MetLife

northerncrane4 said:AND DON'T FORGET ABOUT HIM TOO!

If only Angelica, Nate, and milk could drop by, then all my favorite people would finally be gathered right here in this thread!

Hey, how could you leave me out? You didn't even mention me! 😬

Richard Hernandez13 said:Shame on you—you didn't even mention me. 😬

Since you're already here, you might as well move this thread over to the "MetLife" section—specifically under "good review of MetLife by Mimi Rogers." As for the other one? Toss it into either "Literature" or "Other Media."😎

dustyscout53 said:Film criticism is essentially just a platform for people to justify their own personal worldviews.

Is it only yours, though?

goldenhound32 said:just yours, or what?

What's mine? Look, I don't do film criticism. And man, you should see the types who make a career out of it—you clearly thought I was one of them.

Anyway, all that stuff they drill into your heads at college or those fancy seminars—wherever you pick up all that "expert" knowledge—you can basically just toss it in the trash.

Critics, regardless of which outlet they write for, if they aren't doing it my way... well, what's even the point of them? Seriously.

Especially with movies—I mean, film is such a fast-moving medium that doesn't really care about the past. Plus, let's be real, movie audiences are pretty mindless; otherwise, they wouldn't watch anything, or at least, they wouldn't flock to the same blockbusters over and over.

So I'll say it again: if you have some formal film degree, especially an American one, do us all a favor and just lose it.

The main reason? American cinema.

Case closed.

Totally off-topic. 😁 😁 😁 🙂

dustyscout53 said:So I'll say it again—if you actually have some formal film education, especially if it’s from an American institution, just throw it in the trash.

The main argument? American cinema.

And I suppose you've read plenty of reviews for American films, haven't you?

northerncrane4 said:So you've read a ton of reviews for American movies, huh?

Honestly—I'd say I've just watched way too many American movies.

dustyscout53 said:I'd probably just say I've watched way too many American movies.

So, there it is.

dustyscout53 said:What am I supposed to do with that?

"Film criticism is merely a platform for explaining one's own worldview," they tell me. Personally, I find that notion utterly absurd. I shouldn't even have to justify my skepticism; if you actually want your opinion to carry any weight at all, you are obligated to provide a rationale first.

The general moviegoing public is quite dim-witted; if they weren't, the blockbusters would never be the things everyone watches.

So, if someone views a movie purely as a way to unwind, they're considered stupid? Give me a break.

So I'll say it again, if you happen to have some kind of formal education in film...

I have no idea where you're pulling that from, or how it relates to anything we've discussed thus far.

Case closed.

What do you mean, 'case closed'? If you make a claim, expect a rebuttal. That is simply how forums function, and not just here in the States. 'Case closed'... honestly, look at this guy...

"Film criticism is basically just a playground for explaining one's own worldview," they told me. Personally? I think that’s nonsense. I don't even feel the need to justify my stance, but if you want anyone to actually take your opinion seriously, you kind of "have" to explain yourself first.

Since my thoughts lean pretty close to what the quoted author is getting at...

Film is an artistic medium that hits the cognitive system in its "purest" form. It’s this continuous stream of visual and audio stimuli that doesn't really handle any "lag" during processing. When I say purest, I mean the fact that space and time are synced up to such a degree—assuming we're talking about decent craftsmanship, obviously. The opposite extreme here is Ed Wood. In a well-made film, there shouldn't be any heavy lifting required by the brain to process the info. Also, movies are incredibly dense with information, so any "lag" in processing breaks the flow; your brain ends up struggling just to catch up with what's happening. Like, if you step out of the theater for ten minutes and come back... it takes a moment to settle in, or you just give up entirely. You get the same effect if a movie is just poorly made.

I guess you could look at it like a model of fertilization, where millions of tiny little sperm cells (the information a film provides) are racing toward the uterus (the worldview). Only one can succeed, so by that parallel, a film is "good." If the result is twins, it's a classic. Anything above that is just pure cinematic genius. Not to go off on a tangent about in-vitro filmmaking, though. Most attempts at fertilization end up being just plain sex—whether because of condoms or birth control... in movies, we just call that entertainment. Anyway, back to the point...

So, this specific sequence of information within a set context (liberal, misanthrope, jerk, idiot, madman...) produces different interpretive models for everyone—basically, different ideas of what the director was trying to say. The more accessible that concept is, the more people will find the film appealing. The more complex the concept is (not necessarily "lower," mind you), the smaller the audience that will consider it good. And that brings us to the "worldview" embedded in the film's concept. That's why "reviews"—which aren't really dry treatises following a rigid structure, but more like intimate windows into someone's personal philosophy—exist. The film tries to install itself like an essay, because that worldview is attempting to interpret symbols and their relationships. To me, any explanation of that is essentially a literary work in itself.

I find reading those kinds of "reviews" fascinating—especially for films that actually touched me somehow. That kind of relationship with cinema is almost confessional. The film acts as a catalyst where a person's internal worldview can be brought to such a level of clarity that it becomes possible to actually put it into coherent words. There's huge value in that, because very few of us truly understand our own worldview, and even those who do usually struggle to describe it.

Not to mention the ones who went crazy after having that realization. Or worse.

dustyscout53 said:If critics aren't following my specific blueprint—regardless of which media outlet they're writing for—then what on earth are they even doing with their lives?

Are you actually suggesting that if their reviews don't consist of just rehashing the plot exactly like yours, they shouldn't bother being critics at all?

