|
|
Post by mstreepsucks on Aug 14, 2019 4:14:06 GMT
I bet he even does dislike Ghostbusters and Carrie also.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Aug 14, 2019 4:15:49 GMT
I bet he even does dislike Ghostbusters and Carrie also. Ghostbusters - 3 stars Carrie (1976) - 2.5 stars
|
|
|
|
Post by twothousandonemark on Aug 14, 2019 4:25:47 GMT
Bought Maltin's guide as a tv room companion, every other (odd) year. 2015 was the final. Still have it, though for 2020 I'll pick up the Videohound's guide... not out til' November though via amazon.
As listed, his The Dark Knight, Blade Runner, & some Harry Potters weren't his favs.
More jarring were some of his bigger winners, namely Curious Case Benjamin Button 4/4, & Goblet of Fire 3.5/4.
As with any guide though, the actual grades weren't the breaking points of his books. Once you accept a critic's pov, & even Ebert had his whiffs for many ppl, it's all relative.
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Aug 14, 2019 4:25:47 GMT
I've got reviews for all the films I listed and entries for "Carrie (1976)" and "To Live and Die in L.A.".
|
|
|
|
Post by darkreviewer2013 on Aug 14, 2019 5:23:58 GMT
This is why I can't take film critics seriously. Taste in film is simply too subjective.
|
|
|
|
Post by Prime etc. on Aug 14, 2019 7:17:56 GMT
Blade Runner - 1.5 stars
“A triumph of production design, defeated by a muddled script and main characters with no appeal whatsoever.”
The Shining - 2 stars
"Intriguing but ineffectual adaption of Stephen King's thriller ...". He goes on to say : "Nicholson goes off the wall so quickly there's no time to get involved in his plight. Some eerie scenes, to be sure, but the film goes on forever."
The Matrix - 2.5 stars
"Cutting-edge visuals and production design compete with an overlong script, written by the directors, that's got a high MJQ (Mumbo-Jumbo Quotient) and a tendency to keep changing its own complicated rules."
Terminator 2 - 2.5 stars
"Box-office smash has special effects to knock your socks off and action to spare, but like so many sequels, lacks the freshness of the first one and gives us no one to root for."
I think those reviews are pretty good/accurate summaries. I would give the Shining credit for some spooky scenes but no credit for characterization. He's right. Nicholson goes insane immediately.
How appealing are the characters in Terminator 2? The kid is obnoxious, and the mother is probably insane.
The male adult is a machine. Ditto for Bladerunner. Is Deckard an appealing character? I don't think so.
How are the summaries inaccurate?
I wouldn't rate Taxi Driver a great movie for appealing characters either. Or Casino. Even though I am really fond of ALIEN I am not going to pretend it has any genius beyond the production design. Replace Giger's designs with a Don Post alien mask and it would not be sustained as a movie.
Maltin is an animation historian so he is more of a genre film geek than Siskel or Ebert and not going to make opinions to protect his review career or kiss ass (unless its Chuck Jones maybe).
|
|
|
|
Post by miike80 on Aug 14, 2019 8:08:06 GMT
Well, for some movies i agree, especially for Fight Club
|
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Aug 14, 2019 12:02:48 GMT
Not anything controversial, but bonus reviews of the Alien films (and Prometheus and Alien: Covenant). Alien - 3.5 stars (Maltin had a change of heart on the film going from 2.5 to 3.5 after revisiting the film.)"Space-age horror film reverts to 1950's formula, but unfolds at a deliberate pace, populates the story with interesting, colorful characters, and plants its (genuine) shock moments with exceptional skill. Imitated but seldom equaled." Aliens - 3.5 stars
"Weaver, the sole human survivor from ALIEN, returns to planet that spawned the yukky creatures with a Marine squadron that's ready to wipe them out. Intense, exciting sequel directed by Cameron the same way he did THE TERMINATOR - once it gets going there's just no letup! Weaver is sensational in compelling lead role. The special effects won an Oscar. Director Cameron's original version of the film, running 17 minutes longer, has been released on video. " Maltin's Aliens TV review at 2:22 in the video below: Alien 3 - 2 stars"More-of-the-same sequel has Weaver and other survivors of ALIENS (1986) being sent to isolated prison planet where (you guessed it) the alien regenerates itself and runs amok. Good performances, some scares, but a definite feeling of déjà vu hangs over the proceedings." Alien: Resurrection - 2 stars"Clumsy sequel with crummy logic, far too many wisecracks; a few good action scenes, but strictly for series fans." Prometheus - 3 stars"Companion piece to Scott's Alien offers echoes of that film in both good and not-so-good ways: it's thoughtful and intelligent, with two strong female characters and masterfully crafted, but gives way to icky, gross-out moments...right up until the end. Fassbender is a stand-out as a sly, watchful robot that's one step ahead of everyone else."
