"Lady in the Water" = GARBAGE!
RichA
trotsky
> Another dog week of summer movies
>
> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it. Those dickheads
would pan "Citizen Kane" if it were released today. But tell us, Rich,
are you saying you're stupid enough to listen to what the critics say?
How would you ever manage to see a horror movie, then? Get your head
out of your ass and stop being such a goddamned hypocrite, loser.
Alric Knebel
I'm not much for believing critics, but if critics panned THE VILLAGE,
I'm in agreement this time. But I don't remember that being the case.
I remember some of them issued caveats, and some of them hemmed around
saying bluntly that it was band, but none of them expressed anything
near the sharp disdain I felt for it. What raises doubts about the
quality this out is that he Shyamalan cast HIMSELF in something close to
a starring role. This is a sign that he's lost his objectivity and his
ego is outweighing his good judgment. I think I'm going to wait to see
what all you guys say about it before I go to it. I'll probably see THE
DEVIL WEARS PRADA this weekend.
--
______________________________________________
Alric Knebel
http://www.ironeyefortress.com/C-SPAN_loon.html
http://www.ironeyefortress.com
RichA
Sorry, there is more to it than this. The garbage label appeared long
before the movie
release. It appears the director has fumbled the ball here badly. But
I'll still see it.
Scooby
RichA wrote:
> Sorry, there is more to it than this. The garbage label appeared long
> before the movie
> release. It appears the director has fumbled the ball here badly. But
> I'll still see it.
But, but, but you proclaim the film as garbage, the critics state that
it is garbage, and yet you will still see it?!? I see now how these
films make money.
David Johnston
>RichA wrote:
>> Another dog week of summer movies
>>
>> http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
>
>
>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
As did the viewers.
Brandon Fisher
"David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
news:n872c2lhp39hm2hb1...@4ax.com...
Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
atyl
> >
> > As did the viewers.
>
> Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
Well, in it's second weekend, the box office for The Village dropped
almost SEVENTY PERCENT. That was the nearly the worst second weekend
drop of any movie of 2004. (I believe only Alien vs. Predator's plunge
was steeper.)
That's the power of bad word of mouth.
Brandon Fisher
"Scooby" <scooby...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153506334.8...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
He proclaimed that the film was labelled garbage long before it's release.
You know, before anyone actually SAW it. This movie seems to have been
reviewed before principal photography even began.
Critics are generally useless. Their opinions are no more valid than the
opinions posted here. And if we all went by the opinions posted here, we
would never see another movie again.
RichA
Can't you people READ? I didn't say it was garbage, I only relayed the
general message from the reviewers, 75% of whom say it sucks.
RichA
Then do what any independent person would do, go see it and not worry
about
what other write or let their opinions hurt your fragile little
feelings. If you think
the opinions are wrong, go see it and then if you like the movie,
counter the negative
opinions with your own.
>From my point of view, I'm worried about the movie simply because the
subject matter
seems lame. But I have no real opinion of the substance of the movie
until I see it.
Ari Flisherman
has the worst reviews ever.
"RichA" <rande...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:1153480280.8...@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com...
Derek Janssen
> "Scooby" <scooby...@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:1153506334.8...@b28g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
>>RichA wrote:
>>
>>
>>>Sorry, there is more to it than this. The garbage label appeared long
>>>before the movie
>>>release. It appears the director has fumbled the ball here badly. But
>>>I'll still see it.
>>
>>But, but, but you proclaim the film as garbage, the critics state that
>>it is garbage, and yet you will still see it?!? I see now how these
>>films make money.
>
>
> He proclaimed that the film was labelled garbage long before it's release.
> You know, before anyone actually SAW it.
So...like...maybe he wanted to show off what he could C-P from the
RottenTomatoes site for headline value, even if he didn't know enough
actual content to say something about it?
<thinks>
...NAAAHH.
Derek Janssen (that would be, like, casting aspersions on Rich's
credibility!)
eja...@comcast.net
Alric Knebel
Every viewer I personally know hated it, and one woman I know went to
the theater owner and asked for her money back. AND HE GAVE IT TO HER.
The movie was an outrage, leading up to something big that turned out
to be ridiculous.
Tom Zielinski
"Alric Knebel" <alric@[cableone.net]> wrote in message
news:12c2pme...@corp.supernews.com...
