Here comes captain obvious to save the day. The refernce to Vivid Video is because the 3Dwm project is about Human/Computer Interaction. High Tech porn... Human/Computer Interaction... High Tech Porn... HUMAN/COMPUTER INTERACTION..
To top it off, Xybernaut recently donated two wearable computers to the project, perfect platforms for this kind of thing.
(.) All you're REALLY doing is fucking over the artists even more.
I am sorry but people will always prefer the convenience of store bought material over downloads. That is a fact. You said yourself that mp3s sound like shit. Why do people buy CDs or DVDs? For the extremely high quality of the reproduction. However, to argue that trading songs on napster hurts artists is projecting your failure as an artist onto a technology. If you make good music then people will trade tapes of it for free, then ask for it, then buy it. Napster could help this process out. Unfortunately, you would rather whine about companies lost profits (which is a fantasy since their profits have not deviated since 1968).
My advice is to write better music, market it relentlessly, or go home and get a job.
He would have been just as annoying as a guy in a rubber suit with the same lines.
So when Liam Neeson was looking off behind Jar-Jar's head, saying lines that were poorly timed, that would have come across just as bad as if a real actor had been there?
C'mon! There were more things wrong with Ep. I than just jar jar, but he definately didn't help.
Way to go, captain america! I think you figured napster users out! Congratulations!
What moralists like yourself fail to realize is that you are defending corporations. People with your view claim that napster users are taking away their hard earned profits. Well, I for one do not recognize their claim to my hard earned dollars in exchange for overpriced pieces of plastic with nice packaging.
By arguing in favor of the corporations, you are playing the Uncle Tom.
..that's something the people who own the rights to distribute the music should decide, NOT us.
Since when is it right for corporations to make decisions for the good of the people? Why should we vote then? We should let the aristocracy decide who rules not the people, since the people don't know whats good for them.
I say NO! No longer will I stay a slave to the corporations! No longer will I only be a mindless consumer, stuck in a demographic, only a statistic. I am taking back some of my rights by removing the strangle hold that the RIAA has on the distribution of music. Will this kill art or the music industry? no. Did the home VCR kill the movie industry? no. There will always be a market of people who will pay for music. This is not about moral absolutes. This is a battle for $3 Billion vs. $12 Billion a year for the record companies. Does a few billion less in the pockets of business majors affect my life? NO WAY.
Forget you, forget about being in the moral/legal right, forget the corporations, forget myself. This is about payback. This is for everyone who feels ripped off by the establishment. For everyone who feels that paying $19.98 for a CD is morally wrong. For everyone who hates paying $70.00 for a pair of shoes that cost $1.50 to make.
Now, to back up my claims, I must establish that Hollywood is liberally biased.
Thank you very much for that insightful comment on the personal leanings of the Hollywood establishment. Of course Hollywood has liberal leanings, so do the majority of people who are fed up with senators like the one played by Gary Oldman in 'The Contender', who go around trying to dig up dirt from private lives in order to satisfy some politcal goal. If you think that his character is far from the truth, then you need to catch up on your CSPAN viewing!
What really upsets me is your conservative take on American Beauty. American Beauty's message is that true happiness comes from being true to yourself, not from trying to conform to some made up image of the Nuclear Family. Happy mom, happy dad, happy daughter all eating dinner together, not saying what they are feeling, not doing what they love. That is maddness. The only happy people in the neighborhood are the homosexual couple who are being true to themselves. The unhappy people are the ones who try to be what they aren't. American Beauty does not try to make broad definitions of sexual preference as an indicator of psychotic actions.
And what about Dogma? You should have been all for this movie! It actually works on the premise that God exists. Albeit that its view of God is one that is not based in the conservative view of an omnipotent father who wants us to execute Copernicus for suggesting that the earth is not the center of the universe. Rather, Dogma wants you to consider the fact that God wants us to enjoy his/her creation and stop worrying about the effect of science on your belief system. Don't waste your time persecuting others when you should be living a full and happy life, like God wants you to.
So what is so wrong with being conservative? Tons of things. Conservativism is a closed-minded view of the world. Conservatism's form of currency is NOT logic. Come on!! Take a look at the 'head-in-the-sand' viewpoint that conservatives take on the theory of evolution, or the idea that you can 'catch' homosexuality, or on the view of educating kids about birth control.
