|
WARS; WHAT IS IT GOOD FOR?
The hate mail for Walter's review of Star Wars: Episode II - Attack of the Clones kept apace even after we published his last words (and, we thought, yours) on the subject in last month's special edition of Reader Mail, "Attack of the Drones." Here are a couple of favourites--as with last time, unabridged and uncorrected:
Dear Walt, I really think you had the absolutely worst review in all time. Star Wars Episode was an excellent film, in which charm and romance take a place. Things like "It's screenplay serves as an auto-critique, and it's clumsiness as it's most damning censure." You know, What The FUCK? I think the monsters and actors all served their parts. The movie turned out wonderfully. I especially liked the stunning special effects. I will give you something though, Episode One Sucked bad. Plz reply!!!
Sincerely, DJPHILL7
Thanks for the chuckle. -Walter
I am sure in the circles you run in there is a certain amount of status that comes from raising yourself above the vulgar masses and writing a particularly scathing review of something as widely loved as Star Wars. It is possible that intentionally exagerated in order to get a response, if so I think you are kind of funny. But the melodramatic anger that you direct toward the film borders on the ridiculous. Your review reminds me a little of a kindergarten child whose birthday party isn't going as they had hoped. I think if you are honest with yourself you can admit that the movie isn't that bad. I am a fan, but I can admit that the two newer episodes don't truly stand on their own as films, even the Jedi was a little weak as a film. But there is a larger story that Lucas is trying to deal with and that is the real magic of the Star Wars universe. Save the vitriol for when you find your boyfriend in bed with another woman.
Chris
Wally, Do you purposely try to use B.I.G. (Blatantly Incompetent Gasbaging) words in your reviews to compensate for something else? This is the B.I.G.-est P.O.S. (that's "Piece of Shit"-Sherlock) review that it's been my misfortune to ever read. Do you bring your thesaurus to the theater with you? What a cacophony of multi syllabic diatribe. (see bold...anyone can type blather) You write like someone still trying to impress his 85 year old English teacher in community kollege. (it's a "K" on purpose Wally) Lets guess your age....26+- Anyone not old enough to see/understand "A New Hope" shouldn't be allowed to review any of the Star Wars trilogy thereafter...but I guess everyone is entitled to their opinion...but your entire AotC review is completely condescending and is devoid of any true merit. Stick to reviewing I.F.C. and Sundance movies you arrogant POS. Pseudo intellectual real world dummies like you seem completely oblivious to the real meaning of the original trilogy and Sci-fi movies in general. Star Wars IV-VI was never intended to be a trend setter in acting, screen writing or story line. It was always about tension, action and continuity. Good vs. evil a new concept? NO. Get over your self.
Tony
Talk about ignorant, Tony. You come in here weeks and weeks after the fact with this thing? Read the hate mail section for Episode II that we have posted--we've already responded to you and your kind, mate. And we've already predicted nearly every word of this letter. Yawn. Consider that how you choose to defend something reflects on that which you seek to defend. When you have a minute, swing by our reviews of Spider-Man, Fellowship of the Ring, and Blade II--let's see how your IFC/Sundance theory holds up. You really need to try to figure out why it is that Episode II is the only blockbuster we've reviewed negatively this summer. -Walter
Wally, Lets break this down. I give your review of SW AotC 1/4 stars. To start, I could care less if Lucas thanked me, held a parade in my honor, or hand delivered a bouqutte of white roses to me or not. I wasn't defending his work as much as I was showing my utter disgust with yours. Point#1 How is it ignorant to respond to something two weeks after the fact? hmmm..let us think.... Answer: Considering I go to movies when I want to, and I just saw SW AotC at my leisure, it's not. Your point much like you review is moot. If you don't want people to respond to your reviews, go to your webmaster and have him remove the link to your e-mail. If not, STFU and have some cheese with your whine. Point#2 If indeed I am ignorant, why bother responding? Answer: See point one Wally. Really think hard about it. But don't pop a vessel. Point3# If you would have reviewed AotC with the same honesty and unedited opinion that you have presented below, instead of that putrid spew of Roget's horseshit (seriously, did think of that angle or did your editor put a gun to your head) maybe I would have not even written all this. Your "review" sucked not your opinion but your written presentation of it. Your style is awful and I'll pass on reading anymore of your reviews as I have just had dinner and I don't want to barf it up. point#4 "And we've already predicted nearly every word of this letter" Tells me you knew your review sucked prior to it's release and did it for one of two reasons shock value, boredom or stupidity. Oh! That's one of three reasons-my bad. Remove one (your choice) I don't care which one. "we've already responded to you and your kind, mate" Is that supposed to be an insult?? Mate??? Who says mate?? God, don't tell me your Australian. The fact that your site will even except money from advertisers/double-click.net for related merchandise on the same page as the review shows you/your web site has ZERO ethics or integrity. I should have stopped reading when I saw them. I'll take the hit for that error. Jesus, no wonder dot-coms are vanishing faster than shit down a toilet. It's also no wonder web sites are begging for paypal donations. I Seriously, hope they are paying you for those reviews by the syllable. Print that. Nuf' said-
Tony
My turn: I don't think the integrity of Film Freak Central is at stake here--we print these reader diatribes, after all, when we could assume a position of unchallenged authority. In fact, selling merchandise in conjunction with a film that we panned tilts closer on the scale towards integrity than lack thereof, as we could just as easily praise every movie up and down for the sake of encouraging revenue. STFU to you, too, in other words, Tony. -Bill
THE LAST WORD?
