Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Fri Dec 26, 2014 7:21 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next
CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC 
Author Message
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
Oi...and February continues to blow at the movies. Is it March yet?


Sat Feb 14, 2009 9:58 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
panos75 wrote:
I always enjoy your most vicious reviews James.
But it seems to me that you have gone soft over the years. :)

I still remember back when I read for the first time your reviews about ''Adrenalin'' or ''Knock Off'', I was litteraly crying from laughter.


Haha I love the vicious ones too, and I expected as much for this one, having read at least one of the books, which I found to be repulsive and indulgent and insulting...boy do I hate chick lit and chick flicks.

James is king. I geek out about 'my critic' a lot, even though sometimes you totally get it wrong! E.g Taken, which you said wasn't so bad, but I found it unintentionally hilarious...it should have come out in the 90s.


Sun Feb 15, 2009 12:48 am
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
That was the worst review you've written in quite some time, James.
I wonder what exactly made you give it one full star? I really didnt notice anything positive about the review, except something about the acting, which you also criticized a bit.
But quite amusing really. It's fun to read your your bad reviews!


Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:14 am
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
lol, sunshinebear ... I always get weird looks when I refer to "my critic." I wonder if that's unique to reelviews readers ;)


Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:17 am
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
jksander wrote:
lol, sunshinebear ... I always get weird looks when I refer to "my critic." I wonder if that's unique to reelviews readers ;)


Hahaha, today I was just saying, "Shopaholic? My critic brutally panned it and gave it one star!" I'm always doing it, and it annoys my parents constantly. :lol:


Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:40 am
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
James, I really enjoyed the review, and I agree with you 1000% that it's especially insulting to release it now. In fact, the review came out on the same day one of my colleagues got laid off for purely economic reasons - a pretty devastating event for a five-person company. So I guess the review was well-timed, but the movie wasn't :|


Sun Feb 15, 2009 2:22 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
Arun wrote:
That was the worst review you've written in quite some time, James.
I wonder what exactly made you give it one full star? I really didnt notice anything positive about the review, except something about the acting, which you also criticized a bit.
But quite amusing really. It's fun to read your your bad reviews!

when i said "worst review", i meant the most vicious one....


Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:24 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
Arun wrote:
Arun wrote:
That was the worst review you've written in quite some time, James.
I wonder what exactly made you give it one full star? I really didnt notice anything positive about the review, except something about the acting, which you also criticized a bit.
But quite amusing really. It's fun to read your your bad reviews!

when i said "worst review", i meant the most vicious one....

Well it got a star not because it was good but because it wasn't as bad. Ratings don't neccessarily start at 0 and then work their way up -- if they did that then there would be no way to distinguish a very bad film from an unwatchable one. ;)


Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:53 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
Frogster wrote:
Arun wrote:
Arun wrote:
That was the worst review you've written in quite some time, James.
I wonder what exactly made you give it one full star? I really didnt notice anything positive about the review, except something about the acting, which you also criticized a bit.
But quite amusing really. It's fun to read your your bad reviews!

when i said "worst review", i meant the most vicious one....

Well it got a star not because it was good but because it wasn't as bad. Ratings don't neccessarily start at 0 and then work their way up -- if they did that then there would be no way to distinguish a very bad film from an unwatchable one. ;)


You're right, they start at your max and work itself done if necessary :)


Sun Feb 15, 2009 3:55 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC (Non-SPOILER discussion)
James Berardinelli wrote:
Pedro wrote:
At least you can look forward to The Class next week.


Well... not really. I have already seen it. I originally had intended to post the review this past week, then I realized I'd have almost nothing to post next week, so I moved things around. In fact, the only reason I'm seeing Fired Up next week is because I'm desperately in need of reviews of new films, and almost nothing is coming out next weekend or the weekend after (although I expect to have reviews of both Echelon Conspiracy and Crossing Over on or before 2/27).


You're seeing Fired Up? That's grim.
On the bright side, it seems like there's more 3 star movies than last years "movie abyss".


Last edited by thewatcher on Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:11 pm, edited 1 time in total.



Sun Feb 15, 2009 5:49 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
Definitely a great, vicious attack on what looks like a waste of a film released at a bad time.

However, the film is a success mainly because of it being based on a popular book.


Sun Feb 15, 2009 6:09 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
Ouch. And I was looking forward to watching this too.
Ah well, hard times call for hard measures.
Your writing is as strong as ever!


