You missed my point, you would do the same. And to be honest, I do discard some opinions. I've read posts from several people who like Scorsese mostly for Goodfellas say that Mean Streets was a boring movie with no plot. When someone says that, of course I'm gonna challenge why, which I believe Capo has also done in the past. If that's all the person can say on the movie without any real reasons, then I generally don't even bother with it. Capo dislikes a lot of movies I think are great, such as Fight Club, but I respect his opinion because he validates it with respectable points.

Amen DV.

Trust me, I rather have someone hate a movie that I dig but back up their negative reviews with valid critical points, then someone to concur with me in liking a certain movie but then give almost ZERO valid serious reasons why, save for "It Rockz" or whatever IMDB-esque posting dreck.

I can understand when some say they don't like a movie and you wonder why (I'd do the same). But when I posted that I thought Mean Streets was boring, that's really all I could remember from it. It's been well over a year or so since I've seen that movie and when I posted that comment it had been a VERY long time since I'd seen it (and I've only seen it once) so I didn't have a lot to work with.

But again Irishman, like your review of FANTASTIC FOUR, a horrible mediocre-as-boiling-water-hell movie(*1/2 out of 5), you don't give a reason why MEAN STREETS is "boring".

Oh and please, none of that Michael Bay-Defense I've seen you give on some movies, you know...."Its Entertaining!"

Not a Michael Bay fan but I do enjoy some of his movies first of all. And as I just stated above, it had been probably a year since I saw the movie and when I said it was boring. That's all I really remember from it except I didn't think it was nearly as well directed or edited as say Raging Bull or Goodfellas. If you're implying that I should watch the movie again to "validate" my opinion, guess again. I have no desire to see it right now (sometime down the way though probably) but I've got so much crap to watch it's wayyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy down on the list

I can understand when some say they don't like a movie and you wonder why (I'd do the same). But when I posted that I thought Mean Streets was boring, that's really all I could remember from it. It's been well over a year or so since I've seen that movie and when I posted that comment it had been a VERY long time since I'd seen it (and I've only seen it once) so I didn't have a lot to work with. [/b][/quote]Well, cool then. However do you realize what I'm talking about? You'd jump on someone too if they did the same. Picture someone saying "Scarface was the gayest movie ever." What would you do? You, like many others would reply..... intensely. :p

I've heard some say Carlito's Way is better than Scarface. I don't agree with it and may ask them why and what they didn't like about Scarface but that's his/her own personal opinion and I respect it (no matter how much I disagree with it because there are entitled to feel that way)

Meh, Carlito's Way was close to being better then SF. The plot and character was better. The problem was, both DePalma and Pacino didn't give that project the push they gave Scarface. Pacino pulled off better acting in the earlier film, and DePalma directed it better, which is why I rate it higher then CW.

Film = escapism.

Who can look at art for 150 mins straight?

Umm, BARRY LYNDON?

Whatever.

Someone who doesn't have ADD or a closed mind. :rolleyes: Two hours and 30 mintues is nothing.

Hmm, you are on The Godfather boards... :rolleyes:

Another thing I should mention. I do watch films to escape everyday life, among other things. However, that's irrelevant to rating films.

I concur again DV.

Oh and Irishman...

"I've heard some say Carlito's Way is better than Scarface. I don't agree with it and may ask them why and what they didn't like about Scarface but that's his/her own personal opinion and I respect it (no matter how much I disagree with it because there are entitled to feel that way)"

Just wondering, you read my CARLITO'S WAY review for RRA'S VIDEO BIN REVIEW? I discussed partially what I liked about WAY compared to SCARFACE. However, I'll go deeper whenever I review SCARFACE.

Artistic appreciation requires a degree of active criticism and interprtation, whereas escapism via an artisitc work allows passive appreciation and enjoyment derived through association with the characters or the storyline, a suspension of belief and a mild disassociation from the "real" world.

When watching the GF films, or indeed any other, the most enjoyment in my opinion comes from losing oneself in the world of the Corleones (or whomever are the protagonists) - escapism. Many movies certainly are works of art in the loose sense that they are gainful and enjoyable vehicles for escapism.

But escapism is irrelevant to GRADING movies. I was taken up in the world of Eraser, but it was one of the worst of the 90's.

