$2.50 Reviews: 200 Movie Reviews Wrap-Up!/Blood Diamond (2007)

[Marter]

Since this is going to be a long list of responses, I'm going to include them in individual spoiler tags. If you choose to respond, you might want to *snip* me when you quote, just to stop it from being so messy.

<spoiler=ColdBlooded>

Good to hear your state of mind is better, I was a little worried about you. After 200 daily reviews, you deserve a break.

Also I really should check out this film.

Thanks for your concern. I'm actually doing really well at the moment. Fixed myself, and am now doing better than I was for about 6 months. And yes, you should definitely watch Blood Diamond!

<spoiler=DustyDrB>

Man, I've been meaning to watch this movie for years now. After I'll put it in my Netflix queue, right after season one of Deadwood.

Anyway, I hope you enjoy the sabbatical from reviews. They certainly must take up a significant chunk of your time. It's a good time of the year to explore new interests (or at least it is here, where it's been consistently 75 degrees and sunny).

About the lack of comments: I'm afraid that's just the nature of this section of the forums. I'm looking at the first two pages of the User Review section and only two threads have made it to a second page.

And while I enjoy your reviews, there's often not much to comment on other than "Nice review" and "I agree/disagree" (maybe said with more eloquence). Even then, I don't want to repeat the comment on every review because then I just feel like I'm patting your ego.

Here's an idea. Some movies you watch will cause you to ask yourself some difficult questions. Maybe it's a question raised by the narrative of the movie (choices made by the characters, themes within it, etc), or maybe it's a question raised by real-world factors about the movie (what makes this movie so popular, where does this rank among the directors work, etc). You could either add a discussion-type question to the review, or you could create a separate thread for it in "Off-Topic").

I don't know how good an idea this is or how repetitive it would get over time, but it would likely mean two things. One, this means you'll probably want to do reviews less (maybe on a once-a-week basis). Two, not every movie will prompt the same level of discussion (unless you're really good at digging up good issues out of a Transformers movie).

Either way, I enjoy the reviews and hope to see you continue them so long as they aren't a burden on your life. Happy 200th

Actually, watching the movie takes far more time than writing the review. I can often pump out a review in about 20 minutes of solid writing, and then about 5 for editing. Then I just need to format it into an actual post. The 2ish hours it takes to actually watch the movie takes up the most time. >_>

Your idea isn't a bad one, but it's one I tested once, and it ended up failing. After the Hitman review, I wrote an "<url=http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/18.230396>article", that gathered precisely one response from someone else. Now, maybe that was my fault for making it so long, or not including an exact "discussion question", but it just bombed. I might try it again sometime, but we shall see.

Thanks for the response! (And commenting "Nice review" helps bump it up, which is always appreciated ;D)

<spoiler=Redlin5>

Glad to hear you're doing better man! Redlin approves of this concentrating on school.

[sub]I should probably do so myself, all things considered.[/sub]

IN ANYCASE,

take this break and do not worry; your fans will still be here in May.

They had better be here come May. Otherwise I'm going to be very sad.

<spoiler=Sassafrass>

I shall go and poke about for a DVD of this when I head to town over the weekend. Should be cheap now, I think. A good review as always, I could not see any errors in my read through. And it's good to hear you're feeling better, man.

As for changes, I've got a couple of smaller ones that aren't really here nor there and are just things you can do to get a few more comments. First suggestion is that you hold back on the amount of reviews you post. At the moment you post a review a day, more or less. By doing so, you're effectively killing off your previous review by posting a new one, as it shuffles the old one off onto the second page faster. I'd suggest posting about two or three reviews a week, see if that results in any more comments/views. And also, tactical bumping. Deciding when to bump a review at the right time can make it last longer. Like I did here. >> [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/read/326.246820-Sassafrass-Reviews-Fallout-New-Vegas]

Second suggestion is to do here what you started doing over on Mellow Leprechauns and start having a mega-thread, sort of like Stranger's music review thread. [http://www.escapistmagazine.com/forums/jump/326.183857.5516279] Course, this will combat the potential character limit problem that you must be getting close to by now, as well as giving people an interesting and easy to find glossary of your own reviews, which could be upsides. Downsides to this is that it may be a lot of work to maintain, keeping the OP up to date with reviews and changes, but I think on somewhat decent internet, it wouldn't be too hard and/or annoying to keep up with.

Anyway, I hope you do well with your school work and I hope you feel very relaxed when you get back to posting reviews.

I will not take your advice to not post a review a day. Doing that is less, umm, regular, I suppose. I thrive on maintaining a schedule, and I don't like doing it on a non-consistent basis. Tactical bumping is something I already do, but to a lesser degree than you are likely talking about. I bump it up after it falls from the very top of the page, usually, and then stop bumping at all once I hit 100 views.

I considered changing it to a single thread, but also figured it wasn't worth it.

