Ever asked what another person thought about a movie and got a reply which was less than what you wanted? Ever seen a movie which you enjoyed which was slammed by reviewers? This blog is designed to address some of these issues and have a look at some others when it comes to the subject of movie reviews.
Movies give us a glimpse of one person's imagination about what a particular world/reality is like, and it is important that in general it does not even come out how the writer wanted either. With regard to this we all need to appreciate the work which has gone into creating a movie and appreciate it for what it is. The prime example of this is where a book has been made into a movie.
All too often I hear the response with regard to a movie review that, "The book was better." This particular response is entirely unsatisfying for me in that a movie will never be as complete as a book for tow main reasons in my opinion.
- Pages versus minutes. "The Count of Monte Cristo" is a novel which is 1650 pages long. In order to cram this into a two hour movie a lot has to be left behind, indeed even to put it into a mini-series much has to be left behind. The same can be said for other stories which go from print to screen. There are parts of the book which will have to be left out.
- Imagination versus presentation. When we read a book the characters come off the page through a combination of what is written by the author and our own imagination. The director is somewhat limited with regard to this as he can only present what he is able to, and his imagination is no doubt different to the audiences'.
Action movies are always a prime target for movie reviewers for criticism. The plot is seen as predictable, the characters two-dimensional, the dialogue to basic and the movie over-run by too many explosions and scenes of violence. If you go along to see an action movie, you are not there for some in-depth plot, you are there for the action. I mean that is why they are called action movies. The late 80's and early 90's saw great blockbuster action movies such as "Die Hard", "Rambo", and "RoboCop" to name a few. These really set the standard for what would be expected from an action movie. Sure there is some character development and so forth, but the action was the focus. You want something with in-depth plot and character development, don't see an action movie.
How many old movies have been recently re-hashed to bring them into the current era? Lots actually. Some have attempted to slip under the radar, but there are a lot of them out there. The first thing that needs to be thought here is whether or not to compare them with the originals. With regard to this they can and they can't be. The originals were made when they were so it is difficult to compare technology. Comparing the actors is much of the same issue. Comparing the storyline is a little more difficult, especially if the new director wants us to see something different. As with the book to movie comparison, I would appreciate each for what they are.
Ever seen a movie which you thought was great but all of your friends did not like it? In this instance you need to keep your own opinion and not be swayed by others. This is often influenced by popular media, reviews and other outside influences. People who are swayed into seeing or not seeing a movie due to the reviews which have been given by others usually are missing out on an experience for themselves. Each person has the right to have their own opinion, even if it is different to others'.
Cheers,
Henry.
