Movie Reviews

[Guest]

It amazes me how some reviews praise a movie and how some tear it apart worse than if the celluloid went through a paper shredder.

I thought Minority Report was perfectly fine. It was Spielberg. It was just the kind of movie he used to make before Jurassic Park and Hook. In the days of Jaws, CE3K, and Raiders. But then you get people that give MR a 3 out of 10 just because of some barely-noticeable flaw that doesn't bring down the plot or the movie all that much if you use your imagination to skip over it. Even if a movie didn't have that kind of flaws, they'd find something wrong with it. But what's the point? Do you go to the movie to examine it for flaws or to be entertained and to enjoy the product? For instance...Ebert didn't like Spider-Man because of the way he landed without making a big impact. With that aside, he loved the rest of it, but gave it a thumbs down because of the landings! What's the point of that? Had he used his imagination to overcome the possibility that MAYBE Spider-Man wasn't a true story, he might've given it two thumbs up. It's like hating Superman just because he flies and everybody else doesn't.

Other people hate MR because it wasn't as deep as A.I. Did MR LOOK like it would be?

It just amazes me how a really good movie like MR can get torn apart to the extremes by some people, for minor flaws or things they didn't like. I didn't like the holographic dream rooms that Rufus had at his place, but it didn't convince me to hate the rest of the film. I guess it all depends on who people are and how much they enjoy life...