Films you generally avoid...

[Broccoli]

If that were the case, he wouldn't have been in journalism for over 40 years.

Self-fulfilling prophecy.

What? That doesn't even make sense.

Good, you agree. Now, we're making progress.

Just more denial. "Your point had nothing to do with my post" is obvious nonsense. In fact, it had everything to do with it, and you know that.

No. That was me making a joke. Seems like you are the one more in denial.

In any event, earlier I pointed out how he gave positive reviews to the prequels when they were generally given negative reviews. This served as some proof against your initial point that Ebert follows the herd. Instead of disproving what I was showing you, you go on to his Clone Wars review which didn't really disprove anything I said.

But, as others have said, you have not given any proof to your initial claims and just keep repeating your rant. Therefore, I have to conclude "that which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence."

Edit:

Er, can we maybe drop the whole Ebert debate so we can get back to the original topic?

Sorry, Greg. I didn't see your post when I posted. You are quite correct. We should.

 

[Amaris]

a latent fear of being discovered as wholly wrong.

Reminiscent of the "latent fear" that the Emperor actually has no clothes. Or as someone once put it, a shadow of his former self. But if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, do we even have to admit that the tree fell?

Well, that's a pants shittingly bad non-sequitur. You are a sad and lonely man trying to glom onto the sad point that the man you despise will forever be more rich and successful than you could hope to be, and what's worse; he disagrees with your opinions regarding film, and you find that unacceptable.
Please seek help, because if that stick in your ass gets any deeper, it's going to puncture your brain.

 

[kirk55555]

I avoid Westerns, romance/romantic comedies, and most modern comedies. There are some good comedy movies that have came out in the last few years, but I'm picky about what I find funny. I'm perfectly fine with curse words, and off color stuff (George Carlin is my favorite comedian ever, and I love Family Guy) but I can't stand most sexual humor. Superbad might be the worst comedy movie I've ever tried to watch. I don't like the American Pie/Van Wilder movies either, or movies that are similar. Anything with too many sexual jokes just isn't entertaining to me.

 

[Gov Kodos]

a latent fear of being discovered as wholly wrong.

Reminiscent of the "latent fear" that the Emperor actually has no clothes. Or as someone once put it, a shadow of his former self. But if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, do we even have to admit that the tree fell?

Well, that's a pants shittingly bad non-sequitur. You are a sad and lonely man trying to glom onto the sad point that the man you despise will forever be more rich and successful than you could hope to be, and what's worse; he disagrees with your opinions regarding film, and you find that unacceptable.
Please seek help, because if that stick in your ass gets any deeper, it's going to puncture your brain.

And the horse you rode in on!

 

[Set Harth]

You keep reposting variations of the same rant without offering a shred of evidence to support it.

Not a shred, not an iota. The problem is that I don't know the dimensions of an "iota" because you're the one making the rules.

Apparently The Fountain doesn't qualify as an "iota". So what number of films would get us to iota or shred status? Two? Fourteen? A gazillion?

[ Not coincidentally, Ebert gets the plot of The Fountain substantially wrong, and that's not just my opinion, it's also been confirmed by the director. Such is the danger of lazily copying someone else's cheat sheet instead of figuring out the answer yourself. Ebert did get the most common wrong answer, though. Rock on! ]

In practice, Ebert doesn't have the time to follow the herd, because he's usually writing before he's aware of what it is the herd thinks. He couldn't kowtow to public opinion on a film unless he's uncanny at guessing at it.

The key word here is usually. Also, there's a way to find out public opinion on a film before other "professional" reviews are published. I'll give you a hint: it has something to do with computers.

Well, that's a pants shittingly bad non-sequitur.

I don't think you know what "non sequitur" means, but if my post actually produced such an effect, you may wish to consider changes to your diet and/or lifestyle.

You are a sad and lonely man trying to glom onto the sad point that the man you despise will forever be more rich and successful than you could hope to be

I don't care about that at all, but it's an interesting fantasy universe you've imagined nonetheless. You may have overlooked the fact that my point also involved "despising" all those who let others do their thinking for them, including reviewers and completely random people, many of whom have no particular wealth or success to speak of.

Seems like you are the one more in denial.

Of course, anyone denying the infallibility of the great Ebert would have to be in denial. By definition.

