Posted by KT- at cc1077596-a.mcmb1.mi.home.com on July 09, 2001 at 19:11:42:
In Reply to: Malcom, Vincent,and all the other A.I. movie goers posted by Grendel__ on July 09, 2001 at 00:20:05:
: It's not often I feel the need to follow up on something........but this is something I NEED to do.
: A.I. to me was no question a visual masterpiece. TRON in the year 2k1 as it was said.
: That being said and all praises due to H.J. Osmet. This kid is going to be wowing them for years to come. The problem I do have is thus: Just because his name is Spielberg does NOT mean it will be a classic. Or even good.
I'd rather touch on this subject than the rest of your post, since everyone else is pretty much covering and re-covering the same points.
I agree that Spielberg does not automatically = good movie. He has an excellent reputation, but that's not a guarantee. More like a good reference.
"Duh. That's obvious."
Well, how many people on this board apply the same common sense to Kevin's movies? How many people in general? For christ's sake... just look at all the "When's Clerks 2 coming out?!?" posts. It was a joke, and yet people not in the know were fawning to see it.
Personally, I think Kevin's a great writer. I love Clerks, I still stand by Mallrats as my all-time favorite of the four, and Chasing Amy was excellent. Dogma is fourth on my list, but only because there are four movies to date. The writing kicked ass, but the rest? ...thbbpt. I'm not a fan of it. And sometimes I wonder how many people secretly feel the same way, but don't want to say it because they'll get royally flamed. I agree with the general ideas of the film, which I support. For me, though, the acting sucked in general, the special effects sucked (normally not high on my agenda, but I think this particular movie needed better ones), and the direction... well, I'm no expert, but something was lacking there, too.
I'd rant on a bit more, but I'm going out to dinner now. Yum.
KT