| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| The General |
Posted - 05/28/2006 : 17:31:17
I surfed on to the front page of FWFR and read the following new review (edited to remove spoiler):
Jean kisses, ********* Cyclops.
If you've seen the review, it seems to give away some of the movie's plot (I'm not sure, as I haven't seen the movie yet). I'm looking forward to seeing it and, if this review is true, part of the suspense is now taken away for me.
Is there an approach the MERPs take to spoiler reviews? Perhaps they should not be posted along with other new reviews and reviewers could keep them out of their FYCs until the movie is a few months old. |
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 14:40:52
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
quote:
Originally posted by boydegg
*sigh* ... there goes my 'Bruce Willis is ghost' review.
You bastard, I was really looking forward to seeing Die Hard.
Ah well... I guess it won't spoil it any more if I tell you it turns out McClane's a guy, too.
Really! You know, I suspected it from way back... why, I think it was when I saw "Sweet Charity" that I... what? Oh...!
(Nevermind.) |
| benj clews |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 13:55:53
quote:
Originally posted by BiggerBoat
quote:
Originally posted by boydegg
*sigh* ... there goes my 'Bruce Willis is ghost' review.
You bastard, I was really looking forward to seeing Die Hard.
Ah well... I guess it won't spoil it any more if I tell you it turns out McClane's a guy, too. |
| BiggerBoat |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 13:44:14
quote:
Originally posted by boydegg
*sigh* ... there goes my 'Bruce Willis is ghost' review.
You bastard, I was really looking forward to seeing Die Hard. |
| Koli |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 13:27:47
quote:
Originally posted by benj clews
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
And I didn't think Kate's pair were anything special.
 I beg to differ!
I'm with the boss on this one. They were the first pair two of my kids saw in a film, and are likely to provide them with a benchmark labelled 'female bodily perfection'. Well, better that than thinking Jordan or Rebecca Loos represent normality. |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 11:53:31
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Oh, come on now, that's not fair.
How about the bit where Leo sinks?
Nahhh... too slow. Should've happened three hours earlier. 
You have a point, but better late than never, eh?
Yes, thank heavens for small favours!
|
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 11:36:37
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Oh, come on now, that's not fair.
How about the bit where Leo sinks?
Nahhh... too slow. Should've happened three hours earlier.
You have a point, but better late than never, eh? |
| benj clews |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 11:05:24
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
And I didn't think Kate's pair were anything special.
I beg to differ! |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 10:52:17
quote:
Originally posted by Se�n
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Oh, come on now, that's not fair.
How about the bit where Leo links?
Nahhh... too slow. Should've happened three hours earlier. Mind you, if that had happened then Kate wouldn't have 'got them out'.  <the only bit of the movie I remember...> 
I agree with the Whip - Leo's death was too slow and too late in coming.
(And I didn't think Kate's pair were anything special. Of course, being a straight female, I'm hardly one to judge.)
|
| Sean |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 09:54:17
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Oh, come on now, that's not fair.
How about the bit where Leo links?
Nahhh... too slow. Should've happened three hours earlier. Mind you, if that had happened then Kate wouldn't have 'got them out'. <the only bit of the movie I remember...> |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 08:16:00
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
I remember before I went to see that particular version of Titanic I was a bit wary, and said: "why did they bother making yet another film about the Titanic? The ship sinks, lots of people die, some people survive. What more can they do with this basis to make it all that different?". Of course, that was before I saw the underwater scenes of the real Titanic. That was the only good thing about that movie, for me.
Oh, come on now, that's not fair.
How about the bit where Leo sinks?
Glug, glug, glug...  |
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 06/06/2006 : 07:15:04
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Okay, I realize that once in a while a review here might actually give something away that someone who hasn't seen the movie really shouldn't know (example: "Rosebud was the *****" - even I won't fill that in, just in case...). But if you think about it, for the most part, exactly how much CAN we give away in only four words? For instance, if I did a review for Gosford Park that was "Butler didn't do it" I'm sure the MERPs would reject it for being too generic. I'd say that most of the reviews (my money's on 90%) that could give too much away would actually be considered too generic to be accepted.
Warning: Those of you who haven't seen TITANIC do not press this link!
Hehehe. Still... with most movies that are supposed to be including some historical facts, you can't really write a total spoiler review. I remember before I went to see that particular version of Titanic I was a bit wary, and said: "why did they bother making yet another film about the Titanic? The ship sinks, lots of people die, some people survive. What more can they do with this basis to make it all that different?". Of course, that was before I saw the underwater scenes of the real Titanic. That was the only good thing about that movie, for me.
(Ooops - did I spoil something for someone here?)
|
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 06/05/2006 : 21:35:42
quote:
Originally posted by ChocolateLady
Okay, I realize that once in a while a review here might actually give something away that someone who hasn't seen the movie really shouldn't know (example: "Rosebud was the *****" - even I won't fill that in, just in case...). But if you think about it, for the most part, exactly how much CAN we give away in only four words? For instance, if I did a review for Gosford Park that was "Butler didn't do it" I'm sure the MERPs would reject it for being too generic. I'd say that most of the reviews (my money's on 90%) that could give too much away would actually be considered too generic to be accepted.
Warning: Those of you who haven't seen TITANIC do not press this link! |
| boydegg |
Posted - 06/05/2006 : 21:19:09
*sigh* ... there goes my 'Bruce Willis is ghost' review.
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 05/31/2006 : 07:15:19
Okay, I realize that once in a while a review here might actually give something away that someone who hasn't seen the movie really shouldn't know (example: "Rosebud was the *****" - even I won't fill that in, just in case...). But if you think about it, for the most part, exactly how much CAN we give away in only four words? For instance, if I did a review for Gosford Park that was "Butler didn't do it" I'm sure the MERPs would reject it for being too generic. I'd say that most of the reviews (my money's on 90%) that could give too much away would actually be considered too generic to be accepted.
|
| Sean |
Posted - 05/31/2006 : 06:47:13
quote:
Originally posted by duh
As Sean said once, I don't have to rent DVD's, I can just sit on my couch and watch the movies in my head.  
 I've got no recollection of saying that. It doesn't mean I didn't say it, just that if it was before last week, then I've forgotten it.  I have the memory of a goldfish, so spoilers aren't a big deal for me, as I'm almost certain to have forgotten them by the time I watch the movie. |
