Author Topic: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI  (Read 51773 times)

rtprod

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #120 on: May 21, 2006, 05:39:51 pm »
Well I guess what I mean by personal taste is its a matter of opinion....my wife didn't like the movie not because of the quality of the film but because it was not her kind of movie...she's more the Notebook kinda person....and that right there is a personal taste... 

Now I understand that you didn't like the movie but that is your personal opinion and I respect the hell out of that...I for one did enjoy the movie - granted I agree its definetely not what it could have been had there been a stronger director and maybe even a stronger lead actor attached but there wasn't....and I think they made the best out of the situation....again that is JMO...

I guess I think that it could have been a LOT worst...

But IMO it is a matter of personal taste....virtually everything is these days....and just because it didn't suit your taste doesn't mean that it didn't suit others....that was my only point...

We're on a disagreeing streak here and thats a good thing....I enjoy hearing others opinions... :)

Yeah, we'll have to agree to disagree on this because what I'm saying has little to do with my individual taste, a component that doesn't enter into my film criticism.  What I am talking about has to do with the set of criteria that measures a capable film--script that makes sense, acting that is good, cinemtography that is appropriate to the material, editing that moves the film along--all of these things that coalesce into what makes good filmmaking.  In this regard The Da Vinci Code is a failure.

Now I have liked many a poorly made film in my time from Dune to Myra Breckinridge to Showgirls to, it pains me to say it, Alexander, and have scores of them in my DVD collection to prove it.  I fully recognize that they are poorly directed, badly shot or acted, otherwise less than capable in many ways and that anyone objectively critiquing them can rightfully call them the spades that they are.  However, I still like them with that caveat.  But I am under no delusion that any of them are "good" films in any way just because I happen to have found some personal window into them that affords me fun. 

I posted on this subject recently (maybe on this thread even) about the role of a film critic and the questions to ask.  Personal taste may enter into evaluating the merits of the next American Idol or U.S. president but it doesn't usually apply when you are objectively critiquing a film, boxing match or an Olympic skating competition. 

If it does, then we have no way whatsoever of establishing any quality standards or best practices.  I mean, is there a case to be made that Citizen Kane is a bad film if for some reason I don't like B&W films?  Or that Not Another Teen Movie should have gotten an Oscar (not that those hold any weight) if I somehow got excited by Chris Evans and liked the soundtrack? 

Sorry to go on here but this is a very important topic in my life and more so as time goes on, and so to be fair in our judging we should always ask:

1.  What did the director intend to do?
2.  And how well did he do it?

I may not personally, in my taste, be up for a documentary on the mating habits of skunks, but if someone makes one that blows me away in its approach and they got exactly what they wanted with their end product, then maybe the subject did not appeal to my taste but I'll be the first to trumpet how well done it is while making that very distinction.  At the same time, I cannot in good conscience give Alexander a full pass just because I dearly like Colin Farrell, as much as he blinded me to that film's deeper flaws with his endearingly naive and too large performance. 

rt
« Last Edit: May 21, 2006, 05:59:10 pm by rtprod »

slayers_creek_oth

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #121 on: May 21, 2006, 05:47:10 pm »
I posted about this recently (maybe on this thread even) about the role of a film critic and the questions to ask.  Personal taste may enter into picking the next American Idol or U.S. president but it doesn't usually apply when you are critiquing a film, boxing match or an Olympic skating match. 

Ok thats where we're differing here....because I am not critiquing the film....and am simply saying that I enjoyed it...I'm not a critic and have no desire to be...but I did enjoy the film for what it was whether or not it was well made or if the director achieved what he set out to do...and that is personal taste and opinion.  Honestly I don't care if it was well made at this particular point....all I care is that is was enjoyable...and to me it was!   ;D

Quote
Yeah, we'll have to agree to disagree on this

And there is nothing wrong with that!  :)

Offline Sheyne

  • Brokeback Got Me Good
  • *****
  • Posts: 960
  • I am pretty good with a canoe tho..
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #122 on: May 21, 2006, 05:56:07 pm »

Okay..  *jumps into water waist deep and its freezing*  ;)

Yes, I spose there are different ways of looking at a film. A reviewer will be looking for very different things to somebody who's just dragged their wife along on a Saturday night..

But yeah, it CAN come down to personal taste, but whichever way you look at it, it ALWAYS comes down to the skill of the film-makers!!!  Always!  For example, I shudder - physically shudder - at the thought of Brokeback Mountain filmed in the hands of anybody else but Ang Lee.  Okay, we don't have the same movie anymore, do we?

