Sucker Punch

[Seamus]

Words can't express how excited I am to see this movie.

 

Okay, maybe they can. While it certainly looks like the best thing in the world, I've only enjoyed one Zak Snyder movie previous to this (Watchmen. Haven't seen Legend of the Guardians, don't plan to) and hated the others. But a real crazy, stylish movie like this appears to be only comes once every few years--The Spirit and Scott Pilgrim come to mind (I liked both but no, they're not great). Who else is excited?

 

Oh, and please, MARK ANY SPOILERS.

[Lord Sinister]

I was going to watch it until I read that it actually sucks. Shame really as it had looked rather good.

 

http://www.metacritic.com/movie/sucker-punch

[J.C.]

Well, the user reviews are not so bad (6.5 out of 10).

 

"Do yourself a favor and ignore the critics on this one. It's a flawed, but very fun and very awesome ride. It's probably the only case I can think of when saying that a movie reminds me of a video game is actually a complement. For sure, it's a "check your brain at the door" kind of flick, but I don't think they could have found more ways to pack what is obviously the nerdy dreams of Zack Snyder (and, by extension, every nerd) into one movie. It's all very silly, and Snyder needs to work on writing better dialogue, but it definitely exceeded my (somewhat tailored thanks to the critics) expectations"

 

So I think I'm going to go ahead and watch it next week, when it's released here. I don't expect a masterpiece, but I'm sure the visuals are going to be spectacular.

 

EDIT: I just saw the ranking of new movies on that site. "Justin Bieber: Never Say Never" has a rating of 52 out of 100 based on the critics reviews. I mean... WTF?

Edited March 26, 2011 by Guest (see edit history)

[Seamus]

Really, I've been looking forward to it for so long that no critic can sway me from seeing it. When it comes to these kinds of movies I usually ignore reviews, anyway.

[His Spogness]

When it comes to these kinds of movies I usually ignore reviews, anyway.

 

I'm the same way, the only way I can ever know if I like or don't like a movie is if I actually see it (exceptions come to trailers that actually don't impress me and I end up ignoring the whole movie). Critics are anything special anyway; they're just like any other person that says if they like a movie or not, only they're "famous."

 

As for the movie itself, when I saw the trailer, I could tell that it wasn't going to be a completely original masterpiece with an exceptional plot and magnificent dialogue, but it would still be zomg awesomefun anyway. But we'll see when I manage to view the movie.

[Alyxx Thorne]

I definitely think you should ignore the critics and trust your gut feeling on it.

 

Everyone said the Doom movie sucked but I watched it with a pretty open mind and found it somewhat enjoyable.

[Jek Jek Roo]

I know just a little about that movie. I'm not sure go to the cinema to see it, but probably I'll get it on DVD.

[His Spogness]

I definitely think you should ignore the critics and trust your gut feeling on it.

 

Everyone said the Doom movie sucked but I watched it with a pretty open mind and found it somewhat enjoyable.

 

Ah I didn't like the Doom movie; I was extremely disappointed it wasn't demons from hell but a lame-ass virus. The only part I found really enjoyable was the FPS segment, it was hella good. The rest of it made me wanna snooze.

[Alyxx Thorne]

I definitely think you should ignore the critics and trust your gut feeling on it.

 

Everyone said the Doom movie sucked but I watched it with a pretty open mind and found it somewhat enjoyable.

 

Ah I didn't like the Doom movie; I was extremely disappointed it wasn't demons from hell but a lame-ass virus. The only part I found really enjoyable was the FPS segment, it was hella good. The rest of it made me wanna snooze.

Yeah, I already knew that so I had very low expectations when I watched it. I think that actually was in my favour though.

[BTGBullseye]

I definitely think you should ignore the critics and trust your gut feeling on it.

 

Everyone said the Doom movie sucked but I watched it with a pretty open mind and found it somewhat enjoyable.

 

Ah I didn't like the Doom movie; I was extremely disappointed it wasn't demons from hell but a lame-ass virus. The only part I found really enjoyable was the FPS segment, it was hella good. The rest of it made me wanna snooze.