> Brandon Fisher wrote:
>
>> "David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
>> news:n872c2lhp39hm2hb1...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:47:39 GMT, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Another dog week of summer movies
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
>>>
>>>As did the viewers.
>>
>>
>> Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
>
> Every viewer I personally know hated it, and one woman I know went to the
> theater owner and asked for her money back. AND HE GAVE IT TO HER. The
> movie was an outrage, leading up to something big that turned out to be
> ridiculous.
I agree, and I'm a big fan of William Hurt. He was the only redeeming thing
in that laughable and predictable excuse for a drama. It's pretty obvious
that Shyamalan will never come close to the quality of THE SIXTH SENSE.
That was his shot, everything since has been a disappointment. Though there
were moments in SIGNS I suppose. Anyway, I have little interest in LITW
and won't be viewing.
Saw CLERKS II today. I mostly really like Smith's stuff, and though I
laughed a few times I was overall disappointed. It really only worked when
Mewes and Smith were on-screen. Smith has likely peaked as well. Too bad
too, because I really enjoyed CHASING AMY and J & SB STRIKE BACK.
David Johnston
>>>>>>Another dog week of summer movies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
>>>>
>>>>As did the viewers.
>>>
>>>
>>> Every single viewer hated it?
Every single critic hated it?
trotsky
Why would you see it if it's "garbage", idiot?
trotsky
Okay, you didn't say it was "garbage" EXCEPT IN SUBJECT LINE YOU STUPID
MOTHERFUCKING IDIOT, but you did say "It appears the director has
fumbled the ball here badly" (as if there was a good way to fumble the
ball) which can probably be interpreted as "it's shit" also. So what
the hell is it you're talking about?
trotsky
> "Alric Knebel" <alric@[cableone.net]> wrote in message
> news:12c2pme...@corp.supernews.com...
>
>>Brandon Fisher wrote:
>>
>>
>>>"David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
>>>news:n872c2lhp39hm2hb1...@4ax.com...
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:47:39 GMT, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>>Another dog week of summer movies
>>>>>>
>>>>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
>>>>
>>>>As did the viewers.
>>>
>>>
>>>Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
>>
>>Every viewer I personally know hated it, and one woman I know went to the
>>theater owner and asked for her money back. AND HE GAVE IT TO HER. The
>>movie was an outrage, leading up to something big that turned out to be
>>ridiculous.
>
>
>
> I agree, and I'm a big fan of William Hurt. He was the only redeeming thing
> in that laughable and predictable excuse for a drama. It's pretty obvious
> that Shyamalan will never come close to the quality of THE SIXTH SENSE.
> That was his shot, everything since has been a disappointment. Though there
> were moments in SIGNS I suppose. Anyway, I have little interest in LITW
> and won't be viewing.
"The Village" was easily M. Night's most accomplished film, and I'm a
little surprised you didn't see that, TZ. The production values were
superb, and the film was shot with artfulness that reminded me of Ang
Lee. Bryce Dallas Howard was good enough to be a revelation, and Adrien
Brody had such a difficult part I don't know how many actors could've
even "attempted" it. The story was fascinating, and really the only
thing you could say bad about it is that he set himself up as a writer
by making people think they were going to get some huge surprise based
on his previous films. Basically, when people criticize a movie as
nuanced as this, there comments are all variations on "It was shit".
What a lot of people don't realize is that most of their comments are
shit too.
> Saw CLERKS II today. I mostly really like Smith's stuff, and though I
> laughed a few times I was overall disappointed. It really only worked when
> Mewes and Smith were on-screen. Smith has likely peaked as well. Too bad
> too, because I really enjoyed CHASING AMY and J & SB STRIKE BACK.
Kevin Smith's fifteen minutes was up ten or fifteen years ago.
Tom Zielinski
"trotsky" <gms...@email.com> wrote in message
news:Cfgwg.1092427$xm3.89416@attbi_s21...
> Tom Zielinski wrote:
>> I agree, and I'm a big fan of William Hurt. He was the only redeeming
>> thing in that laughable and predictable excuse for a drama. It's pretty
>> obvious that Shyamalan will never come close to the quality of THE SIXTH
>> SENSE. That was his shot, everything since has been a disappointment.
>> Though there were moments in SIGNS I suppose. Anyway, I have little
>> interest in LITW and won't be viewing.