I watched Star Wars II last weekend. I must agree with your review, all your points reverbate with what I experienced when I watched the film. There is no way around it, the film is "trash". Unfortunately, maybe because I am part of the generation that grew up with Star Wars (1977), I feel compelled to watch the film again and/or purchase the dvd when it comes out. I guess that is an evil curse that has been bestowed upon the fans.... Putting this trash out is not only ruining the franchise, it also seems evil, as if Lucas' own dark side is coming out. Especially when he knows there is a ready market for this.
David
"COMPANY" MAN
Re: Your review of Bad Company. What were you thinking? One of the worst of the year? You never saw Snow Dogs, did you? Anyway, zero stars, whatever. I saw this movie Monday night in Washington D.C. and enjoyed it very much. I know of several people who did as well. Even the big critic in Washington D.C. gave it 2.5 stars out of 4. Rock and Hopkins working together comes out really well on screen. I didn't find anything in the movie far-fetched (cough, Sum of All Fears) and it wasn't all action and little plot like most Bruckheimer movies.
Michael
Nice to have studio spies and all that, but come one now, who do you think you're fooling? -Walter
LOVE LETTERS IN THE SAND
MAY I SAY SOMETHING???? Well, im gonna say it anyway. Ive been readin up on some of my favoritwe films at rotten tomatoes, and you seem to have given them bad reviews!!!! Well Walter, I could let you off easy w/ some of that "matter of opinion" stuff, but thats just b-s. You, and the paper you write for, SUCK!!!!! thats all i have to say goodbye, Walter
Connery71
ENOUGH'S ENOUGH
Hey, read your review of Enough. I couldn't agree more! It even made me laugh at some points. I hope J Lo and the producers read it. The movie was such rip-off trash! You pointed out many of the flaws that I guess some people just don't pick up on. Besides it being such a sick twisted look on life and the people around you, that is. Sooooo shallow. Shallower than Hal! :) Have a nice day.
Mike
Any critic who mercilessly destroys Enough *and* the latest Lucas cash grab in words of more than two syllables is in the running to become my new god. Keep up the good work,
CjO'C
I BRUCE EASILY
I watched [Lenny] last night; I saw this when it first came out and I couldn't recall my opinion of it. I clearly remember all the nudity and drugs but I could not recall my feelings regarding Hoffman's portrayal. Sadly after viewing I would characterize the effort as more of a betrayal. Now seeing it years later Hoffman's performance is not even remotely evocative of Lenny Bruce. It is like Al Jolson in blackface. Valerie is wonderful, Surtees' cinematography is masterful, the jazz music is elemental and erotic. There is so much rhythmic energy in Fosse's direction that it is downright painful to watch Hoffman bumble and stumble with the possibilities of syncopation. Lenny Bruce was as fluid and rthymic as a horn player and Hoffman is such a casper milquetoast that what is essential about Lenny, his delivery, is missing. I love the site and greedily read both you and Walter. You guys are eloquent and precise, thanx for all the powerful verbiage.
Michael
Thanks for the kind words on our writing; couldn't agree with you more about Hoffman's performance, which only seems to work if you've never been exposed to the real deal. -Bill
GET SOME SLEEP
Your reputation (re: Insomnia): What does it say about a film critic, when he dislikes a film, that all the other film critics like? Is he 'smarter' than the others? ....or 'dumber'?....maybe much dumber. maybe not in raw intelligence, but certainly in the 'applied' variety. It's his 'Achilles heel'. Credibility, which is all you have, really,...... takes a nose dive. Is your "critics reputation" better off afterwards......or worse.?
"RIGHT" OR WRONG?
Mr. Chaw: I'd like to respond to your review of All the Right Moves. I certainly don't think it's a great movie, but much of your criticism of it is just wrongheaded. In particular, your discussion of the film's treatment of race, class, and gender issues is way off. I didn't think the film was that hard to understand, but since you had some trouble, here goes.
