| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| aahaa, muahaha |
Posted - 10/19/2006 : 06:02:42
FOUR YOUR CONSIDERATION - TREASURE HUNT
 Put any five reviews you like in your F.Y.C. list.
 The only rule is to not use the ones from the previous round - you must change them every round.
 Post here to declare that you've done it. Sooner is better than later.
 You must read the F.Y.C.s of all participants.
 The next round starts on Monday or Thursday at 6:00 a.m. FWFR time, whichever comes next.
|
| 15 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Demisemicenturian |
Posted - 10/23/2006 : 09:06:26
quote:
Originally posted by BaftaBabe
If I don't get a review that I suspect may be brilliant, and there's a hint, as you say, about character/plot contained in the review ... then I look up the film and read about it
I often do this too, but I find it quite a hassle and would rather the review had just been explained to me.  |
| w22dheartlivie |
Posted - 10/23/2006 : 04:41:06
V&V |
| thefoxboy |
Posted - 10/23/2006 : 02:47:04
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
V&V to here.
I liked...
And both Sean and Foxboy's Pam and Tommy Lee reviews.
Thanks.
VVed. |
| Whippersnapper. |
Posted - 10/23/2006 : 02:24:13
Veed.
&
Veed.
|
| redPen |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 23:58:23
quote:
Originally posted by demonic
I'd far rather not have to explain my carefully constructed quads of joy.
Editor's Note: With 5 reviews per round, wouldn't that make them "quints of joy"?
 |
| demonic |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 22:30:32
All done.
Zulu got 4/5 from me. Ace.
Whipper's "base ball players" for Eight Men Out is one of those deceptively simple, and brilliant reviews. Bravo!
As for hints and notes, as you know I regularly do it in case the voter doesn't know the film in question and might appreciate my work if they know a little more. I really don't mind if they aren't used, but as Yukon said even a single extra vote is appreciated. Actually he said he was a vote whore. But that's two ways of saying the same thing.  Of course, if I think the review is obvious or for a very well known film I don't bother. I'd far rather not have to explain my carefully constructed quads of joy. |
| randall |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 21:04:21
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
Bottom line, there is no right/wrong answer in the debate. I respect Randall's view that a review should stand on its own. He's a better man than me. I'm a vote whore who likes seeing the tally pile up to prove that I have written a good review.
Not a better man, just a different man. I likes me my votes too, and I had a tough time once with a movie called Spit. I wrote one review, then -- remember how I said I often have second thoughts? -- realized I could top it with a slight little tweak. It bothered me so much that I disowned my original review, even though I had to give up several votes to do it.
This is why you see two very similar reviews on the page. Both were written by me, but one's credited to Alan Smithee. I'm content now that I won't go through life regretting not having made the change , and I also got the happy experience of being able to vote on my own review! |
| Josh the cat |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 17:50:23
quote:
Originally posted by Josh the cat
Visited Read & Voted Accordingly
I will be back!
Josh the cat
Repeat! |
| Yukon |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 17:36:02
[quote/]
Well, Yuke, there IS another way -- I confess I don't alwaysdo this but I do more often than not. If I don't get a review that I suspect may be brilliant, and there's a hint, as you say, about character/plot contained in the review ... then I look up the film and read about it and usually that pays dividends both to judge others' reviews and perhaps enticing me to write my own review.
I do try to review only films I've actually seen, but even I --umbilically connected to cinema  -- have gaps in my viewing!
Since we get several days on FYC to vote, there should be time for this, with the added bonus of expanding our cine-knowledge.
Wotcha reckon?
[/quote]
Wish I could but you missed the part about my three kids (all under the age of 3 1/2), so there is little free time in my house. Remember when you took care of that hedgehog -- or was it a possum? What ever ... times that effort by three!) After my kids are in bed at 8 p.m., my wife is usally on the computer from 8 to 9:30 , Leaving my with a precious hour of review writing/voting time. (If I was a single guy with no kids, I think I'd be churning out reviews like Calmer right now.)