>
>
>
> "The Village" was easily M. Night's most accomplished film, and I'm a
> little surprised you didn't see that, TZ. The production values were
> superb, and the film was shot with artfulness that reminded me of Ang Lee.
> Bryce Dallas Howard was good enough to be a revelation, and Adrien Brody
> had such a difficult part I don't know how many actors could've even
> "attempted" it. The story was fascinating, and really the only thing you
> could say bad about it is that he set himself up as a writer by making
> people think they were going to get some huge surprise based on his
> previous films. Basically, when people criticize a movie as nuanced as
> this, there comments are all variations on "It was shit". What a lot of
> people don't realize is that most of their comments are shit too.
I remember walking out simply feeling disappointed. Perhaps the film was
not marketed properly, but the "twist" climax was a let-down if not
laughable. And "twist" is how Shyamalan is marketed. If expectations were
too high they weren't of my own making. Are you planning on seeing LITW?
Speaking of Mr. Lee, I finally caught HULK on DVD. Enjoyed it immensely, so
good call on the recommendation. Much more nuanced and far superior to
SUPERMAN RETURNS. (Comparing the comic genre.) I also just rented THE
MATADOR and liked it better than when I first saw it in the theater. Have
you seen that film?
Derek Janssen
>
> I remember walking out simply feeling disappointed. Perhaps the film was
> not marketed properly, but the "twist" climax was a let-down if not
> laughable.
(There's an old comic's rule about "Never let an audience be smarter
about your subject than you are--They will kill you."
This also applies if you're hoping to impress them with neato film
concepts that were already done better and in more detail in teen novels
several years before, and you're not aware the audience has already read
them and you haven't--
It's pretty darn humiliating when your one defense against a plagiarism
lawsuit was, "...But I thought I was making it UP! :( ")
> And "twist" is how Shyamalan is marketed. If expectations were
> too high they weren't of my own making.
I blame it on the mania for "Sixth Sense":
There was the creepy atmosphere, Bruce Willis' performance, Haley's
Oscar moment, the unexpectedness of the good movie (remember when we saw
the trailer and thought "Bruce and a kid?--Mercury Rising II!"?), and
the first time we'd ever seen "Magical realism" that *was* played
realistically, and didn't try to go all cutesy about it.
But no. That's not what hit the headlines at the time. And seven years
later, it's STILL not the part of the movie we talk about. -_-
Even "Unbreakable", which had the same creepy realism and gloomy-dog
Bruce performance, but didn't really have a Big Twist (just a little
one, once you got the general concept), was audience-horsewhipped
immediately after "Sixth" for "Ehh, the Twist Ending wasn't as good--I
could see it coming a mile away!"
So, congratulations, people--YOU created the M. Night Frankenstein you
now enjoy, and if so, you may have gotten the Shyamalan you deserved...
Like the kid burping at the table, or like JK Rowling killing off Harry
Potter characters, Night gave us what he thought we all wanted.
Oh. Joy.
Derek Janssen (and, like most "twist" movies, "Sixth" is better once you
DO peek at the Christmas presents)
eja...@comcast.net
Marian...@aol.com
Derek Janssen wrote:
> So, congratulations, people--YOU created the M. Night Frankenstein you
> now enjoy, and if so, you may have gotten the Shyamalan you deserved...
> Like the kid burping at the table, or like JK Rowling killing off Harry
> Potter characters, Night gave us what he thought we all wanted.
> Oh. Joy.
I dunno. I think M. Night, even at his worst, has more substance to
his films than some directors at their *best*. Of course, I loved
"Sixth Sense" in all aspects. "Village" scared the bee-jezus out of me
and I didn't groan at the ending at all. I thought it was pretty good,
actually. The "crop circles" film was just okay, for me, but not
actually terrible to the point where I could say it was a huge
disappointment. Okay, the "Sixth Sense" was by far the best--but the
problem is that it's so terrific that it's tough to equal. I am going
to shell out for "Lady In the Water", probably tomorrow night. Heck,
I've spent my money on worse losers [in my opinion] in the past 12
months than I suspect M.N.S. could ever produce--even if he went
deranged and lost all perspective. However, Derek, what I think
perhaps you are saying is that M.N.S. now believes all his films have
to have some unexpected twist at the end--which is probably not always
necessary and, could,. in some instances, prove contrived. I think the
guy is a talented enough artist not to have to just look for such
stories to tell. He has proved his chops as a director and could even
move along out of the horror genre.
