RGA vs Lexmark -- was: Worst Sequel of all Time

[RGA]

"Man apparently any Hack can work for these magazines."

I'm a HACK? Far from it, my friend. Stop making accusations regarding NOTHING YOU KNOW ANYTHING ABOUT. I am a well respected member of these editorial teams, whether you want to cry about that for jealousy reasons or not because only your WORLD RESPECTED rating system can only be deemed and regarded as power-filled in THIS forum as compared to the remainder of the world......now THATS funny, coming from someone who throws the word HACK around and yet wants us to bow down to his "ultimate rating system"......yeah, right. Like thats EVER going to happen......and you call ME a hack? Dont make me piss my pants, please man.....

First of all your reviews here come across as grossly amateurish writing with little or no real insight to film criticism - so I can only assume the magazines hire pretty much anyone willing to sit there and detail every frame of a DVD -- surprisingly I would find that more tedius than garbage collection so it is BY CHOICE that I would never seek out such a dull career or side career. Furthermore, if I did do such a thing for a living I sure would not be reviewing most of the dregs yoyu've been trotting out for review.

"You seem to think that if anyone does not like a film that ytou like they just don't understand it."

Simply not true. Im just trying to say that each of these directors had something they were going for which may just not have been understood by the viewers like you who didnt like it; you dont like it, dont like it. I dont really "give a rats ass" as you say below whether you like these films or not because to me, your rating system doesnt mean **** in my eyes.

Here's a thought - if your going to say that the viewers don't get it then why don;t you tell us what thgey were going for and I'll tell you if it matters. What P{RECISELY was the director going for. You suggest he is making a film that stands apart from the Terminator films and to work as an action movie -- so then here's a question - Why use the title Terminator 3. If he wanted to make an independant action film then he should have made one -- sorry but he's using the same characters at a future date and resting on the Terminator story -- sounds to me he's heard the criticism and backpeddled to some crap about going for something differen and can con star struck naive magazine writers to write.

What does my rating system have to do with anything? Most everyone who reviews film has some sort of rating system - professionals and non-professionals.

WHAT ELSE DO YOU WANT TO USE AS VALIDATION THAT HE WAS GOING FOR AN ACTION FILM THAT WOULD STAND OUTSIDE OF THE OTHER FILMS IN THE FRANCHISE OTHER THAN THE DIRECTOR'S POINT OF VIEW???? What are you smoking over there, man?

I am apparently clearer headed than you it would seem. If you believe Mastow then you are a big sucker. If he supposedly wanted to make an action film that stands outside of the original franchise then he would not have made a Terminator film! Ohh I see he just called it Terminator 3 to make a buck knowing that people would go see it due to their love of the first 2. Exactly HOW does it stand apart from the first two films? Same characters grown up and a new sophisticated Terminatrix. Same exact kind of story line. No I think I understand full well that this film is another Terminator movie -- and comparatively a pitiful one.

"I don't give a rat's ass if the film departs from the original Terminator it still has to be a good movie in its own right and it wasn't."

Again, giving yourself WAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAY too much credit there, bud; shall we refer again to your self-proclaimed and self-acknowledged rating system which I really dont give a rats ass about? Jonathan Mostow claimed he can respect those who watch this film for an action film alone outside of the Terminator series, and I respect THAT point of view a hell of a lot more than I do yours of saying that because YOU claim it wasnt a good movie it wasnt.....yeah, that will be the day that I let YOU tell me what is a good film and what isnt.

First Terminator one and two were action films sop what the hell are you talking about. The first two also had superior Dramatic and science fiction elements the first one had Romance and a horror feel to it as well. I'm not saying you have to dislike it because I do. But you state that anyone who didn't like it just doesn;t klnow what the director had in mind and you've done this on other threads. Sorry to tell you this but what the director had in mind means NOTHING -- the ONLY thing that matters is what ends up on the screen and any decent film critic sure as hell can review a non-intellectual action picture like Terminator 3. Real film critics actually tackle quality films from time to time and there is nothing particularly difficult in Terminator 3 that amateur film critics DON'T UNDERSTAND. mastow respects people who can watch it as an action picture -- well they would have to watch it for the action because every other facet of the film was brain dead dreck. I gave it ** because of the action and the effects and overlooked some of the idiocy. I consider myself a bvery generous critic of most films especially out of hollywood.