Have you seen many polls of political leanings? They show that with higher education comes an increased tendency towards liberal viewpoints. Why is that? Why is it that the un-educated farmer with 6 kids who goes to church every sunday is the one who always votes conservative, and always funds Pat Buchanon, the NRA, and anyone who can find Adam and Eve's remains? And why is it that the average person who recieves a higher education almost always has a liberal leaning? Is it because they use emotion for currency? Probably not. Its probably because they have had their mind's broadened by education and refuse to close them again. Let's look at some other conservatives who didn't like the theories being taught in schools and who didn't like mass media pointing out flaws in the government. You might know them as National Socialists from Germany, or you might know them as the Spanish Inquisition, or you might know them as Rush Limbaugh.
The point that I am trying to make is that conservativism is flawed due to its inability to accept change. (When was the last time a conservative scientist discovered something new?) I am not trying to say that Liberalism is THE best and THE only way. I would just like to say that it is open to new ideas and new arguments like we should all be.
I feel that it is my responsibility to write you this letter now. In the past, I have flamed your movie reviews on sundays with happiness. You replied to me that
"you can see from the posts that some people agree with my POV, and some don't. You really think that's bad? That you should only read posts that agree with you, critics that feel the same way you do?"
Well, I must say that the posts that agree with your POV are quickly dying out while the anti-katz posts are gaining steam. This saddens me since I love to review movies. I would love to see an open discussion of movies continue in the slashdot features. The idea of a weekly feature section on current movies, written by intelligent slashdot authors for slashdot readers is a great help for slashdot movie-goers.
However, the flames in this thread for Jon Katz are getting much too loud. I can't tell if my post got modded up because it was any good, or because it was the only one that didn't involve anal rape by Mr. Katz.
I hope that Slashdot will do something to correct this problem and keep the movie reviews going.
Sincerely,
roberjo
Re:Dilema. Movie looks bad, But Katz is an idiot.
on
'Saving Silverman'
·
· Score: 1
I too thought that Saving Silverman looked like a banal piece of kiddie film. However, don't worry. Its got Jack Black. Its funny as hell.
Go see it. You know that if Katz says its stupid, you are going to enjoy it. =)
I don't know how Katz does it, but every sunday he reviews the exact same movie that I had gone to see. I only see one movie per weekend so it is kinda creepy.
Anyway, I saw Saving Silverman this weekend and I have to say that I haven't laughed out loud at a movie that hard since American Pie. Sure it was based on absolutely silly plot twists, but what I found redeeming about it was that it didn't try to rectify or explain the idioicy. Instead, it embraced stupidity with a wholehearted bliss. Nothing in the movie is meant to be taken seriously. I mean come on, the Nun factor was completely random and entertaining (lets bust out some power squats!).
To me, it seemed that this movie was completely outside of reality. It seems to be written from an adolescent boy's subconscious. All of his fears: marrying a psychotic psychologist, discovering that he's gay, being fired from subway, having coach shit in your yard, all of these are caricatures of fear, and damn funny at that. I will admit that the movie had some obvious crutches at points (the way silverman and sandy fall in love for no reason, when he jogs 30 miles to the convent to get sandy and she just up and forgives him, etc.) that show obviously bad editing/writing, however, I am willing to suspend my critic's hat for an hour to roll on the floor at cursing nuns and Neil Diamond.
The only thing I hated about this movie, was the two rows of 13 year olds behind me. Jeezus.
One more thing, at the end, did you notice that the movie ended but noone got up to leave? I was seriously getting weirded out. The credits were rolling, Neil Diamond was singing, but noone in the theater moved to leave. Crazy.
Here's something else to think about. In my mind I compare Katz to Andy Rooney on CBS. Rooney is another collumnist who also shares opinions that are 180 degrees from mine. However, he has supporters/fans in the +75 age group who view CBS all of the time. I hate what he says on tv, and I wish everyday that I had an easily accessible forum on CBS that would allow me to retort his articles. Slashdot has simply given me a means to do this for Katz' reviews. However, since I am no big CBS fan, I don't have to add Rooney filters or buy a Tivo in order to ignore his views. I can just change the channel. I do not want to stop reading/. though. I am a HUGE/. fan and as much fun as filtering by posters is, I do enjoy the occasional Katz post on other topics, just not movies.
Looking at this another way, Andy Rooney does not try to write articles for other channels like MTV or TechTV. (Did you see the time he went on Martha Stewart and she all but bitch-slapped him for being an ass? LOL) The argument is that if you don't like Katz then don't read it, if you don't like Rooney, then don't watch CBS (who can argue that CBS hasn't lost the ratings war? Everybody Hates Raymond).