Thanks for the input!

Get a blog. Go to RottenTomatoes, they've got thousands of people like you. Finish school. Anything.[/QUOTE]
I almost want to post a "Not sure if serious" picture and just leave it at that, but I suppose I'll reply with words. Did you read my post? I am finishing school. And I don't need a blog. What's the point of that? To eliminate the opening post of this thread? Sure, that would help tell the people on this site what my future plans for this series are. Good call there. And FYI, I am on Rotten Tomatoes. I post my reviews there as well.

<spoiler=Rylot>

Congrats on the 200th review! Good luck with the school stuff, and we look forward to more reviews in May.

Thanks! They'll be back on a daily rate starting May 1st!

<spoiler=urahara75>

Congratulations on a superb, and (as usual) well conveyed review.

On to the pressing issue at hand:

It's regrettable you're committed to a self-imposed hiatus, but understandable. You carve out hours(?) at a time to write, proofread, and provide feedback to your reviews on the forum. Sometimes it seems like you do multiple a day, at least every other day. With as much as you have going on in your personal life, doing reviews in such quantities appears to have resulted in "burning the candle at both ends".

Even though it's been suggested before, might I propose that you limit the film reviews to no more that 2 perhaps weekly, or biweekly? It would suck, for everyone, if it so happened that these film reviews caused any unnecessary undue burden for you.

Hours? Proofread? I think you have the wrong person here!

I definitely do not put that much effort into these. I spend about an hour max writing them, and I only reach that amount of time when I am multitasking while writing them. I don't really proofread much, except for spelling/grammar errors. My initial ideas are almost always the ones that you'll read, phrased almost exactly as I initially write them. Possibly a bad idea, but it seems to have worked so far. =D

I don't believe it to be a result of "burning the candle at both ends" though. I've fit this into my schedule for 6+ months now, and never struggled for time -- until now. And that is only because I need my free time in order to fix some things I've been neglecting. Not neglecting due to lack of time, but due to a lack of care. I haven't been in a good place mentally for a while now, and now that I've rectified that, I need to fix other things. I need most of my free time, and cannot adhere to my own one-per-day schedule at the moment.

But I do definitely want to keep that schedule. Regularity like that is something I really like, and deviating from that leaves me feeling like I'm not doing my job. (Even though it isn't a job, and you guys likely don't care that much, I feel like I must do it). It's not a burden, I just need the free time for a bit. They will continue, daily, May 1st, and continue that way for, at the very least, another 100.

<spoiler=superbatranger>

You know, I enjoy reading your reviews very much. I think the only reason I don't comment on all of them is because some of the movies you have reviewed I have either never heard of or never seen, so I can't really think of anything to say. I sometimes feel that just saying "That was a good review" isn't good enough. But, regardless, keep up the awesome work.

Thanks! Posting "good review" or something similar does bump them up though, which is always helpful. I would not object to you posting just that, although I do see the reason why you wouldn't want to. Glad you enjoy the reviews!

<spoiler=googleit6>

You deserve a break, most definitely! 200 is a big number, you know. Something to be proud of.

As for Blood Diamond, oh man, I loved the movie. I was sobbing at the end, I'll be honest. It was very tough to watch.

My parents actually went to seee this in theatres I believe, and my mother actually told my father after the movie that if he ever wanted to buy her diamonds of some sort, he would have to give her Canadian ones, so she didn't get a blood diamond. I guess that's just a real life application of this movie's message. (On a side note, my dad actually did buy her a piece of jewllery with a Canadian diamond in it. Go figure.)

200 is, if I do my math correctly, more reviews than Yahtzee has done now. I know it's not fair comparing video reviews to text, but given how long he's been here, I think it's something to be happy about. =D

<spoiler=Cain_Zeros>

Glad to hear you're doing better. And I'd say you've definitely earned a bit of a break.

And thank you for your support!

<spoiler=oliveira8>

I would actually like you to continue doing reviews, but only if you actually improved much more on them and your own cinema knowledge. I'm going to be quite blunt, but I don't really mean to offend you or anything in any regard, just some criticism. If I do offend you, I apologize. I also only know you and your movie watching habits from these reviews, so I would wager, that the movies you watch on a daily basis are the ones you eventually review. If I'm wrong, I also apologize.

