The DVD Talk Review for Garfield is way too harsh
10-21-04, 11:48 AM
#1
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Clemson, SC
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The DVD Talk Review for Garfield is way too harsh
Okay, I just got through watching it. I picked it up as a blind buy. I didn't think it was nearly as bad as the review. In fact, I kind of enjoyed it. It wasn't the greatest movie, but that review is a little harsh. I think the reviewer forgot to take his meds or something. Anyway, maybe it helps that I've been a Garfield fan for a long time. What are other people's opinions?
10-21-04, 12:15 PM
#2
DVD Talk Legend
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Formerly known as Groucho AND Bandoman/Death Moans, Iowa
Posts: 18,298
Received 373 Likes
on
267 Posts
This probably belongs in the review forum or the feedback forum. If you're looking for people to discuss the quality of the film itself, it goes in the movie forum.
10-21-04, 12:28 PM
#3
DVD Talk Reviewer/ Admin
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Greenville, South Cackalack
Posts: 28,858
Received 1,893 Likes
on
1,244 Posts
Re: The DVD Talk Review for Garfield is way too harsh
Originally posted by Novasonic
It wasn't the greatest movie, but that review is a little harsh. I think the reviewer forgot to take his meds or something.
It wasn't the greatest movie, but that review is a little harsh. I think the reviewer forgot to take his meds or something.
10-21-04, 12:36 PM
#5
DVD Talk Legend
The only problem I have with Adam's review is that he put too much effort into writing a review about a totally dismissable film. 
I agree, it's pretty much a disaster...but perhaps not the worst film I've seen this year (I did sit through Van Helsing and The Village, after all.)
The idea that a "kid's movie" (or a movie from any genre, for that matter) should be treated less critically than a Speilberg or Scorcese flick has always bothered me. It's either a good movie or a bad movie - you don't get bonus points just because your target audience is younger.
As Adam pointed out:
Iron Giant: Good kid's movie
Garfield: Bad kid's movie
I agree, it's pretty much a disaster...but perhaps not the worst film I've seen this year (I did sit through Van Helsing and The Village, after all.)
The idea that a "kid's movie" (or a movie from any genre, for that matter) should be treated less critically than a Speilberg or Scorcese flick has always bothered me. It's either a good movie or a bad movie - you don't get bonus points just because your target audience is younger.
As Adam pointed out:
Iron Giant: Good kid's movie
Garfield: Bad kid's movie
10-21-04, 12:40 PM
#7
DVD Talk Reviewer/ Admin
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Greenville, South Cackalack
Posts: 28,858
Received 1,893 Likes
on
1,244 Posts
The star ratings are pretty arbitrary, but using 2.5 as the average and my opinion that Garfield is considerably below average, 1.5 stars sounds about right.
I wouldn't say it's the worst movie I've seen all year, but it's really, really far down there. Here is a list of all the movies I've recommended skipping this year.
I wouldn't say it's the worst movie I've seen all year, but it's really, really far down there. Here is a list of all the movies I've recommended skipping this year.
10-21-04, 12:50 PM
#9
DVD Talk Reviewer/ Admin
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: Greenville, South Cackalack
Posts: 28,858
Received 1,893 Likes
on
1,244 Posts
I did like Lost in Translation, actually.
I wouldn't characterize myself as some sort of stodgy, uptight, elitist reviewer, and if you look at some of the other reviews I've written, I don't think you'd come away with that impression either.
I wouldn't characterize myself as some sort of stodgy, uptight, elitist reviewer, and if you look at some of the other reviews I've written, I don't think you'd come away with that impression either.
:
10-21-04, 12:56 PM
#11
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Clemson, SC
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Adam Tyner
I did like Lost in Translation, actually.
I wouldn't characterize myself as some sort of stodgy, uptight, elitist reviewer, and if you look at some of the other reviews I've written, I don't think you'd come away with that impression either.
I did like Lost in Translation, actually.
I wouldn't characterize myself as some sort of stodgy, uptight, elitist reviewer, and if you look at some of the other reviews I've written, I don't think you'd come away with that impression either.
