Escape to the Movies: Centurion

[SamElliot'sMustache]

snip

i think real reason ppl r pissed (well at least me when i first saw the expendables vid)is that as a critic BOB seemed the most "human" if im making any sense. as a critic he would praise originality and artistic vision, but wasn't afraid to show his "normal" side and say HEY ITS GOT TITS (for lack of a better term). case and point this review about priranas 3d thats pretty much what he said.

now with this in mind he is A LOT more relatable as a critic and therefore his opinions hold a little bit more with people watching his reviews. (at least to me) . so when he simply insults everyone who watched the movie it seems like a betrayal of sorts.

now this review ticked me off too, mainly because he said pirhanas 3d was "good" simply because it had gore and boobs, and really giving no other reason as to why its "better" than expendables.

now dont get me wrong i didnt like the expendables and i though scot pilgrim was WAY WAY better, but i think it was quite petty to insult everyone for seeing it.

Again, I'm going to reiterate:

The one question I have for everyone so butthurt over Bob ripping on 'them' (i.e., they happened to be part of the general population that went to see The Expendables for a change, so now it's personal) is this: how many times on this very site have you either started, or participated in a thread decrying some popular piece of entertainment you thought sucked, and how many times have you insulted whole groups of people who liked said piece? This includes phrases like "emo fags" or "screaming tween girls" (for Twilight). No one seems to have a problem with flinging out the insults to whole groups of people just because of what entertains them, but the minute it's dished back out, they start bawling like they were beaten up and had their lunch money stolen.

Even if Bob is more 'human' than most critics, that actually means that we should be even less surprised when he rages on a movie that he hates but the majority of people inexplicably go see, or even like, because if there's one thing the Internet should have taught us is that that's what people do. On this very site alone, it seems that a dozen or so threads get started with this very thing in mind (just replace movie with game, music, book, celebrity, baby, whatever you want), and these often get hundreds of replies. And people like to insult whole groups of people who like something they hate.

So, getting mad at Bob for doing it to people who liked The Expendables is...how do we say...hypocritical. And notice that no one here got mad that he also raged on Eat Pray Love being the number 2 movie, despite the fact that he did the same thing to those viewers. What, no Julia Roberts fans on here?

 

[johnman]

I saw the expendables the other day, and bob is right it does suck. Jet Li repeates the same 3 lines (i have no money, I need money, I have family), the gunfights could of been good but they go for the camera technique where you see fuck all most of the time and the story doesnt make a shred of sense. There is no back story to anything or anyone and I actually forgot a few of the characters existed at all.

I am not going to watse my money on Piranhas but Centurion looks interesting and I havent seen in a film in a cinema for about a year now so I might look that up.

 

[KingTiger]

This shows how much of a cave man brainless idiot you are....you called us unwashed stupid sheep for watching the expendables and you are watching a movie for naked chicks, talk about being a brainless animal with over sexualized instinct.

At least I know not to take any of your advice seriously regarding movies.

 

[Starke]

snip

i think real reason ppl r pissed (well at least me when i first saw the expendables vid)is that as a critic BOB seemed the most "human" if im making any sense. as a critic he would praise originality and artistic vision, but wasn't afraid to show his "normal" side and say HEY ITS GOT TITS (for lack of a better term). case and point this review about priranas 3d thats pretty much what he said.

now with this in mind he is A LOT more relatable as a critic and therefore his opinions hold a little bit more with people watching his reviews. (at least to me) . so when he simply insults everyone who watched the movie it seems like a betrayal of sorts.

now this review ticked me off too, mainly because he said pirhanas 3d was "good" simply because it had gore and boobs, and really giving no other reason as to why its "better" than expendables.

now dont get me wrong i didnt like the expendables and i though scot pilgrim was WAY WAY better, but i think it was quite petty to insult everyone for seeing it.

Again, I'm going to reiterate:

The one question I have for everyone so butthurt over Bob ripping on 'them' (i.e., they happened to be part of the general population that went to see The Expendables for a change, so now it's personal) is this: how many times on this very site have you either started, or participated in a thread decrying some popular piece of entertainment you thought sucked, and how many times have you insulted whole groups of people who liked said piece? This includes phrases like "emo fags" or "screaming tween girls" (for Twilight). No one seems to have a problem with flinging out the insults to whole groups of people just because of what entertains them, but the minute it's dished back out, they start bawling like they were beaten up and had their lunch money stolen.

