criterionforum.org

Michael Kerpan wrote:I'm not convinced that this (so called) Mark Twain iis pulling people's legs. He's kept up the same schtick now for two years.

May I alert you to his birthday?

Or his "favorite book."

Oh well, then his jokes are getting repetitive and stale. ;~}

Someone's one-star review of Captain Blood

A Customer wrote:I am Capt. Cope and their is no one better than m

:-k

Fans of this thread might enjoy this blog's "You Can't Please Everyone" series. I would have given between one and three stars to nearly everything on that first page, but in a way that's beside the point. Some of these reviews are priceless, and reading them on this blog and not at Amazon takes away any temptation I might've had to add comments to them.

Gregory wrote:Fans of this thread might enjoy this blog's "You Can't Please Everyone" series. I would have given between one and three stars to nearly everything on that first page, but in a way that's beside the point. Some of these reviews are priceless, and reading them on this blog and not at Amazon takes away any temptation I might've had to add comments to them.

Well, I must say I don't disagree much with THIS comment on GWTW (especially after having lived in Atlanta for just under 8 years):

"The portrayal of African Americans in this movie is a disgrace. The movie is glorifying the old south and thus glorifying slavery. When I watched this racist flick–I rooted for General Sherman! Slavery was wrong–the south was wrong–the right side won–get over it! This is like a sugar coated “Birth of a Nation”. (and the story is boring as well)".

Look, I don't want to beat this horse but Gone With the Wind is nothing compared to some of the South-centric Hollywood films its success inspired. Like the hilariously awful Belle Starr, in which Gene Tierney both has a "mammy" and cheerfully runs black carpetbaggers off Southern property with guns blazing. Now there's a history lesson

I'm with you there, Michael. At first I thought the blog was simply including every 1-star review for each title, but now I see that Gone With the Wind has 44 such reviews. One good one, glancing at it now, is this one:

I never thought that the Blue-Ray version of a grate movie would not be wide-screen. The lost beauty for the full panoramas is very disappointing. I'm sending it back and waiting for the real thing. Plus the music has lost something. I don't think they bothered to re-master it. Compare the sound to MP3 downloads from Amazon and you will hear the difference.

It looks like a few other people already complained about this in reviews of their own. I hope Amazon doesn't really give full refunds to these fools.

Gregory wrote:Fans of this thread might enjoy this blog's "You Can't Please Everyone" series. I would have given between one and three stars to nearly everything on that first page, but in a way that's beside the point. Some of these reviews are priceless, and reading them on this blog and not at Amazon takes away any temptation I might've had to add comments to them.

Morgan Freeman(this spelling may be wrong, but I don’t care) is a man of limited talents: he can play a guy hunting a serial killer, and sometimes the president, but when he tries to act he’s terrible. And you know I’m right.

It's like Philip J. Fry has been given a critical mouthpiece. Thanks for the link Gregory, as you said, some of these are just priceless.

Gregory wrote:Fans of this thread might enjoy this blog's "You Can't Please Everyone" series. I would have given between one and three stars to nearly everything on that first page, but in a way that's beside the point. Some of these reviews are priceless, and reading them on this blog and not at Amazon takes away any temptation I might've had to add comments to them.

What a stupid blog. The "how can anyone say bad things about these canonized CLASSICS?" attitude is disgusting. The five star reviews on these type of films are usually much funnier than the one-star ones. Hell, some of these even make good points. On Dr. Strangelove: "There is nothing worse, when it comes to comedy, than blatant satire; YOU CAN’T FIGHT IN HERE, THIS IS THE WAR ROOM." I don't see what's so absurd about that comment.

I give your review of reviews one star. I tried to play it but it wouldn't work in my machine. Please send another.

When is Criterion releasing Bottle Rocket?!

NilbogSavant wrote:Hell, some of these even make good points. On Dr. Strangelove: "There is nothing worse, when it comes to comedy, than blatant satire; YOU CAN’T FIGHT IN HERE, THIS IS THE WAR ROOM." I don't see what's so absurd about that comment.

(Finally got to use it!)

You can't make jokes in here, this is the Rediculous Reviews thread!!!

Murdoch wrote:

NilbogSavant wrote:Hell, some of these even make good points. On Dr. Strangelove: "There is nothing worse, when it comes to comedy, than blatant satire; YOU CAN’T FIGHT IN HERE, THIS IS THE WAR ROOM." I don't see what's so absurd about that comment.

(Finally got to use it!)

Fair enough. But aren't reviews like these even better?

http://www.amazon.com/review/R1TTJEQLCM ... r_rdp_perm" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
"I thought Eddie Murphy and Mike Meyers were the original multi-character creators. I was wrong, Peter Sellers showed them how to do it. "

...a perfectly valid positive response from someone just getting their feet wet in older films. Why mock an accurate statement?

domino harvey wrote:...a perfectly valid positive response from someone just getting their feet wet in older films. Why mock an accurate statement?

I agree. Someone proudly saying something blatantly ignorant if much more amusing than someone admitting to their ignorance, but trying to fix that. If anything the guy should get praise for searching out Sellers and realizing where these new guys got their tricks.

domino harvey wrote:Look, I don't want to beat this horse but Gone With the Wind is nothing compared to some of the South-centric Hollywood films its success inspired. Like the hilariously awful Belle Starr, in which Gene Tierney both has a "mammy" and cheerfully runs black carpetbaggers off Southern property with guns blazing. Now there's a history lesson

Gone With the Wind being less embarrassingly offensive than its relatives doesn't prevent it from being an overly long soap opera though.

Gone With the Wind invites an especially intense measure of denunciation because of its pretensions to being a great, important epic story about our country's past, and because so many people treat it as though it's still on that pedestal. Belle Starr and its ilk are relatively insignificant parts of the ripple effect of all this.
The politics of GWW are still worth discussing for reasons that are not really about the attitudes that prevailed in the 1930s, in my view; it's because it's still considered a masterpiece -- one that's powerful in shaping many people's views about the South during the Civil War and Reconstruction in ways they're generally unconscious and uncritical about. This is not so much true for things like Belle Starr.

domino harvey wrote:...a perfectly valid positive response from someone just getting their feet wet in older films. Why mock an accurate statement?

You're right. I'm being far too stupid and reactionary on the internet these days. Please ignore my previous atrocities.

Pretty normal quotes on the front of the cover, what you would expect:


But on the back cover:

"The Bourne Identity meets Flipper" -Peter Travers

What does that make Day of the Dolphin?

On 'The Fellowship of the Ring' - from the above mentioned blog:

I’m a big movie buff, I’ve seen Citizen Cane and I love Castleblanca, but I can not see why this film has gotten so much attention! It bills itself as a historical drama, but none of the history books I’ve looked through mentioned any great war or things like Hobbits or Elves. And talk about a long movie! They think we need another half an hour? …

I recomend Pearl Harbor, it’s a much more historically acurate and the love story is more believable.

Man, I just love that Castleblanca, too.

Le Samouraï -- I would like to believe that the LOTR review was snark-infested.

It bills itself as a historical drama

I gotta check my DVD case ...

manicsounds wrote:Pretty normal quotes on the front of the cover, what you would expect:


But on the back cover:

"The Bourne Identity meets Flipper" -Peter Travers

"One of of the most important films I've ever seen"

Not that I care but someone may want to edit that before it goes to print.