Films and expectations....

[Mr Mystery]

How do!

Good lord, it's a thread that's not about prices. Fancy that!

But it is kind of a whinge of sorts, kind-of-ish.

You see, this has been triggered by my other thread about Battleship, where I reccommend a film which has been otherwise slated as nothing but good fun.

And it's film reviews, or perhaps, the reviewers I want to discuss....

In short? Are professional film reviewers simply up themselves? I mean right now, we're in January, which means cinema wise the hard, lean earnest weeks of 'look at me I want an Oscar' left right and centre, and precious little thought given to 'ah sod it, it put a grin on my face'.

Now there is of course room for a whole gamut of film styles out there (except Boll. There is no excuse for Boll) but when it comes to reviews, people get so bloody snooty.

Case in point? Transformers. These are a series of films about 80' tall alien robots and their ongoing war with a supporting case of humans, and Megan Fox's norks and the other girls lovely bum. It is there to please. Not to be Oscar fodder, but to give everyone a cinematic thrill in a way the Telly, Stage and Print mediums simply cannot compete with. Yes the dialogue is shonky, yes the plots are often quite wobbly...but then that's not why I'm wanting to see them. I want to see those 80' tall alien robots knocking seven bells out of each other, with a side order of Megan Fox's knockers wobbling about all over the shop in slow motion (sorry EG, but it's true!) and that is exactly what I got. It's a competent piece of entertainment. So why the knocking of it?

Ditto Battleship. To be fair, I picked this up last night because it was £5, and thought why not. Didn't expect a great deal, but again what I watched was a competent piece of entertainment that point blank refused to take itself seriously. Not an earnest, hand wringing moment of introspection, because lets face it this was all about big ships blowing up and aliens get squished, and a moment of moralising would have scuppered it!

These sorts of films don't pretend to be anything else. Just like the Marvel films (although positively shining examples of their genre) they are what they say on the tin. If they tried to punch above their weight they'd ruin themselves. So why are they never judged as such? What makes film pundits slate them because they aren't Citizen Kane, or It's a Wonderful Life?

I mean, I cannot stand Jennifer Aniston. I consider her the single most one dimensional actress I have ever seen, and as such I avoid her work like the plague. I may question the need for a big budget RomCom when it can be done just as sickeningly sweetly on the Telly, but hey, those sorts of films aren't my bag at all, so I simply won't watch them. Doesn't mean the films themselves are incompetently shot, plotted and acted piles of drivel (though I understand Sex in the City 2 is indeed all three).

Other things that get my goat are comparissons to genre classics. Take the Kurt Russell version of 'The Thing'. That will never, EVER be topped in my opinion. It just does everything right, and the effects are awesome (if a little ropey here and there, but hey! Budget!). Now inexplicable remakes/prequels aside.... Just because a genre has a top player (and it inevitably will) doesn't mean it should never be tackled in another way. But please, don't just compare it to the Daddy Film. That doesn't inform me a great deal. For example, Blade Runner, The Directors Cut (to prevent the ending confusing things). The quintessential dystopian view of the future. Many have taken cues from it, but don't tell me when they're not as good, I'll take that as a given. Just tell me whether the film is in itself a worthy addition to the genre, or even better, when you consider it to be superior to the benchmark.

Book reviews don't seem to suffer to quite the same review. Take Fantasy. Tolkein defined the genre, but that doesn't mean all other Fantasy novels are judged by that standard. So why are films reviewers so sodding snobby about things??

[alshrive]

Amen to that brother! i enjoy the genre of film that will never win an oscar even if there was no other contenders and is just there for a good watch! my example- Tremors! all 4 of them are inherently atrocious but you cannot help but watch them and enjoy it! and don't mention Jennifer Aniston- if my wife spots something with her in, I know I am in for a few hours of mind numbing boredom! (at work at the moment- may well come back this evening and put a proper post in place!)

[Godless Zealot]

I can see your point on certain films not being held to the same standards as others but film reviewers have to gauge a standard. Does that mean professional reviewers are a bit snooty? Yes it does but that's their job and they have to take everything into account. I quite like Mark Kermode, he's a bit up himself and quite anally retentive when it comes to films but you can often see his point and his rants can be genuinely funny. Of course they're still just recommendations and it's up to the individual to decide. Personally I always prefer to make my own decisions and choices for entertainment rather than base them on the reviews of others, professionally paid or not. Certain films will always split crowds like Transformers etc but if you enjoy them for what they are that's cool.

[Mr Mystery]

But that's my point.

I'm not so much criticising their own tastes. Not everyone is going to enjoy a brainless blockbuster. But to rubbish a film, precisely because it's a brainless blockbuster doesn't get us anywhere. I'm left with no impression about the film, but a firmly negative opinion of the reviewer.

There are those who simpy pour praise over some black and white art house films, whilst refusing to say anything positive about the blockbuster or other crowd pleasers, like Hipsters, but paid for their opinions. Why? Why have someone so utterly biased? What does broadcasting their opinion on a national scale achieve? Arthouse stuff is not mainstream precisely because it tends to be incomprehensible, pretentious crap, designed for hipsters to claim to enjoy to be that little bit cooler!

[DrLove42]

Megan Fox is on the same list as Angie Jolie for me.

Women people say are hot, but must clearly be missing their glasses and half their brain. Not hot. At all

I take the same view on films as you. Films only win awards if they have some deep meaning. And a journey. And no explosions. The only films that win awards are "art" with very few exceptions.

[Wolfshade]

There are certain things to consider.

Firstly, are film critics still worth while? In this modern era of online-journalism and blogging why is someone who is employed as a critic's opinion any more important than anyone elses.

Secondly, every film no matter how bad there is always someone who likes it and vice versa. I very much enjoy watching films, even bad ones. Also, there can still be something endearing in a poorly made low budget film that a multimillion pound remake does capture.

Thirdly, it irritates me the conservativeness of the film industry at the moment, at one stage every advert I saw for a new film was either a sequel, prequel, re-imagining or spin-off. Not an original storyline in the whole kaboodle. These films are safe bets, a new Star Trek film will not flop, it will make a tremendous amount of money because the die-hard fans will see it regardless of any critic and it is these such cash cows that the studios are trying to milk.

Fourthly, some films are great, not because they are any good, but because of what they remind us of. The Wife and I watch Ghostship the other evening, and it was in my opinion a pedestrian predicatable and poor but she loved it as it reminded her of first night at uni where here and her housemate watched it.

[Mr Mystery]

On your third point Wolfie I kind of agree, but I must tip my hat when like with Star Trek, they really go for it.

[Psychosplodge]

Yeah she does nothing for me.

Some films are great for just turning your brain off and **** blowing up...

[Wolfshade]

Yes certainly, the reboot of the franchise was something slightly different rather than just another sequel.
But look how many spider men films there have been since 2000
Spider-Man
Spider-Man 2
Spider-Man 3
Spider-Man 4 was cancelled
The Amazing Spider Man
The Amazing Spider Man 2 (in production)

[Psychosplodge]

Probably a few too many there