Film critics don't understand context

Home Forums Off Topic Film critics don't understand context

This topic contains 4 replies, has 3 voices, and was last updated by Mr.K Mr.K 1 year, 11 months ago.

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #3817
    KahunaDrake
    KahunaDrake
    Participant

    Well, I watched Walk Amoung Tombstones the other day and I thought it was a decent film. Nothing spectacular or worth a re-watch but it was solid. After the movie, I wanted to look up the context of a plot point in the film and upon searching, I found two articles from the LA Times and the Washington Post dismissing Tombstones as “torture porn” and entertaining fantasies of violence towards women.

    Are you kidding me?

    First of all, the LA Times article compared Tombstones to Eli Roth’s films. Dude, have you even seen Hostel? Tombstones is nothing like “touture open”. To me, it was a milder version of 8mm.

    Second, the most violent deaths on screen were done to MALE characters. The women were implied to suffer horrible deaths but we never see the killers do the deed on screen.

    Lastly, and most important of all, CONTEXT. This is a gritty crime drama based off a book series from the 70s, of course there is going to be grisly violence done to both men and women by psychos. What did they expect, a pleasant romp in a Summers Eve-scented field of wildflowers?

    The LA Times article said the movie was pretty good but gave it so much crap because it had depictions of violence towards women. The Washington Post article was just a call for people not to support any movie/TV series that has themes of violence towards women. I thought it was sort of funny when Game of Thrones was brought up in the comments section and critized because it had too much sex, violence (and rape male-on-female rape) in it.

    People, sex and violence (of all kinds) are a part of life and human nature. Why is it such a big deal if fiction mirrors those themes? Plus, it’s all fantasy! I’m sure people have crazy fantasies all the time but they don’t act on them (at least the sane majority of the population).

    http://www.latimes.com/entertainment/movies/la-et-mn-walk-among-tombstones-review-20140919-column.html

    I kind of went on a rant there but I seriously hate it when “critics” don’t look objectively at subject matter and put their own bias on things. It’s nothing new but it needs to change.

    Rabid ecstasy, 1997

    #3820
    PandaWarlock
    PandaWarlock
    Participant

    The thing about reviews is that they are not objective. They aren’t even supposed to be completely objective. Whether it’s about movies, games or books. Review is always from the reviewer POV. It depends on preferences, mood and experience of the critic. Someone who likes certain genre might be more enthusiastic about a film or harsher on it.

    And you know what? That’s fine. As long as the critic makes it clear that it’s his opinion. Because reviews can be subjective, but shouldn’t be biased. Shouldn’t be political. If first line of the review is “I’m no fan of slashers”, I know to take his opinion with a grain of salt. Or to be really excited if he actually praises the movie. But once politics and ideologies get mixed up in this, when he stops seeing film as a film and loses his distance – that’s the time to pass the column to someone else.

    #3892
    Mr.K
    Mr.K
    Participant

    I read this a year ago while strolling through Rotten Tomatoes and yeah, this is a really bad review. He does realize that Hostel was a torture film based on an actual incident in Europe and the first Hostel wasn’t even that graphic since most of the deaths were up to the viewer’s imagination (until Hostel 2 & 3 to fuck it up big time). This is why you do the damn research before writing a review that is based on old novels or else, you’re gonna end up looking like a fool (*cough* Rex Reed *cough*)

    "The world is merciless and it's also very beautiful."

    #3920
    KahunaDrake
    KahunaDrake
    Participant

    Ha Rex Reed

    Anyways, its fine if you don’t like a certain type of genre/movie/game but give credit where credit is due.

    Acknowledge what the piece gets right and where it could have been improved.

    These people just sounded like they did not do their research and ignored everything else in the film just to make a “statement”.

    I don’t care about your politics, just tell me if the film is worth my time and/or money.

    Rabid ecstasy, 1997

    #4002
    Mr.K
    Mr.K
    Participant

    That’s nothing Kahuna. Try reading some of the awful reviews for Jupiter Ascending where critic bash the film for “ruining originality” while 50 Shades, Insurgent and Do You Believe? get a free pass on harsh reviews.

    "The world is merciless and it's also very beautiful."

Viewing 5 posts - 1 through 5 (of 5 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.