Comments for That Was Junk

Comment on #201 – PULP FICTION – BAD by Ashleigh

Ashleigh — Mon, 02 Jan 2012 03:03:42 +0000

Just watched it. Couldn’t agree more.

Comment on Valhalla Rising by Ben

Ben — Wed, 21 Dec 2011 21:37:02 +0000

This review is as pretentious as that which the reviewer is trying to debunk. This movie was infinitely more original than say Braveheart and far more moody then most hollywood drivel. For that alone it deserves props. The symbolism doesn’t need to be obvious to enjoy the film. I don’t mind an artist who is brave enough to put it out there even if it may only have personal meaning to him and him alone, as done with Trier’s film Antichrist. I’ll take this film over many others in it’s genre any day with all it’s grit ,style and cerebral violence.

Comment on Valhalla Rising by normanplombe

normanplombe — Tue, 22 Nov 2011 17:34:23 +0000

simply a self-indulgent piece of shit. i’m watching it now…the part where the guy is…i dunno what is he doing? arbitrarily stacking rocks that fall down…and another guy is stabbing mud…and another guy is jamming mud in another guy’s mouth…and there’s like…i dunno mud and stuff…for two fucking hours while the remaining cast and audience stare and mouth-breathe. here’s a good rule of thumb for would-be art film makers: if you don’t have anything to say, say it long and say it weird….maybe a few won’t be able to tell that you had nothing to say.

Comment on Valhalla Rising by Chris

Chris — Sat, 05 Nov 2011 18:29:07 +0000

Dozens of times every year, movie reviews like this one are released. These slow, drawn out, unentertaining acts of indignant selfishness arrive on substandard websites and it’s become common for those who are unable of finding some sort of meaning or motivation behind a movie’s existence to call out all those who can as “brain-washed, pandering sheep of the intellectual art-film system”. They will tell their disputers to go back to watching their metaphoric, atmospheric art house cinema and leave the obvious, spoon-fed Hollywood drivel for them, the people who can only truly appreciate them.

Well, fuck that.

It’s not just that you don’t get it, it’s that you claim nobody else can either. Your first paragraph tries to preclude dissent, but only makes you sound like a small minded idiot. I’m not suggesting you have to like Valhalla Rising, but try not to suggest that those of us who did are somehow the pretentious phonies in the equation.

What I liked about it is often what you disliked. The ultraslow pacing was excruciating and suspenseful, in a good way. The characters were archetypal, and very much trapped in one-dimensional motivations. I think that was the point. The symbolism was about the inevitable clash of paganism and Christianity in both the Old World and the New, and how ultimately One-Eye (Odin) and the natives had more in common with each other than with the Christians. If you are ignorant about or uninterested in these topics, then this film is not for you. But to claim that there was no worth or meaning in the film is incredibly arrogant.

You didn’t like it or get it. Fair enough. But save your crits for the film, rather than the people who enjoyed it.

Comment on Valhalla Rising by shaneeeee

shaneeeee — Wed, 26 Oct 2011 21:04:07 +0000

honestly, i didn’t understand any of the ties to norse mythology, and ancient pagan religions and all this other jazz i’ve heard in other reviews, and though i didn’t “get it” i still enjoyed how open ended his symbolism was. I thought it was very well put together, and i liked that it was different from the conventional movies. i like that it wasn’t a viking movie based on the fight scenes vikings had, i’m glad it wasn’t a movie where the character development is key to the movie. rather than looking at the characters as mythological beings like odin or jesus, i thought it was more fun to look at the characters as different classes, or countries. Honestly, my interpretation could make no sense to someone else, but at the end of the day, i don’t make my interpretations for other people, the same way that the director CLEARLY wasn’t trying to make a mainstream styled movie. overall, i enjoyed this abstract movie, and i enjoy change. yes some of you will “never get that 90 minutes back” but you can also never get the x amount of minutes you spent typing up your hatefilled review about your movie preference… while the optomists and pessimists are arguing about the glass of water, I, the opportunist, choose to drink from the glass.

Comment on #201 – PULP FICTION – BAD by Josh

Josh — Tue, 25 Oct 2011 22:08:04 +0000

I’m deadly serious.

Comment on #201 – PULP FICTION – BAD by M

Tue, 25 Oct 2011 19:55:43 +0000

If serious, this review makes me so sad. I wonder if you’re too young and inexperienced and just don’t get it. I trust with time and life lived you’ll learn to appreciate it. I’m guilty of not liking the Big Lebowski the first time I saw it! So, just give it time. Trust me.

Comment on Valhalla Rising by Brett

Brett — Sun, 09 Oct 2011 07:06:54 +0000

It’s sad that this movie fell short of my expectations, I was really rooting for it to pick up and become more interesting at some point. I see some others have taken to their high horses speaking down to the reviewer because he didn’t “get it” and they did. I’m not sure there was that much to “get” here.

The director did an excellent job of putting me in the moment. I could feel the drudgery of one eye’s daly life and the hopelessnes of the christian vikings as their faith failed them. However; I don’t need to be beaten over the head with it. The point was made early on how difficult the characters lives were, there was no need to continue on and on over 90 minutes. The director would have been better served to spend more time on the plot and some sort of ending that was satisfying to his customer, the movie goer.

Instead we are left with a reference to the sacrifice of christ by one eye as he walks into slaughter at the hands of the natives. Of course his “sacrifice” leaves a young boy to slowly die alone on the shores of a foreign land.

If this movie was a 16 oz steak, it would be 3oz of red meat and 13 oz’s of cold tofu.

Comment on Valhalla Rising by kyle

kyle — Fri, 26 Aug 2011 07:12:11 +0000

i thought this film was awesome, although you can find meaning in anything if you think hard enough (even in this film) i think as a society we are tought that in movies we need closure, meaning, and there has to be the same structure in every movie, i just dont understand why there needs to be a meaning, after watching ten minutes of this movie i was sucked in, i liked how barbaric it was, i liked the vivid visuals, and how well the unsettling “music” that went along with it. while watching it i thought the same things, how slow it was moving, how they didnt develop the characters…but just because every other movie does that, thats not necessarilly how it has to be, when “regular” movies do that it almost seems forced and not realistic, this movie seemed very real and very raw, it may not have been the fastest most exciting movie, but it was very gripping and i couldnt keep my eyes of the screen, for 90 minutes it took me away from reality and made me feel as if i were in the movie, shit was dope, watch it again maybe youll change your mind

Comment on How to Train Your Dragon (2010) by Ozyno

Ozyno — Wed, 27 Jul 2011 17:46:36 +0000

By now, you probably know. The reason,why toothlesa and stitch look alike is because they where both designes by Chris Sandler. You should look his artwork up.