• OriginEnergySux@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    6
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    7 days ago

    Nope, I’m still pissed off at Ridley Scott’s Napoleon for changing things historically. It was a fun movie and really entertaining but it pissed me off so I couldn’t fully enjoy it.

    I’m assuming this movie will be the same, so I’ll pass until I learn to let things go

  • lordbritishbusiness@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    7 days ago

    I have. I enjoyed the heck out of it, it’s a retelling definitely intended for modern audiences with some things removed and additional historical context added.

    It’s an excellent telling of an old story that reminds you that the Iliad was not truly glorious, and those that go to war will not come back the same.

  • cmbabul@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    8 days ago

    I swear rotten tomatoes and IMDb fucked up movies and tv more than anyone talks about. You can’t REALLY make an review of a work of art, even if it is corporate produced tripe, with a percentage scale or */10 system, and before anyone comes at me I know it’s been done for decades but it was never a be all and end all thing, critics wrote articles about things and you might disagree with their sensibilities and go see it specifically because a particular critic didn’t like it, the opposite is also true.

    At some point though we crossed a line where no one actually reads the criticism and internalizes it, instead they just look at the number and make it either a personal attack or validation. Thats a really bad way to experience art of any kind.

    This isn’t a complete thought I feel, but I hate the reality of film and television criticism today, not because critics are worthless, because that’s just silly. If you like something Peter Travers said was dog shit go find a critic that speaks to your taste it’s not difficult and doesn’t mean your favorite movie actually sucks.

    • |IlI|lIIl|IlIll|Il|IllI|@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      8 days ago

      I agree they both fucked it up, but my main problem is how there seems to have been a clear shift in how they “weigh” reviews after both IMDB and RT were bought by large corporate entities (Amazon and Fandango, respectively).

      I can’t help but feel like a lot of the movies coming out from those companies or their subsidiaries (…and at least some number of politically expedient allies) somehow manage to get higher overall review scores on RT and IMDB than they maybe deserve.

      For example, that shitty right-wing nationalist churchslop movie “Young Washington” got relatively high scores on RT

      …and IMDB

      …but not on Letterbox’d

      …which is one of the main reasons I shifted to checking Letterbox’d for reviews… but unfortunately, another day to shift to a different platform be coming soon again.

      • cmbabul@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        I want to be clear I don’t disagree at all you’re correct. Corporate control of art means they will go to any lengths to ensure profit.

        But also, I really kinda glossed over the overarching problem, which is that the film industry is now driven by reviews and vibes reviewed by c-suite folks that answer to shareholders and don’t give a fuck about the actual film or show or whatever

        This has always been true with the plastic arts but we’ve reached a zenith.

        I will die on the hill that art cannot be considered a financial investment. It by definition has to take risks and investment people cannot handle that

        • djdarren@piefed.social
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          8 days ago

          This Patrick Willems piece does a really good job of digging in to why so many streaming “blockbusters” are so shitty these days.

          Tl;dw: The streaming companies have the metrics, and are now essentially making movies that hit certain beats to satisfy what they perceive as customer requirements, rather than movies that exist for their own sake.

      • NaibofTabr@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        In Darknet Diaries Ep 27: Chartbreakers, Jack Rhysider describes how cheap and easy it is to buy your way to the top of the Apple Podcasts rating chart or onto the New York Times bestseller list.

        After listening to this, it’s pretty easy to extend the logic to every other rating platform. Paying for review manipulation is basically part of the marketing budget.

    • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      8 days ago

      Toy Story is 100%

      What does that mean? Does it mean it’s the best movie ever made? Nope, it just means everyone at least kinda likes it. It’s Toy Story, it’s a good movie. Though I wouldn’t say it’s the greatest movie of all time. Just a decent movie.

      The way the scoring works means that if everyone thinks a movie is better than average, the movie gets a perfect score.

      If 75% of the critics think something was the greatest movie ever, while 25% didn’t like it, it’s a 75% score. It might be a movie you’ll think is the greatest movie ever too, but you might give it a miss to watch movie that 90% of the critics thought was just ok instead.

      So if a studio is making a movie to try to get a good score, they will make it so it doesn’t offend anyone, and have it universally be considered ok. The way these sites measure movies encourages mediocrity and playing it safe.

    • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      Yeah these ratings are worse than useless. Oh The Abyss 14% better than Amelie?? Fuck off, Poindexter.

      They’re completely disconnected from my own opinions and when I see then before watching a movie they just distract me by wondering what tf other were watching.

      You can’t map.reduce this shit, it’s totally subjective

      • amorpheus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        it’s totally subjective

        Yet we agree that there is such a thing as one movie being better than another, broadly speaking. It’s not something to boil down to a percentage, but you might as well show more detail when you have the data.

        Personally, I use ratings to estimate whether a movie that I’m interested in is worth my time. Especially Rotten Tomatoes is super useful for this because the critics score is basically a distilled thumbs up or down.

        • grrgyle@slrpnk.net
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          7 days ago

          it’s totally subjective

          Yet we agree that there is such a thing as one movie being better than another

          I mean I wouldn’t say that, it’s kind of the opposite of what I was saying actually. But if reviews form a kind of aggregate metric you find useful then that’s good for you.

          Elsewhere I even talked about how frequently I disagreed with Siskel and Ebert’s thumbs ups/downs, but the text of their reviews at least showed me I would love a movie they thought was bad.

  • Noxy@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    5
    ·
    7 days ago

    My partner and I walked out of The Odyssey after ten minutes and got a refund.

    WAY too loud. Excruciatingly, painfully, unnecessarily loud. And yet I still had trouble hearing some of the dialogue. We were in an AMC Dolby theater, and I don’t think I’ll ever go to a Dolby branded theater like that again.

    I’m not sure how to split the blame here between AMC, Dolby, or Christopher Nolan, but I’m mad at all three for the ringing in my ear that’s still there several hours after we walked out.

    Can’t comment on the movie itself as we barely saw any of it. Might see it at a different theater but I’ll be bringing earplugs just in case, though I may want a refund there too if it’s still so loud as to require earplugs.

    Nolan really not helping his reputation at being an outright sadist when it comes to sound.

  • trslim@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    7 days ago

    I watched it, did not care for it. To dark, there were so many points i could not see what was happening, WAY to loud, actually hurt my ears, and, i just did not enjoy it as an experience. Actors are all fine, but there were times where the writing felt clunky or out of place ngl.

    • Noxy@pawb.social
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      7 days ago

      My partner and I actually walked out after 10 or 15 minutes because it was so painfully loud. Asked for (and received) a refund.

      Infuriating that I can’t trust movie theaters to maintain reasonable volumes. I shouldn’t have to bring earplugs to a movie.

  • thethrilloftime69@feddit.online
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    I have a very simple system. If the movie was made for legitimate artistic reasons, then I think it was worth the effort to make it. If the movie was made to sell tickets, I don’t bother.

    I decide which artistry is legitimate.

    • Trampampoline@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      6 days ago

      Simpler than that. The movie was made because Nolan saw the Titans movies and thought, “someone should make a not ‘ass’ version”.

  • DandomRude@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    I think the best approach is to find reviewers whose tastes largely align with your own. Their reviews can serve as a good reference when you’re looking for a movie you haven’t seen yet.

    There are simply too many criteria you could apply. The “Cinesiasts”, for example—who like films like Citizen Kane or works by Ingmar Bergman, Aki Kaurismäki, and the like—naturally know a great deal about their field. However, that by no means means their reviews would be a good reference point for the general public, who simply want to be entertained and don’t place too much value on artistic merit or the most elaborate technical skills of filmmakers.

  • andz@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    7 days ago

    Just came home from watching it. I’ve read it quite a few times, both out loud to students and by myself, so I didn’t go in completely blind so to speak.

    Still, it managed to confuse me a few times, especially a few conversations, and at some points, a little who’s who. (Might just have been me, though. See below).

    Still, overall, it was a pleasure to watch. Damon gives one of his best performances. It’s perhaps not the best he’s ever done, but he’s good enough to carry a large part of the movie by himself. There are other standouts as well, a few from his crew, and Pattinson is his usual brooding self, which fits right in here. Casting Tom Holland as Telemachus perhaps wasn’t completely fair to his capabilities, but he did well enough with his limited time and lines.

    It’s quite hard to write about further details without spoiling stuff, but one thing I can say is that the scenery is very well done. If you go in expecting Greek summer sunshine, you’re in for another thing altogether. The backdrops were gorgeous. The CGI is also quite well done, imo.

    Anyway, to be completely honest here, I have issues with my spine and right leg (the ischias nerve) so I’m pretty heavily medicated and that might have put a positive tint on the whole thing, I don’t know.

    (tl;dr) Still, in my opinion, it’s very much worth watching, and if you can afford it, it’s worth watching it in a movie theatre because of the effects and sound.

    Edits: I had to repair my broken and not very sober English after the fact.

  • ddplf@szmer.info
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    8 days ago

    My man, If you need your tastes to be affirmed by some magical numbers, then I don’t know what to tell you.

    • 1984@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      8 days ago

      It’s not about affirmation, it’s about feeling connected to some parts or the human race. Mostly people who are simular to ourselves. When you meet your friends, you probably discuss things you all like. Its universal.

      We feel what we feel and we look for others to feel the same. Not affirm it, but to not feel alone in our feelings.

      • GladiusB@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        8 days ago

        As much as I understand what you say, this is not one of those things for me. I just don’t care what other people like or don’t like. I am going to form my own opinion based on my own experience and information. I also don’t look at these ratings at all.

      • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        8 days ago

        It’s both. The old motherly advice “if your friends jumped off a bridge would you too?” still applies. Everything is intertwined.

        • 1984@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          8 days ago

          Well yeah, I dont do anything my friends say. We often have different opinions about things too. But its how you deal with that. Some people fight over different opinions (common on Lemmy). Others have their own opinion without needing others to agree, and still remain friends anyway.

  • 4grams@awful.systems
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    8 days ago

    I never look at reviews, I just go in expecting to be disappointed and so usually am not. Even shitty movies are fun since I plan on them sucking…

    Update- saw it last night. A bit of a mess, but interesting and enjoyable. I like how it was a retelling of the story but connected it with modern themes. I enjoyed very much the diverse cast, I like performances, and appreciate various takes on the roles from performers with different backgrounds. Dialog was a bit wooden in places, especially the last line, but it was a show, not a documentary so I don’t mind a little ham-fistedness.

    The best part was the Trojan Horse portrayal. My whole life I’ve seen the cartoons of a horse rolled up to the gate, and a simple telling of how they were tricked. This put the human cost of it into perspective (the fictional human cost anyway), and the stuggle with how it unfolded by Odysseus. Made me think about it more than I ever have, and from a new perspective.