Jump to content

TearsInRain

Members
  • Posts

    273
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by TearsInRain

  1. It amazes me that people think reviews are worth so much. I read reviews too, but it doesn't change my will to see a movie. Everybody in that discussion is getting mad over it. I'm not saying expressing your opinion at a forum is useless, but to go mad about it like that. Just a waste of your time...You either enjoy it or you don't and you can discuss the good/bad things with other people and just keep it nice and fun and all.

     

    I like to keep my reviews short and sweet.

     

    Like for example, i think Battlefield Earth is a piece of shit.

     

    I know that's intended as funny and I did laugh but it made me think about how lazy we've become as a society. We now discount or approve of any art (not that all movies are) by quick witted catch phrases or a part of our anatomy raised or lowered. As if there is nothing in between.

     

    I remember Lynch's Dune when it came out and how Lynch had spent like 3 years trying to do something different. He certainly was not trying to make a bad movie. When it came out it was quickly disregarded as crap - worthless crap - not even a discussion of what might have actually worked or not. Same with Ston's Alexandra this last year. And I thought - wow, what it must feel like to have all your effort, all your hours, dreams and passions just trashed by some thoughtless 'slacker's smart ass line. The reviewer couldn't even find it in themselves to put out an ounce of effort in regarding another person's life work. It's Rome all over again but we're not feeding them to lions, we're chewing them up the public eye.

     

    It's laziness and total disrespect and it's meant to give a 'coolness' factor to the reviewer who "just didn't have the time to expend any more words to this POS." It's like those who stick their noses in the air when TV shows are mentioned. "Oh I don't watch TV." We have become a snob society of lazy critics that all believe we can do a better job if given the chance, which is so easy to claim because no one is ever going to hand the reins over to anything worthy in this world. We have to work hard to get that chance and by the time we do, we should be thankful and possibly overwhelmed and we'll work our ass off to prove the critics wrong and create something memorable only to see our creation shot down by the now classis lazy reviewer's most concise review -- IT SUCKED.

  2. The Cinemafasntique (how do you spell that??) on Constantine just hot the stands. Five or page article with mostly the two writers and a bit with Francis. Then a nice piece on the composer. Sounds like the writers at least had read the material and even shot for a english JC.

  3. Okay, okay, will stop playing the cynical bastard for one moment to say something extremely nice about Keanu because i know he is looking at this and beaming with pride and joy.

     

    When Keanu doesn't work in movies, he works in a Cancer Research shop where he sells second-hand thriftshop clothes and researches the lymphatic tumours of cancerous lungs, breasts and testicles between the hours of 9am and 5pm two days a week.

     

    huh?

    I'm missing the hidden message in this post...ah well...I'm a blonde

     

    YOU should have played JC!!

  4. Song is forgettable but the idea was pretty clever since we never see where Angela goes when she's drowned. The video does give you an idea of the mood of the film, the pacing, the way it's taken very seriously. And John even shows a bit of his humanitarian - non asshole - side even in this video clip.

  5. Welcome to the forums fuji.   :biggrin:

     

    Thanks. Sad to see the movie getting trashed the way it is. A friend saw the film a few weeks ago in LA and almost said the same thing that most of the reviews were saying. Rachel Weisz stole the movie, Keanu was crap and the movie is not Hellblazer.

     

    The bad thing about that was the fact that he told me that Shia LaBeouf gets killed during the end of the film which does suck because i kind of like him.

     

    Where in LA did he see the movie and how did he get in?

     

    He works for a marketing group out there and got in because they were invited to the screening by some of the people who work for Warner brothers. He does business with them on certain projects.

     

     

    Did he happen to sit in a theater with a test screening crowd? From the reactions to 4 screenings, the audience response was overwhelmingly positive.

     

    By the way sarcasm is a lost art here. My post above was intended as such. Aw.. who the fuck cares anyway... Just to recap - negative reviews are always correct, positive ones are always plants. And people in the industry who see and critique those films of their competition are always unbiased with no malcontent intended.