Instead of disproving what I was showing you, you go on to his Clone Wars review which didn't really disprove anything I said

Once again, that review contains charges levied against the film which also apply to the PT, and similarly supports its criticisms of the film by contrasting it with the OT in ways which also apply to the PT. Thus it is unsurprisingly in line with fashionable PT hate, and the portrayal of Ebert as PT maverick fails.

 

[Gov Kodos]

You keep reposting variations of the same rant without offering a shred of evidence to support it.

Not a shred, not an iota. The problem is that I don't know the dimensions of an "iota" because you're the one making the rules.

Apparently The Fountain doesn't qualify as an "iota". So what number of films would get us to iota or shred status? Two? Fourteen? A gazillion?

Or any substantive answer to the question, evidently.

 

[Admiral Buzzkill]

In practice, Ebert doesn't have the time to follow the herd, because he's usually writing before he's aware of what it is the herd thinks. He couldn't kowtow to public opinion on a film unless he's uncanny at guessing at it.

Well, acknowledging the whole of what Ebert said would interfere with Harth's baseless ranting.

Harth can't produce a single good reason to believe that Ebert is a "follower," anyway. Repeating it over and over won't make it any truer, either.

 

[Klaus]

...and we might want to bring this back to genres of film rather than endless kvetching about a reviewer...

 

[Neroon]

Edit:

Er, can we maybe drop the whole Ebert debate so we can get back to the original topic?

Sorry, Greg. I didn't see your post when I posted. You are quite correct. We should.

...and we might want to bring this back to genres of film rather than endless kvetching about a reviewer...

A good recommendation and much appreciated... provided the focus is placed upon actual science fiction and fantasy films. Otherwise, feel free to start a similar thread in the TVM forum.

 

[Greg Cox]

...and we might want to bring this back to genres of film rather than endless kvetching about a reviewer...

Amen!

I gotta admit: I avoid sad animal movies, too. I can't even watch those heart-breaking anti-animal cruelty ads . . . .

I can watch people getting eviscerated and sleep like a baby. But don't hurt the puppy!

 

[MagGu]

I avoid horror movies. Scary images tend to stay in my mind and scare me later. I've even had nightmares about the guy from Scream. and those movies are pretty tame. I'm a wuss!

 

[Gov Kodos]

I avoid horror movies. Scary images tend to stay in my mind and scare me later. I've even had nightmares about the guy from Scream. and those movies are pretty tame. I'm a wuss!

With horror, I usually avoid the grotesque or realistic in blood and gore. Something like 'Saw' is just unwatchable for me. I enjoy the psychology of horror, but cruelty and gore just don't carry it for me.

 

[Mr. B]

The horror genre is pretty much the only one I abstain from altogether. I see no entertainment value in the graphic, systematic murder of the main cast...and frankly I think there must be something wrong with people that do.

 

[Neroon]

a latent fear of being discovered as wholly wrong.

Reminiscent of the "latent fear" that the Emperor actually has no clothes. Or as someone once put it, a shadow of his former self. But if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, do we even have to admit that the tree fell?

Well, that's a pants shittingly bad non-sequitur. You are a sad and lonely man trying to glom onto the sad point that the man you despise will forever be more rich and successful than you could hope to be, and what's worse; he disagrees with your opinions regarding film, and you find that unacceptable.
Please seek help, because if that stick in your ass gets any deeper, it's going to puncture your brain.

Infraction for flaming. Comments to PM

 

[Amaris]

Reminiscent of the "latent fear" that the Emperor actually has no clothes. Or as someone once put it, a shadow of his former self. But if a tree falls in the forest and there's no one around to hear it, do we even have to admit that the tree fell?

Well, that's a pants shittingly bad non-sequitur. You are a sad and lonely man trying to glom onto the sad point that the man you despise will forever be more rich and successful than you could hope to be, and what's worse; he disagrees with your opinions regarding film, and you find that unacceptable.
Please seek help, because if that stick in your ass gets any deeper, it's going to puncture your brain.

Infraction for flaming. Comments to PM

Noted and understood.

I avoid horror movies. Scary images tend to stay in my mind and scare me later. I've even had nightmares about the guy from Scream. and those movies are pretty tame. I'm a wuss!

With horror, I usually avoid the grotesque or realistic in blood and gore. Something like 'Saw' is just unwatchable for me. I enjoy the psychology of horror, but cruelty and gore just don't carry it for me.

I was the same way with The Passion of the Christ. There were many scenes where I simply couldn't look, because it was so gory, that my stomach simply couldn't tolerate it.

 

[Deckerd]

That was an interesting read. A blazing row punctuated by "I don't like horror" every second post.

I don't like horror btw.

 

[PlainSimpleJoel]

^ LOL. I'm another person who doesn't like Horror. Especially many of the recent horror films like Saw series and Paranormal activity. I don't wish on seeing that violence. Same goes for anything that sounds like Twilight or the Twilight movies themselves.

Not really interested in most rom coms either. Part of me is wanting to see what the Harry Potter films are like. Can't be bother reading the books.

 

[Locutus of Bored]

The problem with most horror films today for me is that their basic conventions have been so overdone and parodied that the films are usually completely predictable at this point, so instead of trying something new to correct that problem they compensate by going over-the-top with gore, gimmicks, and the grotesque. The scariest scene I've watched in a movie to this day is still the nightvision scene in 'Silence of the Lambs,' specifically where Buffalo Bill reaches out to stroke Starling's hair in the darkness. Scared the hell out of me, my friend, and the audience when I saw it in the theater as a teen. Dramas with horror elements like Silence of the Lambs and 'Seven' (the pedophile still being alive, for instance) are far more ominous in tone, shocking, and scary than conventional horror films are to me.

I avoid romantic comedies for many of the same reasons. The format for most of them is so completely predictable at this point. The main characters who are destined to be together treat each other like absolute garbage throughout 95% of the film until they finally realize the obvious and hook-up, despite the abominable and often illegal things they did up to that point. Frequently there's a group of women badly dancing and doing air karaoke to Motown songs with kitchen utensil or hairbrush microphones as well.

The "________ Movie" parodies. Unfunny and lazy movies that seem to think simply referencing the source material without expanding on the joke is enough. There hasn't been a decent parody film since the era of Airplane, The Naked Gun, and Hot Shots.

Live-action movies with personified animal characters. I can't remember the last time one of these was any good. Children's animated movies can pull it off, sometimes, but in live-action it's almost always awful even before you go for the death blow by bringing in Brendan Frazier or Kevin James.

Animated films that crash headlong into the Uncanny Valley. Your films work better when the characters look silly and not like dead-eyed horror mannequins. Occasionally a film can pull it off and not be creepy, like Final Fantasy, but that's the exception to the norm.

 

[Gov Kodos]

The problem with most horror films today for me is that their basic conventions have been so overdone and parodied that the films are usually completely predictable at this point, so instead of trying something new to correct that problem they compensate by going over-the-top with gore, gimmicks, and the grotesque. The scariest scene I've watched in a movie to this day is still the nightvision scene in 'Silence of the Lambs,' specifically where Buffalo Bill reaches out to stroke Starling's hair in the darkness. Scared the hell out of me, my friend, and the audience when I saw it in the theater as a teen. Dramas with horror elements like Silence of the Lambs and 'Seven' (the pedophile still being alive, for instance) are far more ominous in tone, shocking, and scary than conventional horror films are to me.

I avoid romantic comedies for many of the same reasons. The format for most of them is so completely predictable at this point. The main characters who are destined to be together treat each other like absolute garbage throughout 95% of the film until they finally realize the obvious and hook-up, despite the abominable and often illegal things they did up to that point. Frequently there's a group of women badly dancing and doing air karaoke to Motown songs with kitchen utensil or hairbrush microphones as well.

The "________ Movie" parodies. Unfunny and lazy movies that seem to think simply referencing the source material without expanding on the joke is enough. There hasn't been a decent parody film since the era of Airplane, The Naked Gun, and Hot Shots.

Live-action movies with personified animal characters. I can't remember the last time one of these was any good. Children's animated movies can pull it off, sometimes, but in live-action it's almost always awful even before you go for the death blow by bringing in Brendan Frazier or Kevin James.

Animated films that crash headlong into the Uncanny Valley. Your films work better when the characters look silly and not like dead-eyed horror mannequins. Occasionally a film can pull it off and not be creepy, like Final Fantasy, but that's the exception to the norm.

'Silence of the Lambs' has a lot of wonderfully scary scenes, for me it's when Hannibal walks off slowly blending in with the crowd at the end. The monsters among us, delightfully chilling.

 

[Klaus]

I'll agree with the growing consensus here about modern horror films... the classics are fun, but the current splatter/torture genre doesn't do anything for me either. It's probably a good thing that the sfx tech is developing so carnage can be more real in other movies, but that's about it.