For me, though, having Katz post movie reviews on/. is like letting Andy Rooney host Politically Incorrect, or take Jimmy Kimmel's place on The Man Show. It is unnecessary, and an irritation, since there are tons of other channels for Mr. Katz to post film reviews to. So I say, let Katz post on as many other topics as he wants, but please, get someone else to do the movie reviews!
This is actually a very good question. Why are there so many Katz bashing posts? What would make the readership of/. so upset with one individual poster? What is it about Katz that pisses us off?
My own personal experience with Katz has been his movie reviews. When I first started reading Katz' reviews, I immediately found that I was at the opposite end of the spectrum in regards to all of my views on movies. I don't just mean differing views on themes, or character development. I mean, Katz says its good, I say its bad. Katz loves this movie, I see it and hate it immensely. Usually, I would just shrug this off as being a subjective view of a single movie, but it has happend over and over again. Not only this, but all of those 'troll' postings on Katz' reviews would mostly echo what I was feeling. Could it be that Katz is not in line with the general/. readership?
Could it be that I am not in the minority, but rather it is you, Mart who are in the minority with your support of Katz? I don't know. I want to know how Katz got signed on with/. in the first place? It is a fruitless question though, since Katz will continue to post to/. and people will continue to exercise their katz-filters and simply ignore his opinions.
What about the other 'trolls'? Why do you hate Katz so much?
I was about to say. Willem Dafoe doesn't like to be called William.
He will have to eat yew laater.
BTW, Snatch was a great movie, and its sad that Katz would play it off as being too cinematically herky-jerky just because he can't follow the brilliance of Guy Ritchie.
HOWever, I do believe that SotV is going to be an excellent movie even though Katz gave it a good review. *sigh*
The police do not defend my freedom. The police did not secure my freedom from the forces of evil. The police are little more than social referees who respond to grievances from the public.
DO NOT preach to me about walls and people being needed to guard me while I sleep. The police are not Marines, the police are not the Army, the police are not the FBI or NSA, the police are the guys in high school who weren't too bright, and always wanted to wear a gun around town. They are quick to anger, always worried about the next traffic stop that might kill them, and generally have the shittiest job on the planet.
The fact that they were concerned with a website that made fun of them, and not out and about 'defending my freedom' makes me concerned. They could begin by keeping my freshman neighbors from having an 80 person party at 3 am on a tuesday morning.
Katz, you have a hollow and skew opinion not shared by most slashdot readers. Movies you give bad reviews to are often very well made and well written, and movies you give good reviews to are often boring and/or banal.
Katz, you are entitled to your own opinion, and you are entitled to expressing your opinion wherever you feel like expressing it. I am entitled to expressing mine as well. In fact, I could express mine by writing journalistic pieces for the NY Times, or Washington Post. However, I realize that I have no journalistic skills, and have no degree in journalism. I also realize that others probably will not appreciate or value my articles. Therefore I do not try to become a journalist. Likewise, you should realize that we, your critics, are not trying to restrict your right to express yourself, we are just saying that we do not value your contribution to our/. community. You might want to consider posting to other communities, like Yahoo!Movies, or MSNkidz. Somewhere where the members might share your values and views.
Normally when I read a movie review, I will consider what the author has to say about a movie, and often that author will provide well written, intelligent commentary on a piece of film. Katz, everything you write must be taken with the viewpoint that you have poor taste in movies. I apologize for having to be so negative, but nothing is more frustrating than a bad critic. The very fact that others feel the same way that I do and are also compelled to post their frustration should definately point out that something isn't clicking, Katz.
Question: If everyone filters out Katz's completely worthless posts, then do Katz's posts exist at all?
Shouldn't something be done about posters like katz? I have only been on slashdot for a few months, and already I have realized that Katz's posts aren't even worth reading.
It amazes me that someone can keep posting and posting and posting when he knows that there are tons of people who filter his posts out because his opinion sucks.
I have to agree with Anonymous Coward here. If you want real 'cultura' without sex, low IQ's, unability *should be inability* to count votes then you should check out Telemundo (Latin American Television), or French Television, or Italian Television. Come on, these elements run through all forms of entertainment. If you took sex, stupid people, and low class humor out of works like "The Odyssey" or Dante's "Inferno", what would you have left?
Your post is simply baseless, tasteless, and rude. Thank god this type of post represents less than 0.00000...1% (cfr. supra) of slashdot posts.
To say that other cultures don't value sex, laugh at people with low IQ's, or have problems with crooked politicians is to create a dreamworld for yourself that has all the substance of the film worlds you critque.
