racketboy.com

Retrodude wrote:

Ack wrote:But you also come off as a pompous windbag.

If that's so, then I apologize, but I have little tolerance for people who think that because of some aspect of their lives (money, education, profession, what have you), they're somehow better than the rest of us. All I'm trying to say is that just because someone thinks they're important, that doesn't make it so.

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SmallNameBigEgo

But before you go insulting them for what they've got, maybe you should consider that at least some of them have taken the time and the effort to do the research and the work to be able to do this. A critic doesn't become a critic overnight, he or she spends years watching and analyzing film, putting thoughts together into coherent statements, seeking an education in the history and artistry. Yes, some do come off as pompous, while others come off as comical, endearing, academic, or at least interested in examining the innerworkings of a film.

Eventually they will find something they dislike and either trash it or misjudge it, based on their current educations, the prevalant theories and research at the time, personal opinion, and so on. This will happen in any circle as certain styles come and go, new techniques are developed, and new theories on the examination of artistry are formed. At the time of its release, The Wizard of Oz was found wanting, but now it's considered a classic. In fifty years, Transformers might be considered some kind of technical darling. Plus, these guys are only human, and they watch films in the thousands. Not only modern works, but classics of various stripes, international films, all manner of genre works, art films, cult hits, etc. You have to give them a little credit. I've seen about 1600 unique films in my life. If I'm lucky, that's 1/10 of what Ebert saw before he died.

And if you disagree with them, that's fine. You might stop and consider their arguments for why a particular film works or does not and then compare these against your own thoughts. The impact or emotional resonance of a movie may be very different for two people. But you at least have to give them credit for sinking the amount of time and thought into their profession that they have.

Oh, and another thing about you and Luke. Yes, he's pompous and arrogant at times. So are you. But Luke has spent the time to do what he does, and I guarantee he's had his chops busted more than once, just as we all have. He's also a good guy to know or at least consider the opinion of, just as Ds, Pulsar, Fastbilly, and all the other guys here are. And if you plan to create films, you might at least consider what arguments they are making about quality film work, pacing, character development, cinematography, etc.. Simply considering their arguments can only help to improve your work by causing you to focus on those areas, even if you disagree!

And yes, Twilight was really bad, but I could point you to something worse! Twilight's sequel.

I think yall should differentiate between a Critic and a Reviewer. That might clear up some of the issues here. To me a Critic is like what Ack just described where as a Reviewer is any joe schmo. While both have merits, I am far more likely to listen to a Critic, especially if he is voiced by Jon Lovitz.

Though if you want to move into talking about film production we should parse that out into another thread. And I know a good lot of books to read if you want more knowledge on the subject.

MrPopo wrote:

fastbilly1 wrote:

Luke wrote:When a production company commissions you to give a review of a movie, get back to me. But for now, please hush it and don't call critics arrogant and say they don't have a real job.

But you are arrogant

Luke's arrogant, but not because he's a critic.

I prefer Cocky: Arrogant, esp. in a bold or cheeky way: but fair is fair.

Luke wrote:I prefer Cocky: Arrogant, esp. in a bold or cheeky way: but fair is fair.

Wrong. The correct term is "honest".

Ack wrote:if you plan to create films, you might at least consider what arguments they are making about quality film work, pacing, character development, cinematography, etc.. Simply considering their arguments can only help to improve your work by causing you to focus on those areas, even if you disagree!

Point taken. If for no other reason than because it's my first and I lack previous filmmaking experience, when I finish the film I'm working on now, I fully expect that most people will tell me it sucks and that's fine. If they go into detail on why it sucks, I can take their comments into consideration when I make my second film. This being the internet, though, I imagine that most people won't do that, they'll just insult me and move on. Oh well.

Ack wrote:Oh, and another thing about you and Luke. Yes, he's pompous and arrogant at times. So are you. But Luke has spent the time to do what he does, and I guarantee he's had his chops busted more than once...

At times it feels like studio heads (rarely ever writers) intend on punting my balls clear off my being. I never intend on being a killjoy, but when asked for my opinion, I'm going to give it, 100%. And my opinion doesn't come with a "If you don't like it, shove it up your beehive" I just give the straight dope as best as possible.

Retrodude wrote: This being the internet, though, I imagine that most people won't do that, they'll just insult me and move on. Oh well.

I guarantee I would give you a thorough and honest review of your short film.

Retrodude wrote:

Ack wrote:if you plan to create films, you might at least consider what arguments they are making about quality film work, pacing, character development, cinematography, etc.. Simply considering their arguments can only help to improve your work by causing you to focus on those areas, even if you disagree!

Point taken. If for no other reason than because it's my first and I lack previous filmmaking experience, when I finish the film I'm working on now, I fully expect that most people will tell me it sucks and that's fine. If they go into detail on why it sucks, I can take their comments into consideration when I make my second film. This being the internet, though, I imagine that most people won't do that, they'll just insult me and move on. Oh well.

Well, I would hope you consider people's comments on filmmaking before you start, haha! But relax. Yes, your first film may be terrible. Heck, your first ten might be terrible. Who knows? But if you at least try to learn from each one, then you can only get better. And even if your first, second, or third film is a hit, learn from it and move on. And ask the critics. You don't necessarily have to worry about the masses who haven't put in the time that the critics have to contemplate these things, but I'm certain the folks who have spent years analysing these things will give you the same fair shake they try to give everything.

Usually when I think of promotions for THE MAN OF STEEL I think about a Cavill placard frowning on me for not purchasing Twizzlers.

The most obvious tie-in totally sneaked by me and perhaps others: It's released on Father's Day weekend. There are very strong Father and Son ties in the movie and *boom* it just hit me; perfect way to spend time with your Father on Father's Day would be to see MAN OF STEEL together. And that way, you can spend time together without all that overrated "talking" nonsense.

A dollar short and a day late I am. I would have even launched a bogo offer for Father and sons.

Loved it.