Escape to the Movies: Love & Other Drugs

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT
 

Casimir_Effect:
Wow I hate almost everything you say in this one.

Firstly, Last Samurai and Blood Diamond were fucking legendary. Djimon Hounsou was screwed out of the Oscar by the old Hollywood boys network of it being Alan Arkins turn.

For the last time, having some attractive girl get naked in the film does not make it better. Just thrown on some porn if that's what you're after. You said this with Pirahna, Machete and god knows how many others. It stops me taking your views at all seriously.

So Hollywood only understands men of the age 18-40? I guess that explains why nothing has grossed too high in the recent years. Oh fuck wait, what was that recent movie about a bunch of blue motherfuckers dicking around in happy-tree-land? And every Pixar film ever. Sure, rom-coms are a bad genre which typically only satisfy girls for a night-in/sleepover-esque movie which they'll happily take the piss out of while watching (like guys can do with 300 and other action movies), but these days dramas and thrillers are almost universally appealing to both sexes. I see things like The Departed or Fight Club playing at a local cinema - the crowd is split almost 50:50.

I'll happily give this movie a watch because I've enjoyed some romantic comedies in the past. But something has happened to your reviews recently which makes them shit. What up?

I've figured it out and it sadly wasn't hard.

When bob compares anything to anything, or looks at anything in existence, he thinks that his eyes are the same eyes everyone in the world has and uses, he never takes into account various groups of people and he always judges quality by what he personally sees in it, and then tries to sell it off as fact.

Secondly, the reviews. Most of the time now, he doesn't so much as review a movie, or anything, as he does explain it. Who are the actors? "They are..." What happens? "This and This and This." Why does it look good? "Well let me tell you all about the director without explaining their style, mentality and methods." What's the bad? "Well let me tell you..."

Most of his reviews have fallen under these two problems, and I used to really like him. I used to laugh and enjoy when his videos were posted, now they make me sad, watching somebody fall this far down. Lastly, and this is easily his biggest problem even if he doesn't do it that often, he takes things out of context, only to make the movie look bad, without explaining what actually happened before and after the fact.

CosmicCommander:
The problem is, films like this will be alienating a large portion of their potential audience; such as myself. Sexual Conservatives like myself are driven away by all the promiscuity and debauchery going on- I'll be finding it almost imposable to connect with the characters.

Roll on January, the King's Speech looks like where I am gonna be enjoying- a good old-fashioned cast, with a nice, morally agreeable premise and plot.

Your post is hilarious.

Bob, I'll come to your defense. I love chicks that get naked in movies. I'm 23 and I'm no different (sexually) when I was 16. I beat you dollars to donuts, most people are lying here. Trying to look all nice and intellectual. Guess what? My cock moves when I see a hot naked chick.

Baby Tea:
I kind of have to disagree that sex is 'relationship fuel'.
Sounds like a pretty hollow relationship to me.

Sex is certainly there, and important to a degree, but to call it 'fuel' is vastly overstating it's importance.
And by 'vastly' I mean 'really really vastly'. Unless you're 15 or something.

And since your recommendation seems bend around the fact that they seem to be 'real' only because they are having a bunch of sex (And that's what real people do, apparently. All the single people I know obviously have a 'friends with benefits' thing on the side. Totally realistic), that the rest of the cliched tripe can be overlooked?

I find that hard to digest, Bob.

You try to pass off the addition of sex as something 'real', and then say 'see it for the obvious eye candy', essentially dumbing down that point of 'real relationships' to worthlessness. Apparently it's just boobs. How nuanced.

Are you seriously saying we have to overlook everything you said in your 'Yes' tirade, describing every romantic comedy cliche in existence (The only thing it's missing is her gay friend, apparently), just because they have sex?

Because, really, that was your big point: Sex is there. Now it's real.
Seems rather low-brow, and just an excuse for girlfriends to drag their boyfriends along.

I'll pass.
I'm not 15, Bob.

