Fuck the Critics (Sucker Punch Rant)

[Axelhander]

LOL @ a thread beginning with bringing up a MovieBob review then claiming that other critics are full of vitriol.

At least most of those other critics back up said vitriol with real reason for why the movie is very likely a pile of trash.

 

[Chased]

So, from what I get in this thread, Critics suck, and this movie is similar in visual style and tone to Watchman and 300, but with more hot women and giant robot samurai dudes.

...excuse me, I need to go watch Sucker Punch fifty times in a row.

I agree with this logic. I also believe there are dragons.

 

[Chemical Alia]

I saw that movie last night without reading any reviews seeing preview prior, and I came out of that movie with a huge grudge against all nerdy 16-year-old weeaboos for somehow creating the ability for this movie to exist. Had I known it was going to be a pretentious, dumbass, live-action anime, I never would have subjected myself to it, lmao. I went to see it with my boyfriend and about 7 other guys from work (nerdy game developers), and only one of THEM managed to derive some enjoyment from it. And if anyone is the target audience, it should be guys like them.

Just listened that audio review, and I agree with just about everything they said, including the nerd rant. It really felt like a movie derived from a shitty deviantart drawing, really infuriatingly immature and nerdy.

But yeah, I don't usually mind reviews or let them get to me when I don't agree with them, and generally try to avoid them before going to see a movie. :C

 

[Trivun]

See, this is why I never, NEVER, trust critics. I watch Zero Punctuation, for the laughs and because I like Yahtzee, and I've seen a few Moviebob videos (for the same reason). But almost always, I disagree with what games/films they like or dislike. At the end of the day, to me, my opinion is the only one that should matter,m and the same should apply for everyone else (i.e. they follow their own opinion, not someone else's). That's why I've always loathed bandwagons of hate or love for something, because most of the people on said bandwagons form an opinion about something before they've even seen/played/read/heard it. And it's why I always go and see things regardless of whether a critic says it's crap or not.

I've seen the Sucker Punch trailers, and after seeing a comment conversation between Graham and Matt (from LRR) and Moviebob on Twitter last night, I commented that I'm a gamer and I'll still so and see Sucker Punch, and I'll probably love it too. It's something that looks interesting, very well filmed, an intriguing storyline, and generally ticks all the boxes that I have for 'enjoyable film'. If someone else doesn't want to see it then that's up to them, but I'll be damned if they're going to tell me I'm an idiot for liking it when they don't. Opinions are one thing, stating opinions as fact is something else.

EDIT: It gets released on April Fool's Day, next Friday, here in the UK. And you can bet your bottom I'll be seeing it on release day

And yes, that was a Shrek reference.

 

[The_root_of_all_evil]

However, I can say they're fairly popular and that accusing them of attention-whoring just because they gave a negative review to a movie that some people happen to like is not fair.

I don't think I was accusing them of attention-whoring, just that actions that would bring attention to their reviews would be favourable to them.

Yahtzee is renowned for his attack on SSBB, but I don't think that was attention whoring either.

 

[JourneyThroughHell]

However, I can say they're fairly popular and that accusing them of attention-whoring just because they gave a negative review to a movie that some people happen to like is not fair.

I don't think I was accusing them of attention-whoring, just that actions that would bring attention to their reviews would be favourable to them.

Yahtzee is renowned for his attack on SSBB, but I don't think that was attention whoring either.

Cool enough.

I guess I took it the wrong way, then.

 

[Saelune]

These reviewers, from what I hear (in their review) are idiots, bad at their job, and bigots.
"I missed that, I was taking a piss" Why am I even listening to your review of a movie you did not even completly see? One thing people need to consider, both reviewers and those recieving them, is if you both are so different in view, then the review is pointless. These guys sound like they would prefer some stupid movie where a bunch of rappers pretend they actually are tough thugs.

Wow...your opinion on the Spill Crew is way different than it actually is. Bob is much less professional than they are.

Im not familiar with them, but its called a review, so I expect you to watch the whole movie.

which they did.

Did you listen to it? He said he was pissing and missed important stuff that set up the whole movie.

That's part of having a collaborative effort, if you miss the beginning, you can have someone else keep you posted on what they had missed.

Or he could back off and omit from reviewing, or re-see it all the way through. Im not going to bother with a review from someone who is bad at his job like that.

The man you are talking about is named Korey. He runs the site, edits the reviews and podcasts, animates the video reviews, as well as coordinates events for the site. Don't bother telling me that he doesn't do his job well, when you don't even know half of the behind the scenes details.

So I should not criticize something I dont fully know about? Sounds familiar...