I don't attack Italian films, or French films, or Peruvian films, because I do not understand the culture that has produced them. In fact, I believe that most people from other cultures would not have the lack of manners to post such comments about a film like "O Brother" and for this reason, I assume that this AC is nothing more than a vapid person here in the U.S. trying to seem cultured by posting how he dislikes Americans. How odd... You aren't fooling anyone, AC.
Besides, any member of the proletariat has more class than this imbecile.
So go shovel your snobbery somewhere else, Anonymous Windbag. If you don't understand the culture that produces films like "O Brother" then you do not have a place attacking the comedic genius of the Coen brothers in creating it.
First of all, I saw Unbreakable simply on the merits of the director's previous work(the Sixth Sense) and not for Bruce Willis' character completed his character arch. I have never seen a completed character arch advertised for a movie.
Secondly, it is fantastic that Unbreakable actually had plot elements that I had previously overlooked. (due to their lack of quality, merit, worthiness to be pointed out) So Unbreakable has complete character arcs, and an ending event. Congratulations. Too bad they were neither surprising, nor fulfilling. (aside: showing the son the newspaper was unnecessary for the plot and stupid in that it slowed the movie down. Why was it important that the boy be reassured that Bruce was a superhero? The audience already knew it, why redundantly state it again?).
After an entire movie about comic books, it is revealed that Bruce's character is a comic book hero and Samuel L. is his nemesis. Surprise! If you didn't see any of that coming, God help you.
If you saw it coming that Tyler Durden was actually Ed Norton, you are a truly gifted film viewer. Fight Club's ending made me reevaluate the ENTIRE movie. It shook up the audience completely. I immediately wanted to see it again and again. I took the movie to heart and applied its message to my life. We are the same decaying organic matter as everything else. THAT is a good movie.
As far as Codas go, Seven's was irrelevant. (I was too busy crying for Gwyneth Paltrow's character)
You said that, "The ending event that gives Sixth Sense purpose was Bruce and the boy exposing the mother as a murderer." You are a bit off here. I could have sworn that the ending event for Sixth Sense was Bruce figuring out that he himself was a ghost. (Talk about a surprise ending with meaning and fulfillment! So tasty, so fresh, so new!) I could be wrong tho.
Good call, Josh. I agree with your interpretation of the powers being irrelevant. To place emphasis on the powers is to ignore the premise of the movie.
Roberjo
Suprise isn't necessary, but worthy ending is.
on
Review: "Unbreakable"
·
· Score: 2
Josh,
Sure some movies are great without a surprise ending: Star Wars, or Saving Private Ryan for example. These movies are not surprising, in that the good guys win. However, the exact how and why is unknown.
Take a look at some of the best movies to come out recently tho: Seven, Fight Club, the Sixth Sense. These movies were great not only for their surprise ending, but because the ending added to the enjoyment of the film. Unbreakable's ending only detracted from my enjoyment of the movie.
Unbreakable didn't even have an ending event that gives the movie purpose. No Death Star explosion, or P-51's zooming in to save the day. Something that lets me know I sat through an hour and half of film for a reason, or makes me want to come back for more.
Personally, I have no reason to consider seeing any trilogy created along this movie. I just hope Shyamalan's next film will fare a little better in the plot department. Roberjo
Trilogy.. oh god. Some possible titles: Unbreakable 2: Breakable With A Vengance Unbreakable: First Blood Part 2
Unbreakable: Breakable Strikes Back
I keep waiting for Samuel L. to break out with a, Say 'What?' Again, Motherfucker! or a You sending Mr. Glass? Well sheeeeit. Thats all you had to say.
Unbreakable was a great idea that got lost in the process. Whether its the predictable plot, shallow character development, or lack of excitement, Shyamalan really fudged this one up.
Katz called this movie homage to Superhero comic books, to which it is unwaveringly faithful. Yes, it was unwaveringly faithful, but so much so that I could have bought a comic book or watched a rerun of Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman and gotten the same result. Just because a movie is about something you love does not mean that the movie is a breathtaking piece of filmmaking. I love comic books, and I loved the Sixth Sense, but Unbreakable was nothing more than dumb.
Unbreakable started out being about comic books, was about comic books in the middle, and ended in comic book style. What is wrong with this? NO SURPRISE ENDING.
What made Sixth Sense different from other ghost movies? (see Bill Cosby's Ghost Dad) The plot twist at the end. Without the surprise ending, sitting through an hour of "I see dead people." would have been pointless, slow, and boring.
