|
Post by oh oooh on Sept 27, 2021 17:57:59 GMT
I thought Lawrence of Arabia was rubbish
|
|
Sneelock
god
you're gonna break another heart
Posts: 8,546
|
Post by Sneelock on Sept 27, 2021 18:00:16 GMT
I can't really put that genie back in the bottle. seeing it up on a true blue silver screen really was pretty striking. the sands were almost as beautiful as Peter O'Toole!
|
|
rayge
Administrator
Invisible
Posts: 8,790
|
Post by rayge on Sept 27, 2021 21:45:34 GMT
I saw it when it was released, in a pukka widescreen cinema. I remember the cinematography, but haven't a clue about the plot or characterizations. Stunning Teflon.
|
|
|
Post by Reactionary Rage on Sept 28, 2021 7:35:05 GMT
I thought Lawrence of Arabia was rubbish One of the greatest movies ever made OBV
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Sept 28, 2021 7:40:38 GMT
(I haven't seen it really but it's definitely not my SCENE)
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2021 7:43:28 GMT
I still struggle with the idea that an opinion expressed eloquently has more validity than just 'it's rubbish'. Are articulate writers more likely to be right? Why does Pauline Kael get many of us nodding our heads and Markus mostly doesn't? Opinions are rarely interesting in and of themselves. Knowing that someone dislikes something isn't intrinsically interesting, but knowing why might be.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 28, 2021 7:47:40 GMT
I still struggle with the idea that an opinion expressed eloquently has more validity than just 'it's rubbish'. Are articulate writers more likely to be right? Why does Pauline Kael get many of us nodding our heads and Markus mostly doesn't? If one just runs around and says everything is rubbish, after 2-3 times people tend not to listen and just figure the person is mistaken, ill-informed, wrong or not very bright. But if they give their reasons will know for sure if the person is mistaken, ill-informed, wrong or not very bright. Actually Markus wrote very good film critiques, because he cared, it was in the things he didn't care about that he got sloppy. His ' film critiques', if you can call them that, were mainly muddled discussions of whether he thought the acting was good or not. His tastes ran to US crime and Sci-fi from the 90s onwards, very little beyond that.
|
|
|
Post by oh oooh on Sept 28, 2021 7:50:34 GMT
I still struggle with the idea that an opinion expressed eloquently has more validity than just 'it's rubbish'. Are articulate writers more likely to be right? Why does Pauline Kael get many of us nodding our heads and Markus mostly doesn't? Opinions are rarely interesting in and of themselves. Knowing that someone dislikes something isn't intrinsically interesting, but knowing why might be. Absolutely. I really meant to focus on the way the opinion is expressed. A dismissal is no good to anybody. But you know what I mean - if a mate says 'I thought it was shit 'cos the acting was rubbish and it all looked like it was filmed through my fuckin' sock', you wouldn't take much notice. A critic saying 'some of the performances were oddly unconvincing and the presence of an orange filter throughout created a distance between viewer and scene that I imagine was not what the director wanted' - that carries more clout. But they're saying exactly the SAME THING
|
|
|
Post by tory on Nov 30, 2021 8:13:01 GMT
Douglas Murray's scathing takedown of James O'Brien in this week's Spectator was a great read.
|
|