10-21-04, 12:57 PM
#12
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having and expressing your opinions is one thing. Critising opinions of others and making statements like
is another. You are entitled to your opinions just as much as someone else is entitle to his/hers.
I bet you and Shannon are the type of people that think Lost In Translation is a good movie.
10-21-04, 01:03 PM
#16
Senior Member
Thread Starter
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Clemson, SC
Posts: 608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Van Helsing may not have been the greatest movie, but it was still better than that trash. What's worse is that I bought Lost In Translation on a blind buy and I'll regret it for the rest of my life now. I mean what could you possibly like about that movie. Nothing happens at all. I was hoping at least that they would end it the way I thought, but no, they couldn't even do that right.
Last edited by Novasonic; 10-21-04 at 01:06 PM.
10-21-04, 01:08 PM
#17
DVD Talk Legend
Let's see..
Van Helsing is 23% fresh at RT.com, 16% from esteemed critics.
"There are bad movies, then there are really bad movies — and Van Helsing is even worse than that."
"This moronic abomination is not a movie. It's just a noisy, nasty and repulsive video game-slash- theme-park haunted-house ride designed to appeal to the offspring of warlocks and trolls."
"I lost more brain cells watching this film than with the alcohol I consumed trying to forget about it."
Lost in Translation is 94% fresh, 97% from the cream of the crop.
Interesting.
Van Helsing is 23% fresh at RT.com, 16% from esteemed critics.
"There are bad movies, then there are really bad movies — and Van Helsing is even worse than that."
"This moronic abomination is not a movie. It's just a noisy, nasty and repulsive video game-slash- theme-park haunted-house ride designed to appeal to the offspring of warlocks and trolls."
"I lost more brain cells watching this film than with the alcohol I consumed trying to forget about it."
Lost in Translation is 94% fresh, 97% from the cream of the crop.
Interesting.
10-21-04, 01:08 PM
#18
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by Novasonic
Well, it's not really an opinion. Lost In Translation really is a crappy movie.
Well, it's not really an opinion. Lost In Translation really is a crappy movie.
10-21-04, 01:12 PM
#20
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Haven't seen the movie, don't plan to, but I would like to say this about the review:
This gave me a chuckle:
"Garfield is easily one of the worst movies I've seen this year, and if you've happened to look at the types of movies I typically review, that's saying a lot. "
And this is very expressive phrasing:
"The difference is that Music's Garfield sounded disinterested, in keeping with the character. For the movie, Murray himself sounds disinterested, phoning it in for a seven-figure paycheck. "
OP: All reviews are inherently objective. Different people do have different tastes, and that makes the world go round. When I read a review of a dvd, movie, or game, I try to see not if the reviewer liked/disliked it, but *why* they liked/disliked it. Things they like, I might dislike, and vice versa. As long as a reviewer tells me why his opinion is what it is, I almost actually prefer to read negative reviews first--I like to prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. Plus, negative reviews are more likely to be funny : )
This gave me a chuckle:
"Garfield is easily one of the worst movies I've seen this year, and if you've happened to look at the types of movies I typically review, that's saying a lot. "
And this is very expressive phrasing:
"The difference is that Music's Garfield sounded disinterested, in keeping with the character. For the movie, Murray himself sounds disinterested, phoning it in for a seven-figure paycheck. "
OP: All reviews are inherently objective. Different people do have different tastes, and that makes the world go round. When I read a review of a dvd, movie, or game, I try to see not if the reviewer liked/disliked it, but *why* they liked/disliked it. Things they like, I might dislike, and vice versa. As long as a reviewer tells me why his opinion is what it is, I almost actually prefer to read negative reviews first--I like to prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. Plus, negative reviews are more likely to be funny : )
10-21-04, 01:13 PM
#21
DVD Talk Special Edition
Re: The DVD Talk Review for Garfield is way too harsh
Originally posted by Novasonic
Okay, I just got through watching it. I picked it up as a blind buy. I didn't think it was nearly as bad as the review. In fact, I kind of enjoyed it. It wasn't the greatest movie, but that review is a little harsh. I think the reviewer forgot to take his meds or something. Anyway, maybe it helps that I've been a Garfield fan for a long time. What are other people's opinions?
