 65
MSNBC at the movies show is on this weekend a whole hour of SW, travers and another critic will be going head to head reviewing the film. :roll:


Post Posted: May 21st 2005 4:42 pm
 
User avatar

Join: May 19th 2004 1:42 am
Posts: 65
Wow, Travers looked like a fucking moron, He run out of bad things to say about it, I mean the guy says, "The only dialogue, I liked in the movie was from Chewie" and he did bring up the kool-aid, "Star Wars fans have give me alot of crap for saying that"

Here's the page of the show vote for SITH they will show the result in next week's show.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6862436/


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
  Page Previous  1 ... 9, 10, 11, 12, 13



Jump to:  




millenniumfalcon.com©
phpBB©