Yeah, I already knew that so I had very low expectations when I watched it. I think that actually was in my favour though.

I bought the movie... They actually got the military procedures down pretty good... Nobody saying "retreat" and lots of double-taps.

[Alyxx Thorne]

Yeah, I already knew that so I had very low expectations when I watched it. I think that actually was in my favour though.

I bought the movie... They actually got the military procedures down pretty good... Nobody saying "retreat" and lots of double-taps.

Watching the extras, they actually had a millitary guy training them for the movie. A bit of a waste since it underperformed massively but that impressed me as well.

[Kirkreng]

I will probably see the movie. I mean a lot of people say it isn't good but tbh i don't mind watching a "bad" movie as long as i enjoy watching it. For example: i watched I am number 4 yesterday and it wasn't a "good" movie(very cliche), but i still enjoyed watching it.

[Doom Shepherd]

I have a rule about listening to critics. That rule is "If you know so much, where's the awesome movie that you made?"

 

That said, I expect this movie to be a guilty pleasure, like Transformers. (Plot? PLOT?? Are you kidding me? I came here to see Giant Fighting Robots. Plot is secondary. Tertiary, if I get to see Megan Fox bent over an engine of some kind.)

[J.C.]

Plot is secondary. Tertiary, if I get to see Megan Fox bent over an engine of some kind.)

 

I approve this comment.

[KoopaTroopa]

I have a rule about listening to critics. That rule is "If you know so much, where's the awesome movie that you made?"

Not to sound like a douche, but that's a horrible policy. No one could basically make any critics of anything taking that idea to it's logical conclusion. You think that webcomic sucks? Well, show me your comic. What, you think that guy is not a good basketball player? Well, how long have you been a member of the NBA? What, you think "Twilight" is shallow and sucks? Win a Pulitzer and maybe then I'll pay attention to you.

I don't know about you, but I'd trust a review by Roger Ebert over one made by Michael Bay any day of the week.

 

That said, I do believe that often critics are wrong or criticize movies for misunderstood reasons, and that they shouldn't be 100% obeyed, but they do offer insight on how good a movie may be, although the final decision must be left to one alone, and not saying "Doom is terrible because the critics say so".

 

That said I believe Doom was terrible and have no real intention of seeing Sucker Punch, until I catch it on TV or something. Don't get me wrong, I really like Zack Snyder and have enjoyed every movie he's made to date, but there's something I realized: It's all been an adaptation, nothing original from him.

Dawn of the Dead was a remake, 300 and Watchmen were comic books and that Owl movie was based on children's books. Now that he has a blank check to write whatever he wants, everyone is apparently realizing "hey, this guy makes beautiful movies, but he sucks at writing". A shame, it sounded like an interesting concept, the whole "real world/insanity imagination world" thing.

[Axeldeath]

Plot is secondary. Tertiary, if I get to see Megan Fox bent over an engine of some kind.)

 

I approve this comment.

 

I do not, who even likes Megan Fox?

[Kirkreng]

yeah, megan fox is overrated.

[Doom Shepherd]

Not to sound like a douche, but that's a horrible policy. No one could basically make any critics of anything taking that idea to it's logical conclusion. You think that webcomic sucks? Well, show me your comic. What, you think that guy is not a good basketball player? Well, how long have you been a member of the NBA? What, you think "Twilight" is shallow and sucks? Win a Pulitzer and maybe then I'll pay attention to you.

You're not a douche.

But what you say plays in to my point. There ARE other comics creators, other NBA players, and other writers, and they generally DO make better critics than your average "Neverdone Jack," because they at least can demonstrate that they know what they are talking about.

 

Harlan Ellison said it best: "You do NOT have a right to an opinion. You have a right to an informed opinion." Quote frankly, everyone else should have to add a disclaimer, like "Your Mileage May Vary." People who state their opinions as though they were absolute fact (like SOME critics do) are douches.