Well has anyone considered that the whole business of GRADING movies as you put it is a sorry one? There's nothing worse than a "Top Ten" list of movies, nor more tedious than people who rate moves in terms of a percentage score or an A-F rating.

The quality of films are incommensurate and cannot be measured as 5 out of 10, or 72%, or B+ or whatever. One of the most inane questions to be asked is "What is the best film / your favourite film of all time". Only a person who had seen very few films could answer that question decisively. Anyone who has seen a good number of movies will appreciate that there is no single best film (either objectively or subjectively).

The answer to the art / escapism dichotomy lies in discovering the predominant reason for sitting in front of a screen for 150, 200 or however many minutes. I would venture that, while there are moments of genuine artistic class, the general part of a film is enjoyed through escapism and not through artisitc appreciation.

So THAT is why you didn't post in my Top 100 Movie lists for 80's and 90s....figures!

Anyway, lists are lists. They usually don't bother me, and I discard MANY of them. However, the only list that matters to me are the ones I compose for whatever occasion.

Oh and my rating for this topic so far...**/5.

No, it can be. Sure it's ridiculous to have a 66% scale or Yahoo's shitty ABC scale, but a simple four star scale is not tedious at all. It's not hard to consider a film a *** or **** film. Good or excellent. That's simplifying how good you think it is. Reviews is where the real appreciation is, because that opening describes the film and why it's great. A rating is nothing more then a stance on how good you think a movie is.

Yeah well after I finish watching a movie, I don't even think about pulling out the *** or ****s, or reaching for my red marking pen. I just as one question: did I enjoy it? Was it a film I would watch again, or recommend to my friends? Would I recommend it as a wise investment of x number of hours of my life? Like the emperors of Rome, I prefer the simplicity of a "thumbs-up" or "thumbs-down" approach - I liked it or I didn't.

Well you have your way and I have mine.

I'll get my coat.

My friend, you are an idiot. We pull out the pen and hack away at a film to see if it's worth to be recommended. That's our method. We take into account the things that matter, not just "Do I feel good after seeing it?", etc.

Just saying "I liked it" or "I didn't" isn't fair to the film, and it's not wise to go arround recomending films in that manner nor doing that overall in life. You need to take into account the Possitive and the negative.

I do. The positive gets a thumbs up, the negative a thumbs down. What could be simpler. It's popular entertainment, not something that requires analytical or scientific precision.

I do. The positive gets a thumbs up, the negative a thumbs down. What could be simpler. It's popular entertainment, not something that requires analytical or scientific precision. [/b][/quote]Why not analyse it though? If someone can try and analysie the works of some Spanish dude by the name of Dali, why not look at a film by the name of "The Godfather"? Or surely you wouldn't be here unless you wanted to discuss this more. Well that's what we do with other movies.

What makes the film tick? Why DID I like it? Why just mearly dismis the film so quickly?

IMO Scarface is Pacino's best role. I can't even begin to imagine how many times I've seen this movie but I still have a hard time believe that is indeed Al Pacino on screen (Mr. Michael Corleone himself) because he was so real and authentic.

No I haven't read it. No offense but your reviews are a little long (not that that's a bad thing) and I'm usually doing other stuff while I'm online (such as keeping up with this BB games)

But previously you just said, and I quote 'Films = Escpaism', and now you are saying many films are art, and escapism also? If your intention is to disagree, you need to be a little more clear.

But that, and I'm sure everyone is understandably sick of hearing of me say this, is personal preference. Neither of the way you and Vercetti review of films is wrong, there's no official way of watching, enjoying and making an opinion on films. You and me might not appreciate the appeal of a personal favourites list or star ratings, but these guys do and it seems to enrich their film viewing experience. And one should be thankful for the thoughtful debates their reviews inspire.

That is what is great about film it is all things to all different people. It is anything you want it to be. You want to escape it can take you away. You want to feel, it can touch any emotion. You want to learn, it can teach you. You want to see, it can show you. You can argue all you want and no one will ever be wrong because film is as much the person watching as it is the person making. You can look at Birth of a Nation and see “man they were really racist back then” or you can see the birth of modern editing. You can look at Man on Fire and see clichéd filmmaking or you can see a tremendous use of style in editing and musical score. But no matter which way you look at it War of the Worlds still had a crappy ending.