Even if Bob is more 'human' than most critics, that actually means that we should be even less surprised when he rages on a movie that he hates but the majority of people inexplicably go see, or even like, because if there's one thing the Internet should have taught us is that that's what people do.

Yeah, they do. But, and this is a big one, Bob isn't acting more "'human'", he's throwing a tantrum and being unprofessional. Remember, in theory, Bob isn't just a neck-beard in his mother's basement flipping out about how this movie pissed him off for it's lack of showing "the goods" before offing Megan Fox. He is, allegedly a professional film critic who is paid for his opinion. That's a huge difference.

On this very site alone, it seems that a dozen or so threads get started with this very thing in mind (just replace movie with game, music, book, celebrity, baby, whatever you want), and these often get hundreds of replies. And people like to insult whole groups of people who like something they hate.

Okay, two things here, and I'll deal with them in reverse order. As for insulting people who like something you don't? I've never really understood that. Yahtzee's assessment that it dates (for consoles) back to an era when people couldn't afford to sample everything has some credibility, but in a larger scope, that argument really doesn't hold up.

Now, as to the first point, if you write professionally, (which I'm guessing you don't), then you basically have to moderate your own comments, and then give them to an editor who will moderate them even more. Some sites, like Something Awful have carved out a niche by ignoring this and spewing the crap that people who do or could write professionally in the same tone they'd use in their living room with their friends.

Now, the Escapist is, primarily, a business, and as such they lean towards professional writing. There's some informal content, but the bulk is pretty well grounded in the professional writing range. That doesn't mean people like, say John Funk, don't relax and behave more informally among their friends, it just means that they can, and do write professionally when composing material for the site.

What goes on in the forums, is firmly in the informal "shit you say with your friends" territory. So, what all this is building up to is this: your example is flawed. Sorry, man.

So, getting mad at Bob for doing it to people who liked The Expendables is...how do we say...hypocritical.

Nah, it's not. You see, for it to be hypocritical, then Bob's tone from day one would have had to have been that of a petulant man child, which, it wasn't. He began with a fairly professional, and properly formatted review. What people are upset about is that he's not writing reviews anymore, he's painting pissed off blogs on the Escapist's front page about how his favorite film of the hour isn't being financially successful, and throwing a tantrum. It isn't hypocritical in the least to want more from him than that.

And notice that no one here got mad that he also raged on Eat Pray Love being the number 2 movie, despite the fact that he did the same thing to those viewers. What, no Julia Roberts fans on here?

There probably are. But someplace between point A and point B, Bob's opinion on chick flicks borders on misogynistic, so the less said on the subject the better.

 

[Starke]

This shows how much of a cave man brainless idiot you are....you called us unwashed stupid sheep for watching the expendables and you are watching a movie for naked chicks, talk about being a brainless animal with over sexualized instinct.

At least I know not to take any of your advice seriously regarding movies.

It was funnier than that last week. We had people following in Bob's wake mindlessly accusing anyone who raised a question or criticism of being mindless sheep.

 

[wolfgirl90]

I kinda find it funny that there are people who criticized and hated MovieBob for his review on The Expendables last week are back THIS week watching his reviews again.

While some people "claim" that the reason why they criticized MovieBob was because they insulted them, this wasn't really the reason as far as I could see, mostly because 1) the "insult" only applied if you were one of those people he was talking about (a comment that I honestly find valid) and 2) MovieBob is not the only person who gives out insults around here (Yahtzee does it almost every freaking week), so I can only hope that people were not personally insulted by that off-handed insult that he gave.

 

[gphjr14]

Its still just funny that (according to RT)the Expendables is still topping the box office charts and Scott Pilgrim is at the bottom. The premise of the movie is great its just I can't stand Michael Cera, and apparently I'm not alone.

 

[PeterDawson]

So really while there is some cross-over don't lump Transformers 2 fans in with Expendables fans, there's a difference. There's no irony or hipocrisy, except perhaps from people being shocked that we're not letting it go after Bob himself failed to let it go.

Regardless of which one was better (I know, Transformers 2 was an abomination), my comment still stands. There's an obvious double standard here that all these people are obviously falling prey to.