I'm sorry, but what you wrote really disturbed me. Maybe you need to get some release?

I'm not adverse to romantic comedies, though most of mine are anime. The tropes are different, but I do understand what you're getting at: the 1950s level of pretending sex (or even just physical attractiveness) doesn't exist and isn't a prime motivator early in a relationship. It's like the lack of death in GI Joe cartoons: the important stuff is there, but it just seems so fake. Granted these are just cheap fantasies: for women to beleive in that emptional relationship and that they'd get a man no matter how ugly they were/are, and for men to find that girl that completely accepts them and isn't going to try and completely change their bad behavior after the wedding.

If anything I think these have done more to raise the divorce rate than anything as everyone thinks a perfect relationship just happens and isn't worked on constantly.

Still, at the very least this is refreshing on one front: a movie that says: guys, we know your girlfriend dragged you to this, so here's something you'll enjoy to make up for it.

Movie Bob's gotta be the least harsh critic I've ever seen.

It's got action? Go watch it.
It's got explosions? Go watch it.
It's got naked people? Go watch it.
It's about nerds? Go watch it.
It has Bruce Willis? Go watch it.
It has Giant Metal Robots fighting? Worst movie ever.
It has an attractive female lead? Go watch it.
It reminds you of the 80s? Go watch it.
It has science fiction? Go watch it.

Really now. Moast of your credibility died for me when I watched RED which was an excruciating pile of mediocrity. It was so mediocre that it felt more painful to than a really bad movie.

Anyway, I like your reviewing style and enjoy The Big Picture quite a lot, but you seem to give around 4/5 of all the movies a go ahead, it just doesn't seem to go well with my wallet or your integrity.

VenusInFurs:

Baby Tea:

I'm not 15, Bob.

I'm sorry, but what you wrote really disturbed me. Maybe you need to get some release?

Hahaha. Ouch. That was quite harsh, but very sincere.

I like The Spirit.

Looks like it's date night tonight.

HANK AZARIA is in this movie?!?!?
Sweet

A great review and a pleasant surprise. I admit I wanted to see you tear this apart but now I'm glad you didn't. I'll probably rent this film...the first romcom I've ever seen without a pretty girl dragging me to it.

Shiftshaper:
"We see them fuck, so it's like they're real people!"

That's what I got out of this.

Apparantly it still has every other romcom cliche in the book, the fack that they get it on doesnt sound like enough reason to stop this from sounding like another immensely annoying movie to watch.

Yeah, this is pretty much what I though. Not sure where Bob's going with this.

Synopsis: The way to make men like romantic comedies is to put tits and ass in them.

Why did it take 5 minutes and 42 seconds to say that, Movie Bob?

romance and romantic comedies are designed to be overly unrealistic and sappy if you will. most women don't need to see a movie about REAL people, they want to see a heartfelt warming story about true love conquering all and a girl meets a georgeous kind quirky sensitive fun romantic passionate and did I meantion georgeous guy, who stumbles around a relationship as men often do, and eventually arrives on an epiphany of the girls needs and wants and comes rushing to her because deep in his heart his love only goes to her.

we're not stupid, we know this isn't what life and romance is like, but when you're feeling down and in the dumps, and have officially decided that every man is a self serving sadistic pig who has no reason to live, you need a sappy romance or a funny romance comedy to put yourself back on the right track and believe with your heart that eventually you too may find true love.

grab me one of those movies and a bucket of icecream and I could get through anything.

VenusInFurs:

Baby Tea:
I kind of have to disagree that sex is 'relationship fuel'.
Sounds like a pretty hollow relationship to me.

Sex is certainly there, and important to a degree, but to call it 'fuel' is vastly overstating it's importance.
And by 'vastly' I mean 'really really vastly'. Unless you're 15 or something.

And since your recommendation seems bend around the fact that they seem to be 'real' only because they are having a bunch of sex (And that's what real people do, apparently. All the single people I know obviously have a 'friends with benefits' thing on the side. Totally realistic), that the rest of the cliched tripe can be overlooked?