 

Dawn of the Dead was a remake, 300 and Watchmen were comic books and that Owl movie was based on children's books. Now that he has a blank check to write whatever he wants, everyone is apparently realizing "hey, this guy makes beautiful movies, but he sucks at writing". A shame, it sounded like an interesting concept, the whole "real world/insanity imagination world" thing.

Well, you know, MOST successful movies and plays have been adaptations. And almost no directors write their own movies (Kevin Smith excepted.)

 

But that's just my opinion. It's possible I could be talking out of my butt.

[Alyxx Thorne]

yeah, megan fox is overrated.

She's pretty but I'm not convinced by her acting abilities.

[KoopaTroopa]

You're not a douche.

But what you say plays in to my point. There ARE other comics creators, other NBA players, and other writers, and they generally DO make better critics than your average "Neverdone Jack," because they at least can demonstrate that they know what they are talking about.

 

Harlan Ellison said it best: "You do NOT have a right to an opinion. You have a right to an informed opinion." Quote frankly, everyone else should have to add a disclaimer, like "Your Mileage May Vary." People who state their opinions as though they were absolute fact (like SOME critics do) are douches.

 

Thank you.

And what you say makes sense, but my point is that you can't invalidate what a film critic says just because he hasn't made a movie, which seemed to be what you said in the first post you made.

Also remember, especially in a medium like cinema, the movies are made for the audience and not the director (unless you are Uwe Boll I guess), so while a director may have other factors to consider when watching a film and making a more complete critic, these may not actually matter to us, the audience.

For example, a professional runner can look at another one run a race and say "he has an amazing technique, balancing his muscles or whatever", which is something us enjoying the race as audience may not realize, but at the same time we wouldn't give a crap until that "amazing" racer actually wins a race.

In the same way, a director may be able to look at another one and say "he has an amazing ability to connect with the actors and have them do exactly what he wants, and always manages to get the producers to allow him to do whatever he wants", which I'm sure is something they care about, but the final product, the movie, is something we can all watch and appreciate if the things we care about (does it have a good story? Does it look good? Does it convey emotions, make you feel the way you're supposed to while watching the movie?) are there.

I don't need to be an ice cream maker to know whether it tastes like chocolate or shit, is what I'm saying.

 

Hell, from a certain point of view critics may actually prove to be better at criticizing movies than directors, since they have the outsider's perspective we'll have when watching it, only with years of experience to notice subtleties that may not jump out at first sight. Directors may notice more things regarding their area of expertise, true, but generally speaking these may be things we don't care about when watching a film.

 

Well, you know, MOST successful movies and plays have been adaptations. And almost no directors write their own movies (Kevin Smith excepted.)

 

But that's just my opinion. It's possible I could be talking out of my butt.

Of course, but my point is, Zack Snyder, while a great director when it comes to visuals, coreography, camwork and whatever else, apparently lacks in the writing skillset. I didn't really like the way Watchmen was adapted, for example. Was it good looking? Hell yes. Faithful to the original work? Maybe even too much. But it played awkwardly, with Snyder acting as if the comic book had been the storyboard.

Then comes the owl movie. Now, I normally don't like cute children's movies (my avatar notwithstanding) but this was probably the most beautiful movie I've ever seen. The visuals were simply astounding, and my eyes wanted to make sweet tender love to every shot of the landscape or the cute little critters. But the movie could have also been called "Cliche: The movie". I know it was a kids movie, not exactly room to reenact Apocalypse Now, but there are ways to make compelling stories for kids without printing out the most visited pages of TVTropes and using them as basis for your script. I knew exactly what was gonna happen at least 30 minutes before it happened for the whole movie and at the moment I had never heard of the story, never watched any trailer or, indeed, didn't even know it was directed by Snyder until someone told me later, so it wasn't some bias against him either.

 

I just hope he doesn't turn into a new M. Night Shyamalan with bullet-time instead of twist endings. I like the way he directs, but he should consider getting some help with writing.

 

And indeed, as you say,I all say is my opinion as well. Just fun having a discussion.