For those who would claim Unbreakable as a validation for a life spent reading tons of comics, and believing they were an 'Art' form, I congratulate you. You have finally found a friendly soul in Shyamalan. However, do not expect me to extoll the beauty and fantastic virtues of a movie that was slow, dull, predictable, and a waste of $6.50.
I invite all flames, counter-arguments, and irate moderators to bash this posting. I know you love your comic books, but that does not make a movie great.
Oh yeah, well I'm a Native American, and a Vietnam Veteran! How dare you be so insensitive and mention the catholic church?
I must have missed the memo that Kahuna Burger means "female bi atheist". My bad.
Speaking of old eductational movies, the School House Rocks series are the best.
Oh yeah, anything that I didn't save the article and quote exact stats on is an urban legend. Real mature. I just like reading that again for fun. *smirk* Nicely said.
Slashdot Mirror
To top it off, Xybernaut recently donated two wearable computers to the project, perfect platforms for this kind of thing.
Can I make it any clearer?
I am sorry but people will always prefer the convenience of store bought material over downloads. That is a fact. You said yourself that mp3s sound like shit. Why do people buy CDs or DVDs? For the extremely high quality of the reproduction. However, to argue that trading songs on napster hurts artists is projecting your failure as an artist onto a technology. If you make good music then people will trade tapes of it for free, then ask for it, then buy it. Napster could help this process out. Unfortunately, you would rather whine about companies lost profits (which is a fantasy since their profits have not deviated since 1968).
My advice is to write better music, market it relentlessly, or go home and get a job.
The reason the RIAA wants to kill Napster is so they can set up their own version that they can make money off of.
Congrats on having a family member with talent. Sucks to get stuck with the leftovers.
So when Liam Neeson was looking off behind Jar-Jar's head, saying lines that were poorly timed, that would have come across just as bad as if a real actor had been there?
C'mon! There were more things wrong with Ep. I than just jar jar, but he definately didn't help.
What moralists like yourself fail to realize is that you are defending corporations. People with your view claim that napster users are taking away their hard earned profits. Well, I for one do not recognize their claim to my hard earned dollars in exchange for overpriced pieces of plastic with nice packaging.
By arguing in favor of the corporations, you are playing the Uncle Tom.
Since when is it right for corporations to make decisions for the good of the people? Why should we vote then? We should let the aristocracy decide who rules not the people, since the people don't know whats good for them.
I say NO! No longer will I stay a slave to the corporations! No longer will I only be a mindless consumer, stuck in a demographic, only a statistic. I am taking back some of my rights by removing the strangle hold that the RIAA has on the distribution of music. Will this kill art or the music industry? no. Did the home VCR kill the movie industry? no. There will always be a market of people who will pay for music. This is not about moral absolutes. This is a battle for $3 Billion vs. $12 Billion a year for the record companies. Does a few billion less in the pockets of business majors affect my life? NO WAY.
Forget you, forget about being in the moral/legal right, forget the corporations, forget myself. This is about payback. This is for everyone who feels ripped off by the establishment. For everyone who feels that paying $19.98 for a CD is morally wrong. For everyone who hates paying $70.00 for a pair of shoes that cost $1.50 to make.
This is for US, NOT them.
Thank you very much for that insightful comment on the personal leanings of the Hollywood establishment. Of course Hollywood has liberal leanings, so do the majority of people who are fed up with senators like the one played by Gary Oldman in 'The Contender', who go around trying to dig up dirt from private lives in order to satisfy some politcal goal. If you think that his character is far from the truth, then you need to catch up on your CSPAN viewing!
What really upsets me is your conservative take on American Beauty. American Beauty's message is that true happiness comes from being true to yourself, not from trying to conform to some made up image of the Nuclear Family. Happy mom, happy dad, happy daughter all eating dinner together, not saying what they are feeling, not doing what they love. That is maddness. The only happy people in the neighborhood are the homosexual couple who are being true to themselves. The unhappy people are the ones who try to be what they aren't. American Beauty does not try to make broad definitions of sexual preference as an indicator of psychotic actions.
And what about Dogma? You should have been all for this movie! It actually works on the premise that God exists. Albeit that its view of God is one that is not based in the conservative view of an omnipotent father who wants us to execute Copernicus for suggesting that the earth is not the center of the universe. Rather, Dogma wants you to consider the fact that God wants us to enjoy his/her creation and stop worrying about the effect of science on your belief system. Don't waste your time persecuting others when you should be living a full and happy life, like God wants you to.
