Interstellar (Nolan)

[dimejinky99]

Ummm.... Yeah. I liked it. Convincing parts all round. Amazing and believable space stuff.

But the only thing I'm wondering about

Spoiler: show

can someone please explain the whole inside the black hole / event horizon part? That lost me completely

[dimejinky99]

Let me be first to rank..

1. 2001

2. Contact

3. Interstellar

4. Moon

5. Sunshine

6. Gravity

7. Prometheus

[Rangi Guy]

It disturbs me that people rank 2001 so highly. I hated it so much!

[dimejinky99]

I dont rank it at all, i just wanted to look cool putting in my top ten..

[Rangi Guy]

I dont rank it at all, i just wanted to look cool putting in my top ten..

[E.H. Ruddock]

Contact is a horrible movie

[malice]

Contact is a horrible movie

the first half wasn't bad.

[Dev]

I thought this was ok. Saying it was terrible is laughable. And, so is saying the Ninth Gate is great. If you had to watch one of those movies over and over again for the rest of your life, you would really choose the Ninth Gate? No way. Common, Loathed. Let's get real, bro.

[LoathedVermin72]

I thought this was ok. Saying it was terrible is laughable. And, so is saying the Ninth Gate is great. If you had to watch one of those movies over and over again for the rest of your life, you would really choose the Ninth Gate? No way. Common, Loathed. Let's get real, bro.

This is one of the stupidest posts I've seen in A&E in a while, Dev.

[verb_to_trust]

This movie was dangerously close to 'bad' in my opinion....

[Dev]

I thought this was ok. Saying it was terrible is laughable. And, so is saying the Ninth Gate is great. If you had to watch one of those movies over and over again for the rest of your life, you would really choose the Ninth Gate? No way. Common, Loathed. Let's get real, bro.

This is one of the stupidest posts I've seen in A&E in a while, Dev.

Well, I puked when I read that you liked The Ninth Gate.

[Dev]

We probably do have differing world views, the difference is that I don't demand a movie conform to my world view in order for it to be considered good. I wouldn't call an otherwise fine movie "worst movie ever" just because I disagree with a worldview (if it even actively promotes one or i guess it correctly). Maybe I'm misreading, but it seems you do this ALL THE TIME.

Let me ask you this: would it be an unfair criticism if an atheist watches God’s Not Dead or Heaven is for Real and says it’s a bullshit movie because they don’t buy into its perspective? Perspective is important. Sure, I could go around and just try to make myself into some objective automaton judging movies in an ideological vacuum, ignoring how I feel about society, people, the world, reality, etc. But I have no interest in doing that because movies don’t exist in a vacuum; they’re part of that world.

An individual’s perspective and worldview is what makes them unique, what gives them something to say, and I think those perspectives should be brought to and valued in film criticism and art analysis, not coldly excluded and belittled.

Yeah, but there's a difference in disavowing God's Not Dead because it's retarded, and hating on lot's of the other movies you go after, because they don't jive with your own personal sensibilities, even though they do succeed in conveying a level of truth about humanity (or certain human beings). You're dominated by your personal prejudices, bro. Need to work on becoming more secular and shit.

[nah]

this movie is not emotional. even if you watched it while your wife delivered your first child named murph. sure you feel it when he leaves his daughter crying on the bed and when he cries watching 23 years of videos but it isn't felt throughout this film. when anne hathaway turns into a puddle to explain love being blah blah blah, no one feels it because theres no appropriate lead in. anyone trying to claim this is a theme in the movie is a knee tunes to the 50th power.

new mcconahay is great in this. it's like his pedigree is of deniro or pacino these days.

but why does he enter the teseract at the exact moment and place that he does? why not another point in time. was that explained?

why does anne hathaway have to exemplify exactly why women can't think with their brain?

nasa can't find mcconahay but how fortunate their number 1 star finds them. and their so matter of fact when he shows up. they would have been jumping around like lebron just windmilled from the free throw line. but instead their like 'oh, you're here'

the shots of the clamps trying to secure the air lock was so childish. it lessened the drama. didn't need to see that multiple times because im not 4 and sleep with a teddy.

so i had a lot of issues with this movie except mcconahay and tars. loved them. its a solid b-/c+. i don't mind long movies but this one didn't warrant it for me.

