• 🇬🇧󠁿 🇸🇪 🇿🇦 🇮🇪 🇬🇭 🇩🇪 🇪🇺
    European & African
    Drug Discussion

    Welcome Guest!
    Posting Rules Bluelight Rules
  • EADD Moderators: Pissed_and_messed | Shinji Ikari

Recommend YET MORE movies per post

Status
Not open for further replies.
^ I hate that cunt. Well seeing he's in a film called Goon, he is a total fucking goon.

TheSpade said:
The reviews I saw were that it was the worst of his films. Apparently it's the first of his films to be scripted and have a professional acting cast.
Click to expand...

Ali G In Da House is scripted & has a full acting cast (I don't know how professional though). Borat & Bruno were all about the people who thought the character was real, there's none of that in The Dictator & the Ali G film is the same.
 
What is it that you dislike about him? Your tastes in music, art, literature, and film, are very narrow aren't they?
 
Mr Smokes Blunts. said:
What is it that you dislike about him? Your tastes in music, art, literature, and film, are very narrow aren't they?
Click to expand...

What is it I dislike about him? Should I really have to explain that? He's fucking Sean William Scott. I'm clearly not supposed to like him. He's a fucking frat-boy pumping, beer ponging, sweet duding prick. American Pie personified. I wish death upon him & his family.

My tastes in music etc aren't narrow at all. Just thinking about recent gigs - Jamie T, The View, Laurent Garnier, Wu-Tang Clan, Marilyn Manson, Drive-By, DOOM, Nas & Damian Marley, along with various house/techno nights & local/friend's bands. Fairly diverse imo.
 
Last edited:
parttime crackhead said:
What is it I dislike about him? Should I really have to explain that? He's fucking Sean William Scott. I'm clearly not supposed to like him. He's a fucking frat-boy pumping, beer ponging, sweet duding prick.

My tastes in music etc aren't narrow at all.
Click to expand...

He plays a totally different role in this though. He is an actor, not the actual character he was type casted as in his early 20s lol.

If your tastes aren't narrow they certainly aren't open to expansion! The amount of things i've seen you write off entirely, even whole genres of music, is incredible.
 
Mr Smokes Blunts. said:
Goon-movie-poster.jpg


I watched this last night, and it was actually really good. I had written it off as one of those films that needs to be advertised on the sides of buses to draw in the crowds, but it is definitely worth a watch. The fights are good, it's funny, and it has a little bit of emotion in it too. I'd probably give it about a 7.5/10. Definitely one to watch high as fuck.
Click to expand...

No amount of people telling me that it is good could make me watch it. Looks dreadful and is sure to be dreadful.

parttime crackhead said:
^ I hate that cunt. Well seeing he's in a film called Goon, he is a total fucking goon.

Ali G In Da House is scripted & has a full acting cast (I don't know how professional though). Borat & Bruno were all about the people who thought the character was real, there's none of that in The Dictator & the Ali G film is the same.
Click to expand...

Right enough Ali G had to be scripted. It was on BBC News' movie show I heard them say it was his first scripted film but I wasn't sure it was true anyway.
 
TheSpade said:
No amount of people telling me that it is good could make me watch it. Looks dreadful and is sure to be dreadful.



Right enough Ali G had to be scripted. It was on BBC News' movie show I heard them say it was his first scripted film but I wasn't sure it was true anyway.
Click to expand...

That's what I thought, but give it a watch and you'll be surprised. It's got like 80% on rotten tomatoes. I don't think professionals are going to state their reputations on saying something like that is good when it isn't, do you?
 
People give good ratings and reviews to films I find shit all the time. There's no way I'll watch it.
 
parttime crackhead said:
Lol at the "It must be good because it got 80%" comment. Wtf?



Yes, I do.
Click to expand...

You clearly don't understand the reviewing system. Almost everyone shares your opinion that the guy acts in shit films, it's a pretty big risk putting your name on the line to say that he has done a good film, because if you're wrong your name as a critic goes in the bin. They have correlated near enough 100 different professional reviewers and 83 of them like it, and the 17 that didn't like it didn't like it because it was too violent. What possible motivation do they have to jeopardise their career pushing people into the cinema to see a shit film? It has better reviews than the dictator, and it is definitely a better film.
 
Mr Smokes Blunts. said:
It's got like 80% on rotten tomatoes. I don't think professionals are going to state their reputations on saying something like that is good when it isn't, do you?
Click to expand...

As PTCH said, of course they would. They do it all the time. And, as previously noted, professional reviewers have terrible taste in everything in general. Tis a requirement of the job. I only trust reviews from folks who have a consistent track record of knowing what they're talking about. As a broad and general rule, that tends to be the polar opposite of the vast majority of other reviews say :D

No idea about the fillum in question here though. No idea who Sean William Scott is so presume he's just another generic prettyboy I'd cheerfully murder until proven otherwise.

Quite fancy watching a film tonight. Dunno what though. Got some goodies lined up so may have a rummage later.