I find that hard to digest, Bob.

You try to pass off the addition of sex as something 'real', and then say 'see it for the obvious eye candy', essentially dumbing down that point of 'real relationships' to worthlessness. Apparently it's just boobs. How nuanced.

Are you seriously saying we have to overlook everything you said in your 'Yes' tirade, describing every romantic comedy cliche in existence (The only thing it's missing is her gay friend, apparently), just because they have sex?

Because, really, that was your big point: Sex is there. Now it's real.
Seems rather low-brow, and just an excuse for girlfriends to drag their boyfriends along.

I'll pass.
I'm not 15, Bob.

I'm sorry, but what you wrote really disturbed me. Maybe you need to get some release?

what he wrote was very well stated, he's actually an adult, which is more than I can say for you apperently

First, let's get this out there, the movie isn't a romantic comedy of the typical sense. There is actually a little bit of flesh to some heavier topics. On the other hand, it isn't pure drama either. The preview is just very misleading. However, thankfully the preview is misleading, because otherwise it would surely spoil the movie.

Bob is right. The relationship in the movie works because the sex is just straight forward and honest. Most of the movie is very straight to the point, which is refreshing because you can pay attention to the movie rather than getting pissed off at the director for delaying obvious things/emotions/whatnot. Also, the movie avoided the majority of stupid cliches I feared would show up. And yes, you get to see her naked, which was done pretty tastefully.

Overall, it was a romantic comedy-ish movie that didn't completely suck.

Wait is this a movie based on fact or fiction? Films that revolve around the beginnings of successful companies have always been a sort of interest for me. Beyond that Hank Azaria is one of those actors that I always make a point to see in films since I really enjoy his acting. This is a category that includes Phillip Seymour Hoffman and Steve Buscemi always happy to see them crop up in films.

Nehari:

what he wrote was very well stated, he's actually an adult, which is more than I can say for you apperently

So many posters don't realize that they do not in fact possess a deep understanding of human relationships when all they really do have is opinions of what they should be. They get offended at things that in all honesty they shouldn't, or atleast to the degree that they evidently are.

Nehari:

VenusInFurs:

Baby Tea:
I kind of have to disagree that sex is 'relationship fuel'.
Sounds like a pretty hollow relationship to me.

Sex is certainly there, and important to a degree, but to call it 'fuel' is vastly overstating it's importance.
And by 'vastly' I mean 'really really vastly'. Unless you're 15 or something.

And since your recommendation seems bend around the fact that they seem to be 'real' only because they are having a bunch of sex (And that's what real people do, apparently. All the single people I know obviously have a 'friends with benefits' thing on the side. Totally realistic), that the rest of the cliched tripe can be overlooked?

I find that hard to digest, Bob.

You try to pass off the addition of sex as something 'real', and then say 'see it for the obvious eye candy', essentially dumbing down that point of 'real relationships' to worthlessness. Apparently it's just boobs. How nuanced.

Are you seriously saying we have to overlook everything you said in your 'Yes' tirade, describing every romantic comedy cliche in existence (The only thing it's missing is her gay friend, apparently), just because they have sex?

Because, really, that was your big point: Sex is there. Now it's real.
Seems rather low-brow, and just an excuse for girlfriends to drag their boyfriends along.

I'll pass.
I'm not 15, Bob.

I'm sorry, but what you wrote really disturbed me. Maybe you need to get some release?

what he wrote was very well stated, he's actually an adult, which is more than I can say for you apperently

I'm in two minds about this. On one hand, Bob didn't really give much more reason to their relationship being believable than just sex.

On the other, BabyTea saying sex isn't important in a relationship is baffling.

I'm not saying sex isn't the be all and end all of a relationship, but it's really god damn important and such a neutered view of sex does make nearly every relationship in movies ring hollow.

I haven't seen the film, so I'm not going to read too much into this though.

VenusInFurs:
Bob, I'll come to your defense. I love chicks that get naked in movies. I'm 23 and I'm no different (sexually) when I was 16. I beat you dollars to donuts, most people are lying here. Trying to look all nice and intellectual. Guess what? My cock moves when I see a hot naked chick.

Really/ I would feel awefully embarrased to be turned on in a cinema. Heck I feel self conscious seeing even a scantly clad girl in public.

I think part of the problem here is hard romance is to film, in particular love. I've felt hatred, sadness, attraction, happiness, platonic love but romantic love for someone? Never. Thus to me, it's trying to get across and entirely alien emotion. Throw in the fact that the rom-com is hardly the place where the driectors of gravitas hang, and you further compund the problem of having to deal with a sublime issuse and only have mediocre talent to do so.

On the other, BabyTea saying sex isn't important in a relationship is baffling.

Some people do manage to have celibate relationships. However yes they are vastly in the minority.

Wait a minute ... a romantic comedy that isn't british that does not suck, *runs to window*, ok worlds not coming to an end just yet.

But I won't go to see it any way. I doubt it can top 4 weddings and a funeral.

Yes, romantic comedies don't have to suck. But most do because they don't have the guts to show true passion.

That's why the only one that I have liked so far is Frankie and Johnny, now that's human relationship for you.

Most others are fantasy fulfillment for silly females. Much like most action movies are that for silly males.

... though we all must engane in sillyness eventually lest we turn insane. But some people just overdo it.

I can definitely see the problems with sex being kept out of a romantic movie. Let's face it, sex is ALWAYS a big part of a romantic relationship and the exclusion of sex kinda damages the credibility of the writing. I mean, fuck, even Twilight makes mentions of sex. There are of course a lot of problems with Hollywood's conservative, misunderstood ideas of romantic storylines, but avoiding a key part of relationships is definitely one of them.

As for Anne Hathaway's body, not my thing. Ah the glories of not having a sex drive or a romantic interest in anything (kinda like Sherlock Holmes)

usucdik:

CosmicCommander:
The problem is, films like this will be alienating a large portion of their potential audience; such as myself. Sexual Conservatives like myself are driven away by all the promiscuity and debauchery going on- I'll be finding it almost imposable to connect with the characters.

Roll on January, the King's Speech looks like where I am gonna be enjoying- a good old-fashioned cast, with a nice, morally agreeable premise and plot.

Your post is hilarious.

Why, thank you- I'll take that as a compliment.

Yeah, yeah, my grammar and spelling were gawd awful there. That's what tends to happen when I haven't had my caffeine.

He forgot to mention that unlike most romcoms, it's leading stars are proven to be good actors.

Has anyone here read Dan Savage or listen to The Stranger podcast? Sex in a relationship is very important. It's 50/50. Actually, it's a very legit reason to break up. Anyone who says other wise is lying (especially if you're a man). I swear the comments here are cringe worthy. Come on, I know most people who comment here are guys, but you can't be that pathetic. It's like being in a room of "nice" guys being "nice" and saying "the right things" to get laid. By the way, my cock did move when I saw Gaspar Noe's Enter the Void, Why? Because I'm a frigging human being!!! Maybe I'm being a bit harsh, but sex is very important in a relationship, just like having an emotional connection is. There has to be sexual chemistry and sexual computability there. It looks like most people here haven't had experience in this department.

"Heck I feel self conscious seeing even a scantly clad girl in public."

Where the hell are you people from? This is what I mean. Jeez.

There has to be someone who agrees with me here, right?

VenusInFurs:
"Heck I feel self conscious seeing even a scantly clad girl in public."

Where the hell are you people from? This is what I mean. Jeez.

Ireland. I tend to imagine it is a sense of catholic guilt engineered into me. That and my naturaly geeky akwardness. Some stuff is fine to see when your own (in fact very nice to) but in public less so. You will find people uncomfortable with public displays of affection as well so I'm not alone.

