[go: up one dir, main page]

    कैलेंडर रिलीज़ करेंटॉप 250 फ़िल्मेंसबसे लोकप्रिय फ़िल्मेंज़ोनर के आधार पर फ़िल्में ब्राउज़ करेंटॉप बॉक्स ऑफ़िसशोटाइम और टिकटफ़िल्मी समाचारइंडिया मूवी स्पॉटलाइट
    TV और स्ट्रीमिंग पर क्या हैटॉप 250 टीवी शोसबसे लोकप्रिय TV शोशैली के अनुसार टीवी शो ब्राउज़ करेंTV की खबरें
    देखने के लिए क्या हैसबसे नए ट्रेलरIMDb ओरिजिनलIMDb की पसंदIMDb स्पॉटलाइटफैमिली एंटरटेनमेंट गाइडIMDb पॉडकास्ट
    EmmysSuperheroes GuideSan Diego Comic-ConSummer Watch GuideBest Of 2025 So FarDisability Pride MonthSTARmeter पुरस्कारअवार्ड्स सेंट्रलफ़ेस्टिवल सेंट्रलसभी इवेंट
    जिनका जन्म आज के दिन हुआ सबसे लोकप्रिय सेलिब्रिटीसेलिब्रिटी से जुड़ी खबरें
    मदद केंद्रयोगदानकर्ता क्षेत्रपॉल
उद्योग के पेशेवरों के लिए
  • भाषा
  • पूरी तरह से सपोर्टेड
  • English (United States)
    आंशिक रूप से सपोर्टेड
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
वॉचलिस्ट
साइन इन करें
  • पूरी तरह से सपोर्टेड
  • English (United States)
    आंशिक रूप से सपोर्टेड
  • Français (Canada)
  • Français (France)
  • Deutsch (Deutschland)
  • हिंदी (भारत)
  • Italiano (Italia)
  • Português (Brasil)
  • Español (España)
  • Español (México)
ऐप का इस्तेमाल करें

jaywolfenstien

अग॰ 2001 को शामिल हुए
What baffles me about message boards is the number of people who don't read what other people write. It's like they figure out someone's stance on an issue based on a keyphrase, and then read into that post whatever would best serve their argument. Or in other words, said idiot is arguing with the words they put in their opponents mouth . . . or in other words, they're arguing with themselves. Then they think they're sophisticated debaters? HA! Irony.

And since said idiot's opinion of you is based on quick keyphrase, complex discussion is out of the question. The attention span is not there to read a series of a statements that build up to an overall, very fine-tune and specific, thesis. Nope. Everything is judged impulsively as it comes. Forget the parts. Forget the whole. They're going to build a robot out of only one bolt. Meanwhile, I'm going to step aside and have myself one hell of a laugh.

Intelligent discussion on an internet message board is such a rarity due to this impulsive nature and rampant belief that others should give a damn of their opinion, it yields the search virtually fruitless because intelligent discussion is apparently above and beyond the grasp of internet message boards 99.9% of the time. Why bother unless for a time killer? Personally, I post just to see how screwed up people can misintepret statements that I blatantly spell out multiple times in the same post. You know, the people who ask, "Did you like Citizen Kane," after I made the , ahem, complex statement, "At first I thought Kane was 'eh' but now I adore the movie." Um, hello, what part of that is vague?

But nothing beats the moron who decided to seriously answer a series of rhetorical questions that I jokingly posted. My faith in the humanity has dropped dramatically since I started reading message boards . . .

Another thing that baffles me is the number of people who think they must agree with the review to find it useful. Perhaps that's why so many people complain about critics - because they, themselves, aren't bright enough to know how to read a review. A well written review will describe a critic's reaction to the film, citing the various aspects of the film that generated said reaction. It really isn't that difficult to use basic reasoning skills to note the differences of opinion and figure out if you'd reach the same conclusion of the critic.

Everyday I'm baffled at the number of people who judge films based solely upon their preconcieved expectations generated by reputation, word of mouth, and advertisements. What is so friggin' difficult about letting the film define itself? Films are self-contained entities; why is this concept beyond people's grasps? Especially after decades upon decades of the same thing--ravings fans, critical acclaim, deceptive advertising--haven't we learned by NOW? And then they expect me to take their opinion seriously when they're too stupid to catch on to age-old trends?

This goes into my theory that people would rather have everything pander to them instead of making judgments on their own. Heaven help them if someone asks provocative questions, and God forbid, challenge their intellect. Heaven help us if life isn't served on a silver platter, custom fit to Bob-nobody.

I've given up on star ratings. They have no real point, and give the reader no real information. If people want to know how good a movie is and whether they'd like it, they should read reviews and apply basic deduction principles. If that's too comlicated, there's plenty of sites and critics willing to pander.