PS: Before you say I don't understand how reviewers work I'll point out I used to get paid for reviewing films meself so technically could argue the case that I'm a retired professional reviewer... would be a weakly argued case admittedly :D
 
Shambles said:
As PTCH said, of course they would. They do it all the time. And, as previously noted, professional reviewers have terrible taste in everything in general. Tis a requirement of the job. I only trust reviews from folks who have a consistent track record of knowing what they're talking about. As a broad and general rule, that tends to be the polar opposite of the vast majority of other reviews say :D

No idea about the fillum in question here though. No idea who Sean William Scott is so presume he's just another generic prettyboy I'd cheerfully murder until proven otherwise.

Quite fancy watching a film tonight. Dunno what though. Got some goodies lined up so may have a rummage later.
Click to expand...

Take a chance on this film, and see if i'm right ;) I've recommended pretty much nothing but pure class in this film thread. I don't think there's one film i've recommended in here that is of questionable quality! There are way way too many different newspapers, different websites etc. to write them all off.

parttime crackhead said:
Critics talk shite all the time. I don't trust Rotten Tomatoes (or IMDB) scores as the mark of a good film. There's plenty shite films with 80%+ scores on RT.
Click to expand...

Such as? I think most of their shite:good talking ratio is far lower than yours in most cases ;) IMDB reviews are worthless because they are based on popularity among users.
 
Fair enough, Mr SB. Will give it a go when it's up on the torrent sites. Have no particular prejudice for the actor cos I dunno who he is so just my prejudice against Hollywood pap in general to get over ;)

Will get back to you as and when :)

On the Rotten Tomatoes/IMDB ratings debate, the lower the rating the more likely it is to be worth watching seems to be the case for me.
 
parttime crackhead said:
Titanic 3D 88% on RT. Better get that watched straight away, eh?
Click to expand...

That is just pretty much the reviews carried over from when Titanic came out, isnt it? Titanic was a smash hit at the time, and although not up your street (or mine for that matter), it was a really well made and acted film and is enjoyable just on that level. The thing with critics is that they are actually able to go beyond a very simple and superficial level of understanding, and delve into what makes a film enjoyable to watch - from the set design, to the plot, to the direction, to the acting etc. They are also capable of being much more open minded, for instance not just writing a film off because of some weird ingrained prejudice. If you don't like the romance genre it makes sense that if the critics like a film from that genre it's probably not worth watching, but if you do like violence and comedy and they give a violent slapstick comedy a good review, 2 hours of your life is hardly going to be missed. I'm guessing almost any of your favourite top 10 films are going to have reviews that are roughly inline with it...?
 
^^ Methinks you place to much stock on the opinions of jaded and easily bought off professional critics, Meeestar SB. Whilst it's true they are paid to look a lil more indepth at the reasons why a film is "good" or "bad" I think it's also fair to say that the majority of viewers couldn't give two shits about why a film may be technically incredible whilst simultaneously being a total chore to watch. They tend to be looking for different things than the average viewer and draw comparisons that are meanigless for most. Gut instinct is probably a more useful way to judge whether a film is worth a looksee, I'd suggest. Nobody knows your personal taste better than you yourself. Certainly not paid professionals anyway.

Colt: I fuckin' hated Equilibrium despite being a massive Christian Bale fan. Film was pure wank. Style over substance and not especially stylish either. Yawnfest.
 
Shambles said:
Methinks you place to much stock on the opinions of jaded and easily bought off professional critics, Meeestar SB. Whilst it's true they are paid to look a lil more indepth at the reasons why a film is "good" or "bad" I think it's also fair to say that the majority of viewers couldn't give two shits about why a film may be technically incredible whilst simultaneously being a total chore to watch for most. They tend to be looking for different things than the average viewer and draw comparisons that are meanigless for most. Gut instinct is probably a more useful way to judge whether a film is worth a looksee, I'd suggest. Nobody knows your personal taste better than you yourself. Certainly not paid professionals anyway.
Click to expand...

I don't see them as an absolute by any stretch of the imagination. For instance they are extremely biased toward long drawn out stories about how terrible the lives of Jews were in any given historical era, which become quite boring by the 3rd or 4th hour. But I think it is you who is jaded if you think you could pay off so many reviewers who work for national newspapers to say that a shit film is good. If it was that simple they wouldn't hand out such negative criticism for 9/10 films they watch! Usually you can rely on reviewers insofar as you aren't going to sit there watching a film whose plot has loads of holes, whose actors can't act, and whose ending is a total piss take. And for the most part they are generally right for me, especially when the reviews hover around 80-90%... For instance Fight Club, Donnie Darko, OldBoy, Sexy Beast, Pulp Fiction, A Clockwork Orange, American Psycho, The usual suspects, Fargo, The Big Lebowski, Scarface, The Godfather etc. etc. All films worth watching, all films they've said are worth watching. It is very rare that the combined opinion of over 100 reviewers at once lets me down.

And the reviewers agree on almost everything that I have had the misfortune of watching recently that I thought was shit; Alice in Wonderland, Equilibrium, Smoking Aces etc.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top