But you're basing his job on one review, when he's been a critic for over 10 years. That's like judging something based on a single-framed imaged.

I was bashing the one review. The review was done poorly I think. I did not say every review he does is poor, cause I have not seen (heard) them. I WAS going off that one review, which was very harsh and ignorant too, which stikes a sore spot.

I'm sorry but someone should go pay money to see a movie again because they missed maybe 2-3 minutes of a film because he or she had to go to the bathroom? Say he took a generous time of 3 minutes, he still saw 97% of the movie (hour and a half run time), it isn't like he left for 15 minutes. And to say that his opinion/review is complete negated by this is a bit silly, do you think that this is the first reviewer ever to have to go to the bathroom during a movie? I highly doubt that seeing those 2-3 minutes would honestly change his or anyone's opinion on a movie. Hell if a movie needs you to see an exact short sequence at any point of a movie in order to enjoy a movie, and if you miss it you will somehow magically hate it then that probably just shows that there is something wrong with the movie. Seriously go take a movie you absolutely love to death and take a friend you know will love it too. Have them sit down and watch it, then at some point skip ahead say 5 minutes,I seriously doubt the 5 minutes they lost will make them hate the movie.
Also just want to point out that the use of bigotry and ignorance is pretty harsh to say about anyone you really don't know about because of their (limited) beliefs that you have heard, so you might want to take a step back and realize the irony in that.

5 minutes can matter though. It depends on the movie. You could always miss one little bit of important info. Not at the begining, but imagine watching Star Wars Ep: 5 and leaving when Darth Vader says that famous revelation? (without knowing) Less than 5 minutes but important as hell. And the first thing he does is trash nerds.

 

[MisterGobbles]

Judging by what I've heard from friends and such, this seems to be one of those movies where the general consensus from the public is that the film is amazing, and the general consensus from the critics is that it sucks. Granted, they see way more films than us, and if they have that opinion, then it shouldn't be ignored. But this is one of those times where you should probably trust your friends more than the critics when deciding whether to go see this movie or not.

 

[Tuddle]

Sucker Punch is the second greatest movie of all time. Screw the bad reviews, just go see it! That's what I say.

 

[WorldCritic]

Meh, I don't listen to these guys, and this review has not left a very good first impression.

 

[jrb_brownie]

I'm sorry, but really? I can agree with "Critics are biased towards art cinema", but "I'm excited for art cinema to die out completely"?

It depresses me that in with the newly found acceptance of cult trash cinema, there's also this new attitude of "Oh? You like Kurosawa or Godard? You must be a stuck-up critic who hates genre film."

The meaning of your statement may be unintentional, but the film snob in me is offended.

Sadly, I suspect art films will go the same way as fine art. Some will remain to be appreciated by those who truly understand their greatness (much like people go see great art in museums), but it will drop out of production in favor of gratuitous violence, star-stuffed casts (Expendables, anyone?), and sexualization of media.

OT: If you don't like how a critic reviews, stop watching them. The idea of a critic is not to appeal to everyone, but to appeal to a very specific taste. This way, you have someone with similar tastes to tell you if you'll like something. If it is largely ineffective, it's your fault for choosing poorly. Look around for someone you agree with more often.

I agree with you that fine art is a waxing and waning phenomena. But what you are failing to understand is that "fine art" in your words is simply a concept and those who define the concept define the art itself. We are much different from past generations in what we consider art. Because this is a video game website I would chance to jump to the conclusion that we can all agree that video games can be extremely artistic. In 20 years when we are the old guard, because like it or not we will be, we will look back upon video games of the early years and praise their artistic merit. Animation is another new artistic medium that will someday, if it is not already, become "fine art".

Now on the topic at hand. I have stopped listening to critical opinions long ago. What it comes down to is whether or not you identify or at the very least are entertained by a work; be it video games, art, movies, music, whatever. No one has the right or the privilege to decide that for you. So stop listening to what some overpaid smug prick has to say and simply decide for yourself. I understand the anger over the review, I am a fanboy of many things, and i can acknowledge your frustration with spill.com but still...be a big boy or girl and make up your own mind.

In closing, wow am I ever glad I found this website, this forum is the most civil one I have ever visited. Props to the moderators for being on the ball. I am new so this is very refreshing to have an actual debate without it digressing into name calling and trolling.

 

[Scout Tactical]

I agree with you that fine art is a waxing and waning phenomena. But what you are failing to understand is that "fine art" in your words is simply a concept and those who define the concept define the art itself. We are much different from past generations in what we consider art. Because this is a video game website I would chance to jump to the conclusion that we can all agree that video games can be extremely artistic. In 20 years when we are the old guard, because like it or not we will be, we will look back upon video games of the early years and praise their artistic merit. Animation is another new artistic medium that will someday, if it is not already, become "fine art".

I'm not quite sure why you felt the need to ramble about videogames as art. We are discussing movies as fine art. You don't need to make everything about videogames.

You seem to fail to understand the argument I was making. Sure, what is "great" is defined by a culture at a given time. In fact, this was the core of my argument. I assert that previous classics, built on intellectualism, are being marginalized in favor of works that appeal to the lowest common denominator. This type of argument isn't even relevant to videogames, which are still in their infancy as a medium.

Unless, of course, you'd like to make the argument that The Expendables has greater artistic value than Citizen Kane. In which case, I'm not interested in discussing anything at all with you.

 

[Rednog]

These reviewers, from what I hear (in their review) are idiots, bad at their job, and bigots.
"I missed that, I was taking a piss" Why am I even listening to your review of a movie you did not even completly see? One thing people need to consider, both reviewers and those recieving them, is if you both are so different in view, then the review is pointless. These guys sound like they would prefer some stupid movie where a bunch of rappers pretend they actually are tough thugs.

Wow...your opinion on the Spill Crew is way different than it actually is. Bob is much less professional than they are.

Im not familiar with them, but its called a review, so I expect you to watch the whole movie.

which they did.

Did you listen to it? He said he was pissing and missed important stuff that set up the whole movie.

That's part of having a collaborative effort, if you miss the beginning, you can have someone else keep you posted on what they had missed.

Or he could back off and omit from reviewing, or re-see it all the way through. Im not going to bother with a review from someone who is bad at his job like that.

The man you are talking about is named Korey. He runs the site, edits the reviews and podcasts, animates the video reviews, as well as coordinates events for the site. Don't bother telling me that he doesn't do his job well, when you don't even know half of the behind the scenes details.

So I should not criticize something I dont fully know about? Sounds familiar...

But you're basing his job on one review, when he's been a critic for over 10 years. That's like judging something based on a single-framed imaged.

I was bashing the one review. The review was done poorly I think. I did not say every review he does is poor, cause I have not seen (heard) them. I WAS going off that one review, which was very harsh and ignorant too, which stikes a sore spot.

I'm sorry but someone should go pay money to see a movie again because they missed maybe 2-3 minutes of a film because he or she had to go to the bathroom? Say he took a generous time of 3 minutes, he still saw 97% of the movie (hour and a half run time), it isn't like he left for 15 minutes. And to say that his opinion/review is complete negated by this is a bit silly, do you think that this is the first reviewer ever to have to go to the bathroom during a movie? I highly doubt that seeing those 2-3 minutes would honestly change his or anyone's opinion on a movie. Hell if a movie needs you to see an exact short sequence at any point of a movie in order to enjoy a movie, and if you miss it you will somehow magically hate it then that probably just shows that there is something wrong with the movie. Seriously go take a movie you absolutely love to death and take a friend you know will love it too. Have them sit down and watch it, then at some point skip ahead say 5 minutes,I seriously doubt the 5 minutes they lost will make them hate the movie.
Also just want to point out that the use of bigotry and ignorance is pretty harsh to say about anyone you really don't know about because of their (limited) beliefs that you have heard, so you might want to take a step back and realize the irony in that.

5 minutes can matter though. It depends on the movie. You could always miss one little bit of important info. Not at the begining, but imagine watching Star Wars Ep: 5 and leaving when Darth Vader says that famous revelation? (without knowing) Less than 5 minutes but important as hell. And the first thing he does is trash nerds.

Wow I kinda saw this coming, of course missing the end of damn near any movie will throw off anyone's opinion of a movie, but we're talking about a random/general part of the movie. But even then do you honestly think that if someone didn't know Vader's revelation then they would hate the rest of the movie otherwise? The whole movie is enjoyable, hell some people regard it as the best of the star wars franchise, sure the revelation is iconic and people love that part, but they also love the rest of the movie, it is just icing on the cake. And listening to the review carefully again he only missed a part where the girls mother died and she left her daughters everything, he still knew the mom died and the whole thing with the father. How does that affect that rest of the movie considering the plot is about the girl escaping the fantasy land because her life in the institution is terrible? Seriously, I stand by the point that calling for a reviewer (especially in this case) to re-watch the whole damn movie because of missing that little tidbit of information that has very little impact on the movie as a whole is ludicrous.
I am so happy I have seen this movie, I'm happy that I can come back and talk about it, cause now I can tell all you f*cking geeks,and 13 year old boys, all all you nerds in between it sucks. Leave me the f*ck alone, I've had so many say "When you gonna see sucker punch? When you gonna see sucker punch?" You know what take the punch out of it and just sucker. So he is trashing nerds, 13 year olds, and geeks by saying that in his opinion of the movie, which that it is terrible, they would be suckers to be lured into the movie's pandering to their demographic? Still waiting for this terrible trashing he throws out at the beginning for the review, and Damn near a minute in the are talking about the plot now. Later on in the review they are saying that, in their opinion, that this is a movie that is meant to appeal to a demographic of young boys who are into fantasy and would do anything to see half naked women fighting monsters, aka nerds/geeks. Their stance is one of, this is nothing more than eye candy, a blast of visual effects with scantily clad women, and no plot. I mean this, if true, really is the definition of a movie that is seeking to just pander to a small crowd. I mean don't kid yourself with Movie Bob's attempt to disguise the whole half nudity as an artistic attempt at burlesque. I mean really? A girl is institutionalized and about to get a lobotomy and to escape the horror's of this and her life she is going to go to a fantasy world where her and her friends strip down? Please.
Speaking of Movie Bob, considering the OPs post holds Movie Bob in such high regard as compared to Spill's terrible thrashing of 13 year olds; go watch Movie Bob's review of the Expendables. He uses much harsher language and directly insults the crowd the movie was intended for. I mean seriously, wtf, Bob in this case loves the movie and really doesn't care that it has no plot, it clearly is just about the visuals, so just sit back and enjoy them, why are you worrying about plot everything doesn't need plot just have fun! But that is exactly what he bashed the Expendables for... I would seriously go recommend watching Movie Bob's, but I have a feeling the impact of Bob's insults won't be that great because you probably won't consider yourself a part of the crowd that Bob is referring to, and granted I don't know you, but as life usually is people who think of them selves as geeks/nerds usually have some animosity to the crowd Bob is referring to.
Sigh, with all that said let's summarize. Yes missing the ending (last 5 minutes) of any movie would suck for any viewer, but even then like in your case missing that one point still wouldn't affect the viewer's enjoyment of the rest of the movie. And the reviewer in question really didn't miss anything that important in terms of what is happening to the lead, he just missed a part about the motivation behind what a bad guy is doing.
Also, the bashing down right bashing of an audience, really isn't that deep, their stance is one of this movie panders to this crowd of adolescents, and the movie is pretty much terrible. The only people who will go see this and try to salvage anything out of it are people who share some traits in the targeted demographic, and that is a shame to them because they think it is a waste of money and this will just fuel Hollywood to make more of this.

 

[Watchmacallit]

Critics, in my experience, think they are a god in their respective fields. So if they see something like Sucker Punch, they think, '13 year old nerd' would watch this, its crap. Their heads are normally too far up their own asses IMO.

 

[JonnWood]

Ehh.. what do you expect really?

Its a film, built to look like an Anime.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378194/

 

[GotMalkAvian]

I have every intention of seeing Sucker Punch at some point this weekend, reviews be damned. I love Zack Snyder's work and the trailers looked amazing. However, I am also going into this movie with an understanding of what it is: Pure unmitigated fanservice. I'm not expecting a deep plot or compelling characters, and I think that's where a lot of critics fail.

For some reason, a lot of critics end up with this annoying attitude that movies can't just be entertainment. In order to warrant a good review, a movie has to be a masterpiece of the form (being foreign, a period piece, or a biopic just about automatically doubles a film's credibility, for some reason) or a kids' movie... I don't get it. Critics can't understand that some movies are supposed to be mindless and gratuitous, and that their value derives entirely from those

Sometimes it seems that every critic is a bitter film student who couldn't hack it as a director...

tl;dr version: Critics take themselves way too seriously and people should just see movies that they want to see.

Well, after seeing Sucker Punch, I stand corrected... That movie was god-awful. I still have nothing bad to say about Zack Snyder as a director, since he was in top form visually and artistically. The problems lay with the plot and the acting, which were both horribly executed.

Don't get me wrong, I can tell that there was a plot there somewhere, but I just don't think Snyder was a capable enough writer to handle the great concept he came up with. I think he's spent too much time working with the works of writers the likes of Frank Miller and Alan Moore, and got it in his head that he could do it, too.

There was so much potential in Sucker Punch, and I really loved the action scenes. The rest of it was just bogged down by almost-incoherent storytelling, bad acting, and copious amounts of glitter.

 

[GotMalkAvian]

Ehh.. what do you expect really?

Its a film, built to look like an Anime.

http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0266697/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0378194/

See also: The Matrix. Well, the first one. And maybe the second.