Alien: Covenant"The alternate title for this latest space thriller might be Alien: Again, for while it provides plenty of scares and visual effects, it is basically a retread of what we’ve seen before…not only in Ridley Scott’s original Alien but his most recent prequel, Prometheus. An intrepid (and well-cast) crew explores an unknown planet only to find themselves victimized by gruesome monsters who invade their bodies and emit lots of goo. Another lesson already learned in Prometheus: don’t trust Artificial Intelligence, even if it is cloaked in the form of Michael Fassbender. The new movie introduces us to his souped-up superior, a lookalike who conducts philosophical conversations with his dangerous doppelganger. There is an air of pretension to this aspect of the film, especially considering that it’s far from original. We learned all we need to know about this topic—at least, movie-wise—years ago from HAL 9000: as soon as you allow man-made creations to think for themselves, you’re in for trouble. That’s the trouble with Alien: Covenant. Members of the Covenant crew repeatedly say things like “I’m just going over here to wash up” or “I’m going to take a leak.” Why do they feel the need to walk away into the darkness to do anything when it’s inevitably going to invite a monstrous attack? This B-movie trope seems unworthy of director Ridley Scott, who is working from a screenplay credited to the prolific John Logan and Dante Harper, based on a story by Jack Paglen and Michael Green. The strongest asset of Alien: Covenant is a tangible feeling of a team at work. Scott has chosen an interesting array of actors, with Katherine Waterston scoring particularly well as a strong but emotionally vulnerable heroine and Danny McBride in a serious role as a skillful and determined pilot. Alien: Covenant is well-made and never dull, but you can learn all the exposition you need from the trailer. And if you’re a wimp, like me, and jump at every gooey attack, you may tire of the repetition fairly soon." Review: leonardmaltin.com/alien-covenant/ |
|
|
|
Post by ck100 on Sept 6, 2019 11:58:28 GMT
The Shawshank Redemption - 2.5 stars
"Widely praised film is well-crated but terribly overlong, and (like much of Stephen King's non-horror writing) hollow and predictable."
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Sept 6, 2019 14:39:27 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by Lebowskidoo 🦞 on Sept 6, 2019 20:31:51 GMT
Goes to show that it's the public who decides what movies become classics, not the critics. Leonard is a hard man to please. I can remember his reviews on Entertainment Tonight were almost always negative, probably why he's no longer on a celebrity ass-kissing show like that anymore. His annual movie guides were extremely valuable though, back in the pre-IMDB era, his knowledge of the movies he did like was very educational for any budding movie fan.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 21:18:47 GMT
At the risk of being run out of town, I don't think he's wrong about Blade Runner. Maybe I like Harrison Ford more than I take him seriously as an actor, but he was the weak spot for me. Even in the newest one too. I didn't fall in love with Blade Runner and a friend tried to sell me on it by reminding me it's virtually a favorite of all movie buffs and critics. To which I say okay, but what does that do for me?
I used to be less kind to The Matrix. It's my own snobby fault because I was in university at the time doing philosophy and felt like the ideas in The Matrix were simplistic. It wasn't until several viewings later I came to adore it as not some intellectual piece, but an action movie, a martial arts movie, a love story, a total package of a movie.
Forrest Gump. Bleh. I just can't deal with Tom Hanks. I don't trust his face. I liked him enough once in A League of Their Own but I didn't buy him as developmentally disabled and felt the story just rained cheese.
Terminator 2, for me, wasn't as good as the 1st, but it's way better than 2.5. The 1st Terminator is one of my all time faves so no shame in being behind. The 1st was darker, more intimate, more unnerving, and I really liked Kyle Reese and its version of Sara Connor. The 2nd is still a blast though.
I liked Inception quite a lot. It seems like a more personal movie than it lets on. Half the theme of the story is emotions are obstacles and manifest themselves as human viruses. I thought it was a highly adequate blockbuster.
The Dark Knight is one of this generation's defining movies. I know, I've heard it all before. It's a superhero movie, a Batman movie, and a sequel, but it's a total package on steroids. My biggest criticism was I felt it had a rushed third act because the first two took so much time, but the film straddles a spot between being realistic/gritty enough to be called pretentious and violent/superhero enough to not be worth Oscar consideration. If you get into the movie's trivia, there's a lot going on. It has a lot of themes, big ideas and thoughts into it. There's some big explanations behind small stuff and everyone came to play. Many of the actors contributed their own thoughts to Nolan and he used them. There a lot of lore in the behind the scenes aspect of the film and it wasn't a career killer. I found out just yesterday Josh Hartnett apparently turned down the role of Batman, partially out of fear of being typecast or being Batman forever (no pun intended). Christian Bale managed to get out without being only Batman, or typecast as superheroes. As far as I'm concerned, the execution and success of this film defied expectations of being associated with superhero movies. It's a good movie...that happens to be a Batman movie. An interesting testament to what any given material looks like in the hands of a certain creator.
Too bad about Casino. I thought it was way better than 2.5 stars. The review lost me at "long". Yes, it's a long movie, but never once felt like it dragged. Never once felt like homework.
Unfortunately I almost completely agree with Ferris Bueller's Day Off except I'd have gone lower. Call it a personality type on my part but I just never thought he deserved to not get caught. I never got the sense of fun that was supposed to come from skipping school. He's a loser who shouldn't have gotten away with it. Call it a personal bias. I didn't like the premise or the bit.
I thought Carrie was better than that and Alien's better than its upgraded rank.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Sept 6, 2019 21:33:09 GMT
I am more of a fan of Maltin as an animation historian, but I do like to look through his movie guide once in a while.
It is strange he gave Back to the Future Part 2 such a low rating since he adores Part 3.
|
|