     

    He went to a private screening that was held on the studio lot. He also said that some of the executives were badmouthing the movie as well. One said that Keanu was a bad choice for the role and another said that the movie would had been much better off if it just focused on the main female character and just completely cut out the comic book connection to the film, because it would have been cheaper to go with the female lead instead of Keanu and she was a better character than he was. Many agreed that a sixth sense approach to the film with a strong female character (They really liked Rachel Weisz and her character) would had been a much better movie than it was now and some of them were quite angry on how it all turn out. At that time, they also said that the producers had to cut the film themselves because they did not like the directors cut of the film and made the director and some of the cast redo a lot of the scenes in the movie.

     

    Wow, this is news to me... They took the film from Francis. Hmmm... wonder if he knows that. And I wonder which execs these were because I'll lay odds NONE of them were there when this film started development there. Man sounds like when the execs were so angry at that kid Lucas when he turned in those crappy movies American Graffetii and that other stupid sci fi film of his - what was it, Star Wars? "Why doesn't the gold robot's mouth move when he talks?" Execs bad mouthing films they had nothing to do with is something I've never ever heard of. Great job security no matter what happens, Why is this review of a review even being considered is beyond me. It comes from Warners, about Warners, so why are we believing it? Oh, because it's negative... right....

     

    If you’re going to get that bent out of shape over what someone said, then you have major problems. I hope the movie is better than what I was told and what I’m reading so far but i'm not crying over every bad review like you are. If you don’t like the reviews posted then don’t read them. No one should get that upset over a review.

     

    You're new here, you don;t understand my role as the town crier. I take it very seriously, thank you. Now back to your board game. Jump two pieces and crown me.

  6. Welcome to the forums fuji.   :biggrin:

     

    Thanks. Sad to see the movie getting trashed the way it is. A friend saw the film a few weeks ago in LA and almost said the same thing that most of the reviews were saying. Rachel Weisz stole the movie, Keanu was crap and the movie is not Hellblazer.

     

    The bad thing about that was the fact that he told me that Shia LaBeouf gets killed during the end of the film which does suck because i kind of like him.

     

    Where in LA did he see the movie and how did he get in?

     

    He works for a marketing group out there and got in because they were invited to the screening by some of the people who work for Warner brothers. He does business with them on certain projects.

     

     

    Did he happen to sit in a theater with a test screening crowd? From the reactions to 4 screenings, the audience response was overwhelmingly positive.

     

    By the way sarcasm is a lost art here. My post above was intended as such. Aw.. who the fuck cares anyway... Just to recap - negative reviews are always correct, positive ones are always plants. And people in the industry who see and critique those films of their competition are always unbiased with no malcontent intended.

     

    He went to a private screening that was held on the studio lot. He also said that some of the executives were badmouthing the movie as well. One said that Keanu was a bad choice for the role and another said that the movie would had been much better off if it just focused on the main female character and just completely cut out the comic book connection to the film, because it would have been cheaper to go with the female lead instead of Keanu and she was a better character than he was. Many agreed that a sixth sense approach to the film with a strong female character (They really liked Rachel Weisz and her character) would had been a much better movie than it was now and some of them were quite angry on how it all turn out. At that time, they also said that the producers had to cut the film themselves because they did not like the directors cut of the film and made the director and some of the cast redo a lot of the scenes in the movie.

     

    Wow, this is news to me... They took the film from Francis. Hmmm... wonder if he knows that. And I wonder which execs these were because I'll lay odds NONE of them were there when this film started development there. Man sounds like when the execs were so angry at that kid Lucas when he turned in those crappy movies American Graffetii and that other stupid sci fi film of his - what was it, Star Wars? "Why doesn't the gold robot's mouth move when he talks?" Execs bad mouthing films they had nothing to do with is something I've never ever heard of. Great job security no matter what happens, Why is this review of a review even being considered is beyond me. It comes from Warners, about Warners, so why are we believing it? Oh, because it's negative... right....