[LoathedVermin72]

they do succeed in conveying a level of truth about humanity (or certain human beings).

Your opinion, not mine. Obviously if I thought a movie was conveying a truth, I wouldn’t blast it for being bullshit. Guess what: what you view as “truth about humanity” is part of your own personal outlook, and not everyone is going to share it, man. Need to work on becoming less solipsistic and shit.

You're dominated by your personal prejudices, bro.

That’s a pretty ironic accusation coming from someone who just said:

Saying it was terrible is laughable. And, so is saying the Ninth Gate is great. If you had to watch one of those movies over and over again for the rest of your life, you would really choose the Ninth Gate? No way. Common, Loathed. Let's get real, bro.

[@SkitchP]

Honest Skitch:

Here's the problem with debating movies with you loathed. I am not saying this to try and be a dick, You use seemingly objective and finite language when critical of a film. You really sound like you know what your talking about a lot of the time. But the second you get called on some of the shit YOU like, you seem to disregard the same things that would bother you in a film you otherwise DIDN'T like, and then hide behind "personal preference." Which of course is always going to be a debate ender, because at the end of the day, no movie is good or bad to an individual if you enjoyed it.

[LoathedVermin72]

But the second you get called on some of the shit YOU like, you seem to disregard the same things that would bother you in a film you otherwise DIDN'T like

Genuine curiosity: can you give me an example of this? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

[LoathedVermin72]

By the way, for the record, I like that you guys are challenging my perspective on film criticism. It encourages self-examination. It's making me think hard about my views on art, and about myself. It's easy to get lost in my comfortable headspace of how I view film and film culture; it's healthy to have some people making counter-arguments.

I just wish we could get straight to the more earnest, nonjudgmental, conversational level this discussion is reaching with certain posters now and skip the intitial phase of reactionary attacks, dismissiveness, and general dickishness.

[@SkitchP]

But the second you get called on some of the shit YOU like, you seem to disregard the same things that would bother you in a film you otherwise DIDN'T like

Genuine curiosity: can you give me an example of this? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

TV writing- you dismiss it because that isnt what interests you, cinematic feel does, but then true detective, you acknowledge the feel, but dismissed it, even though you acknowledged its cinematic feel because you didnt like the writing. But will extole the virtues of Batman and Robin purely because of cinematic feel, where the writing is clearly and universally accepted as being horrific.

Spoiler: show

See, i did it without even mentioning godzilla!

[@SkitchP]

and sorry that sentence is so wonky, i was searching in between sentences to make sure I didn't remember something wrong

[LoathedVermin72]

But the second you get called on some of the shit YOU like, you seem to disregard the same things that would bother you in a film you otherwise DIDN'T like

Genuine curiosity: can you give me an example of this? I'm not sure what you're referring to.

TV writing- you dismiss it because that isnt what interests you, cinematic feel does, but then true detective, you acknowledge the feel, but dismissed it, even though you acknowledged its cinematic feel because you didnt like the writing. But will extole the virtues of Batman and Robin purely because of cinematic feel, where the writing is clearly and universally accepted as being horrific.

Spoiler: show

See, i did it without even mentioning godzilla!

I see what you’re saying. But individual films and TV shows can be good or bad for many reasons. My complaints about TV not feeling cinematic were complaints about the zeitgeist of television in a larger sense; I was suggesting it wasn’t in any kind of golden age and wasn’t measuring up to film because, generally speaking, it lacks the visual/atmospheric refinement of film. It’s a writer’s medium, whereas film is a director’s medium.

That said, that doesn’t mean I’m not going to criticize bad writing when I see it; identifying a large, general problem with the zeitgeist doesn’t mean that it can be the only valid problem with an individual work. TD got the visual element down, but still suffered from other problems. It broke the biggest general problem with the zeitgeist, but still has its own issues regardless of that.

And I think B&R’s writing is germane to its tone and intentions – it’s silly and dumb. The whole movie is meant to be silly and dumb.

Spoiler: show

And thanks! You’re a class act, Skitch.