Favorite Films:
Trouble with Harry (Alfred Hitchcock)
Psycho (Alfred Hitchcock)
North by Northwest (Alfred Hitchcock)
Das Boot (Wolfgang Peterson)
The Exorcist (William Friedkin)
War of the World's (Steven Spielberg)
Suspiria (Dario Argento)
Bride of Frankenstien (James Whale)
The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly (Sergio Leone)
Citizen Kane (Orson Welles)
Big Fish (Tim Burton)
Million Dollar Baby (Clint Eastwood)
Goodfellas (Martin Scorsese)
Halloween (John Carpenter)
Exorcism of Emily Rose (Scott Derrickson)
The Thing from Another World (Christian Nyby)
Alien (Ridley Scott)
Patton (Franklin Schaffner)
Terminator 2: Judgment Day (James Cameron)
The Untouchables (Brian De palma)
नई प्रोफ़ाइल में आपका स्वागत है
हम कुछ अपडेट कर रहे हैं और आपके अनुभव को बेहतर बनाने के दौरान कुछ सुविधाएं अस्थायी रूप से अनुपलब्ध रहेंगी. 7/14 जुलाई के बाद previous version. को एक्सेस नहीं किया जा सकेगा. आने वाले रीलॉन्च के लिए हमारे साथ बने रहें.

बैज5

बैज कमाने का तरीका जानने के लिए, यहां बैज सहायता पेज जाएं.
बैज एक्सप्लोर करें

समीक्षाएं311

jaywolfenstienकी रेटिंग
Blood+

Blood+

7.5
  • 2 मार्च 2010
  • Astounding peaks with low valleys.

    Black Widow

    Black Widow

    6.7
  • 23 जन॰ 2010
  • Dull , predictable, and boring

    About midway through Black Widow, I realized my eyes constantly fell upon Gene Tierney during her scenes. Even when Van Heflin or another actor delivered his pivotal and emotional speeches which would otherwise command attention, I found myself watching Tierney's quiet reactions. Sometimes her presence in a scene amounted to nothing more than subtle eye movement; nevertheless, I found her mesmerizing.

    I state this observation not to draw attention to Tierney's performance (a fine actress, indeed, but she does not have much to do), rather, I mention this to criticize director Nunnally Johnson's utter incompetent frame. An artist controls his canvass through focal points; he commands the viewer's eye to journey through the image across a predetermined path. This sets up a visual rhythm, helps the audience take in and process the imagery, and motivates the viewer to continue, you know, viewing.

    Johnson's frame, though, remains bland, flat, and uninteresting—a non-descript street where a parade of characters will march, deliver their lines, and rigidly move the plot along to a monotonous drum. Never does the camera linger on the sights or appreciate the visual aspect of the medium. Characters appear, they move around, and they talk. Oh, do they ever talk. They talk so much that Black Widow could transition to a radio drama with minimal altercations.

    Some films, such as Blade Runner, are so visually spectacular one could mute all sound and let the images speak for themselves. With Black Widow, one could shut off the picture and lose absolutely nothing. Since Johnson failed to provide a frame worth looking at (much less a focal point), is it any wonder why the eyes might settle on Tierney even when she's just part of the background? I know, I know. Not all movies are equal, and not all movies are supposed to be Blade Runner caliber demonstrations of artistic virtuosity. The focus—nay, the entire point—of Black Widow is the plot. So, a young attractive writer (Peggy Ann Garner) moves into town and turns up dead in producer Peter Denver's (Heflin) apartment. In traditional Hitchcockian fashion, the innocent man must clear his name, get to the bottom of the accusations, all while avoiding the authorities.

    This brings me back to Johnson's directing (and writing) where a lack of subtlety all but announces the killer, which proves fatal in the telling of a murder mystery. The deceased woman had a relationship with the husband of a famous Broadway actress. Well, there's a whole two men in the movie that fit that bill, and we know one did not do it. Now throw in ominous lines of dialog like, "no darling, I'd never cheat on you. You'd strangle me in my sleep." Is it a coincidence that the victim also died by … nevermind.

    Like all murder mysteries, the ending is a series of monologues explaining what may have happened and, ultimately, what did happen. And when the audience has pieced together the puzzle twenty minutes ago, it gets quite boring watching the characters play catch up. You just want to sit down next to Gene Tierney there in the background, chill out, and wait for the plot.
    Avatar

    Avatar

    7.9
  • 6 जन॰ 2010
  • To Dream of Another Time.

    When I was 10 years old, I remember seeing Terminator 2: Judgment Day in the theater. And when Arnold first saves John Connor from the T1000, I recall the vivid awareness that I wasn't just watching that Summer's action Blockbuster. It was something more. At the time, I didn't really know or understand that feeling. But years later, when I'd revisit T2 it would click into place.

    I wasn't watching a movie. I was watching a Dream.