MFalc1
Derek Janssen wrote (in part):
> So, congratulations, people--YOU created the M. Night Frankenstein you
> now enjoy, and if so, you may have gotten the Shyamalan you deserved...
> Like the kid burping at the table, or like JK Rowling killing off Harry
> Potter characters, Night gave us what he thought we all wanted.
> Oh. Joy.
>
I peeked at the audience for LADY IN THE WATER in roasting-hot
Chatsworth, CA before going down the hall to see CLERKS II. The
attendance looked sparse.
Let's all face it. Most people that aren't warned off by the reviews
are likely to withhold
their ticket money because they weren't sold by the premise/trailers.
I do agree with the sentiment that Night should try doing adaptations
of other people's work or, even, try working in a different genre.
But if you are a wealthy-as-a-pasha writer/director who has ridden the
rollercoaster of applause/rotten tomatoes for four films worth since
your breakthrough, it makes sense that you have to purge yourself of
toxins at some point.
Let's wish Night a better sixth film and move on to a thread about
whether or not Ivan Reitman should go back to making tasteful IKEA
comedies like DAVE and JUNIOR.
Mark L. Falconer-film and video links at
http://hometown.aol.com/mfalc1/links.html
Recent film/DVD releases seen:
CLERKS II ***
BASIC INSTINCT 2 *1/2
Brandon Fisher
>
>> "David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
>> news:n872c2lhp39hm2hb1...@4ax.com...
>>
>>>On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:47:39 GMT, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>Another dog week of summer movies
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
>>>
>>>As did the viewers.
>>
>>
>> Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
>
> Every viewer I personally know hated it, and one woman I know went to the
> theater owner and asked for her money back. AND HE GAVE IT TO HER. The
> movie was an outrage, leading up to something big that turned out to be
> ridiculous.
And every viewer I personally know liked it. So... statistically
significant? No.
Granted, there are plenty of people that didn't like it. But, these wild
generalizations that everyone shares the same opinion that it was awful just
aren't valid. Even a low Cinemascore poll of 63% positive moviegoer reviews
opening weekend still shows that a MAJORITY of people liked it. Now, no
studio would love a score of 63%. But, 63% is a far cry from the 0% that
some would like to believe.
Brandon Fisher
>> Critics are generally useless. Their opinions are no more valid than the
>> opinions posted here. And if we all went by the opinions posted here, we
>> would never see another movie again.
>
> Then do what any independent person would do, go see it and not worry
> about
> what other write or let their opinions hurt your fragile little
> feelings.
Uh... who's fragile little feeling got hurt here? And who said I didn't
plan on going to see it?
> If you think
> the opinions are wrong, go see it and then if you like the movie,
> counter the negative
> opinions with your own.
>>From my point of view, I'm worried about the movie simply because the
> subject matter
> seems lame. But I have no real opinion of the substance of the movie
> until I see it.
I love how you have to respond with this antagonistic post just to agree
with me. Who are you arguing with, exactly?
trotsky
No, but I will. Brosnan really has grown as an actor, and I would watch
anything he chooses to be in at this point. He just seems like a good
guy too, and probably will never be a Scientologist.
trotsky
> Derek Janssen wrote (in part):
>
>
>>So, congratulations, people--YOU created the M. Night Frankenstein you
>>now enjoy, and if so, you may have gotten the Shyamalan you deserved...
>>Like the kid burping at the table, or like JK Rowling killing off Harry
>>Potter characters, Night gave us what he thought we all wanted.
>>Oh. Joy.
>>
>
>
> I peeked at the audience for LADY IN THE WATER in roasting-hot
> Chatsworth, CA before going down the hall to see CLERKS II. The
> attendance looked sparse.
>
> Let's all face it. Most people that aren't warned off by the reviews
> are likely to withhold
> their ticket money because they weren't sold by the premise/trailers.
>
> I do agree with the sentiment that Night should try doing adaptations
> of other people's work or, even, try working in a different genre.
>
> But if you are a wealthy-as-a-pasha writer/director who has ridden the
> rollercoaster of applause/rotten tomatoes for four films worth since
> your breakthrough, it makes sense that you have to purge yourself of
> toxins at some point.
