Recently Viewed Films - Reviewed

Im pleading with you, for the love of god, can we please stop with the rating system?

They are USELESS. There is no objective way of giving a rating that everybody will/should agree with. Even if reviews were polled, and an average found, then extreme reactions to films such as Anti-Christ (which il remind you Casey acted all offended and pretentious when he found out the gentleman at Total Film didnt like...) or Twilight will throw it completely out of whack. However, words and opinions cannot be perceived in the same way, and not vulnerable to attack in the same way that a star system is.

It is a way for a MAGAZINE like Empire or Total Film to give a review that canbe splashed across a dvd cover or poster and earns the mag a few extra quid. The format is a very very simplistic way of conveying what the reviewer thought the film worth. If you look at any more civilised film reviews, say from Sight and Sound, Film Comment or the like, they dont resrt to any of the star systems. Now im not saying that these articles are superior, indeed they are often slightly pretentious, however after reading their review i find that i have a much greater idea of their opinion than i do when, for example Empire gives a film a soliary star.

Furthermore, and opinion i already stated is that for the whole, a reviewer (yes, on these here forums) may be biased towards a film they particularly enjoyed, rating the experience they had whilst watching the film, rather than the quality of the film itself. For example, Metropolis. Major had such an extreme reaction to the film, he awarded it a full 10/10. (While i have never seen Metropolis, so cant really comment, im using it for an example) This is FINE, however, is he reviewing his experience of watching it, and judging his personal experience, or the quality of all aspects of the film? A film wherby the narrative is not complete, and after only 1 watch the themes can surely not be even slightly explored (10 watch's guys...). No ratings system in the world can deal with the amount of opinion and debate that can be drawn up by film (part of the reason why so many of us love it so) and this blunt instrument of a 5/5 or a 10/10 certainly cant.

I've completely lost all respect for the rating system, i suggest we ll take the time to write at least a 3 sentence review of the film than choose to tarnish the intellectuality of the Interhood, and indeed, Major, GDF, Seany, Casey (and everyone) you all watch very intelligent, intellectual, brillina tbrilliant films, yet you choose to review them in such a sloppy manner?

Im never using the rating system again, either on here, or in the articles i contribute to the uni magazine, and like, i dont think you should either.

Let's just stop using words in our reviews too as people may disagree with them and we don't want to offend our 15 member community.

Don't take it too seriously Brasco mate. I always put a rough score because I understand the majority won't want to plough through a review, and I know myself I don't always have the time to read a full review. As for me getting all 'pretentious' about the Antichrist review, eh? Bit puzzled here man. I find it a bit derogatory and insulting to be called pretentious, as I simply said I didn't agree. That's all there is to it, at the end of the day: opinion. I may sometimes over-exaggerate a point, but that's just a part of the online construction of myself I suppose.

Im sorry if i appear to be coming across serious, or offensive or whatever, its just that it annoys me when people think thatputting a score is as vald as writing a sentence. Its like a definitative judgement and its mental.

And Seany, lets not be all dicky about this, its a genuine debate across all areas of critical journalism.

Dangly's Last Post - 4/10

Yeah, I get what you were trying to get at Brasco, and you raise some good points. If it's any consolation, whenever I review things for websites or whatever I don't spend too long thinking about the score, otherwise it is just to difficult to figure out. If the review quality is good, I have no quirks with a score at the end. That Antichrist review, however, was a genuinely poorly written review, which is why I remember having a problem with it.

Daaamn, I miss good ol' forum debate. May come along here more often now I'm not a fucking wreck anymore! Ahahaha.

We could use the activity.

Hey, i remember fair enoug you genuinely having a problem with the review, he WAS a biased dickhead, (probably a religious nut...) and i didnt mean to offend, simply using it to illustrate my point.

Ultimately, everyne uses the system, and i shall complain no more, was in a bad mood when i wrote that, and had had a similar argument atthe pub with a course mate, i was just empassioned at the time.

Have we really only got a 15 member community? Wow.

Feels more like a 5 member one.

Adaptation (Second time) - 8/10

Kaufman is a genius.

Did you ever see Synecdoche New York?

And Cold Souls, the new film starring Paul Giamatti feels an awful like Eternal Sunshine by way of Being John Malkovich, i strongly reccomend it. If Giamatti doesnt at least get a handful of Nominations for it, there should be some kind of demonstration.

Saying that, we all know Nine is gonna clean up at next years oscars.

Dude, we had a big discussion about it at the start of this thread!

Alas, indeed. I forget these things.

A Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy (2005).

A pretty brillaint adaption of the undoubtedly brilliant source material. Perfect casting of Martin Freeman (who, after viewing the Office and this in a short space of time has convince me, he doesnt get enough work...) as Arthur. Zooey Deschanel is like, very hot indeed and Sam Rockwell puts in an always effortlessly astonishing performance. I giggled like a child through alot of it, very worht watching.

I found Hitchikers Guide to be terribly underrated

Edit: The whales final thoughts as it plumets to the ground never ceases to make me laugh and feel a little bit sad after.

Brasco wrote:A Hitchikers Guide to the Galaxy (2005).

A pretty brillaint adaption of the undoubtedly brilliant source material. Perfect casting of Martin Freeman (who, after viewing the Office and this in a short space of time has convince me, he doesnt get enough work...) as Arthur. Zooey Deschanel is like, very hot indeed and Sam Rockwell puts in an always effortlessly astonishing performance. I giggled like a child through alot of it, very worht watching.

AYT OWT OF TEN

I was disappointed by the film tbh. The book is so, so much better.

Yeah, the book is vastly superior, but the film captures the spirit and tone of the books well, no doubt.

Hmm, oh well. Film came across as a very mediocre attempt for me. 5/10 material.

Hellboy looks fucking CRISP in Blu Ray, so colourful and vibrant it's superb eye candy and the character of Hellboy is a great badass protagonist. We all know the badass protagonist can fall flat on his face if a film doesn't age well or the people making think he's a badass but he's just an obnoxious douchebag but this guy could duke it out with Ash from the Evil Dead series, Solid Snake and other great badasses no problem. The art design is generally typically Del Toro so if you've seen Pan's Labyrinth you might get Deja Vu but the characters are unique and bring their own character to the film. The special effects can look tacky in certain segments but I'm sure it was top notch in '04. The plot isn't teriffic, you watch it for Hellboy and the action but it's easy to follow and has a nice beginning, middle and end. Angsty firegirl side character almost kills it but overall decent entertainm,ent and I look forwards to acquiring the sequel.

3/5

Hellboy II is far better than the original imo. And I agree with the Pan's Labyrinth thing. I actually have to rewatch that. Its been a while, and it really is a fucking awesome movie.

Zombieland

Far more entertaining than I expected it to be/10

GIVE ME A NUMBER OUT OF TEN, I NEED A NUMBER TO GO WITH THE REVIEW!

Schoolboy error, Major.

He's going along with Dangly's 'ratings are worthless' thing.

American Werewolf In London - 4/5

Not really, I did the same thing with Star Trek. Both are very entertaining, but defy being rated as the overall quality doesn't match the shallow fun value.

Essentially it's somewhere between 6 and 8.