For me, when MB talks about geek film, despite myself generally associating with Geekdom and such, I find myself a little turned off. OK, I wasn't really a comic book geek, though I did greatly enjoy the Iron Man films, but I also have to say that despite his glowing review of Scott Pilgrim, I still had almost no desire to see it.

On the other hand, his review of this and 2012 for instance, films I had virtually no interest in, provide the real insight into films that makes MovieBob good at what he does. He provides real insight into the quality of a film on the basis of real filming and writing techniques, and that is something I don't feel I get out of most mainstream critics. Just like some gaming reviewers can be in the pocket of big games, so I feel are many reviewers getting paid for their opinion. And that's why I keep watching. Great job, Movie Bob.

(I made a rhyming)

Baby Tea:
I kind of have to disagree that sex is 'relationship fuel'.
Sounds like a pretty hollow relationship to me.

Sex is certainly there, and important to a degree, but to call it 'fuel' is vastly overstating it's importance.
And by 'vastly' I mean 'really really vastly'. Unless you're 15 or something.

And since your recommendation seems bend around the fact that they seem to be 'real' only because they are having a bunch of sex (And that's what real people do, apparently. All the single people I know obviously have a 'friends with benefits' thing on the side. Totally realistic), that the rest of the cliched tripe can be overlooked?

I find that hard to digest, Bob.

You try to pass off the addition of sex as something 'real', and then say 'see it for the obvious eye candy', essentially dumbing down that point of 'real relationships' to worthlessness. Apparently it's just boobs. How nuanced.

Are you seriously saying we have to overlook everything you said in your 'Yes' tirade, describing every romantic comedy cliche in existence (The only thing it's missing is her gay friend, apparently), just because they have sex?

Because, really, that was your big point: Sex is there. Now it's real.
Seems rather low-brow, and just an excuse for girlfriends to drag their boyfriends along.

I'll pass.
I'm not 15, Bob.

Pretty much this.
Christ, it's hard to take Bob seriously now. Hell, I am 15 and I know that everything Bob said about relationships in that review is bollocks.

The_Prophet:
Pretty much this.
Christ, it's hard to take Bob seriously now. Hell, I am 15 and I know that everything Bob said about relationships in that review is bollocks.

Well he was right that sex is pretty important in most modern western romantic relationships. He just seemed to phrase it in a way which elimate the other factors.

I'm glad you found a romantic-comedy that you enjoyed. I gleaned from your review that I would probably hate it. I have nothing against sex in a movie but as one person pointed out to me before, "romance ends where sex begins". I like a good prelude and character development putting sex into context rather than movies that jump into bed and then try to figure out if they even LIKE the person! (Music and Lyrics).

It's nice to hear they are branching out and trying something new. But, as cheesy as you may find it, women do want to find that guy that wants to star-gaze, hold hands, and go for walks on the beach as well as have sex. Women aren't as visually oriented as men so dropping two people on a screen having sex just doesn't cut it.

But making in-roads towards romantic films or romantic-comedies that are enjoyable for both men and women to watch is laudable. In the meantime I guess I will go watch Easy A and Entrapment again. Still, thank you for reviewing this one because I thought it was another "Eat, Pray, Love" which looked absolutely terrible on the other end of the scale. You take some bullets so we don't have to.

Oh-and what happened to your "Twilight" review? It was the most thoughtful and different look at the series that I saw. You had some really good points about the marketing to women and I wasn't able to find it the last time I tried to show it to a friend. Your insightful look at a movie that is REALLY easy to mock is what won me to your show. I hope all your work stays up!

370999:

The_Prophet:
Pretty much this.
Christ, it's hard to take Bob seriously now. Hell, I am 15 and I know that everything Bob said about relationships in that review is bollocks.

Well he was right that sex is pretty important in most modern western romantic relationships. He just seemed to phrase it in a way which elimate the other factors.

He basically said "Well, look, romantic comedies suck because the romances don't have enough sex. This one has sex, so this relationship is believable" and then he went on about how sex is what makes it believable and how naked men and women make the film good.

