Snakes on a plane and your usual dumb critics...

Poststructural Pub
1

Well, today I’m going to complain about something. I never really could stand critics, many amateur critics and especially professionnal critics. But their ultimate stupidity is showing when it comes to “Snakes on a plane”. First of all, “Snakes on a plane” has one of the most straight titles I’ve ever seen: it’s actually a movie about… snakes on a plane! If you take 5 seconds to read the movie’s synopsis, it will tell you that it’s a movie about… yes, you guessed right, snakes on a plane!

I think that any person with normal intelligence would know what to expect from that movie just by analysing the contect and using a few electro-nerve-connections in their brains: it’s nothing else than a “B” movie!

How do you review a “B” movie? You change the context and determine if a “B” movie would be good when you sit there with a bunch of friends, smoking weed or not, with coke and chips, and just feel like having a good laugh for two hours. This is how you know if a “B” movie does it’s job.

I’m not even sure I’m going to see the movie myself, but to read online reviews and see the movie with a 3.1/10 makes me laugh and cry at the same time.

It’s like these people in Quebec who go see american movies, funded by Hollywood, and complain that there’s too much american pratriotism in the movie and too many american flags… Hello? HELLO? Is there somebody there? It’s an american movie, of COURSE it’s patriotic. If you want to see a phychological french movie that puts you to sleep after 5 minutes, go ahead, but DONT go see a movie you KNOW you will criticize.

Maybe some people just enjoy criticizing movies and it makes them feel better, maybe.

Here’s a stupid comment on cinemamontral.com:

Why did they make this film? It was so useless. It was a waste of about 2 hours of my life.

Here’s a smart comment on the same site:

Lots of fun to watch in a big group of friends and/or a packed theatre. This movie is all about fun but don’t expect a critical masterpice - it is a b-movie all the way, but what a rollercoaster!

Well, thanks for reading, I feel better now and can go back to work.

2

I am tired of all these mothing critics on this mothing Snakes on a Plane movie! :laughing:

3

Nice! :slight_smile:

I understand that New Line did not prerelease the movie to critics
because they knew the critics would be morons about it. Someone
must’ve got into a midnight showing… They only bothered to review
it because of the hype.

What I wonder is, how will Hollywood try to capitolize on this kind of
grass roots internet hype campain? They will undoubtedly screw it
up if they’re actually trying. The hype worked because it was such a
surprise to the suits at the studios.

4

Nyuk! :laughing:

5

The title, alone, will (without a shadow of a doubt) keep me from seeing this one… ever.

Nor would I go see a flick called “Frogs On A Surfboard”.

6

That’s the beauty of the title. You don’t need the critics, you know exactly what you’re getting, and can decide if it’s for you or (in Joseph’s case) if it would make your eyes bleed.

I’m sure that scares the heck out of the critics… what if movies started being named appropriately? They’d all be out of a job! You could look at the movie listings and say “I definately don’t want to see Costume Drama Wherein a Middle Class Woman is Spurned by High Class Suiters, Then Gets an Unlikely Husband, but I think I would enjoy Jackie Chan in Stuff Blows Up and People Get Kicked in the Face…”

7

I have the opposite reaction JES (but also probably won’t go!)
I think the whole shtick is to attract the exact kind of thrillseekers Azalin described–“Snakes on a plane?..oooh, scary! I gotta go!”

Somehow, I’m congenitally lacking the snakophobia gene. Most likely I’m descended from the one Cro-Magnon who, despite lacking this built-in safety precaution, managed to bumble through life without being bitten, long enough to procreate.

Hence, my reaction is “snakes on a plane?” Aw, that’s kind of cute. Sounds boring though.

I would have the same reaction to Bats in Your Bathroom or Spiders in Your Pillowcase though, so it’s fortunate I live in modern times I guess.

8

Chiffers on a Messageboard

9

Reminds me of the critics of “Godzilla” who complained about the two-dimensional characters, and the lack of intricate sub-plots.

10

Gaaaaaaaaaaaaagggghhhhhhhh!!! :astonished:



Actually, I think SoaP will be fine when it comes out on DVD. I usually only go to theatres when I think there will be stuff worth seeing on the big screen format, like WTC recently.

djm

11

… seen it. It’s a #5 yawner if you ask me.

12

“B” fillums! Yummmmmmmm…

I just watched Jackie Chan’s Shanghai Noon and Shanghai Nights. Not something to boast about, but they were fun.
But those were videos off the TV. I did actually watch Pirates of the Caribbean 2. in an actual Cinema with tilty seats and sticky floors. Yeah, that was fun too, but…
I keep hearing this little voice saying “..a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.”

…and there’s going to be another one. It’s returning to the old days of the Flash Gordon Cliffhangers. Except that there’s a year between one fillum and the next. Don’t miss the next Harry Potter, this time Next Year!

The worst fillum my Wife and I ever saw (to agree on it being the worst) was yes, the French Psychological “Thriller” “Last Year in Marienbad”.

But film reviewers? Not much cop unless you regularly read the same reviewer. When I lived in London I used to get the Trendy Listings Magazine “Time Out”. If they hated a fillum, it was worth seeing. If they raved about it, forget it. Some things don’t change much.

13

The critics on Rotten Tomatoes like ‘Snakes on a Plane,’
in fact. Personally I consider it flawed–derivative
of Goddard.

Movie reviewers are a curse, IMO. Pure ego, many of 'em.
I especially liked the ridiculing of ‘The Sixth Sense’ by
our local movie reviewer.

‘Beefy Bruce Willis, hopelessly miscast in this inept
attempt at a horror movie…’

A difficult mode of expression.

14

“Flawed”? Never! “Seminal!”

15

PIPERS ON A PLANE
I’m sick of these mothaFin’ pipers on this mothaFin’ plane!!

16

You know, this method of naming is hardly new, now that I think on
it. Waiting for Godot is pretty much what the whole play is about.
And Rosencrantz & Guildenstern Are Dead is pretty descriptive…

P.S., what’s a “fillum”?

17

ROTFF!!!

PS Every time I’ve flown, it seems I’m the only one with Uilleannn pipes on board. How 'bout one of those tacky yellow sings, “uillean pipes on board”?

18

I sort of enjoy film critics (Ebert, e.g.) and engage in a bit of it myself with my daughter - we both love movies so. Then again, I prefer the original King Kong to GWTW, never saw the big deal about Citizen Kane, and really enjoyed Conan the Barbarian for what it was. I also never got people who urge boycotts of movies based on what the movie is about, especially when they’ve never seen the movie.

Philo

19

“Snakes on a Plane” sounds like great material for “Mystery Science Theatre 3000”

20

Sorry for being obtuse, but could somebody give me a synopsis of the plot?

I 've already seen ‘Snakes under a Plane’ and ‘Snakes slightly to the Left of a Plane’ and I was wondering if this has anything new to offer the Snake-Plane type genre type thing.

Thank you.

Mukade