I admit I was VERY uneasy when I heard that Ron Howard was at the helm of DaVinci code.  My first thought was "okay, we're now going to have a film that bypasses ANY controversy and keeps everybody happy; no risks will get taken, nothing bad or untoward will be shown". Which, by the sounds of it, is exactly what we got.  Dull, dull, dull.

About the cleverest thing a reviewer here in Brisbane did was to arrange her entire review so that the first letter of each paragraph ended up spelling "It Was Really Boring".

And was it just a rumour or did they change the part in the story about Jacques being Sophie's grandfather??
Chut up!

rtprod

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #123 on: May 21, 2006, 06:01:31 pm »
Well I haven't read the book but he turns out likely not to be her grandfather, just her protector and Priory leader.  In a cliche and pat moment at the end we get a grandmother trotted out in a nice sweater, as if we're supposed to be moved by this family reunification when we know nothing about Sophie much other than her involvement in this mystery and a few too-stylized and bungled flashbacks. 

I was less interested in discovering the heir to the the bloodline than I was in finding some humanity in the picture. 
« Last Edit: May 21, 2006, 06:11:23 pm by rtprod »

slayers_creek_oth

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #124 on: May 21, 2006, 06:08:37 pm »
Okay..  *jumps into water waist deep and its freezing*  ;)

Yes, I spose there are different ways of looking at a film. A reviewer will be looking for very different things to somebody who's just dragged their wife along on a Saturday night..

But yeah, it CAN come down to personal taste, but whichever way you look at it, it ALWAYS comes down to the skill of the film-makers!!!  Always!  For example, I shudder - physically shudder - at the thought of Brokeback Mountain filmed in the hands of anybody else but Ang Lee.  Okay, we don't have the same movie anymore, do we?

I admit I was VERY uneasy when I heard that Ron Howard was at the helm of DaVinci code.  My first thought was "okay, we're now going to have a film that bypasses ANY controversy and keeps everybody happy; no risks will get taken, nothing bad or untoward will be shown". Which, by the sounds of it, is exactly what we got.  Dull, dull, dull.

About the cleverest thing a reviewer here in Brisbane did was to arrange her entire review so that the first letter of each paragraph ended up spelling "It Was Really Boring".

And was it just a rumour or did they change the part in the story about Jacques being Sophie's grandfather??

Very true Sheyne!  But my point is just pure enjoyment!  And sometimes at least IMO the worst made films can be the most enjoyable....

I am not talkin about quality....I'm talkin about entertainment....and yes I agree 100% that the quality of Da Vinci was not very good at all....no argument there and it could have been MUCH better.....but I personally WAS entertained by it for what it was....

Again IMO blockbuster films like this aren't made for quality anymore anyways....they're made for money!  Which is sad but true...JMO!

rtprod

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #125 on: May 21, 2006, 06:10:36 pm »
Quote
I am not talkin about quality....I'm talkin about entertainment....

Never the twain shall meet? 

Refuse to believe it. 

slayers_creek_oth

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #126 on: May 21, 2006, 06:12:16 pm »
Never the twain shall meet? 

Refuse to believe it. 

Well again we'll have to agree to disagree!   :)

rtprod

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #127 on: May 21, 2006, 06:18:13 pm »
Well again we'll have to agree to disagree!   :)

Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Collateral
The Bourne Identity
Mission Impossible III
The Matrix
Legally Blonde
Million Dollar Baby
Erin Brockovich
Sin City
King Kong
Forrest Gump
Contact
Moulin Rouge
Titanic

All mainstream movies that are hits and have integrity and artistry. 

« Last Edit: May 21, 2006, 06:20:41 pm by rtprod »

slayers_creek_oth

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #128 on: May 21, 2006, 06:19:56 pm »
Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
Collateral
Mission Impossible III
Legally Blonde
Sin City
King Kong
Forrest Gump
Contact
Moulin Rouge
Titanic

All mainstream movies that are hits and have integrity and artistry. 



Yes but to me only 3 of those films were enjoyable....so again we'll have to agree to disagree... :)

rtprod

  • Guest
Re: OT: It's a BUST guys: DA VINCI
« Reply #129 on: May 21, 2006, 06:21:30 pm »
Yes but to me only 3 of those films were enjoyable....so again we'll have to agree to disagree... :)

Wow, I don't get you ennis del mar, I really don't.