Okay, what? A double standard is when something is acceptable in one form (bashing Transformers 2) but considered taboo in another (bashing Expendables) with no clear difference between either thing (that is, Transformers 2 and Expendables). Since the two movies have little in common its a pretty weak conclusion. To use an extreme example, it seems like you're criticizing people for liking Space Balls but not liking Epic Movie since they're both parodies.

Point = Missed

I sggest you read back over what I've written because you have no clue what you're talking about.

I have and I still don't get your point. Maybe try explaining it when someone asks you to instead just asking them to read the thing again. Expecting new results with the exact same method isn't usually a sound prediction.

Okay, what? A double standard is when something is acceptable in one form (bashing Transformers 2) but considered taboo in another (bashing Expendables) with no clear difference between either thing (that is, Transformers 2 and Expendables). Since the two movies have little in common its a pretty weak conclusion. To use an extreme example, it seems like you're criticizing people for liking Space Balls but not liking Epic Movie since they're both parodies.

Are you saying you think it's not a double standard because Transformers 2 was horrible while The Expendables wasn't that bad? Is that the gist of it? That's what I got out of your statements, and if I'm right then that is the very definition of a double standard. You deemed one movie better than the other based on your subjective tastes and decided this made it immune to the same criticisms the other received. An arbitrary judgment has placed different standards on one thing than another; that's a double standard. I apologize if I've misinterpreted you though.

I did not think it made it immune to criticism. The camera work was terrible and Couture is an awful actor. Heck, Megan Fox might be a better actor than Couture. I still would argue its a solid movie however due to the story staying together, the characters almost all being decently developped and pretty much no pointless scenes save maybe the bit about gifts, but that was just a part of one scene so whatever.

As for the term double standard, here's the definition in my dictionary (my physical copy, not my own personal definition of the word): Refers to any set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another, typically without a good reason for having said difference. A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain applications (often a term or indentifying remark) are perceived as acceptable to be used by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable?taboo?when used by another group.

I don't see any double standard here, at least for myself. Both films are action romps, yes, but execution makes a massive difference. Calling out subjectivity is bollocks here since its all about opinion and consensus. If the two films were very alike, then there'd be something worth talking about, but they're just the same genre, that's about it. Different shades of blue, really, and liking one shade over the other isn't a double standard.

 

[whycantibelinus]

So I will start approaching your reviews differently, if you say something sucks then I'll assume you mean that it's excellent and I'll go see it.

Enjoy "Eat/Pray/Love".

Sorry you'll end up missing out on most of the good movies coming out.

Sorry I wasn't more clear in my statement. I mean things that appeal to me, not crap like that. You know, things I'm on the fence about.

Just so you know I was addressing Bob, not asking for someone to come and point out something that I felt was inferred in my post. Also, most of the good movies? In my opinion Bob has said that most of the good movies that I have seen were crappy. He and I are clearly two different types of movie goers.

Have fun traveling on the Movie Bob band wagon, I hear you don't have to make any decisions for yourself and you know what? That's one less thing to think about, and that's always a good thing.

 

[sunburst]

I did not think it made it immune to criticism. The camera work was terrible and Couture is an awful actor. Heck, Megan Fox might be a better actor than Couture. I still would argue its a solid movie however due to the story staying together, the characters almost all being decently developped and pretty much no pointless scenes save maybe the bit about gifts, but that was just a part of one scene so whatever.

I thought the story was stupid and horribly written, all of the acting was pretty abysmal, half the characters were irrelevant and underused, the terrible camera work ruined the actions scenes and the entire package came together to spoil a potentially awesome idea. Those are pretty much my exact observations on the Transformers movies too. According to my opinions, these movies are remarkably similar.

As for the term double standard, here's the definition in my dictionary (my physical copy, not my own personal definition of the word): Refers to any set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another, typically without a good reason for having said difference. A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain applications (often a term or indentifying remark) are perceived as acceptable to be used by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable?taboo?when used by another group.

That's a fine definition. Now let's have an example: it's okay to use hyperbolic douchebag insults when talking about the Transformers series and its fans but not when talking about The Expendables and its fans.

I don't see any double standard here, at least for myself. Both films are action romps, yes, but execution makes a massive difference. Calling out subjectivity is bollocks here since its all about opinion and consensus. If the two films were very alike, then there'd be something worth talking about, but they're just the same genre, that's about it. Different shades of blue, really, and liking one shade over the other isn't a double standard.