Baby Tea:

I kind of have to disagree that sex is 'relationship fuel'.
Sounds like a pretty hollow relationship to me.

Outright Villainy:

I'm in two minds about this. On one hand, Bob didn't really give much more reason to their relationship being believable than just sex.

On the other, BabyTea saying sex isn't important in a relationship is baffling.

He didn't actually say it wasn't important, what he said (paraphrasing of course) is that it's not the foundation that a good relationship will be built on. Which is absolutely true.

That said, I also feel like he might have taken away something a little different than I did from the review (though perhaps I'm somehow still a bit naive about these things even when I'm pushing 30). The impression I got was not that the sex is the fuel of the relationship, but more that sexual attraction was the catalyst that causes the relationship to ignite. Now, you CAN have a perfectly good relationship in which A: physical attraction is ignored and B: sex is not important to them. But the point I think he's trying to make here is that in a lot of relationships, at the very least this is how it starts, and the danger of extinguishing it or keeping it burning indefinitely is based around the actions of those involved after that initial burst of sexual energy has been expended. The idea being that this film recognizes that more often than not this is how it works, and to build a relationship you should acknowledge that this bit of physical attraction usually comes first.

Of course, this is pretty much all moot since I haven't seen the film yet, but I'd like to give Bob the benefit of the doubt that when he says a romantic comedy is worth seeing, especially in this age of mediocre, overhyped films, he knows what he's talking about. I guess I'll find out soon enough!

a romantic comedy I might actually be interested in that isnt directed by Kevin Smith O_o
I think this is the sign of the apocalypse people

He basically said "Well, look, romantic comedies suck because the romances don't have enough sex. This one has sex, so this relationship is believable" and then he went on about how sex is what makes it believable and how naked men and women make the film good.

Well I'm afraid I took it differently from you then. What I got was he was criticising the average rom-com for having no sexual element at all, it's usually like something a lonely fifteen year old girl would write, hopelessly devoid of any real grounding in the mechanics.

That said, I also feel like he might have taken away something a little different than I did from the review (though perhaps I'm somehow still a bit naive about these things even when I'm pushing 30). The impression I got was not that the sex is the fuel of the relationship, but more that sexual attraction was the catalyst that causes the relationship to ignite. Now, you CAN have a perfectly good relationship in which A: physical attraction is ignored and B: sex is not important to them. But the point I think he's trying to make here is that in a lot of relationships, at the very least this is how it starts, and the danger of extinguishing it or keeping it burning indefinitely is based around the actions of those involved after that initial burst of sexual energy has been expended. The idea being that this film recognizes that more often than not this is how it works, and to build a relationship you should acknowledge that this bit of physical attraction usually comes first.

agree with that. I don't look at a girl and think "she seems like a great person!" but rather "she has an ass which just won't quit".

VenusInFurs:
Has anyone here read Dan Savage or listen to The Stranger podcast? Sex in a relationship is very important. It's 50/50. Actually, it's a very legit reason to break up. Anyone who says other wise is lying (especially if you're a man). I swear the comments here are cringe worthy. Come on, I know most people who comment here are guys, but you can't be that pathetic. It's like being in a room of "nice" guys being "nice" and saying "the right things" to get laid. By the way, my cock did move when I saw Gaspar Noe's Enter the Void, Why? Because I'm a frigging human being!!! Maybe I'm being a bit harsh, but sex is very important in a relationship, just like having an emotional connection is. There has to be sexual chemistry and sexual computability there. It looks like most people here haven't had experience in this department.

I've read Dan Savage before. And it is 100% percent true that sex is a lot more important than a lot of people are willing to admit. There's a REASON that it's hardwired into 99.999999% of people

 Pages PREV 1 2 3 4 5 6 NEXT

Reply to Thread

Log in or Register to Comment
Have an account? Login below:
With Facebook:Login With Facebook
or
Username:  
Password:  
  
Not registered? To sign up for an account with The Escapist:
Register With Facebook
Register With Facebook
or
Registered for a free account here