    Across the years, I've been blessed to encounter a handful of other films that gave me that same feeling—the feeling that I could close my eyes, and awaken to a new world of distilled imagination. Blade Runner, Pan's Labyrinth, Metropolis, and Nosferatu are a few names on that short list. Early in Avatar, when paraplegic Jake first links with his Na'vi avatar and races across the Pandoran landscape, exhilarated to be running again, I leaned forward in my seat and smiled. Once again, I wasn't watching a movie. I was watching a Dream.

    Avatar uses the classical narrative structure of a man who must step beyond his culture, become one with a society alien to his own, and ultimately make a stand with his new brothers. And unlike previous telling of this tale, Jake can literally step outside of his human skin and take on the form of a blue-skinned and golden-eyed humanoids called the "Na'vi."

    Neytiri, a female Na'vi, guides Jake in the ways of her tribe, and as they make this journey together a bond forms between them. "I see you," she whispers to Jake. "I see you," he whispers back the way two lovers might exchange "I love you"s. And there couldn't be a more appropriate expression of affection for these characters. "I see you." Director James Cameron wants to open his audience's eyes, as Neytiri opens Jake's eyes, to the breathtaking sights of Pandora. But unlike visual effects masturbations like G.I. Joe and Revenge of the Fallen both of which throw CGI out randomly in an effort to create the most/biggest/boomest explosion, Avatar aims to recapture the child-like wonder of experiencing a *vision* that, to quote Manohla Dargis, "really is bigger than life."

    Another director would be content to show the majestic floating "Hallelujah" mountains in the distant background, but not James Cameron. He goes further and invites us to climb them with Jake and the young Na'vi hunters. After dangling perilously from vines and rock faces and clawing our way to the top, Cameron then lets us ride on the back of winged dragon-like creatures, the Mountain Banshees, and soar above and between this magical landscape of towering miracles and impossible valleys.

    But more importantly: amidst the overabundant spectacle, Cameron never loses sight of that child-like curiosity driving all fantasy. Do you remember staring at the cover art of your favorite book asking, "What would it be like to fly? How exhilarating would it be holding on to a Banshee for dear life while it dove 300 feet straight down? To feel the roaring wind rush past with the intensity of a hurricane as you fly—really, truly, honestly fly?" James Cameron remembers asking those questions.

    He's filled the world—the vision—of Avatar with sights both grand and subtle. This is a movie that will go full throttle into an epic battle where a legion of Banshee-mounted Na'vi fly fearlessly through the airborne mountainscape while the military gunships unleash a hellstorm of missiles, and yet it also has the patience to let Neytiri reverently pause to observe where the drifting Seeds of Eywa fall. It will show you giant colorful dinosaur-like creatures smashing through trees in the all but obligatory stampede sequence, but look closely when the Na'vi get ready to ride a Banshee and you'll see gill-like orifices through which the creatures breathe. The world of Avatar feels bigger than life, yet I felt like I could reach out, grab a sample, and take it with me.

    Is Avatar perfect? Far from it. It blatantly contradicts itself during the climax and brushes a little too close with propaganda in places. But like a dream, it didn't matter. When you've looked across the Pandoran landscape at night and absorbed the mystical beauty of the self-illuminating flora, when you've felt the thrill of watching Jake command the meanest predator on the planet and unite the Na'vi tribes, when you've *seen* Avatar … you don't care about its logistical faults.

    It's a movie about sights, and James Cameron isn't shy about that point. It's the heart of the film. It's in every frame—in the very fabric of the film. Hell, it's even spelled out in the dialogue.

    "I see you."

    In the cold mechanical adult world of unforgiving cause and effect, Avatar is the movie to reawaken the forgotten child of so long ago. The child who believes in searching for undiscovered frontiers to explore, who believes dragons and magic exists, and who believes dreams are real. It's always refreshing finding out our inner child is still alive, that the jaded real world hasn't killed him off entirely yet.

    Thank you, James Cameron.
    सभी समीक्षाएं देखें

    हाल ही में देखे गए

    कृपया इस फ़ीचर का इस्तेमाल करने के लिए ब्राउज़र कुकीज़ चालू करें. और जानें.
    IMDb ऐप पाएँ
    ज़्यादा एक्सेस के लिए साइन इन करेंज़्यादा एक्सेस के लिए साइन इन करें
    सोशल पर IMDb को फॉलो करें
    IMDb ऐप पाएँ
    Android और iOS के लिए
    IMDb ऐप पाएँ
    • सहायता
    • साइट इंडेक्स
    • IMDbPro
    • Box Office Mojo
    • IMDb डेटा लाइसेंस
    • प्रेस रूम
    • विज्ञापन
    • नौकरियाँ
    • उपयोग की शर्तें
    • गोपनीयता नीति
    • Your Ads Privacy Choices
    IMDb, एक Amazon कंपनी

    © 1990-2025 by IMDb.com, Inc.