An opinion is not a "good reason" to set different standards. You have to rule out subjectivity when discussing double standards. Your colour analogy is absolutely ridiculous by the way because it's absolutely impossible to imply it's okay to make fun of one shade of blue but not another. I just spent ten minutes trying to make that analogy work without sounding retarded and I just couldn't do it.

 

[SkullCap]

Okay, now let's see what has been covered in this thread already:

1. Pointing out that Moviebob skirted around the REAL reason people were upset by his review last week? Check.

2. Comments made by Escapist's who actually think people are mad at the review because they liked the movie, instead of the fact that Moviebob insulted people's intelligence? Check.

3. Escapist's defending Moviebob's right to insult people and calling them whiners for telling someone they will not accept that someone who wants to be called a professional should act like the everyday dumpster scrapings on Youtube or every forum on the Web.

4. The double standard of Piranha 3-D being good because it "tries" to be a B-Movie, has gallons of blood, lesbianism, and nudity; while the Expendables is a mindless action movie that does what the people want? Check.

5. Centurion looks decent, but that small review was overshadowed by more hurled insults? Check.

6. Boobs are awesome? Check.

7. Geniuses pointing out the obvious of people "whining?" Check.

Well, I think that just about covers the general comments here. Now it's time for my two cents. Christopher Lloyd I love you man, but I can't see this film. It goes against every functioning brain cell I have.

Bob, I appreciate the caricature voices you give to represent the people who, God forbid, disagree with you, ranging from the Paul Walker-like jock voice to describe the general public or the Boston accent you occasionally use as well. However, now it's being used as a defense mechanism similar to that of a child mocking his authority figures. Even though in all your apparent intelligence you mentioned how people said not every film has to be high art, but you opt for showing your signature picture of Ogre from Revenge of the Nerds and repeating that argument in your Paul Walker surfer voice once more belittling people like a child. Grow Up.

Yahtzee insults people, but the very least he stresses that it's his own opinion. Call us "butt hurt" whiners if it makes you feel better, but that still doesn't change the fact that you've drastically fallen down in both professionalism and quality in your recent reviews.

Tits+lesbians+blood=Great bad film.

Mindless stupid action+mediocre plot=A living testament to how cinema's quality has gone down hill and all who see it are brainless douchebags or "Ogres."

Every critic is subject to their own opinion and how they review movies, but Roger Ebert doesn't give 'thumbs down' to a movie and say that people, who liked it must have their own thumbs up their asses. But your not Roger Ebert, your Bob Chipman, the critic who attacks a certain religion and insults their intelligence in his movie reviews. Bob Chipman, the critic who recommended "The Last Airbender." Bob Chipman, the critic whose older reviews focused on the intelligence or lack there of in a film, brief histories about genres, referencing literature, historic events, witty one-liners and re-watchable reviews. Bob Chipman, who never condemned the audience and sunk so low to act like an internet troll in his reviews. What happened to that MovieBob, we miss the old MovieBob, whose this hypocritical troglodyte that's replaced the real Moviebob we know and love? Y'know how he can come back? If you start being a professional once again and stop acting like an infant in your rants.

Tits, lesbians, and how much red corn syrup can fill the silver screen are poor reasons for liking a movie unless your a hormone-enraged teenager! This is not professional, Bob, this what one of those stereotypical frat boy douchebags, whom you compare the general public to, would say his reasons for liking a movie like Piranha 3-D.

Bob, you don't care and you don't mind how many people are starting to see that your reviews are nothing more than poor Youtube movie rants, and you sure as hell will stick by your opinions. You have a hardcore fanbase that will continue this show and a few people who already despise you.

In your GameOverthinker videos you always stress how you can't stand the people who insult people over XBOX Live because they disagree with that person or do something that pisses them off. Guess what? Your that person, an angry ranting voice that insults people they have never met, but continues to insult them b/c the people do something you disagree with.

"If fish looked like that, I'd fuck fish." Piranha 3-D

If anyone needs me I'll be at thatguywiththeglasses.com

 

[Starke]

Bob, I appreciate the caricature voices you give to represent the people who, God forbid, disagree with you, ranging from the Paul Walker-like jock voice to describe the general public or the Boston accent you occasionally use as well. However, now it's being used as a defense mechanism similar to that of a child mocking his authority figures. Even though in all your apparent intelligence you mentioned how people said not every film has to be high art, but you opt for showing your signature picture of Ogre from Revenge of the Nerds and repeating that argument in your Paul Walker surfer voice once more belittling people like a child. Grow Up.

