The "Freeola Customer Forum" forum, which includes Retro Game Reviews, has been archived and is now read-only. You cannot post here or create a new thread or review on this forum.
National treasure is good, better than I thought it would be. Its fast moving, lots of action and just soooooooo fun to watch.However critics said it was rubbish.Which it is not.
My next film im looking forward to is Alexander. I know critics say its disapointing but critics are too harsh these days.They said King Arthur and Troy werent very good and they even said National Treasure wasn't very good.
But guess what I thought they were all very good films and I guess that is my opinion! and everyone is entitled to an opinion. I think that Critics when it comes to films like these expect all films to reach LOTR standard. But lets face it very few films will.
Do you agree?
My next film im looking forward to is Alexander. I know critics say its disapointing but critics are too harsh these days.They said King Arthur and Troy werent very good and they even said National Treasure wasn't very good.
But guess what I thought they were all very good films and I guess that is my opinion! and everyone is entitled to an opinion. I think that Critics when it comes to films like these expect all films to reach LOTR standard. But lets face it very few films will.
Do you agree?
Page:
National treasure is good, better than I thought it would be. Its fast moving, lots of action and just soooooooo fun to watch.However critics said it was rubbish.Which it is not.
My next film im looking forward to is Alexander. I know critics say its disapointing but critics are too harsh these days.They said King Arthur and Troy werent very good and they even said National Treasure wasn't very good.
But guess what I thought they were all very good films and I guess that is my opinion! and everyone is entitled to an opinion. I think that Critics when it comes to films like these expect all films to reach LOTR standard. But lets face it very few films will.
Do you agree?
My next film im looking forward to is Alexander. I know critics say its disapointing but critics are too harsh these days.They said King Arthur and Troy werent very good and they even said National Treasure wasn't very good.
But guess what I thought they were all very good films and I guess that is my opinion! and everyone is entitled to an opinion. I think that Critics when it comes to films like these expect all films to reach LOTR standard. But lets face it very few films will.
Do you agree?
I think it's personal taste, what works for one may not work for another.
But, as a rule, anything that Paul Ross gives his fatfaced thumbs up to is generally a bad bad film.
But, as a rule, anything that Paul Ross gives his fatfaced thumbs up to is generally a bad bad film.
Critics are victims of their own hype most of the time. You need to find a critic who shares your opinions on most films and then read what they have to say about new releases. Works for me.
Paul Ross thinks every film ever made is the best film of the year, easily. But, then again, he isn't a critic.
You tell a really terrible film if it quotes this nobend. And if that's the only quote there is, you're in trouble.
You tell a really terrible film if it quotes this nobend. And if that's the only quote there is, you're in trouble.
Critics have opinions. Like you.
And remember 'enjoyable' and 'good' aren't neccessarily the same things....
And remember 'enjoyable' and 'good' aren't neccessarily the same things....
I have a habit of enjoying most the films I see.
Only film I can think of recently that I really hated was 'Bringing down the house'. I'd sooner stick hot needles up my ass than watch the whole of that crapfest.
Only film I can think of recently that I really hated was 'Bringing down the house'. I'd sooner stick hot needles up my ass than watch the whole of that crapfest.
Being Shmidt was critically acclaimed.
I want those two hours back from my life. It goes NOWHERE and does NOTHING. Mabye it's supposed to be a wake up to 9 to 5 suburban deadheads or something.
I want those two hours back from my life. It goes NOWHERE and does NOTHING. Mabye it's supposed to be a wake up to 9 to 5 suburban deadheads or something.
Hedfix wrote:
> Being Shmidt was critically acclaimed.
Not "About Schmidt"? ;P
But no, I didn't enhjoy it at all either. Same with "Punch Drunk Love", one of the only movies I had to turn off half way through. I usually enjoy these types of movie, but I just wasn't in the mood I guess. I'll not be going back to either one of them.
"Punch Drunk Love" screamed at me that only movie snobs should like it. You know the type, the ones that thought "Lost in Translation" was something other than 2 hours of tedium, looking out of windows and "lets laugh at the Japanese, aren't they kooky and weird". Damn, at least Clive James, when he covered "Endurance" at least made the effort to look as if he was laughing with, and not at. Probably wrong though. :)
> Being Shmidt was critically acclaimed.
Not "About Schmidt"? ;P
But no, I didn't enhjoy it at all either. Same with "Punch Drunk Love", one of the only movies I had to turn off half way through. I usually enjoy these types of movie, but I just wasn't in the mood I guess. I'll not be going back to either one of them.
"Punch Drunk Love" screamed at me that only movie snobs should like it. You know the type, the ones that thought "Lost in Translation" was something other than 2 hours of tedium, looking out of windows and "lets laugh at the Japanese, aren't they kooky and weird". Damn, at least Clive James, when he covered "Endurance" at least made the effort to look as if he was laughing with, and not at. Probably wrong though. :)
Pandaemonium wrote:
> But no, I didn't enhjoy it at all either. Same with "Punch Drunk
> Love", one of the only movies I had to turn off half way
> through. I usually enjoy these types of movie, but I just wasn't in
> the mood I guess. I'll not be going back to either one of them.
See, I liked both. They're both fairly gentle comedies, and I know you like more confrontational brands of humour. I think you have a point though; you have to be in the mood for that sort of film.
>
> "Punch Drunk Love" screamed at me that only movie snobs
> should like it. You know the type, the ones that thought "Lost
> in Translation" was something other than 2 hours of tedium,
> looking out of windows and "lets laugh at the Japanese, aren't
> they kooky and weird". Damn, at least Clive James, when he
> covered "Endurance" at least made the effort to look as if
> he was laughing with, and not at. Probably wrong though. :)
Mm, I prefer Takeshi's Castle to Lost in Translation...
I liked the general feel of the film, but it's a shame she forgot to bother with a decent script.
> But no, I didn't enhjoy it at all either. Same with "Punch Drunk
> Love", one of the only movies I had to turn off half way
> through. I usually enjoy these types of movie, but I just wasn't in
> the mood I guess. I'll not be going back to either one of them.
See, I liked both. They're both fairly gentle comedies, and I know you like more confrontational brands of humour. I think you have a point though; you have to be in the mood for that sort of film.
>
> "Punch Drunk Love" screamed at me that only movie snobs
> should like it. You know the type, the ones that thought "Lost
> in Translation" was something other than 2 hours of tedium,
> looking out of windows and "lets laugh at the Japanese, aren't
> they kooky and weird". Damn, at least Clive James, when he
> covered "Endurance" at least made the effort to look as if
> he was laughing with, and not at. Probably wrong though. :)
Mm, I prefer Takeshi's Castle to Lost in Translation...
I liked the general feel of the film, but it's a shame she forgot to bother with a decent script.
I'm glad I'm not the only one that thought Lost in Translation was a load of rubbish.
Page: