Article Ratings & Comments
(1-20 of 50 posts) | Reply
on May 27 2009 02:24 PM Of course, there has to be one naysayer. You seem to be on the minority, Joe. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 04:04 PM I'd rather read a negative review from this guy than someone the likes of Armond White. At least Joe can write without coming off as a pretentious tool. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 04:06 PM So you will say... "I do not recommend UP for a viewing?" can you say that??????? (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 04:15 PM So let me see, over the past 2 summers, this is what this guy has done.. Fresh: You don't mess with the Zohan, Mamma Mia Meet Dave Rotten: The Dark Knight Up (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 04:26 PM "the bitter truth we critics must face is that, in the grand scheme of things, the average piece of junk is more meaningful than our criticism designating it so" (Reply to this) |
on May 27 2009 04:47 PM I'm really beginning to dislike you Joe. You've not just pandered on some really good movies ("The Reader", "Rev. Road"), but have come down with a boulder of a fist on giant accomplishments such as "The Dark Knight" and now "Up". C'omon man, what do you get out of this? But hey, at least you liked "Meet Dave". Yesh, just keep rewinding that DVD until "Dance Flick" comes out. I know Wall Street is rotten, but you should lay off the hate juice and take a chill pill. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 04:49 PM At least this guy is a normal reviewer unlike our buddy Armond. I always laugh when people pick a select few reviews of the reviewer, and say that makes them irrelevant. You could do that for any reviewer. It has no merit. Plus, I could see how someone could give TDK a negative review. Personally, I liked it (7.5/10), but it is definitely not perfect. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 04:50 PM (Reply to this) |
on May 27 2009 05:05 PM In reply to this comment (#2508691) No movie is perfect. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 05:32 PM (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 05:41 PM I don't really like Joe but despite some serious headscratchers (Fresh: Zohan? Rotten: Dark Knight?) he's not as bad a critic as Armond White and nowhere near the monumental moron Stephanie Zacherick from Salon.com (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 05:53 PM In reply to this comment (#2508750) I actually really like Stephanie Zacherick. Hers was the only negative review of WALL-E last year that I thought was fair. I also think Morgenster's review is just fine. No Pixar film is perfect and deserving of unanimous rave reviews. (Reply to this) |
on May 27 2009 05:58 PM In reply to this comment (#2508714) Slash, the point isn't that no film is perfect, the point is that everyone made Dark Knight out to be perfect. It wasn't. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 06:08 PM It was a matter of time before a rebel showed up. I trust Pixar well enough to just say this: your review is wrong because the movie is good. There we go. I can't wait until a Pixar gets 100%. It's sort of impossible, i want it to be just like Toy Story 1 and 2. Oh well. Maybe next time Pixar. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 06:10 PM In reply to this comment (#2508691) Nobody said it was PERFECTO. They are just grand works, that stick out. They achieve a new level of creation. An undistinguished brand of success and accomplishment. Pixar has done that with every single one of their releases, their 10 movies and most of their shorts. The Dark Knight was one, for elevating a comic book hero into a new geneticism of seriousness and complexity and above all great movie making. **** guys, its not just stories, costumes, effects, or even the acting... It's the freakin emotional state your left in during the scenes, and when the credits roll. Damn it people. This is what movies are about. I can't stand pretentious and pompous priks like Armond, Stephanie, and to a lesser extent Joe (as examples) that overthink, exaggerate and over analyze and by doing so, completely fail to divulge into the layers of works. As Markus G. correctly quoted Anton Ego in saying "the average piece of junk is more important than the criticsm designating itself", and hell, these works are no where near average, and far and away from junk as anything Monet painted. The greatest sin we are committing, is simply investing our time in their web pages, and blogs, etc. Instead of emphasizing and doing our part to spread the word about these great masterpieces. Nevertheless, I do wanna punch Armond "right in the kisser", just like I wanted to do to the dude that right when Wall - E ended said "WHAT A PIECE OF ****, THE ROBOTS BARELY SPOKE", his quote says enough. (Reply to this) |
on May 27 2009 06:22 PM Seriously? Racist comments? Let's not do that. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 06:39 PM i knew the two negative reviews would be Joe and Armond White. couple of *******s. (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 07:00 PM Markus G. - The correct quote is "[T]he average piece of junk is probably more meaningful . . ." (Reply to this) |
|
on May 27 2009 11:48 PM The fresh and rotten system was designed to tell whether it is a bad movie or not. You gave it a rotten because you didn't like it as much as the best animated movie you have ever seen. That didn't mean it was a bad movie, Joe. The low end of amazing is still amazing. Opinions can't be wrong, but yours actually is. And fellow RTers: I have the same advice. He may not be as lousy at reviewing as Armond, but a somewhat lousy critic is still a lousy critic, so don't hold back on old Joe here. (Reply to this) |
on May 28 2009 12:52 AM Yes, Wall Street Journal, God forbid old, white men should be whimsical and adventurous...unless it's with other people's money! (Reply to this) |
IGN RSS Feeds