posted
I wouldn't say his anti-3D argument is completely invalid. The entire movie is blocked with 3D in mind. If it weren't meant to be watched in 3D I promise you a lot of direction would be different. A lot of 3D movies feel a lot more awkward when you don't watch them in 3D. With that in mind, I can understand not wanting to go and watch it, if he hates 3D that much.
That said, these fake reviews are incredibly stupid.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: As if nobody ever uses a trailer as the basis for excoriating a movie?
Yes, of course, that's what trailers are there for.
He wasn't reviewing or trashing the trailer, though, he was trashing the movie. There's a difference between me seeing a trailer and thinking "that movie looks dumb, I'm not going to watch it" and me publishing a review that says "hey, I've never seen this movie, nor do I have a clear idea what it's about, but rest assured that it's stupid, has a recycled, boring, pretentious plot, and the creators clearly don't understand the laws of physics."
His column is about *reviewing* things, and he's now made of trend of reviewing and trashing movies he's never seen. Heck, I would have been fine with him saying what he said about 3D, or even him saying "I'm not going to see it because the trailers look dumb", but him arrogantly trashing the movie itself (making wrong assumptions about it's content in the process and passing it off as fact...) is disingenuous. He hasn't seen it, he doesn't have an informed opinion about it.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
What's actually kinda funny is that there's a lot of people who kind of do the same thing to his books these days.
Posts: 1407 | Registered: Oct 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
Really? I don't doubt you, I just haven't seen anyone who hasn't read his books attack them. Him and his beliefs? Definitely. But the only criticism I've seen of his books comes from people who have, you know, read them. (Though a morbidly curious part of me would really like to see it)
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: As if nobody ever uses a trailer as the basis for excoriating a movie?
Yes, of course, that's what trailers are there for.
He wasn't reviewing or trashing the trailer, though, he was trashing the movie. There's a difference between me seeing a trailer and thinking "that movie looks dumb, I'm not going to watch it" and me publishing a review that says "hey, I've never seen this movie, nor do I have a clear idea what it's about, but rest assured that it's stupid, has a recycled, boring, pretentious plot, and the creators clearly don't understand the laws of physics."
His column is about *reviewing* things, and he's now made of trend of reviewing and trashing movies he's never seen. Heck, I would have been fine with him saying what he said about 3D, or even him saying "I'm not going to see it because the trailers look dumb", but him arrogantly trashing the movie itself (making wrong assumptions about it's content in the process and passing it off as fact...) is disingenuous. He hasn't seen it, he doesn't have an informed opinion about it.
He never claims to have an informed opinion in the first place. It's a from the hip review. It's inherently less useful than an informed review. He of all people would admit to that. People make snap judgements about things they have no intention of trying all the time, why should he be any different?
Posts: 14316 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Actually, Gravity is refreshingly fresh as a sci-fi movie in that it does attempt to stay within the laws of physics. That was one of the main reasons I enjoyed it. There are not enough movies like it.
And Gattaca--OSC doesn't know what he's missing. It's one of the few really good short stories that Hollywood didn't botch, but instead told superbly on the big screen. It's still one of my all-time favorite sci-fi movies.
Posts: 5957 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
BlackBlade: Because he published it. Because he made inaccurate claims about something he knows nothing about and *published it.* Do you understand the difference? If I wrote an article where I wrote "I'm not going to read Ender's Game, it's nothing but a Hitler apologia that sexualizes young boys. Oh, and giant bugs from outer space? That was new in like, the 1950s, though I'm sure Card is smug enough to think this Starship Troopers knockoff is original. Not that I've even read it, I just read the back. And some article someone wrote about it once. But I'm still confident enough in my absolute rightness about things I don't know that I'll publish this in a newspaper read by thousands of people." I imagine you wouldn't be too fond of me. Why does Mr. Card get a free pass to slander movies he's never seen?
Again, (I keep saying this) this is not about him deciding not to see it. People do that all the time. It's fine. It's not about him saying he doesn't want to see it. Again, fine. It's about him reviewing a movie he *hasn't seen* and criticizing it for things that aren't actually true. And then publishing that review! Do you not see the problem with that?
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: He did the same thing but even more extensively with Lincoln last year. He's obviously free to see or not see whatever movies he sees fit, but it's somewhat disingenuous to post a negative review of a movie you've never seen... especially criticizing a movie he's never seen for not understanding the laws of physics when the creators put a tremendous amount of work into making the movie realistic accurate.
What degree of credibility do you actually assign to Orson Scott Card when it comes to film? Because for me, very little he has ever written has had much merit. And that's before you consider the depths of ignorance he trolls when posting reviews of multiple films he refuses to see. The man is an ogre. Who cares?
quote:Originally posted by Dogbreath: BlackBlade: Because he published it. Because he made inaccurate claims about something he knows nothing about and *published it.* Do you understand the difference? If I wrote an article where I wrote "I'm not going to read Ender's Game, it's nothing but a Hitler apologia that sexualizes young boys. Oh, and giant bugs from outer space? That was new in like, the 1950s, though I'm sure Card is smug enough to think this Starship Troopers knockoff is original. Not that I've even read it, I just read the back. And some article someone wrote about it once. But I'm still confident enough in my absolute rightness about things I don't know that I'll publish this in a newspaper read by thousands of people." I imagine you wouldn't be too fond of me. Why does Mr. Card get a free pass to slander movies he's never seen?
Actually it's print, so libel, not slander.
quote: Again, (I keep saying this) this is not about him deciding not to see it. People do that all the time. It's fine. It's not about him saying he doesn't want to see it. Again, fine. It's about him reviewing a movie he *hasn't seen* and criticizing it for things that aren't actually true. And then publishing that review! Do you not see the problem with that?
Exactly. The aggressively unironic, totally unself-conscious hypocrisy of a sci-fi writer with his share of media misunderstandings and pre-judgements perpetuating these types of attitudes is mind boggling.
quote:Originally posted by umberhulk: What's actually kinda funny is that there's a lot of people who kind of do the same thing to his books these days.
To be fair, I secretly, shamefully read all of the books I discuss when it comes to OSC. Even when I say I won't, I do it anyway. If I wrote about it, I read it. Every time.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by advice for robots: And Gattaca--OSC doesn't know what he's missing. It's one of the few really good short stories that Hollywood didn't botch, but instead told superbly on the big screen. It's still one of my all-time favorite sci-fi movies.
Agreed, Gattaca is in that sense perfect as a film: it is exactly what a short-form sci-fi piece should be as a film.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by BlackBlade: As if nobody ever uses a trailer as the basis for excoriating a movie? The movie is great, Mr. Card still hasn't seen Gattaca because somebody he trusts told him he'd hate it.
Whoever that person is, they are a terrible friend to tell him that. Gattaca is one of the best scifi movies I've ever seen.
Posts: 1324 | Registered: Feb 2011
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