So what is so wrong with being conservative? Tons of things. Conservativism is a closed-minded view of the world. Conservatism's form of currency is NOT logic. Come on!! Take a look at the 'head-in-the-sand' viewpoint that conservatives take on the theory of evolution, or the idea that you can 'catch' homosexuality, or on the view of educating kids about birth control.
Have you seen many polls of political leanings? They show that with higher education comes an increased tendency towards liberal viewpoints. Why is that? Why is it that the un-educated farmer with 6 kids who goes to church every sunday is the one who always votes conservative, and always funds Pat Buchanon, the NRA, and anyone who can find Adam and Eve's remains? And why is it that the average person who recieves a higher education almost always has a liberal leaning? Is it because they use emotion for currency? Probably not. Its probably because they have had their mind's broadened by education and refuse to close them again. Let's look at some other conservatives who didn't like the theories being taught in schools and who didn't like mass media pointing out flaws in the government. You might know them as National Socialists from Germany, or you might know them as the Spanish Inquisition, or you might know them as Rush Limbaugh.
The point that I am trying to make is that conservativism is flawed due to its inability to accept change. (When was the last time a conservative scientist discovered something new?) I am not trying to say that Liberalism is THE best and THE only way. I would just like to say that it is open to new ideas and new arguments like we should all be.
I feel that it is my responsibility to write you this letter now. In the past, I have flamed your movie reviews on sundays with happiness. You replied to me that
"you can see from the posts that some people agree with my POV, and some don't. You really think that's bad? That you should only read posts that agree with you, critics that feel the same way you do?"
Well, I must say that the posts that agree with your POV are quickly dying out while the anti-katz posts are gaining steam. This saddens me since I love to review movies. I would love to see an open discussion of movies continue in the slashdot features. The idea of a weekly feature section on current movies, written by intelligent slashdot authors for slashdot readers is a great help for slashdot movie-goers.
However, the flames in this thread for Jon Katz are getting much too loud. I can't tell if my post got modded up because it was any good, or because it was the only one that didn't involve anal rape by Mr. Katz.
I hope that Slashdot will do something to correct this problem and keep the movie reviews going.
Sincerely,
roberjo
I too thought that Saving Silverman looked like a banal piece of kiddie film. However, don't worry. Its got Jack Black. Its funny as hell.
Go see it. You know that if Katz says its stupid, you are going to enjoy it. =)
I don't know how Katz does it, but every sunday he reviews the exact same movie that I had gone to see. I only see one movie per weekend so it is kinda creepy.
Anyway, I saw Saving Silverman this weekend and I have to say that I haven't laughed out loud at a movie that hard since American Pie. Sure it was based on absolutely silly plot twists, but what I found redeeming about it was that it didn't try to rectify or explain the idioicy. Instead, it embraced stupidity with a wholehearted bliss. Nothing in the movie is meant to be taken seriously. I mean come on, the Nun factor was completely random and entertaining (lets bust out some power squats!).
To me, it seemed that this movie was completely outside of reality. It seems to be written from an adolescent boy's subconscious. All of his fears: marrying a psychotic psychologist, discovering that he's gay, being fired from subway, having coach shit in your yard, all of these are caricatures of fear, and damn funny at that. I will admit that the movie had some obvious crutches at points (the way silverman and sandy fall in love for no reason, when he jogs 30 miles to the convent to get sandy and she just up and forgives him, etc.) that show obviously bad editing/writing, however, I am willing to suspend my critic's hat for an hour to roll on the floor at cursing nuns and Neil Diamond.
The only thing I hated about this movie, was the two rows of 13 year olds behind me. Jeezus.
One more thing, at the end, did you notice that the movie ended but noone got up to leave? I was seriously getting weirded out. The credits were rolling, Neil Diamond was singing, but noone in the theater moved to leave. Crazy.
Looking at this another way, Andy Rooney does not try to write articles for other channels like MTV or TechTV. (Did you see the time he went on Martha Stewart and she all but bitch-slapped him for being an ass? LOL) The argument is that if you don't like Katz then don't read it, if you don't like Rooney, then don't watch CBS (who can argue that CBS hasn't lost the ratings war? Everybody Hates Raymond).
For me, though, having Katz post movie reviews on /. is like letting Andy Rooney host Politically Incorrect, or take Jimmy Kimmel's place on The Man Show. It is unnecessary, and an irritation, since there are tons of other channels for Mr. Katz to post film reviews to. So I say, let Katz post on as many other topics as he wants, but please, get someone else to do the movie reviews!