  7. Welcome to the forums fuji.   :biggrin:

     

    Thanks. Sad to see the movie getting trashed the way it is. A friend saw the film a few weeks ago in LA and almost said the same thing that most of the reviews were saying. Rachel Weisz stole the movie, Keanu was crap and the movie is not Hellblazer.

     

    The bad thing about that was the fact that he told me that Shia LaBeouf gets killed during the end of the film which does suck because i kind of like him.

     

    Where in LA did he see the movie and how did he get in?

     

    He works for a marketing group out there and got in because they were invited to the screening by some of the people who work for Warner brothers. He does business with them on certain projects.

     

     

    Did he happen to sit in a theater with a test screening crowd? From the reactions to 4 screenings, the audience response was overwhelmingly positive.

     

    By the way sarcasm is a lost art here. My post above was intended as such. Aw.. who the fuck cares anyway... Just to recap - negative reviews are always correct, positive ones are always plants. And people in the industry who see and critique those films of their competition are always unbiased with no malcontent intended.

  8. http://www.superherohype.com/review.php

     

    Here is a review of Constantine that was just posted at Superhero hype. Unlike Ain't it Cool News, this sounds legit:

     

    Jess

    date posted: 24-01-2005  Rating 3/10

     

    Keanu Reeves plays John Constantine, a cross between Same Spade and Repairman Jack from the F. Paul Wilson novels. He deals with all kinds of supernatural occurrences all around Los Angeles. He builds a kind of reputation that is only heard in whispers and rumors and he's quite known for being in the wrong place at the wrong time. Enter Angela Dodson (Rachel Weisz) who needs his help with the mysterious suicide of her twin sister who jump off the roof of the mental hospital she was staying in. She believes that there is more to it than it seems and wants Constantine to help her figure it out. So they both embark on a investigation that includes half breed demons strait out of episodes of Buffy and Angel, angels that look way too asexual for words and the devil himself, who looks like he just got back from gambling trip in Atlantic City. Now if you think that I'm being a tad over the top in my plot summery, think again. I'm actually being way too kind. Now it's very hard to start off with the good parts of the film with out addressing the very bad parts of it first and that's Keanu Reeves himself. I do think that he's a good actor with some promise but he's miscast in this role as a hardboiled and cynical private eye with supernatural connections and his sour face demeanor does not help him out at with his character at all. There is a subplot that involves his heath that adds nothing to the overall story at all and his character borders between self important idiot to whiney bastard that cries to god when he does not get his way. His transformation into his Neo persona during the last act of the film takes away a lot from what the movie was supposed to be all about and just turns it into a sad parody of itself. The screenplay feels like a hack job in some places and some characters don't really serve a purpose at all other than to be killed off or to just be a part of the scenery. Some character don't really need to be in the movie at all like the character of Chaz played by Shia LaBeouf, who really adds nothing to the movie other than to be a really bad side kick to our sour faced hero and the angel Gabriel who is played by Tilda Swinton, who for starters is only in the film for about ten minutes and really adds nothing to it other than to have a really bad scene with John Constantine that will make you sit up and take notice on how bad this film really is and the last act, where her character is a part of one of the most stupid plot revelations in recent movies (it involves the devil, who is dressed like a pool hall gambler from Atlantic City.) I don't hold Tilda Swinton, responsible for this (she is a very good actress) as much as I hold the screenwriters who wrote her role because we don't really know enough about her character to be surprise with the sudden turn around that she does in the last act of the film. The screenplay itself feels like it does not know what it wants to be from time to time, switching it's tone from dark horror drama to dumb down action movie in the last fifteen minutes of the film and some of the dialog is so badly written that you are grinning your teeth to the bone when you hear it. While there are a lot of bad in this film, there are some bright spots that make the film somewhat bearable to sit though. The best of these is the performance of Rachel Weisz, which is literally holding this film together by a thin and dangling thread. She gives this movie something the script should have giving it and that something is called class. Her performance is gripping and soul searching and its what the film really should have been about if you had serious people behind scenes making it. Which is too bad because the movie would have worked much better as a standard supernatural thriller with just her character in it instead of the mind numbing mess that is presented to us here. Djmon Hounsou is great as well but he's not really in the movie much at all and his character is really just there for camp effect, not substance. The special effects are cool for what they are and they do have a visual impact but not even that is strong enough to make you forget how cheesy the film is after it ends.

