Skip to main content

View Diary: George Lucas "Red Tails" gives Tuskegee Airmen the Rocking War Movie they Deserve (225 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  Wasn't made for reviewers. (15+ / 0-)

    Lucas is on record that he made this for young black men to be able to discover true American heroes. (Star Wars got some terrible reviews when it first came out, IIRC.)

    •  The prequels got bad reviews (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      mrblifil, JBL55

      Because they were bad films.  If you're talking about the original trilogy you'd be wrong, reviews were overwhelmingly positive.  

      And you may be right about the target audience.  But if that's really the case it certainly justifies most reviewers giving it poor marks.  You're talking about a very small demographic of moviegoers.  Even smaller than those terrible Madea films.

    •  They were made for people, right? (3+ / 0-)

      I have news for you guys, critics are just people who've seen more movies than most. Admittedly, that can change your taste a bit and you may respond to different things than a civilian, but if you prick us, we definitely bleed, and if you bore us, we really do think about what we're having for dinner. Most of us are giving our honest reactions to the films, give or take a few phonies and poseurs.

      Of course, if you find that you generally disagree with the critical consensus about movies, by all means ignore it. But the line about "not being made for critics" is pure Hollywood bull-pucky. Are Pixar movies "made for crtiics" -- with the exception of "Cars 2" they've mostly scored about 90% on RT, often closer to 100% and they made enormous sums of money and are beloved by nearly everyone. Most critics have no problems praising a slightly corny but sincere movie if it's actually effective. I can name a long list of movies that were popular, and populist hits of no particular intellectual ambition that scored 70% or higher on RT.

      Also, by the way, the function of reviews is not to simply mirror the opinion of the reader. It's a way to find out something about the movie and to, hopefully, get an intelligent perspective on it. I disagree A LOT with my favorite critics, but that's 100% beside the point. A good review is like a good op-ed you might not entirely agree with. It opens up your mind.

      Now, all that being said, I've also been in that 30% group on a couple of movies myself. Sometimes critics really do miss the point or, more often, a movie just speaks to a smaller percentage of the audience who sees it so most people don't like it, but some do.  

      "Red Tails" actually sounds like fun to me, and I certainly think everyone involved had their hearts in the right place (except when George said that dumb thing about critics) and I might well check out eventually in some form, though it's unlikely I'll shell out $12.00 to see it. Most of the time I do agree with the majority of critics and the odds of me really liking this are not too terribly high but who knows? In any case, I'd be the last person to discourage anyone from seeing it, but when people bash movie critics for not agreeing with their own particular take on a movie, they're being rather narrow, IMO.

      Forward to Yesterday -- Reactionary aesthetics and liberal politics (in that order)

      by LABobsterofAnaheim on Thu Jan 19, 2012 at 11:38:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site