My own personal experience with Katz has been his movie reviews. When I first started reading Katz' reviews, I immediately found that I was at the opposite end of the spectrum in regards to all of my views on movies. I don't just mean differing views on themes, or character development. I mean, Katz says its good, I say its bad. Katz loves this movie, I see it and hate it immensely. Usually, I would just shrug this off as being a subjective view of a single movie, but it has happend over and over again. Not only this, but all of those 'troll' postings on Katz' reviews would mostly echo what I was feeling. Could it be that Katz is not in line with the general /. readership?
Could it be that I am not in the minority, but rather it is you, Mart who are in the minority with your support of Katz? I don't know. I want to know how Katz got signed on with /. in the first place? It is a fruitless question though, since Katz will continue to post to /. and people will continue to exercise their katz-filters and simply ignore his opinions.
What about the other 'trolls'? Why do you hate Katz so much?
He will have to eat yew laater.
BTW, Snatch was a great movie, and its sad that Katz would play it off as being too cinematically herky-jerky just because he can't follow the brilliance of Guy Ritchie.
HOWever, I do believe that SotV is going to be an excellent movie even though Katz gave it a good review. *sigh*
- roberjo
DO NOT preach to me about walls and people being needed to guard me while I sleep. The police are not Marines, the police are not the Army, the police are not the FBI or NSA, the police are the guys in high school who weren't too bright, and always wanted to wear a gun around town. They are quick to anger, always worried about the next traffic stop that might kill them, and generally have the shittiest job on the planet.
The fact that they were concerned with a website that made fun of them, and not out and about 'defending my freedom' makes me concerned. They could begin by keeping my freshman neighbors from having an 80 person party at 3 am on a tuesday morning.
Fuck the POlice. -NWA
Katz, you are entitled to your own opinion, and you are entitled to expressing your opinion wherever you feel like expressing it. I am entitled to expressing mine as well. In fact, I could express mine by writing journalistic pieces for the NY Times, or Washington Post. However, I realize that I have no journalistic skills, and have no degree in journalism. I also realize that others probably will not appreciate or value my articles. Therefore I do not try to become a journalist. Likewise, you should realize that we, your critics, are not trying to restrict your right to express yourself, we are just saying that we do not value your contribution to our /. community. You might want to consider posting to other communities, like Yahoo!Movies, or MSNkidz. Somewhere where the members might share your values and views.
Normally when I read a movie review, I will consider what the author has to say about a movie, and often that author will provide well written, intelligent commentary on a piece of film. Katz, everything you write must be taken with the viewpoint that you have poor taste in movies. I apologize for having to be so negative, but nothing is more frustrating than a bad critic. The very fact that others feel the same way that I do and are also compelled to post their frustration should definately point out that something isn't clicking, Katz.
How can you read Slashdot and not have picked up on a little electronic know-how? You must be either 5 yr. old, or an MIS major.
Either way, don't post if you haven't got a clue.
ciao
As a great man once said, "I may not agree with what you have to say, but I will defend your right to say it."
Question: If everyone filters out Katz's completely worthless posts, then do Katz's posts exist at all?
Shouldn't something be done about posters like katz? I have only been on slashdot for a few months, and already I have realized that Katz's posts aren't even worth reading.
It amazes me that someone can keep posting and posting and posting when he knows that there are tons of people who filter his posts out because his opinion sucks.
How sad.
Your post is simply baseless, tasteless, and rude. Thank god this type of post represents less than 0.00000...1% (cfr. supra) of slashdot posts.
To say that other cultures don't value sex, laugh at people with low IQ's, or have problems with crooked politicians is to create a dreamworld for yourself that has all the substance of the film worlds you critque.
I don't attack Italian films, or French films, or Peruvian films, because I do not understand the culture that has produced them. In fact, I believe that most people from other cultures would not have the lack of manners to post such comments about a film like "O Brother" and for this reason, I assume that this AC is nothing more than a vapid person here in the U.S. trying to seem cultured by posting how he dislikes Americans. How odd... You aren't fooling anyone, AC.
Besides, any member of the proletariat has more class than this imbecile.
So go shovel your snobbery somewhere else, Anonymous Windbag. If you don't understand the culture that produces films like "O Brother" then you do not have a place attacking the comedic genius of the Coen brothers in creating it.
Anyone who hasn't heard of these movies should not be posting on slashdot.
