Script of the Bridge
Banned
Brilliant review, funny and very on the mark.
I love you Plinkett.
I love you Plinkett.
Please. GAF loves lots of things. This is a thread regarding a negative review of a bad movie. What did you expect?
It's not like it's a universally held opinion that it's bad. I think it's fine. Enjoyable, even. It has a 73 on RT and a 60 on Metacritic. That's far from "universally reviled" territory.
I haven't met anyone who has said anything good about it. Thinking about it the only people I've ever seen say it was a good/great movie are on this here forum!
It's not like it's a universally held opinion that it's bad. I think it's fine. Enjoyable, even. It has a 73 on RT and a 60 on Metacritic. That's far from "universally reviled" territory.
Don't disrupt the false narratives!Yeah, that hack Paul Feig couldn't have made a movie like Spy without being carried by a talented writer like Paul Feig.
seems like a pretty universally held opinion tbh but maybe that's just me
regardless rt and meta score don't really mean all that much in the grand scheme, especially in regards to a movie's reception long term. it's been said but there have been great movies that have shit scores and garbage movies with good scores.
I haven't met anyone who has said anything good about it. Thinking about it the only people I've ever seen say it was a good/great movie are on this here forum!
I didn't intend to single you out. If that appears the case I apologize.
I just.. oh God here I go. I remember GAF as a foundry of awesomeness. As a source of information and opinion that I would find constantly relevant, entertainmentimg and refreshing. And *something* HAS changed. I've met Evilore a number of times and he's consistently grateful and gracious. And handsome and typically surrounded by really, really attractive girls. That's probably a product of the environments I meet him in but whatever. This is HIS joint. We're all just pulling up bar stools. But something is rotten in Denmark. Maybe the negativity is a reflection of the times. But I don't like it. And I'm going to say so.
Does anyone remember a period of time when GAF wasn't negative?
Don't disrupt the false narratives!
You're mistaking your opinion for fact, it happens easily, don't worry.
Hilarious how many people think their echo chambers reflect reality
You're mistaking your opinion for fact, it happens easily, don't worry.
The one bad thing with the review is that they never 2016'd up the classic film. Would have been great to see them edit in tons of natter around the actual joke.
If a comedy movie isnt funny whats left?
The one bad thing with the review is that they never 2016'd up the classic film. Would have been great to see them edit in tons of natter around the actual joke.
If a comedy movie isnt funny whats left?
Remember Scarface?
Hilarious how many people think their echo chambers reflect reality
Remember Scarface?
Man after watching the whole review I just feel bad for Paul Feig.
Finally got around to it, was decent. Way better than TFA's review, and it didn't have any diversity talk, thankfully. Dunno if Mike learned that he was wrong or to be quiet about it; hopefully the former and not the latter.
My only issue is that a lot of stuff he said I've heard people say in other videos, though there were some interesting things, like talking about Paul Feig.
Yeah, they really went after him. Not that it was unjustified, but that condensed in an hour-long critique...it's almost hard to not feel bad for the guy.
I feel like if anything it highlights the incompetence of the Sony executives, this should have never been given the green light .
I wasn't too hot about it but I was dragged to the theather and was pleasantly suprised. I enjoyed the concept as well, it was something different than what I expected.
Must not be at that part. They bash Paul for directing it.
I'm gonna have to nerd out for a second.
Gozer didn't summon anything. Gozer is the Destructor. Stay Puft is Gozer.
This is all true. Instead of whining about product placement this should really have gotten more focus. You can tell they don't really get it with how many knocks at the screenwriter they took.This is the biggest problem with RLM and internet reviewers in general who are outside the industry and not actually inside it -- they only criticize what the think they can see -- i.e. the acting, writing, and directing -- but they have no idea so much of that is dictated and hamstrung by factors BEHIND THE SCENES that come down from executives.
Max Landis tried explaining this to them, but I get the sense they just hand-waved away a lot of the good things he actually had to tell them because, well, in their opinion...it was coming from Max Landis.
I mean, Pascal got hit a little bit in the beginning, but then that's that. Why? Because you can't really see things that she did. She put all the wrong pieces together, but then what else are you left to talk about for an hour?
There's no DVD footage of her mistakes they can easily cut to like with Feig or the actors.
This is the biggest problem with RLM and internet reviewers in general who are outside the industry and not actually inside it -- they only criticize what the think they can see -- i.e. the acting, writing, and directing -- but they have no idea so much of that is dictated and hamstrung by factors BEHIND THE SCENES that come down from executives.
Max Landis tried explaining this to them, but I get the sense they just hand-waved away a lot of the good things he actually had to tell them because, well, in their opinion...it was coming from Max Landis.
I mean, Pascal got hit a little bit in the beginning, but then that's that. Why? Because you can't really see things that she did. She put all the wrong pieces together, but then what else are you left to talk about for an hour?
There's no DVD footage of her mistakes they can easily cut to like with Feig or the actors.
This is all true. Instead of whining about product placement this should really have gotten more focus. You can tell they don't really get it with how many knocks at the screenwriter they took.
It really was a bad movie. Hilarious that reviewers didn't dare to call it what it was and it got a pretty high 73% rt rating.
Thank goodness we had Wonder Woman. Look at that succeed solely on the merit of being a good movie without needing to drag in the gender issue.
I think it'll be interesting which direction opinions on this film will veer in 10-20 years time. Will it be largely forgotten or gather cult status? I don't think it's good enough for the latter tbh, but it might cos of Holtzmann, the sfx, a sort of over course correction against the backlash.