Quantcast
 

On Flicked Off, with Mary HK Choi: 'Avatar'

Hmmm. You're putting up with "excruciating" for "fine" and "no problem." Not only that, but you're repeatedly putting yourself through it, despite how "excruciating" it is. Are you THAT bored? Is this a service you provide? I thought most people tend to avoid things they find excruciating.

Now, if this article was something that you LIKED, but are trying to improve for your future reading enjoyment, that would make a lot of sense. Otherwise, I have no idea what you're getting at.

Sorry, I meant, "I have no idea at what you're getting."

Posted on December 21, 2009 at 9:27 am 0

On Flicked Off, with Mary HK Choi: 'Avatar'

Why are you inferring that I only think there are two kinds of reviews? If I say I love apples but hate oranges, I'm not saying there are only two fruits. I understand that this particular review is an extreme, and my other example is also meant to be presented as an extreme.

Let me also ask you, what is your definition of a professional film critic? I assume this writer was paid for this article. If I was paid to twitter, "Avatar sucked," or "Avatar rocked," wouldn't that make me a professional? Clearly you have a definition other than the literal one, so what are your qualifications?

What do you think the point of a film review is?

Posted on December 20, 2009 at 11:55 pm 0

On Flicked Off, with Mary HK Choi: 'Avatar'

Isn't the writer of this article a film critic?

Posted on December 20, 2009 at 8:01 pm 0

On Flicked Off, with Mary HK Choi: 'Avatar'

Between someone that LOVED something and another who didn't, I'd rather be the former.

The most overrated thing in the world is a discerning palate. In the end, no one gives a shit except you. It's like going through life, only fucking with a condom on, and you're bragging about how thick it is.

Posted on December 20, 2009 at 4:11 pm 0

On Flicked Off, with Mary HK Choi: 'Avatar'

I didn't know there was supposed to be an invitation for discussion. Or at least the discussion you're looking for.

I liked that this wasn't an academic essay about the movie so much a one-man bukkake of emotion (or solo jerk to use your wording.) I like that it demonstrates a refusal to hear "Well, the story is derivative of the archetypical Campbell-ian-" STFU because that is just how the writer feels about it. There's no uncertainty about how much they loved it.

This is the kind of review I like. The "This-is-how-I-feel" kind of review. I hate the kind of review that just gives people an excuse to wank their film/TV correspondence degree from USC, where in the end, no one's listening to anyone else anyway.

Posted on December 20, 2009 at 4:04 pm 0