Now for my criticism:

From your reviews I get this feeling that you don't actually know that much about cinema overall. Your Citizen Kane review in the nutshell is horrible. You pigeon hold this movie into categories like "Is the acting good? Cinematography Good? Is X good?". You just don't do that with a film like Citizen Kane.
Not once in your review you actually get to what makes Citizen Kane one of the greatest movies ever made. You talk about the cinematography and the use of the camera angles, but you never go beyond than "Yeah they are good". You never mention the meaning behind all that amazing cinematography, what the different usage of angles are telling, etc. Or better yet, why did Orson Welles and Co. decided to use these type of techniques.
Citizen Kane is told mostly through it's mise en scene. It's a visual movie and the movie's thematic is playing it at the eye level, not via the sound that comes out of the actors mouth. That mirror scene for example, where you see plenty of Kanes reflected, what does that mean? It's more than " wonderfully shot scenes" like you mentioned. It was there to say how multi-layered and complex Charles Foster Kane was, and how it's impossible to nail him to a word(Rosebud), it was also to symbolize how many reflections of the character you were watching till that point. Every person the the reported talked too, had their own idea of who was Charles Foster Kane(And Orson Welles adapts the character's mannerism to each own. Bad acting?), by the end of the movie you never really "met" Charles Foster Kane, you only got to see what other people thought of him and how he was remembered.
This is the stuff that makes Citizen Kane the greatest movie ever. It's told all in the visuals, and it was really the first movie ever to do this in such manner. The placement of objects and actors, the camera angles, all of them are telling a story. The movie took so long to be considered good, cause most filmmakers and critics back then were from an old school of filmmaking and thought. It was only when the Nouvelle Vague hit, and directors like Truffaut and Goddard started to talk about this movie as a reference, that Citizen Kane was reconsidered. Modern movie making exists cause Citizen Kane exists. Yet this is your conclusion?

"It's most definitely a film to watch if you are interesting in film history, or if you just want to learn a bit about William Hearst. "

What? I can understand not liking the movie, that's okay, but the movie is so much more than just that. Yet you, or at least your review of it, misses this completely. You waste the review talking about Orson Welles acting and how the supporting cast is weak. That's not why the movie is considered good.
Which brings me to three conclusions that A)You didn't quite understand the movie or B)You don't understand that well cinema or C)You should really get out of the comfort bubble.

If you just watch for movies that fit into these "review categories"(plot-story-characters-acting) you going to miss a lot of the point of plenty of them. I would actually like to see you try to review a movie from Terrence Malick, Werner Herzog(The Klaus Kinski movies), Fellini, Goddard, (more)Orson Welles, Jean Renoir, Luis Buñuel and countless others outside of American cinema. Directors who made movies that go beyond general convention. Directors that made really weird/fucked up movies. Directors that didn't even know that a concept like editing existed, or how to actually properly make a movie.
Maybe you have watched movies from these directors, I dunno, I can only judge the movies you review. And considering you review a movie a day, I don't think you watch more movies than these ones. I can be wrong, most likely I am. If I am, feel free to call me an idiot. ^^

I guess what I'm trying to say, is that I would like to you to continue doing these reviews, but only if you are stepping up. Expanding your horizons. Most of what you review is well...trash(Garfield?) with the occasional "edgy" movie.(Mulholland Drive) Try something harder and more complex. Something that challenges your own perception of movie reviewer/critic. Something that when you finish watching, you can't quite describe what you watched.

Watch something like Fitzcarraldo by Werner Herzog and then try to fit it in your current review style. I would bet you would spend all the review talking about how the actors are clearly speaking English and the dub is German, and proceed to miss the point of the movie. Some movies go beyond those things. Citizen Kane has pterodactyls in one scene, yet it doesn't stop it from being one of the best. Vertigo has some serious logic gaps and some poor scenes, yet it doesn't stop from being the best movie by Hitchcock.

Anyway that's it. Hopefully I haven't offended you, and I'm not really calling you ignorant or anything in that matter in respects to movie knowledge. If it seems I'm doing that, I'm sorry but that's not really my intention. Nor is my intention to pass off as some cinema snob that only watches arthouse movies. I haven't quite reached that point. xD

To summarize my point: Would like to see you try more complex movies, more hard and thought provoking movies. Movies outside of the English language if so! They make a lot of stuff outside of the US of A and the British islands.

Anyway, enjoy your break! ^^

You're correct when you say that your post was blunt, but I believe you make decent points. Some of them though, I believe to be off-base. Like how you mention a specific scene, (the mirror one), in Citizen Kane. To me, including that in a review is absolutely pointless. My job, as I view it, is to convince someone to watch or ignore a certain film, and list the reasons why they should take that path. Including specific scenes in a film doesn't help this at all, as the person reading the review won't have a clue as to what I'm talking about.

You're right on one account though: My knowledge of cinema is lacking. I'm not okay with that. That's why I'm going to be going to school next year in film studies. These reviews were partially written to get me starting to look at films more critically. I think I've definitely improved since beginning, and continue to do so.

However, you suggesting that I watch less mainstream films is something that I don't think is a fair judgement. At one time, I was told I watch too many "arthouse" films. Truth be told, I just watch the movies that interest me -- That's it. If I come across something I want to watch, I watch it. I find out more about American mainstream films, because they're easier to find. Ones that have come out in the last ten years -- those are the films I have a good knowledge and recognition of, so I have an easier time deciding to watch them. This isn't necessarily right, but it's what happens. Eventually, I'll run out, and then have to search out more foreign films. That's also fine.

My comfort zone is something I like, to be honest. One of the other reasons I began writing these were for my own knowledge. My memory is terrible. I know that, lots of other people know that. If I look back at the first few films I reviewed, I can't remember much about them. So I read the reviews, and I can figure out if I liked it or not. Always commenting on certain aspects allows me to know what I thought about it more easily. Having an in-depth essay on minor parts that are "deep" doesn't help me. I usually review for two things: Enjoyment and quality.

So thanks for your comments, but I have to mostly disagree. Maybe I'm not the critic you want, and that's okay with me. You are looking for deeper films, and deeper thoughts, and I'm not the one to give those. Not right now anyway.

<spoiler=tigermilk>

Just stumbled upon your reviews and I am really enjoying them. The only change I would suggest is updating your 'other reviews' link in your other film reviews so any review can be accessed more easily. As I say though I am enjoying reading your reviews.

EDIT: And perhaps putting the reviews in alphabetical order (perhaps I am just being lazy).

Speaking personally I would have to respectfully disagree with Oliveira8, but before I go on I would just like to mention I am coming to the end of my Masters Degree in film studies so it is not that I wouldn't understand a more academic approach to film criticism. Speaking personally I have access to a huge wealth of academic journals on film and probably have copies of pretty much every major/famous essay/article on cinema available in English due to film readers (specifically the best of Bazin, Mulvey, Dyer etc etc) perhaps the only major gap in my knowledge is not being able to read French so I can't read 'Cahiers Du Cinema' as the authors intended. This is not why I come to the Escapist though, what 'casual/non-academic' reviews and opinions on cinema, their is an immediacy to your reviews that I enjoy. To be honest if I wanted to read an academic critique of 'Citizen Kane' I have a book by Laura Mulvey published by the BFI which offers sufficient depth and a fiercely intelligent critique, I have a number of other articels and book entries discussing the text, I can go to my university library and find a wealth of books and articles on the subject.

I'll cut this ramble (relatively) short, keep up the good work your style is pleasing and immediate and by not inviting comparison with some of the greatest writers of the twentieth century your writing stands out for what it is, well written engaging and entertaining.

p.s. A sentence or two on transfer and sound quality would be great if you have a TV/home cinema set up which means you could offer insight.

The reviews are in alphabetical order on the main page of the User Group. Just so you know!

I like the way you approach these reviews, and what you want out of them. That's largely how I've done it, and it seems to work well. Also, I will be doing a film studies program starting in September. I'm really looking forward to it! =D

As for video/audio transfer...those are usually things I don't notice, and would have to just go to a separate site to include that. Plus, I like reviewing the film like I watched it in the theatre, so that, to me, the review doesn't feel "dated". I don't know why my mind works like that, but that's how I view it. I think including something like that would be out-of-place. >_>

<spoiler=Outright Villainy>

Can I offer a counter-point to this, in that if you (Marter) start reviewing Goddard et al. I'll stop reading.

I enjoy your non pretentious style.

Haha! Thanks for that. Made me laugh.

 

[Sassafrass]

Holy mother of snips

Ah, I can understand that point about having a schedule. I don't really have one as I always fail to stick to it, plus I have a lot of distractions. Like games. <<

And as for the tactical bumping, I just like to finagle as many views as possible out of my reviews, so I normally give things a day or two then I reply to them and so on and so forth til about a week after the review was posted, then I let it die out. Funnily enough, the one review I didn't bump at all sunk off the face of the Earth quickly, apart from JulianKing posting on it after I PM'd him about it. Even then, it fell off the front page quickly.

And fair enough. I guess that's what the group is for, in a way.

Ah well, at least you've read everyone's comments and responded accordingly. Kudos for that, I've seen a couple of people just dismiss them, including me a couple of times.
And I'll still be around in a month to nit-pick small things, don't worry. XD

 

[Marter]

And as for the tactical bumping, I just like to finagle as many views as possible out of my reviews, so I normally give things a day or two then I reply to them and so on and so forth til about a week after the review was posted, then I let it die out. Funnily enough, the one review I didn't bump at all sunk off the face of the Earth quickly, apart from JulianKing posting on it after I PM'd him about it. Even then, it fell off the front page quickly.

And fair enough. I guess that's what the group is for, in a way.

Ah well, at least you've read everyone's comments and responded accordingly. Kudos for that, I've seen a couple of people just dismiss them, including me a couple of times.
And I'll still be around in a month to nit-pick small things, don't worry. XD

Tactical bumping is something I'm using this time! Seems to work out well. XD

And now 3 people have said I should quit. 3. Whole. People. Whatever will I do?