>
> Let's wish Night a better sixth film and move on to a thread about
> whether or not Ivan Reitman should go back to making tasteful IKEA
> comedies like DAVE and JUNIOR.
Superb job of pigeon-holing.
moviePig
Alric Knebel wrote:
> Brandon Fisher wrote:
>
> > "David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
> > news:n872c2lhp39hm2hb1...@4ax.com...
> >
> >>On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:47:39 GMT, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>RichA wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Another dog week of summer movies
> >>>>
> >>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
> >>
> >>As did the viewers.
> >
> >
> > Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
>
> Every viewer I personally know hated it, and one woman I know went to
> the theater owner and asked for her money back. AND HE GAVE IT TO HER.
> The movie was an outrage, leading up to something big that turned out
> to be ridiculous.
In fairness, the theater will give your money back even if, say, you
complain that the lead actor had b.o. In further fairness, of course,
THE VILLAGE likely garnered more than its share of such requests...
but, fwiw, I doubt nearly so many people would felt outraged had they
seen it in isolation (i.e., if VILLAGE had been some little Euro indie
they'd stumbled into).
--
/---------------------------\
| YOUR taste at work... |
| |
| http://www.moviepig.com |
\---------------------------/
Tom Zielinski
> No, but I will. Brosnan really has grown as an actor, and I would watch
> anything he chooses to be in at this point.
It's quirky and funny, and Brosnan is really good. A huge departure role
for him considering he had not yet been let go from the Bond gig. I have
never been a fan much of Greg Kinnear, but he's also good. The ending
surprised me too. Well done.
> He just seems like a good guy too, and probably will never be a
> Scientologist.
LOL! Quite right.
According to his Playboy interview, he considers himself a "sensualist."
Whatever that means, but it sounds like fun. Maybe he should start a
church...
RichA
That was the accumulated opinion of the critics who have seen it, not
mine.
Hence the link to the critical reviews. Understand now?
RichA
Because except for The Village I thought the director's other efforts
were decent enough
and I'm willing to give whatever he does a chance while at the same
time noting what
other people are saying.
trotsky
I see what you're saying: you are unable to comprehend how to attribute
an opinion to someone else or pass it off as your own. Thanks for playing.
trotsky
> trotsky wrote:
>
>>RichA wrote:
>>
>>
>>>trotsky wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>>RichA wrote:
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>>Another dog week of summer movies
>>>>>
>>>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it. Those dickheads
>>>>would pan "Citizen Kane" if it were released today. But tell us, Rich,
>>>>are you saying you're stupid enough to listen to what the critics say?
>>>>How would you ever manage to see a horror movie, then? Get your head
>>>>out of your ass and stop being such a goddamned hypocrite, loser.
>>>
>>>
>>>Sorry, there is more to it than this. The garbage label appeared long
>>>before the movie
>>>release. It appears the director has fumbled the ball here badly. But
>>>I'll still see it.
>>
>>
>>Why would you see it if it's "garbage", idiot?
>
>
> Because except for The Village I thought the director's other efforts
> were decent enough
Yeah, that's an excellent rationale for posting a subject line saying
"THIS MOVIE IS GARBAGE!" Unfortunately, my conclusion is that you have
a bag of dog turds in place of a brain. Sorry.
RichA
Don't be sorry, you couldn't help being born.
RichA
Alric Knebel wrote:
> Brandon Fisher wrote:
>
> > "David Johnston" <rgo...@block.net> wrote in message
> > news:n872c2lhp39hm2hb1...@4ax.com...
> >
> >>On Fri, 21 Jul 2006 12:47:39 GMT, trotsky <gms...@email.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >>>RichA wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>Another dog week of summer movies
> >>>>
> >>>>http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/lady_in_the_water/
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>"The Village" was terrific and the critics hated it.
> >>
> >>As did the viewers.
> >
> >
> > Every single viewer hated it? Not what I heard...
>
> Every viewer I personally know hated it, and one woman I know went to
> the theater owner and asked for her money back. AND HE GAVE IT TO HER.
> The movie was an outrage, leading up to something big that turned out
> to be ridiculous.
>
There was also nothing revolutionary about a group trying to escape the
current
World because it's "too violent" blah, blah.
trotsky
Is that the rationale you use for walking around with a head full of dog
turds?