"Nevertheless, Art as well as film is not completely devoid of objective criticism and SHOULD be rationally justified in the barest of literary reference. "

Finally, some sense is being spewed out of your mind here.....finally.......

If you think it makes so much sense then why are you not doing any of it in your reviews?

WHERE ARE YOUR ESSAYS, REVIEWS AND OPINIONS ON FILM which you EASILY CRITICIZE OTHERS ON the first chance you get when a review goes up in here.....

One does not have to write a review or essay to post on forums == there are dozens and dozens if not thousands of people on the internet doing this already so I see no point in doing them myself. I also do not have the time to watch the sheer number of movies required and then to write full length articles on each one. I give a lot props to someone like James Berardinelli who has made the hobby into a career - but I would grow restless sitting through 9 clunkers for every decent film being made. I mean I'd have to go watch the Dukes of Hazard if I became a film critic and I don't like having two hours of my life shaved off in such a cruel and unusual way. I post my thoughts from time to time in various forums because it is more interactive. Writing an essay and posting it on a self-made web-site is more of a vanity thing anyway.

Who was asking you anyway for your thoughts on this? And if thats the case, DONT REPLY TO THESE REVIEWS because they are MAINLY CONCENTRATING ON THE AUDIO AND VIDEO ASPECTS of the discs themselves. Your comments arent necessary then.

You are posting on a public forum and you are ALSO doing a film criticism not JUST audio video -- I make no comments on the Audio Video portion - I don't even read them - not being mean I don;t read any of them unless it's a film I like. When anyone makes a comment on the film you shut them down as "well you're not a fan of the genre and therefore you don;t understand it" kinda remark. In other words anyone who thinks the film is crap is ignorant. Your remarks are never backed up with any evidence or explanation of what you mean. I can't believe that a masters student has never written an essay and had to back their comments up with supporting argument -- In virtually every paper I ever wriote no matter what subject this was required -- never more so than in the Arts courses. If you say people don't GET it you ALSO have to say WHY and ALSO say what it is rreally about. Saying Terminator fans don't get T3 because the director was going for an Action movie is idiotic. Of course it's an action movie so tell us what grand insightful and deep thing Mastow was going for and why most people ajnd critics didn't understand it.

"There is a big difference between being a film critic and being a sound and vision critic. maybe magazines don't care but at least DVD Town has John J Puchio who I corresponded with a number of times about becoming a film critic [ Teacher, English and Film Studies, retired. Classical Music Editor, $ensible Sound magazine. Review Editor, DVDTown.com. Member, Online Film Critics Society]"

Big deal, as YOU would say.......

The big deal is anyone here can go to that site and read the reviews for themselves from someone who can tell them all about the sound and vision and ALSO be able to write a competant critique of the film. And when i disagree with him on a forum we discuss the film in a well argued rational manner without him saying "Well the director went for this therefore your ignorant of what its about" kinda nonsense you spout off.

"That is fine because you have previously stated you're reviewing DVD quality -- which some no doubt find very valuable though I don't presonally see why. If my favorite movie is Z and the picture and sound isn;t that great I'm still going to buy it -- and if some movie is totally terrible then no matter how great the DVD bonus and pictyure and sound is -- i'm not going yto buy it. Not much different than Brittany Spears putting out a terrific Reference Recording master quality recording -- it's still her. And if Something great I like came out in Mono I'd buy it."

Thats YOUR view and again trying to make me believe this point of view of yours is moot because I simply dont care nor do I agree.

So you don't agree - so you'll buy the worst film in the world if it has a good Audio track but not buy the best film because it's in mono or has a poor video track? I get it. You're not a film fan but a gear head fan. That's fine by me -- I go to movies for the carthatic emotional and intellectual elements they offer - not because I can hear rustling of paper behind my head on the surround mix.

"I mean you're defending movies like Rocky V and Halloween 2. I suppose some people are going to care about the quality of these DVD's but the movies themselves are rubbish"

Again, in YOUR EXPERT opinion......LOL.....now THATS funny........

I think it does not require an expert - just someone with an IQ higher than Forrest Gump.