posted
That's a phrase I see in many summer popcorn-flick reviews. Like most reviewer-speak, it's a way to disguise what they really want to say, which is usually one of two things:
"I loved this, but I'm too ashamed to admit it." -or-
"I'm glad I'm not one of the morons this would appeal to."
Looking at the Cannes reviews for Indiana Jones and the Awkward Title, the phrase is coming up quite often.
quote:Originally posted by Puffy Treat: Like most reviewer-speak, it's a way to disguise what they really want to say, . . .
Or it means what it says directly. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. When I reviewed films at my college paper, I used similar phrases, without hidden meanings.
Posts: 6316 | Registered: Jun 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:well, it would be some movie if it appealed to people who *don't* like this sort of
The statement, if taken literally and directly, doesn't actually mean thing. It's a tautology that says that you'll like this movie if you'd like this movie.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
no, it means that if you don't like a given genre, you won;t like a film that's a representative of that genre, unless it's a really good movie.
is that still a tautology?
Posts: 5700 | Registered: Feb 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Morbo: Or it means what it says directly. Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar. When I reviewed films at my college paper, I used similar phrases, without hidden meanings.
What does it mean directly? It's rather an empty statement.
If it refers to genre, it's rather murky...genre pictures can vary wildly as far as actual content goes. Posts: 6689 | Registered: Jan 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't know; I think it may be possible to recognize that a film is a decent example of its genre, but that I'm not the target audience for that genre. I feel that way about a lot of romantic comedies. I like some of them, but I tend to think that the ones I do either transcend the tropes of their genre or have really well written dialogue or really well realized characters.
(pats self on back for excellent taste)
My wife, by contrast, is a bit more forgiving- she'll still be invested in such a movie when it hits the borderline-inevitable "last-third-crisis-that-threatens-to-keep-our-lovers-apart", which is when I start to squirm and want to leave.
Posts: 3826 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:no, it means that if you don't like a given genre, you won;t like a film that's a representative of that genre, unless it's a really good movie.
While that's certainly what it means, you have to look beyond what the words directly say to find that meaning. I was responding to Morbo's "Or it means what it says directly."
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It depends on what one means by "sort." I think it's legitimate that people can have different ways of classifying movies.
I think if one uses the phrase in utter sincerity, it could mean the reviewer feels the film does not transcend its niche.
But I think there's movies of the sort one likes, and movies that are in an unknown set, and movies one has learned from prior experience that one does not like. I believe I try to classify what I have not liked about movies so I can avoid them in the future.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It isn't a tautology. "This film" is not identical to "this sort of film." The fuzziness may come from not being specific as to what category the reviewer is referring to (Bad films? Period dramas? Harrison Ford movies? John Williams movies? Movies with talking words? Action movies light on plot trying to be funny?).
Posts: 26077 | Registered: Mar 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think it's fairly important that a film knows what it wants to be and conveys that to the audience.
Unfortunately, a lot of movies are trying to be something slightly knew. Unfortunate for trying to establish a system for classifying movies, anyway. I think most people want to think they are watching something novel, even if they aren't. Oh, an example I was thinking of was possibly The Hudsucker Proxy. It apparently confused the heck out of most audiences. I loved it.
Posts: 11017 | Registered: Apr 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
I can get what the reviewers are saying. They realize that the movie caters to a certain demographic, and the people in that demographic are likely to enjoy the movie...even if the reviewer didn't.
My mom loves "feel good" type movies. Sometimes they were musicals (ie: sound of music), sometimes romantic comedies or dramas, but they all had the same feeling. Growing up, neither my dad nor I were fans of her types of movies (we leaned more towards action movies), but we could identify the movies she would enjoy. We would refer to them as "mom movies." We didn't have to enjoy them ourselves in order to know whether or not she would like a particular movie.
Posts: 1901 | Registered: May 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think that statement (in the OP) could be taken a number of ways:
1&2: as you stated them 3: As the case of a movie that was enjoyable but not good. My token case (for me at least) is Wild Wild West... I would never claim that it's a good movie, but I like it for some reason... it's not witty or intriguing, it's just kinda fun. 4): As the case of a movie that was not what you were expecting. My token case was that when I went to see Being John Malkovich, I was expecting a straight-up comedy for some reason, and so despite it being a brilliant movie I was dissatisfied. 5) As the case of a movie that is in a genre that you tend not to appreciate, but others do. I don't like horror movies, but that isn't to say that there aren't really well done horror movies out there. Others don't like really peculiar movies that don't have traditional plots, but I happen to love many of them (see things like Hudsucker Proxy).
Now I'd admit that you're probably right. Most of the reviewers using that phrase are probably just too aloof to admit they like it, or are trying not to ostracize the masses who would attack them for being so aloof over a movie that will almost certainly be well received. It's going to be one of the common consequences of being in the field (or any field for that matter) after a while your expectations and tastes have changed so much that you can no longer empathize nearly as much with the "common man" who doesn't review these things for a living.
Posts: 1038 | Registered: Feb 2006
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