     

    Don't know if this is legit or not but it does seem like a real review than what Harry had in the board.

     

    Of course it's legit, it's negative. What else could it be?

  9. 5492 Gilmore Street

    Van Nuys, CA 91401

     

    It's a trailer park next to the LA river.

    Right. Do you want the PI or will you be mailing me a copy of the script?

     

    And what I think really hacks me off the most is that this wasn't that difficult to move straight into a film. It's a COMIC for fuck's sake! It's already got camera angles and pictures so you don't have to make the whole thing up like you would if you were ripping off PK Dick.

     

    It's a comic, and people involved in the film STILL can't be bothered to read it! What, do you read only scripts and Dick and Jane books? Is your job so mentally taxing that you come home every day and just collapse in front of the television?

     

     

    Well I'm bitter and pissed as shit in that I couldn;t get a few of the more vocal fans here to understand a little more of the production side and why things are the way they are when movies get greenlit. I may not only have wasted time that could have gone to more productive procrastination practices but I've gottern a serious bout of depression knowing that sometimes you just can't win an argument sitting behind a keyboard.

  10. I'm fucking bitter over how the flick is only 1:50 long and not 3 hours like was once posted here.  Shit -- fuck - if Marty can have some shithead King of the World flying in planes for 3 hours why can't JC get his fair share of time kicking demon ass??

    See, you don't get it. Constantine should be TAPPING demon ass. And they're still talking about whether to cut that scene.

     

    Man, give the choice of wiping my ass with this script and poison ivy, I'd chose the script only if I had an author's address, an envelope, and a postage stamp handy. (Thanks, Tom).

     

    5492 Gilmore Street

    Van Nuys, CA 91401

     

    It's a trailer park next to the LA river.

  11. It occurs to me that suppressing the bitterness will just make it come up harder.  So I propose we make a bitter thread, so everyone who wants to be crass and rude and snide about the so-called writer, and so-called actor, and the hordes of little shitheads who took a very good comic and turned it into a goofy Hollywood blockbuster.  And it's marked, so fair warning.  Anyone who wanders into this thread with a Constantine-positive message deserves what they get. 

     

    If I come back and John hasn't deleted the thread, I'll propose my first question.

     

     

    I'm fucking bitter over how the flick is only 1:50 long and not 3 hours like was once posted here. Shit -- fuck - if Marty can have some shithead King of the World flying in planes for 3 hours why can't JC get his fair share of time kicking demon ass??

  12. I wrote a very thoughtful, even-handed essay that didn't rely too heavily on listing every change and why that change was shit.

     

    I know he's probably going to just take a few sentences here and there, but still.

     

    I wrote him and told him that it wasn't exactly Hellblazer, and I'm sorry for that, but it's a good movie just the same.

     

    :-)

  13. Nah, neither of them is "Warners".

    One is a disgruntled ex-employee,

    the other has a celestophilial complex for them.

     

    (Hopefully the former will be back soon, but I am content to read Martyrbore's posts over at imdb - where our old friend stanscud has taken over your place in M's affections.)

     

    Am I the former or Martybore? I get confused. ' But I am not disgruntled. I can't afford to be. Gotta find a copy of All His Engines today...

×
×
  • Create New...