But what I truly cannot wrap my head around is this—where does this absurd urge come from to call out MrBeast simply because he isn't sticking strictly to the forum's topic? Just imagine: someone actually posts a coherent, thoughtful film review in a discussion thread! Honestly, should we give a round of applause to everyone who writes about music, albums, or concerts? Should we tell them, "Wait a minute, you can't just say 'we danced, the energy was wild, it was hot, the band rocked, and we grabbed drinks afterward'—that's just a basic concert report!" No, apparently that's not allowed! If I, dustyscout53, didn't attend a show, am I expected to write some flowery, over-analyzed literary essay, or should I just keep my actual impressions to myself entirely?
(That was the polite version; the uncensored one would be: what the hell are you talking about, dustyscout53?)

Terry Ramos60 said:but what I don't get is—why do you have this weird need to call out MrBeast just because he's off-topic? LIKE, SERIOUSLY, IN A FORUM THREAD—as if anyone actually wrote a coherent film critique here?!?!

Only one reason—I actually think MrBeast can write a decent movie review. If I thought he was an idiot, I wouldn't even be talking to him. 😍

And he knows it. 😍 😍

Love ya, too. 😘

dustyscout53 said:For one reason and one reason only—I truly believe that MrBeast possesses the capacity to pen a coherent film critique! If I actually thought he was an idiot, would I even bother engaging with him at all? 😍

Oh my goodness, wow!🙏 🙏 Do you truly believe he actually has what it takes to pull this off? Can you honestly sit there and maintain that he is capable of such a feat?!
And why on earth would he bother writing you a coherent film critique?
Why don't you go watch the movie and form your own opinion? Wouldn't it be much more rewarding to experience the story firsthand rather than relying on what others have to say?

dustyscout53 said:For just one reason—I believe MrBeast can actually write a coherent film review. If I thought he was an idiot, I wouldn't even bother talking to him. 😍

I even offered you ten cards—just for you. The only catch was that you actually had to watch the movie so we could be on the same page. But no—you just want me to summarize it for you.

All right, fine. It’s not like you walked away empty-handed. Here—Jessica Nguyen85 has laid out all your shared little delusions using a mountain of "wonderful" metaphors—(there are even sperm cells involved!!!).

northerncrane4 said:I even offered you ten cards—just for you. The only catch was that you actually had to watch the movie so you’d get what I'm talking about. But nope! You just want me to summarize it for you.

But whatever. It's not like you walked away empty-handed. Look, Jessica Nguyen85 laid out all our collective thoughts using a bunch of wild metaphors (there's even sperm involved!!!).

So yeah, Jessica Nguyen85 put our thoughts out there. And honestly? That's great. Now this forum is actually functional! 🙂

The actual plot doesn't matter to me—that should be obvious after reading a few pages here. A six-year-old could grasp the plot. But how the movie hits you, how *you* interpret it... that's the whole reason this forum exists, IMHO. But when you write something as cliché and boring as

indie film 🙄

Man, that's when I lose it! Because all I see is our youth—talented, but totally screwed.

Why is everyone being so negative? The trio of negativity (you, Koka, and Lala). A person who's happy with their life can't be this cynical. It's not even cool—I'm actually embarrassed for you guys. I see you've got brains, you've got style... But still... You're just disappointed. As for Lala, I'm guessing she's single. Maybe Koka is a divorcee or heaven forbid a widow, but hey, who knows what's going on with you.

dustyscout53 said:Well, there it is—Jessica Nguyen85 laid out our thoughts. It’s a great move. Finally, this forum is actually becoming functional! 🙂

Asking for this thread to actually become functional would be asking for way too much.

dustyscout53 said:The actual plot of a movie doesn't interest me—that should be obvious after reading a few pages of this. Any six-year-old can grasp a storyline. What matters is how the film hits you personally and how you interpret it—that's the entire reason this forum exists, IMHO. When you write something as stereotypical and mind-numbingly dull as...

Alternative cinema—more like experimental indie stuff. 🙄

😲 Dustyscout53—man! You just don't get it. Do you even know the difference between an alternative film and an indie one? Indie films used to be seen as breeding grounds for free-thinking talent—though they haven't been for a long time now. If you actually understood the current state of global and American cinema, you'd see exactly what the core issue is with this movie—something I've already stated quite precisely and concisely. Are you familiar with any standard screenwriting textbooks? They lay out every beat for a "road movie," including requirements like having the protagonist's goal revealed by page 17. Does Mimi Rogers know that? Honestly, how do you have the nerve to lecture me on staying in line when you lack even that basic knowledge? You should be embarrassed.

northerncrane4, you were totally killing the vibe in this thread—I gave you a friendly heads-up, but now you're acting all high and mighty with your little rulebook.

Just stay quiet until I call on you again, okay? And seriously, keep in mind when you decide to start the next thread...

I'm always watching. 😎

🙂

dustyscout53, are you really sitting around with absolutely nothing to do?

On a different note, thank you so much for the compliment of placing me in the same league as MrBeast and Coca-Cola! Though, if I'm being perfectly honest, don't you think you might have overestimated me just a little bit?

dustyscout53 said:northerncrane4, you were out of line in this thread—I gave you a polite heads-up, yet here you are acting like some pedantic nerd over your little rulebooks.

Keep your mouth shut until I call on you again. And you might want to think twice before you start the next thread...

I'm always watching. 😎

🙂

You're finished.

Terry Ramos60 said:dustyscout53, are you seriously that bored?

Anyway, thanks for the compliment—grouping me in with MrBeast and Coca-Cola. Though, honestly? I think you might be overestimating me.

Nah, I think I underestimated you—you're actually the spicy one here. 😁 😁

walter said:I suppose I underestimated you, because let me tell you, you are quite the firecracker! 😁 😁

However, I simply haven't mastered the art of such elegant articulation myself.

Seriously now, why don't you just go start your own blog already?