I'll admit, I completely missed this, good catch.

Tits+lesbians+blood=Great bad film.

Mindless stupid action+mediocre plot=A living testament to how cinema's quality has gone down hill and all who see it are brainless douchebags or "Ogres."

We are of course talking about The A-Team, or was it GI Joe...

Sorry, if that's sounding snide, but, we're still stuck on that double standard, where the only apparent reason for Bob to dislike the Expendables was because it beat his favored film into a bloody pulp at the Box Office.

 

[Spink]

snip

Yea kid I really don't know what you're saying. You're just that incoherent and you still miss the point of what I'm saying. Honestly what you posted has no relevance to what I posted. For someone who thinks Movie Boob is a witty nick-name I'm not terribly surprised.

 

[JakBandit2208]

Its still just funny that (according to RT)the Expendables is still topping the box office charts and Scott Pilgrim is at the bottom. The premise of the movie is great its just I can't stand Michael Cera, and apparently I'm not alone.

I'm more of the idea that the audience for Scott Pilgrim was never big enough to begin with.

I agree... believe what you will but Michael Cera is pretty popular...hell I like him

 

[PeterDawson]

I did not think it made it immune to criticism. The camera work was terrible and Couture is an awful actor. Heck, Megan Fox might be a better actor than Couture. I still would argue its a solid movie however due to the story staying together, the characters almost all being decently developped and pretty much no pointless scenes save maybe the bit about gifts, but that was just a part of one scene so whatever.

I thought the story was stupid and horribly written, all of the acting was pretty abysmal, half the characters were irrelevant and underused, the terrible camera work ruined the actions scenes and the entire package came together to spoil a potentially awesome idea. Those are pretty much my exact observations on the Transformers movies too. According to my opinions, these movies are remarkably similar.

As for the term double standard, here's the definition in my dictionary (my physical copy, not my own personal definition of the word): Refers to any set of principles containing different provisions for one group of people than for another, typically without a good reason for having said difference. A double standard may take the form of an instance in which certain applications (often a term or indentifying remark) are perceived as acceptable to be used by one group of people, but are considered unacceptable?taboo?when used by another group.

That's a fine definition. Now let's have an example: it's okay to use hyperbolic douchebag insults when talking about the Transformers series and its fans but not when talking about The Expendables and its fans.

I don't see any double standard here, at least for myself. Both films are action romps, yes, but execution makes a massive difference. Calling out subjectivity is bollocks here since its all about opinion and consensus. If the two films were very alike, then there'd be something worth talking about, but they're just the same genre, that's about it. Different shades of blue, really, and liking one shade over the other isn't a double standard.

An opinion is not a "good reason" to set different standards. You have to rule out subjectivity when discussing double standards. Your colour analogy is absolutely ridiculous by the way because it's absolutely impossible to imply it's okay to make fun of one shade of blue but not another. I just spent ten minutes trying to make that analogy work without sounding retarded and I just couldn't do it.

RE quote one (Yes I'm too lazy to edit the quotes individually because I need to head to work): Your critcisms of the film were remarkably similar, not the films themselves. That is my point. Movies having a bad plot still doesn't make them similar, even if the same genre.

RE quote two: That's not a double-standard. You're saying its okay to insult one group of people and not okay to insult the other, and the two groups have little in common besides the obvious. Plus I've never endorsed the bashing of the fans, I'm just arguing the double standard stuff we've dragged on here.

RE quote three: Take teal and sky blue. I consider Teal, granted possibly more a green than a blue but anyhow, an ugly color and when suggested as, say, the color for a car, I'd make a joke referring to how ugly it is. Sky blue, meanwhile, I like, and would seriously consider. Double standard? No, opinion. Yes its nice to eliminate subjectivity but the point is you can't be subjective about everything, especially when in spite of some similarities they are different things.

snip +

If anyone needs me I'll be at thatguywiththeglasses.com

Indeed.

 

[Mumorpuger]

I like how "nerd rage" is one of the search keywords for this video.