51

Re: IMDB review of CR--SPOILER ALERT!

benskelly wrote:

If I can reply to a couple things...

Just because the reviewer trashed the last few Bond movies does not necessarily mean he's NOT a plant.  I don't know if he is or not, but part of what a plant does when they are deemed helpful is to sound like they were "converted" by the movie in question.  In other words, they were just as skeptical as any of the doubters out there and they were surprised and blown away by the movie.  This is much more effective than saying you're a Bond fan who loves the whole series.  I'm not saying he's a plant, but I don't know that he isn't either.

Another thing is people keep referring to the London screening the AICN reviewer claimed to attend a couple weeks back.  But this reviewer says he saw it LAST WEEKEND...so this is not the same screening.  And there haven't been any other "leaked" reviews on AICN or anywhere else that review a recent screening.  It strikes me as strange that there are not a couple other people who saw the same screening.  Of course, the AICN was also not substantiated by anybody else.

I said in my first post, way back, that I wasn't surprised to hear a good review.  That's because I love the script.  Let me just repeat that: I love the script.  I think Campbell and Craig would have to really try hard to screw up this movie.  I fully expect it to be AT LEAST a "B+" movie.  I was as depressed by DAD as anyone.  Not because it was "over the top" - that doesn't bother me - but because it was just sloppy and had no flow or rhythm at all and was edited with a hatchet.  It just didn't work.  And that certainly was not Brosnan's fault.
   
Personally, I don't like it when anyone (non-Bond fans especially) trashes ANY of the Bond films.  I didn't like it when Chris Cornell did it.  It's like you can criticize your own family, but you don't want anyone else doing it.

I'm a Bond fan too, period, that's all.  The first film I saw was OHMSS.  So I didn't even start out with one of the real stars of the series.  Dalton is my least favorite, but I don't hate him, I still enjoy those movies.

I look forward to CR.  I'm not going to criticize, nor am I going to praise Craig, until I see him.  I hope, I hope, I hope...

We're all too close to this thing to see it objectively.

Fair enough, Ben. And I suppose I did over-react by jumping to the gun as soon as I saw a back-lash of negativity again with a positive review (even if the guy writes like a 6 year old and could indeed be a plant).....;)

52

Re: IMDB review of CR--SPOILER ALERT!

TonyDP wrote:
Klaus Hergescheimer wrote:
TonyDP wrote:

... some people who enjoyed TND, TWINE and DAD might take offense to the reviewer's assetion that "the last few film (sic) have been GODAWFUL".

Then don't talk crap about Dalton.

You must have me confused with someone else Klaus, I always said Dalton was a very good Bond, even if I don't care much for the tone of LTK.

Sorry, Tony. I get quite defensive about my Timothy.

53

Re: IMDB review of CR--SPOILER ALERT!

benskelly wrote:

Personally, I don't like it when anyone (non-Bond fans especially) trashes ANY of the Bond films.  I didn't like it when Chris Cornell did it.  It's like you can criticize your own family, but you don't want anyone else doing it.

It's not really like that though, is it? They're just films... if someone has a go at your mum; fair enough, but if they say they didn't like GoldenEye... I just can't get upset about that. At a push if they call you defective for liking them, maybe, but he didn't even do that. They're just films which some people don't like. I'm managing to live with that.

As for this bloke being a plant; he could be, yes, but I see no reason to think he is. Or isn't, whichever point of view you prefer. If you're calling him a plant just because it's positive... well, that's just silly. And if it's because they aren't many other reviews on the net, well how many usually appear for test screenings on the net? I don't remember seeing much more than one on AICN or any of those sites for new movies: not many people actually write reviews on the net and very few people actually get into test screenings. The likelyhood of a high percentage of those being the kind of people who write net reviews is pretty low. That gossip monkey chap that MBE linked to said he'd spoken to a couple, so we know these test screenings are happening (unless he made it all up too! Who ya gonna trust?). It all seems pretty believable to me and if he is a plant, so what? All he's done is smoke out a couple of people who go looking to be offended whenever someone says the word 'Brosnan'.

54

Re: IMDB review of CR--SPOILER ALERT!

benskelly wrote:

It's a metaphor.  Of course I didn't mean that my mom or anybody's mom is on the same level as "Goldeneye" for crissake.  THAT'S silly.

It's a simile actually ajb007/wink
But I was just extending it; why would you be upset because someone doesn't like something you do or vice versa? They're not passing judgement on you personally.

benskelly wrote:

And the reason whether he's a plant or not is important is because...well, obviously, we want to know what an average individual thinks not a shill.

Fair enough, I can see that.

benskelly wrote:

Also, I've been going to AICN since it started and these screening reviews usually appear in 2s and 3s, if not four or five at a time.  Contrary to what you said, people who see movies before everyone else - especially big movies like the new James Bond - can't wait to get online and tell everyone, even if it's just a few lines.  Basically anyone under 60 knows how to post online.

I don't really buy that, though. I used to get asked a lot to attend these things on the street and anyone's invited. Not just net film geeks. And  most people really wouldn't go on the net and tell everyone. Maybe the AICN guys know where to hang out to catch the latest Hollywood screening, but there aren't that many huge films in the UK and I don't think you'd get that many people going online to blab about it; as that gossip monley link shows. Look how many people are on this website right now: 6. That's all. The web isn't where everyone goes.