Mon Feb 16, 2009 2:34 am
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
My wife and daughter have read the book (and others in the series) and they were really looking forward to the film. However, I read out part of your review and that rather put her off!


Mon Feb 16, 2009 10:57 am
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
I didn't see the movie, but I did see the trailer for it while at the theatre for something else.

It's the only comedy trailer I think I've ever seen where no-one, no-one laughed or giggled. The place was as quiet as a funeral home. It was almost awkward.

A lot of critics are pasting this movie because of the consumerism angle during economic hard times. I think that's a bit unfair, call it bad luck. There are so many other reasons why this movie is bad, harping on the release timing dilutes the other, larger issues with the production.


Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:20 pm
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3212
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
MisterEarl wrote:
A lot of critics are pasting this movie because of the consumerism angle during economic hard times. I think that's a bit unfair, call it bad luck. There are so many other reasons why this movie is bad, harping on the release timing dilutes the other, larger issues with the production.


Yes, but it's not unheard of for distributors to hold movies to avoid this kind of bad timing. Remember 9/11? How many action movies were pushed back because of that?

It's almost obscene for this movie to be released now. It's not expected to be a big, tent pole movie. No one would have been dismayed had it quietly been pulled from release and shelved until such time as the economy improved.


Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:35 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
Yeah well the bad economy and 9/11 are two entirely different issues, and I can just picture Hollywood producers laughing at the idea of delaying a film because of the bad economy, it's just not on the same level that 9/11 was.


Mon Feb 16, 2009 1:51 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
James Berardinelli wrote:
Yes, but it's not unheard of for distributors to hold movies to avoid this kind of bad timing. Remember 9/11? How many action movies were pushed back because of that?

It's almost obscene for this movie to be released now. It's not expected to be a big, tent pole movie. No one would have been dismayed had it quietly been pulled from release and shelved until such time as the economy improved.


Releasing the movie in this climate is definitely bad taste, but I have to ask, would pushing the release until economic conditions improve make it more palatable? Did pushing the premiere of 24 until some time after 9/11 make that a better show?

I think the release date calls into question the studio's judgment, but I have to question the judgment of a studio that would release something like this anyway. Maybe a better question is if the movie was hilarious, would that be enough to justify the timing?


Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:06 pm
Site Admin

Joined: Thu Jan 22, 2009 10:55 pm
Posts: 3212
Location: Mount Laurel, NJ, USA
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
MisterEarl wrote:
Releasing the movie in this climate is definitely bad taste, but I have to ask, would pushing the release until economic conditions improve make it more palatable?


No matter when it was released, it would be a bad movie. However, had it come out a year or two ago, when things weren't so dire, it wouldn't have gotten under my skin the way it did. Sex and the City has a similar materalistic life philosophy, but it arrived in theaters at a time when the economy was headed down but before it had really tanked. I'd probably have the same issues with that movie if it was being released now.


Mon Feb 16, 2009 3:38 pm
Profile WWW
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
It's interesting that the timing of a movie's release can influence opinion. In a post 9/11 world, "True Lies" would not be nearly as entertaining. I recently re-watched "Wag the Dog". Huh. Either this flick doesn't offer repeat viewability, or it's past it's shelf-life. I'm voting for the latter. With everybody's eyes on the Whitehouse and the scandals flowing therefrom in the late 1990's, it was perfect timing. Now, not so much.
Maybe when rampant consumerism is back, this movie will gain a half star?

(During a good economy, people line up to buy things they can't afford. During a recession, the lines are much shorter.)


Mon Feb 16, 2009 5:32 pm
Post Re: CONFESSIONS OF A SHOPAHOLIC
My wife read the books, and she knew the movie sucked just by watching the trailer!

She told me, though, that the books are British. This makes me once again wonder why Hollywood has to "convert" British comedy. I understand that some of it is a little too dry for American taste, and needs to be loosened up a little for our sensibilities(e.g. the Office). But I think some of the lighter British humor works just fine, and I think "Americanizing" it just results in over-thinking the whole production. I'm especially surprised, given the relative success of other Brit rom-coms like Bridget Jones' Diary and all the Hugh Grant films, why someone would do this.

I'm not saying it would have saved this movie...but it might have...


Tue Feb 17, 2009 2:22 pm
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 48 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1, 2, 3  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr