'Rediculous' Customer & Critic Reviews

[MichaelB]

Oh, geez, and The Devils! The portrayal of priests in that one is pretty bad, too.

What, a priest who's prepared to suffer the tortures of the damned rather than renounce the principles of his faith? That's actually one of the more positive portrayals of a priest on film - which is why Catholics who've watched it properly and thoughtfully tend to be quite keen on it. (This, incidentally, is a major reason why it got past the BBFC relatively unscathed - Lord Harlech, its President at the time, was a devout Catholic and supported the film).

On the other hand, I concede its portrayal of nuns is somewhat less flattering on just about every level...

[Jean-Luc Garbo]

Sorry, I was thinking of the religious authorities who condemned Oliver Reed and not Reed himself.

[colinr0380]

Another classic from the Guardian blogs, this time on how Looking For Eric peddles an insulting lie.

Some highlights:

Spoiler

Unlike so many of his kind, postman Eric Bishop (played by Steve Evets) at least knows the dignity of labour.

Next, Eric tells Eric to put his trust in his fellows – as he puts it, it's not one of the goals he's scored of which he's most proud, but one of his passes. This time, the outcome's even more impressive. To sort out a gangster who's giving the postie a hard time, three busloads of his workmates are speedily marshalled.

Responding to further guidance from the maestro, the lesser Eric quickly spots the villain's Achilles heel. The resulting spirited triumph of all for one doubtless delighted the film's solidarity-sozzled director. Audiences may be less readily convinced. If only organised labour had shown itself one-tenth as effective in dealing with the more workaday challenges with which Eric's ilk have more frequently had to contend.

So this is Loach's blue collar Fight Club?

[colinr0380]

Sorry Michael B, I've spoiler tagged it! And no, as someone who tries to run in the other direction from anything football related even Ken Loach can't get me to see this. I have got Tickets though, so maybe the Loach segment might totally change my perceptions (though I did see Happy Endings and was surprised that such a short segment could manage to ooze such smugness about the superiority of football!)

[MichaelB]

You were so quick to fix your post that I deleted my one on the grounds of near-instant redundancy!

And the film is largely football-free, despite the second lead character - there's a brief montage of Cantona highlights, and a very Loachian pub argument about whether Manchester United has betrayed its working-class roots, but that's pretty much it. Kes had more actual onscreen football.

[Antoine Doinel]

Why some people shouldn't have DVD players. From the Zip.ca forums:

Does the DVD player read the top (label) side of the DVD or the bottom?

[knives]

=D>
How do you respond to that?

[zedz]

Why some people shouldn't have DVD players. From the Zip.ca forums:

Does the DVD player read the top (label) side of the DVD or the bottom?

I love how he doesn't seem to realise that he's answered his own question. It's like asking about an LP: "Do I play the cover or the vinyl disc?"

[Ovader]

minglifoo33 believes documentary is an insult to cinema. That is a comment he/she made regarding a trailer for a documentary called Meeting Andrei Tarkovsky.

Making a documentary about a movie maker such as Tarkovskij only means you understand nothing about his art. In fact, I believe documentary is an insult to cinema. A documentary is not a "Tarkovsky-inspired work", it's merely a commentary, a comment, words or anything else better suited for paper. The only legacies works of art have are other works of art, not comments or analysis. Tarkovskij has plenty of legacy, but none of it is comment or critics.

[closelyobserved]

I highly recommend the customer reviews of Lovefilm.com for some choice truffles of customer idiocy. Here's one"Barry Norman from the BBC' on Bressons ' Trial of Joan of Arc'

well!
Doors open, doors close, questions get asked, questions get answered. That's about it.

Guess which film this is...a "Customer from Maidstone:

This was awful
Even for a subtitled movie (no idea why i rented it) it was brutal and nasty and why the producer reckoned 'every human should watch it', is quite beyond me, it was not a story as such and hard to follow, Main man played chess with death on the beach and then you have no idea even if he won, you assume he did, as death is nowhere to be seen for quite sometime, til he pops up again as a monk and the main man is tricked into telling him how he was winning in chess against death, so far it was just an odd story, but then you meet some jesters, who are (by all accounts) odd anyway, they have a couple who i guess are married and have a baby (who is left wondering around the field) and a single man (who seems to have it away with any woman who shows him favour) they're on stage and suddenly a procession of monks goes thru, oh my word, they're hitting each other and moaning and groaning and it is one of THE oddest things i've ever seen in my life.

They pass on thru after head monk gives a speech about the end of the world.

Then into a tavern where they start to pick on one of the jesters and it really is brutal, they make him dance while chasing him with fire, it is odd and quite frankly made me feel ill and i switched it off and sent it back.

I really have no idea how or why i ended up with this film i can only guess i thought it was something else, i'm not one to watch forgein films and now i have even more reason not to do so!

Watch at your own risk of being sick

And this reviewer gave Jarmans Sebastiane (suprisinglly given the effect on her) one star

I'm definitely a straight woman!

Crickey, look up homoerotic and here we have it...you thought Brokeback Mountain was risque...tsk...you know nothing! What have we here! Hot, sweating, thong clad Italian men chatting in Latin and frollicking with each other like gazelles in the water. Good lord, I can see every curve and groove of the men's torsoes...definitely a gay gaze...

Yes, I hear you gay men cry and not to mention the male grooming (hair/washing rather than in a really wrong way) in the shower, the morning glory prodding and whipping of the martyr, Sebastiane!

There is a plot, sort of...as we all know (not) that Saint Sebastiane was a Christian martyr who refused to fight and for his redical pacifist leanings he was whipped and tortured in the sun. Eventually, and slightly fetishistically (I may be making words up here) he is tied to a tree and his fellow over friendly Italians take shots at him with bows and arrows.

Moral of the story? Make lurve not war and you will become a martyr...and the Renaisance movement will idolise your naked arrow wounded torso...

Not a film for a sexually frustrated straight woman... :0)

[Tommaso]

I think that's a pretty accurate description of "Sebastiane". And I usually love Jarman's films.

[kidc85]

Doors open, doors close, questions get asked, questions get answered. That's about it.

That's brilliant, sounds like Godard's "Elisabeth is the one who is sick and the other one is her nurse" review of Persona.

[closelyobserved]

My own pithy favorite is the description of Visconti's Death in Venice as that "lovely film about hats.'

Doors open, doors close, questions get asked, questions get answered. That's about it.

That's brilliant, sounds like Godard's "Elisabeth is the one who is sick and the other one is her nurse" review of Persona.

I take it all back. It might be how Bresson would have to pitch it these days :

A Man Escaped: 'Man goes in. Man comes out. Mozart.'

Mouchette: 'Ugly Betty look-alike throws stones. Finds herself in deep water.'

Au Hazard..."Ill-treated donkey failing to find kind owner finally throws towel in.

[aox]

I take it all back. It might be how Bresson would have to pitch it these days :

A Man Escaped: 'Man goes in. Man comes out. Mozart.'

Mouchette: 'Ugly Betty look-alike throws stones. Finds herself in deep water.'

Au Hazard..."Ill-treated donkey failing to find kind owner finally throws towel in.

Those are fantastic summations. A bit reductionist, but great nonetheless.

[domino harvey]

To be fair, someone else on the internet already did this sort of thing and I'm pretty sure we discussed it in this very thread. I still fondly remember the Kill Bill summary: "Irresponsible mother wants custody of her child"

[knives]

Was looking at the Kozintsev Lear and found this gem.

It was too hard to watch! I don't like watching in B-W anyway, but this movie/tale was just to dreary to read the small sub-titles and try to follow the plot. Perhaps great Shakespearean acting, but I passed on this tedia.

He seems to have a hate on for Herzog too.
Stroszek

I had a lot of hopes for this Herzog film. Used to his usually dismal Dreck, I found the first half of this film to be fairly entertaining. Yet in the last third of this work is lapsed into typical Herzogian nonsense and idiotic plotline. Sorry, it'd thumbs down for this plodding tale enpeopled with certifiable morons!

Woyzeck

I should have known better! Any collaberation between Herzog and Kinski is bound to be Dreck! This movie is hard to follow and often unintelligible. The dialogue from the denizens of this small town is mostly rubbish. Real people don't talk like this! Add the decidedly homely Eva Mattes into the mix and you have a decidely awful film!

On the other hand Amanda Bynes is A-Okay

Ho-hum predictable fare, but seemingly enjoyable by teenagers. Our 16 year-old appeared to find it amusing. All in all, it was a lot like all those other teen flicks of years past.

[aox]

from Netflix

on Klimov's Come and See:

1.0 Stars
Proof that the Russians experimented with mind altering chemicals, more specifically hallucinogenic type drugs. Abstract Expressism at it best.

[Perkins Cobb]

I had a lot of hopes for this Herzog film. Used to his usually dismal Dreck, I found the first half of this film to be fairly entertaining. Yet in the last third of this work is lapsed into typical Herzogian nonsense and idiotic plotline. Sorry, it'd thumbs down for this plodding tale enpeopled with certifiable morons!

Brilliant. Enpeopled is the new embiggened.

[Mr Sausage]

I had a lot of hopes for this Herzog film. Used to his usually dismal Dreck, I found the first half of this film to be fairly entertaining. Yet in the last third of this work is lapsed into typical Herzogian nonsense and idiotic plotline. Sorry, it'd thumbs down for this plodding tale enpeopled with certifiable morons!

Brilliant. Enpeopled is the new embiggened.

Apparently empeopled is a word, which drops him from "brilliant" to "bad speller."

[knives]

Guess the film (The ------ is me blocking out a character's name.

It's like dealing with religious believers and when you point out that NOTHING backs up their beliefs and EVERYTHING denies those beliefs, they'll just say "Yes! It's the wonderful power of faith!" ------- isn't remotely as clever or interesting as he fancies himself. His whole career is just a testament to the power of being born wealthy and well-connected with a father who was an excellent magazine editor. If you are an empty-headed snobbish phony who likes things because they've been pre-approved for you, as this film was by the snobbish phony Gene Siskel years ago, then, fine, LOVE this film. Then sit around listening to jazz or whatever you fancy will make you seem smarter than you are. I'll be over here, wretching in a bucket.

[kaujot]

I can't think of a film where a character's father was a magazine editor off the top of my head.

[HarryLong]

Oh, who cares; the concept of being a wretch in a bucket is priceless.

[kaujot]

What's the movie?

[Highway 61]

I can't think of a film where a character's father was a magazine editor off the top of my head.

All I can think of is My Dinner With Andre since long-time New Yorker editor William Shawn is Wallace Shawn's father. But then I just can't imagine someone harboring such distaste for Wallace Shawn.

[HypnoHelioStaticStasis]

Citizen Kane? Of course his "father" is a newspaper editor, but lets not split hairs.