Return To: Board Index | Movie-Specific

Ratings--WTF?

For posts related to a specific film -- beware of spoilers o ye who dareth enter!
Stewball
Posts: 2962
2026 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Stewball » Sun Nov 26, 2017 9:25 am

monclivie wrote:No doubt that SJW disease is common among the critics, but still, judging by trailers, regular people reviews etc., I'm sure that Lady Bird is more likeable movie for the so-called general audience (including me) than Roman.


I agree, but I'm comparing ratings by those that have seen them. And for those that are deciding what to see, you'd certainly think Denzel would have been a more significant draw. But really, I think it's the SJW thing being a negative for Roman and a positive for Bird, which negates or reduces the value other relevant factors, especially content, that sticks in my craw. And I don't expect the Indies to draw like the check-your-brain-at-the-door blockbusters do, it's just that the critics and the current level of popular content appreciation is suppressing the demand good quality scripts and performances. That said, I am very appreciative of the level of quality the Indies are maintaining with the budgets they have.

Maaxwell
Posts: 1212
1840 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:03 am

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Maaxwell » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:10 pm

Stewball wrote:But really, I think it's the SJW thing being a negative for Roman and a positive for Bird

So are you essentially saying here that despite the overwhelming evidence that Denzel has never publicly supported Trump, you haven't changed your mind from your original post? You're blaming so-called "Social Justice Warrors" for middling reviews given to a film that, from what I can gather (and please correct me if I'm wrong), is about a warrior for social justice?

Stewball
Posts: 2962
2026 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Stewball » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:31 pm

Maaxwell wrote:
Stewball wrote:But really, I think it's the SJW thing being a negative for Roman and a positive for Bird

So are you essentially saying here that despite the overwhelming evidence that Denzel has never publicly supported Trump,


...Only if you ignore his brilliantly obvious implications.


you haven't changed your mind from your original post? You're blaming so-called "Social Justice Warrors" for middling reviews given to a film that, from what I can gather (and please correct me if I'm wrong), is about a warrior for social justice?


Nice try, but I am a warrior for justice--poetic, social or otherwise, all except socialist justice (hmmm. that's a keeper). SJW is an ironic epithet, sort of the reverse of Trump supporters calling themselves "Deplorables". The left has no sense of irony or even humor, if it isn't in support of a crisis that needs to be exploited or something.

BTW, I'm sure the SJWs are especially anxious to keep Denzel from getting anywhere near a microphone at the Academy Awards, especially now. Another reason to hate on Roman J. Israel, Esq.

Maaxwell
Posts: 1212
1840 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:03 am

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Maaxwell » Tue Nov 28, 2017 5:57 pm

Stewball wrote:...Only if you ignore his brilliantly obvious implications.

Earlier you praised yourself for "accepting truth as the truth". Yet here you're relying on dubious, so-called "implications" rather than stone-cold facts, which doesn't support that claim at all.

Stewball wrote:all except socialist justice

Nobody mentioned socialism. Needless straw man :roll:

Stewball wrote:SJW is an ironic epithet

I know what it means.

Stewball wrote:The left has no sense of irony or even humor

Please :lol: there's humour everywhere. Being so blindly obstinate doesn't help your arguments, it just makes them sound juvenile.

VinegarBob
Posts: 748
3949 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Jan 06, 2010 7:54 am

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby VinegarBob » Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:08 pm

Stewball wrote:And for those that are deciding what to see, you'd certainly think Denzel would have been a more significant draw.


The overwhelming majority of Denzel's films are crap. Although I think he's a fine actor I tend to avoid the stuff he's in for this reason. I'm sure I'm not alone. I'll reserve judgment on Roman J. Israel, Esq. until I've seen it, but my expectations are low.

Stewball
Posts: 2962
2026 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Stewball » Wed Nov 29, 2017 9:32 am

Maaxwell wrote:Earlier you praised yourself for "accepting truth as the truth". Yet here you're relying on dubious, so-called "implications" rather than stone-cold facts, which doesn't support that claim at all.


Then what's your explanation for why he dodged the question, when the easy answer, if he was still sold on Obama, would have been to simply say so and the reporter and Hollywood would have been happy? And why his attack on the media? There's only one way to read it except for those who never give up the con.

VinegarBob wrote:The overwhelming majority of Denzel's films are crap. Although I think he's a fine actor I tend to avoid the stuff he's in for this reason. I'm sure I'm not alone. I'll reserve judgment on Roman J. Israel, Esq. until I've seen it, but my expectations are low.


I don't know if I'd say "overwhelming majority" are crap, maybe so so, and he elevated many of them; with a few that I think are really good, but which aren't the ones of his that most people remember him for (Glory, The Hurricane, American Gangster and this one). Every movie stands on its own and is the sum of all its elements, and I'm just saying this one, and several others of even better quality, don't deserve the shoddy reception they're getting.

Maaxwell
Posts: 1212
1840 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:03 am

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Maaxwell » Wed Nov 29, 2017 12:13 pm

Stewball wrote:Then what's your explanation for why he dodged the question, when the easy answer, if he was still sold on Obama, would have been to simply say so and the reporter and Hollywood would have been happy? And why his attack on the media? There's only one way to read it except for those who never give up the con.

Now you're using conjecture to establish something as true. Quelle surprise :lol:
Believe it or not, I have no interest in trying to manipulate the gaps in this non-story just to try and support my worldview.

Stewball
Posts: 2962
2026 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Stewball » Wed Nov 29, 2017 3:32 pm

Maaxwell wrote:Now you're using conjecture to establish something as true. Quelle surprise :lol:
Believe it or not, I have no interest in trying to manipulate the gaps in this non-story just to try and support my worldview.


So the information in the articles you put up as evidence are now conjecture? Quelle surprise indeed.

Maaxwell
Posts: 1212
1840 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Feb 06, 2014 11:03 am

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Maaxwell » Wed Nov 29, 2017 4:05 pm

You're just brazenly misrepresenting what I've said because you got busted citing demonstrably fake news and would rather not admit that you were wrong.

Cool
Image

Stewball
Posts: 2962
2026 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:18 pm

Re: Ratings--WTF?

Postby Stewball » Thu Nov 30, 2017 11:16 am

Maaxwell wrote:You're just brazenly misrepresenting what I've said because you got busted citing demonstrably fake news and would rather not admit that you were wrong.


How is quoting what you posted that Denzel said, misrepresenting what you said? But if you actually care to post a response to his comments instead of making another statement that ignores what he said, I'll be glad to provide feedback. OW, I think we're done here...at least I am.


Return to “Movie-Specific”