The movie is basically the story of Stef's (ultimately successful) struggle to improve himself; to become educated and successful without betraying his class; to become an enlightened man in spite of the preponderance of neanderthal role models in his community. Sure, it's riddled with cliches, but the film has a good heart and presents some positive messages. You write it's "a film whose female contribution is essentially that of decorative ornament or dead mother martyr." Lea Thompson is not good actress, but her character is important and positive in the way she educates Stef. She is not an ornament at all. You also write: "All the Right Moves has an unhealthy obsession with how black athletes can dance a lot better than their white teammates. It's one thing to portray a less tolerant time in a less tolerant place, it's another to wallow with nary a hint of irony or self-awareness." The film tries to show how the people of Ampipe are united by class, and how that is much more important than their racial and ethnic differences. The "dancing" scene in the locker room did make me cringe, but you really overstate your point.
The following makes me wonder if you actually watched the movie: "It isn't even as though the picture were entirely innocuous: its casual insensitivity to women and minorities (two white kids get scholarships to college, no black kids even talk about the possibility) is unwise to excuse as a cultural artifact." In the party scene near the end of the movie, the black character Shadow proclaims, "I got into West Virginia!" At which point Stef mentions that he always wanted to go there. At another point, Stef rattles off a list of schools that his team mates--black and white--will be attending. If anything, the film could be criticized for being too PC, for self-consciously avoiding every stereotype. For example: a white guy knocks up his girlfriend; a white guy turns to crime in desperation; the star quarterback is a black guy; the star defensive back is a white guy.
The performances are certainly uneven, but Craig T. Nelson is excellent and really steals the movie, which is why, I assume, he got his own series based on the character. Your comment that Coach Nickerson is "Bobby Knight-abusive in a way that makes R. Lee Ermey's drill instructor from Full Metal Jacket look like a girl scout" is cute and clever, but wrong. You are right about the soundtrack, but that's about it. The messages of the film are neither lazy nor feckless if you are actually paying attention. Finally, I thought the film was very well photographed. Jan de Bont may be a horrible hack of a director, but his work has never lacked "production value" as you say.
Randall
IT GROO ON US
As Groo is the only comic book stacked on the waiting room tables at FFC HQ, we were honoured to receive feedback from illustrious Groo fans regarding Walter's review of The Scorpion King.
 Walter, fun review. Glad you didn't pull any punches. As a Groo fan (groop@groo.com) I especially enjoyed your references to my favorite stupid barbarian. You've become the talk of our list. I don't think the references will get me to go see the film though.
Chris
Thanks for the great review of The Scorpion King. I might have rented it (I guess in a couple weeks!) if not for such a thoroughly damning review like yours. (I have very low standards. I thought 13th Warrior was great.) And I can't stand the WWF. I'm glad someone had the nerve to mention the homoerotic angle! About the only positive thing I can say about it is I guess it gives a lot of work to overgrown stuntmen. BUT! The real reason I'm writing is to thank you for all the Groo References!! I am pretty much the biggest Groo fan on the planet (even Sergio says so) and me and my fellow Groo fanatics appreciate all references to Groo in the "outside world." If you ever need a Groo fix, new adventures are still being published periodically by Dark Horse Comics. Same fabulous art, great writing, and bumbling barbarian. Take care,
Gary G.
P.S.: You are now my favorite movie critic.
P.P.S.: I'm 47 years old, I have a job, I've been married for 25 years and have three very successful kids, so I'm not a "get-a-life" comic geek. But Groo turned into a wonderfully fun hobby not just because it's so good, but also because Sergio, Mark Evanier & Co. are just great, great guys, and thanks to e-mail I have "Groo Friends" all over the world.
Walter, I just read your Scorpion King review. I was led there from the Groo-based group discussion mailing list. I saw The Scorpion King movie this past Friday, opening night. Your review was dead-on, [the movie was] camp city out and out. But then again, what did you expect? It was "The Rock", not Vin Diesel or anyone else with credibility to them. Vin Diesel as a barbarian... That could have potential. Of course, how would we justify his accent?!? Your Groo references were well placed. When I saw the "Falling" scene on the big screen, I did not think necessarily Groo, but the look on The Rock's face was just the same. I did not think the movie was the worst thing to come out this year so far, but then again, my expectations were low going into the theater. I have come to realize that my liking a movie depends on my expectations going into it. Since Star Wars: Episode I came out, I have lowered my Hollywood expectations to very low. It was nice reading your review, keep up the good journalistic work.
Jeff
You can send e-mail to a specific Film Freak Central critic from any of the review pages. (Click the swinging chrome "e-mail" graphic.) Please address general correspondence to bill@filmfreakcentral.net
Letters selected for publication may be edited for length and content.
|
|
dvd reviews: