A note i sent to empire magazine online
July 26th 2009 02:59
:
ok
I recently posted this on the Empire online site as a way of venting the anger i had at good reviews being given to bad films. The replies have been mixed, one person had a cry about me criticising Requiem for a dream and se7en in the same post. I felt i needed to because both of these films were awful. And of course the is the obligatory one about signs again because enough bad things cant be said about that film. Hope you enjoy this rant, i had fun writing it.
----------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------
This isnt about the magazine its about the film guide i got as a christmas present. I really do love that book, its full of so many interesting reviews and film fact.
I just have a little problem agreeing with some of the reviews, i will use 3 to exemplify my problem.
Requiem for a dream-This film was given 4 stars, and the review insists 'the performances...pack real power'. To me this film was nothing more than 96 minutes
of directorial masturbation. The overuse of effects depicting the taking of drugs, the irritating and unrelatable characters and the stupid predicaments they get
themselves into make for a film not worth watching. Ever.
The films best part: I'll tell you when i find it
Se7en- This is a film i heard people talk about for years before i watched it. I heard the hype about how great it was and how the performances were amazing etc.
I think this film should be considered a low point for the careers of everyone involved. The plot is pretty thin, a serial killer finds people he sees as committers of
the 7 deadly sins and uses the sin as inspiration for how to kill them e.g. making a fat guy eat himself to death. The effects are grisly and the film has a perverse feeling
to it, but nothing else in the film warrants the acclaim it recieved.
The films best part: Seeing as this was supposed to be a scary film, i guess it would have to be the way Gwyneth Paltrow made her eyes look so dead. Spooky.
And finally the worst of them all..........
Signs- This film was given 3 stars. I would give it 1 star- the film really sucked, but it looked nice while doing it. I heard a lot of good things about this film,
not one of them was true! The aliens looked so stupid, the whole premise of the thing was rediculous! I also think that M.Night should never appear in
any other of his films (you know, or stop making films all together) because that guy can NOT act.
The films best part: Seeing that family portrait of mel gibson and his family in the beginning- the look on his face is priceless
----------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------------------------- ----------
This isnt about the magazine its about the film guide i got as a christmas present. I really do love that book, its full of so many interesting reviews and film fact.
Requiem for a dream-This film was given 4 stars, and the review insists 'the performances...pack real power'. To me this film was nothing more than 96 minutes
of directorial masturbation. The overuse of effects depicting the taking of drugs, the irritating and unrelatable characters and the stupid predicaments they get
themselves into make for a film not worth watching. Ever.
The films best part: I'll tell you when i find it
Se7en- This is a film i heard people talk about for years before i watched it. I heard the hype about how great it was and how the performances were amazing etc.
I think this film should be considered a low point for the careers of everyone involved. The plot is pretty thin, a serial killer finds people he sees as committers of
the 7 deadly sins and uses the sin as inspiration for how to kill them e.g. making a fat guy eat himself to death. The effects are grisly and the film has a perverse feeling
The films best part: Seeing as this was supposed to be a scary film, i guess it would have to be the way Gwyneth Paltrow made her eyes look so dead. Spooky.
And finally the worst of them all..........
Signs- This film was given 3 stars. I would give it 1 star- the film really sucked, but it looked nice while doing it. I heard a lot of good things about this film,
not one of them was true! The aliens looked so stupid, the whole premise of the thing was rediculous! I also think that M.Night should never appear in
any other of his films (you know, or stop making films all together) because that guy can NOT act.
The films best part: Seeing that family portrait of mel gibson and his family in the beginning- the look on his face is priceless
| 58 |
| Vote |
Comment by Dianna G
I Wish This Was 42
Fictional Worlds
Se7en I've never watched. Signs isn't that bad a movie (bear in mind it's been several years since I watched it) and M. Night Shymalan is great at making movies-he isn't the best actor though, to be fair.
~Dianna
Comment by Bryn
Horrorphile
Requiem for a Dream is based on a novel, which I haven't read, but as a piece of cinema I think it's brilliant. It's more about raw experience, and the contrasts between them; essentially pleasure and pain, but ultimately a descent into a nightmare, thus the title: requiem for a dream ... a lament for something good now gone. The characters are all deeply flawed, which I think makes them far more interesting. The whole movie has an atmospheric quality that is similar to being under the influence of a narcotic or amphetamine.
Signs I will agree with you, it's a lame movie overall, although the set up was great. That's the problem with that director, his premises are great and he has high production values, but he wrecks the movie by the second half, allowing his theological reasoning to cloud the narrative dynamic. Unbreakable is probably his only decent movie as a whole.
I think you missed the point though on the other two movies. Sure, they're not for all tastes, but I totally disagree with your argument that they have no redeeming value whatsoever. Nightmare visions just aren't your cup of cold, bitter tea. Fair enough.
Comment by Anonymous