I'd like to expand my movie knowledge more -- something that has already happened because of this sight -- I just don't have the time to make the effort to look up IMDB. I prefer to have the explanation handed to me on a silver platter, as in a FYC hint.
Bottom line, there is no right/wrong answer in the debate. I respect Randall's view that a review should stand on its own. He's a better man than me. I'm a vote whore who likes seeing the tally pile up to prove that I have written a good review. |
| w22dheartlivie |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 13:01:55
V&V
And thanks to ALL for the tremendous votes this round, I feel the love!! |
| randall |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 12:37:52
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
Randall, I feel there are so many movies out there, and that this fourum is international, that there is no way EVERYONE out there has heard of the movie I'm reviewing usless it's a Hollywood blockbuster.
I understand your point but sometimes I feel I'm missing out on your genius because I'll read one of your reviews for a movie I don't kow and think "If that's the character's name, or the plot of the film is this, than that's is a brilliant review... but I'll never know."
Feel free to dumb down your reviews with explanations in the future for us parents with three young kids who don't have as much time to watch movies as we used to.
You're right, Yukie. But I'm right too. It's just the way I approach this. To laugh at my NEW YORK DOLL review, you have to (1) think "LDS/LSD," and (2) know what LDS stands for. So that's a twin burden I put on the review, but I really believe it only deserves the votes it can get on its own. [I'm not sending back the extras I got this time, though. ]
I was telling Sludge that this has probably happened to me a hundred times, but as soon as that review was posted I thought of a way to make it better. If I had written "Confused rocker TRIES LDS," it might have made more people curious as to what the hell I meant. Oh, well. On to the next one.
EDIT: This is actually the second of my reviews that has been explained in public. I was so proud of myself for "Canine female impersonator redomiciles." for LASSIE COME HOME. But benj declined it at first until I explained that, for production reasons, over the years Lassie has always been portrayed by a male dog. I figured if benj's encyclopedic mind didn't contain that information, others' might not too, so I broke my own rule. That's what rules are for, right? |
| redPen |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 10:39:23
Thanks, guys, for the "Leon" support! Hardly expected that kind of a rush! (Too bad the "Saints" didn't fare as well, but some days you eat the bear and some days the bear eats you, right?)
|
| ChocolateLady |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 09:08:34
Gotcha all, awaiting very late ones before tomorrow's next round. Thanks for all the votes on my Green Mile review, by the way! |
| BaftaBaby |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 08:11:41
quote:
Originally posted by Yukon
I understand your point but sometimes I feel I'm missing out on your genius because I'll read one of your reviews for a movie I don't kow and think "If that's the character's name, or the plot of the film is this, than that's is a brilliant review... but I'll never know."
Feel free to dumb down your reviews with explanations in the future for us parents with three young kids who don't have as much time to watch movies as we used to.
Well, Yuke, there IS another way -- I confess I don't alwaysdo this but I do more often than not. If I don't get a review that I suspect may be brilliant, and there's a hint, as you say, about character/plot contained in the review ... then I look up the film and read about it and usually that pays dividends both to judge others' reviews and perhaps enticing me to write my own review.
I do try to review only films I've actually seen, but even I --umbilically connected to cinema -- have gaps in my viewing!
Since we get several days on FYC to vote, there should be time for this, with the added bonus of expanding our cine-knowledge.
Wotcha reckon?
PS: vv but still lurking for obscure laggers
|
| Yukon |
Posted - 10/22/2006 : 03:25:17
Sludge, I wish there were more North Americans in the Fourum to give your "Ryan bloody sea crest "more votes. Brilliant!! (For you Brits, Aussies, etc..., Ryan Seacrest is the host of American Idol. )
Randall, I feel there are so many movies out there, and that this fourum is international, that there is no way EVERYONE out there has heard of the movie I'm reviewing usless it's a Hollywood blockbuster.
I understand your point but sometimes I feel I'm missing out on your genius because I'll read one of your reviews for a movie I don't kow and think "If that's the character's name, or the plot of the film is this, than that's is a brilliant review... but I'll never know."
Feel free to dumb down your reviews with explanations in the future for us parents with three young kids who don't have as much time to watch movies as we used to. |
|
|