Okay, I just got through watching it. I picked it up as a blind buy. I didn't think it was nearly as bad as the review. In fact, I kind of enjoyed it. It wasn't the greatest movie, but that review is a little harsh. I think the reviewer forgot to take his meds or something. Anyway, maybe it helps that I've been a Garfield fan for a long time. What are other people's opinions?
With its scenes of animal abuse, I think it is somewhat repulsive and probably not even suitable for children.
Saddest thing is that while watching the movie, my four-year-old laughed once. The seven-year-old never laughed. And, yet, while leaving the movie, both asked how long it would be until they could have it on video.
10-21-04, 01:25 PM
#22
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Re: Re: The DVD Talk Review for Garfield is way too harsh
Originally posted by TheAllPurposeNothing
Saddest thing is that while watching the movie, my four-year-old laughed once. The seven-year-old never laughed. And, yet, while leaving the movie, both asked how long it would be until they could have it on video.
Saddest thing is that while watching the movie, my four-year-old laughed once. The seven-year-old never laughed. And, yet, while leaving the movie, both asked how long it would be until they could have it on video.
10-21-04, 01:28 PM
#23
DVD Talk Legend
Mark your calendars: October 21, 2004.
The day that Novasonic realized that different people -- gasp! -- have different opinions.
And, Novasonic, I tend to give a lot more credit to the opinion in the Garfield review (which is well thought out and goes into detail about the flaws and how the are detrimental) rather than your 'that whole movie was bullshit' comments.
If you're going to throw stones at other's reviews/opinions, at least learn to be able to back up yours intelligently.
I'm not saying that it is impossible to defend Garfield and Van Helsing while simultaneously bashing Lost in Translation (although I have my doubts). I'm just saying that you aren't doing a particularly convincing job of it.
The day that Novasonic realized that different people -- gasp! -- have different opinions.
And, Novasonic, I tend to give a lot more credit to the opinion in the Garfield review (which is well thought out and goes into detail about the flaws and how the are detrimental) rather than your 'that whole movie was bullshit' comments.
If you're going to throw stones at other's reviews/opinions, at least learn to be able to back up yours intelligently.
I'm not saying that it is impossible to defend Garfield and Van Helsing while simultaneously bashing Lost in Translation (although I have my doubts). I'm just saying that you aren't doing a particularly convincing job of it.
10-21-04, 01:28 PM
#24
Member
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Canada
Posts: 159
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by dtcarson
OP: All reviews are inherently objective. Different people do have different tastes, and that makes the world go round. When I read a review of a dvd, movie, or game, I try to see not if the reviewer liked/disliked it, but *why* they liked/disliked it. Things they like, I might dislike, and vice versa. As long as a reviewer tells me why his opinion is what it is, I almost actually prefer to read negative reviews first--I like to prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. Plus, negative reviews are more likely to be funny : )
OP: All reviews are inherently objective. Different people do have different tastes, and that makes the world go round. When I read a review of a dvd, movie, or game, I try to see not if the reviewer liked/disliked it, but *why* they liked/disliked it. Things they like, I might dislike, and vice versa. As long as a reviewer tells me why his opinion is what it is, I almost actually prefer to read negative reviews first--I like to prepare for the worst, and hope for the best. Plus, negative reviews are more likely to be funny : )
Couldn't say it better myself.
10-21-04, 01:31 PM
#25
DVD Talk Hall of Fame
Originally posted by Novasonic
No and PixyJunket's opinion doesn't matter. I just realized she hates Family Guy. I don't see how LiT could be 97% fresh, that whole movie was bullshit.
No and PixyJunket's opinion doesn't matter. I just realized she hates Family Guy. I don't see how LiT could be 97% fresh, that whole movie was bullshit.
-He says that a lot of the anime out there is shitty and any fanboy trying to defend it is just lying.
-Strong support for Married...With Children. Perhaps one of the greatest "low brow" comedies, ever.
-Doesn't mince words with other judgement of entertainment.
My point is, just because someone doesn't agree with you 100% doesn't mean they lack insight or have a psychological problem.
Oh, and Lost in Translation is a film 1000x better than Garfield.