Secondly, it is fantastic that Unbreakable actually had plot elements that I had previously overlooked. (due to their lack of quality, merit, worthiness to be pointed out) So Unbreakable has complete character arcs, and an ending event. Congratulations. Too bad they were neither surprising, nor fulfilling. (aside: showing the son the newspaper was unnecessary for the plot and stupid in that it slowed the movie down. Why was it important that the boy be reassured that Bruce was a superhero? The audience already knew it, why redundantly state it again?).
After an entire movie about comic books, it is revealed that Bruce's character is a comic book hero and Samuel L. is his nemesis. Surprise! If you didn't see any of that coming, God help you.
If you saw it coming that Tyler Durden was actually Ed Norton, you are a truly gifted film viewer. Fight Club's ending made me reevaluate the ENTIRE movie. It shook up the audience completely. I immediately wanted to see it again and again. I took the movie to heart and applied its message to my life. We are the same decaying organic matter as everything else. THAT is a good movie.
As far as Codas go, Seven's was irrelevant. (I was too busy crying for Gwyneth Paltrow's character)
You said that, "The ending event that gives Sixth Sense purpose was Bruce and the boy exposing the mother as a murderer." You are a bit off here. I could have sworn that the ending event for Sixth Sense was Bruce figuring out that he himself was a ghost. (Talk about a surprise ending with meaning and fulfillment! So tasty, so fresh, so new!) I could be wrong tho.
What do other /.ers have to say?
Roberjo
Good call, Josh.
I agree with your interpretation of the powers being irrelevant.
To place emphasis on the powers is to ignore the premise of the movie.
Roberjo
Sure some movies are great without a surprise ending: Star Wars, or Saving Private Ryan for example. These movies are not surprising, in that the good guys win. However, the exact how and why is unknown.
Take a look at some of the best movies to come out recently tho: Seven, Fight Club, the Sixth Sense. These movies were great not only for their surprise ending, but because the ending added to the enjoyment of the film. Unbreakable's ending only detracted from my enjoyment of the movie.
Unbreakable didn't even have an ending event that gives the movie purpose. No Death Star explosion, or P-51's zooming in to save the day. Something that lets me know I sat through an hour and half of film for a reason, or makes me want to come back for more.
Personally, I have no reason to consider seeing any trilogy created along this movie. I just hope Shyamalan's next film will fare a little better in the plot department.
Roberjo
Trilogy.. oh god. Some possible titles:
Unbreakable 2: Breakable With A Vengance
Unbreakable: First Blood Part 2
Unbreakable: Breakable Strikes Back
I keep waiting for Samuel L. to break out with a, Say 'What?' Again, Motherfucker! or a You sending Mr. Glass? Well sheeeeit. Thats all you had to say.
Unbreakable blows.
Roberjo
Unbreakable was a great idea that got lost in the process. Whether its the predictable plot, shallow character development, or lack of excitement, Shyamalan really fudged this one up.
Katz called this movie homage to Superhero comic books, to which it is unwaveringly faithful. Yes, it was unwaveringly faithful, but so much so that I could have bought a comic book or watched a rerun of Lois & Clark: The New Adventures of Superman and gotten the same result. Just because a movie is about something you love does not mean that the movie is a breathtaking piece of filmmaking. I love comic books, and I loved the Sixth Sense, but Unbreakable was nothing more than dumb.
Unbreakable started out being about comic books, was about comic books in the middle, and ended in comic book style. What is wrong with this? NO SURPRISE ENDING.
What made Sixth Sense different from other ghost movies? (see Bill Cosby's Ghost Dad) The plot twist at the end. Without the surprise ending, sitting through an hour of "I see dead people." would have been pointless, slow, and boring.
For those who would claim Unbreakable as a validation for a life spent reading tons of comics, and believing they were an 'Art' form, I congratulate you. You have finally found a friendly soul in Shyamalan. However, do not expect me to extoll the beauty and fantastic virtues of a movie that was slow, dull, predictable, and a waste of $6.50.
I invite all flames, counter-arguments, and irate moderators to bash this posting. I know you love your comic books, but that does not make a movie great.
Roberjo
Oh yeah, well I'm a Native American, and a Vietnam Veteran! How dare you be so insensitive and mention the catholic church?
I must have missed the memo that Kahuna Burger means "female bi atheist". My bad. Speaking of old eductational movies, the School House Rocks series are the best.
Oh yeah, anything that I didn't save the article and quote exact stats on is an urban legend. Real mature.
I just like reading that again for fun. *smirk* Nicely said.
Ciao.