Yep.... that was my peak of interest as well. Mikey needs a bigger career in nerdy shite, he is practically an nerd Icon, I'd practically watch him in anything - Daniel Jackson is my Mal Reynolds.themyrmidon said:
Escape to the Movies: Red Riding Hood
- Thread starter MovieBob
- Start date
Recommended Videos
See, this is the reason why I keep watching Moviebob's reviews even though I disagree with about 80% of his opinions of the movies he reviews. He's one of the few critics out there who is on the same wavelength as me when it comes to treating movies made for an age demographic that is not normally considered worthy of effort.
I'm a huge believe that the biggest problem with academia is it's elitism. It's stubborn refusal to give anything that doesn't fit it's exceedingly narrow definition "real literature" the time of day is genuinely hampering the advancement of art in the today's age, to the point that average people literally are becoming the ignorant fools who can't understand art simply because all the people who are supposed to be smart are trying to tell them that art has to be pointlessly vague and impossible to interpret. And boring. Really. Fucking. Boring.
So, thank you MovieBob. I think your taste in movies tends to suck, but I appreciate your efforts to expand what the intellectual world should consider worthy of critical examination.
I'm a huge believe that the biggest problem with academia is it's elitism. It's stubborn refusal to give anything that doesn't fit it's exceedingly narrow definition "real literature" the time of day is genuinely hampering the advancement of art in the today's age, to the point that average people literally are becoming the ignorant fools who can't understand art simply because all the people who are supposed to be smart are trying to tell them that art has to be pointlessly vague and impossible to interpret. And boring. Really. Fucking. Boring.
So, thank you MovieBob. I think your taste in movies tends to suck, but I appreciate your efforts to expand what the intellectual world should consider worthy of critical examination.
*Comes out of hiding*
I just wanted to say that I was one of the young boys who did not understand the immense praise for 300. It had decent moments, but nothing that wasn't already capitalized in other movies.
Well, you know, except for the *key* moment(s). You all know the one.
I just wanted to say that I was one of the young boys who did not understand the immense praise for 300. It had decent moments, but nothing that wasn't already capitalized in other movies.
Well, you know, except for the *key* moment(s). You all know the one.
I couldn't quite figure out if I agreed with you completely or disagreed vehemently. If possible, could you expand on said elitism? Not trying for snark; genuinely curious.RJ Dalton said:
Ok, ya got me with the Smurfs, but still, why do they have to make Red Riding Hood a Twilight style love story?johnman said:
No, Bob. No. Why didn't you review Battle: LA? First you ignored Skyline last year, now you're skirting Battle: LA... and for this movie. Did you think reviewing Red Riding Hood was going to elicit more attention? Was there more to talk about (I'd find that surprising)? Do you have a secret issue with alien invasion movies? I'm filled with annoyance. Bob, you're falling down on the job as a fellow film nerd.
Anyway, good review... but you still fill me with annoyance.
Anyway, good review... but you still fill me with annoyance.
I'm a lit studies major, so my general opinion of academic elitism comes from my experiences in that field. Basically, the academic community has the really narrow definition of what is and isn't literature. For example, anything that you could easily attach a genre to - like mystery, fantasy, or science fiction - goes right out without any consideration. As if that wasn't enough, a lot of them start throwing out things that use anything vaguely resembling a formula to such an extent that if it isn't a character centered story about people who do absolutely nothing but discuss current political and social issues, it can't be considered real literature. The worst of them go so far as to throw out things that make any sense and will only consider the stuff by people like T.S. Eliot, James Joyce and Henry "I don't know the first thing about motherfucking good sentence structure" James as worthy of reading. While at least the first two had a few good works that I did enjoy, my disagreement is that not all art has to imitate that to be art.ProjectTrinity said:
My question is this: Why can't fantasy and science fiction have the same literary merit as Victor Hugo, or Charles Dickens? I ask this question expecting those I ask to set aside whether or not they actually think any of what's currently out there is and just consider why it can't? Or how about children's work? Why does writing for children automatically mean that your work can't be as good as stuff meant for older audiences? Or, like the case of this review, why must we assume a supernatural romance aimed at teenage girls automatically has to be as bad as Twilight?
The simple answer I give to these questions is there is no reason why it should be so and I argue that we really have to stop thinking like that because it's hurting art.
Think for a second about how many people on this site actually argue vehemently that video games shouldn't be considered art because when you say art, they think that art has to be, as the Extra Credits crew so wonderfully said, a "French arthouse" production. The pretension and elitism of the academic community hurting the evolution of art and storytelling by insulting and talking down to the "average person" for not being able to see the "brilliance" of what it chooses to hold up and the reaction of most people to this insult is to shun anything that even remotely approaches that definition, despite the fact that a lot of what the academics hold up can make for good storytelling and artistic elements when done properly.
So that's what I mean.
Wow, now that I actually think about it (i'm a teenage boy) teenage girls really do get fuck all care film wise. I cant think of a recent film aimed at teenage girls thats actually supposed to be good... but then again i'm not a teenage girl haha
Since no one else has answered this, that I saw... the basic concept is: Camp is a movie that knows it's going to be bad, and so it aims to make fun of itself. The movie never tries to be great, never tries to really impress you with it's amazing story or anything like that. It's fun because we can laugh at the actors and the silly plot, and we know the actors are laughing at it too.skfd said:
Or, for a fun analogy:
If you drop an egg, and it breaks... that's a bad movie.
If you throw the egg into the ground, just to see it go SPLAT... that's camp.
So...sounds like a rental, but a *strong* rental. I'm saving my movie-going bucks for "Sucker Punch", anyway.
I will say, I was hoping for a review of "Battle: L.A." or "The Adjustment Bureau".
I will say, I was hoping for a review of "Battle: L.A." or "The Adjustment Bureau".
Interesting to see that camp is still around and in some case taken seriously, like 300. I mean really, besides the art direction it was still scantly clad men fighting, no different from the retro films loved for ironic reasons.
This to.jackanderson said:
