Our inability to handle external merde and other manure based phenomena...
There are many things to say about the Dark Knight, but this is one of them.
The film currently holds somewhere between an 89-91 at Rottentomatoes.com. Six reviews so far have come in as rotten. The first one, by the film reviewer of The New Yorker makes valid artistic criticisms that I feel, if I were dissatisfied with the film, I would see as being my exact problems. He has received 530 comments as of right now (7/16/2008, 2:51 pm EST), ranging from purile, childish insults to death threats. I shit you not, death threats.
530 comments of that. I took the time to count. The total number of comments on positive reviews is 249. And that's the total of 53 positive reviews.
Each of the other five negative reviews have more at least four times as many comments on any of the positive reviews (it would be closer to six, if not for a high volume on Ebert's critique). And all of them the same.
No one allows that their opinions are valid, as all of them are reviewers of reputable magazines, as opposed to Emmanuel Levy of Emmanuellevy.com. And certainly no one admits that their points may be correct in areas. The so-called fans of this intellectual, dark, intelligent film are behaving like the troglodytes they perceive everyone else to be.
At the end of the day, we are a species of brutes. I don't mean to say that negatively, it just is what it is. And people who think we aren't are fooling themselves. Even a person with an IQ of 175 and the patience of a saint will, when properly provoked, start swearing like a 7th grader and either start trying to strike you or think about it because you're bigger than he is.
What bothers me is this inherent concept of righteous anger. There is no such thing as righteous anger. Or having the right to be upset. You are upset. It's just a fact of life. And while some reasons for being upset are more understandable, there's never a anger that is justified because of your perceived superior understanding/intelligence/morality on any given issue. It's simply deluded thuggery. Maybe it's thuggery for a noble cause, but it's still thuggery.
I'm as excited as anyone to see this film, but my fear is that this birth of the "artistically valid" comic book film is giving a very vocal, traditionally repressed and angry minority a sort of "righteous anger" when there are other valid artistic voices disagreeing with them, and that it will only end poorly for all involved. I beg all of you out there who see this film, and indeed, the next time you hear anyone who didn't like a film you and most of your friends/the world liked, don't be a dick to the minority. Because if you are, that makes you a fascist. Which is cool, just don't be offended when I call you on it. Own what you are. And everyone who insulted or threatened David Denby is a fascist.
The film currently holds somewhere between an 89-91 at Rottentomatoes.com. Six reviews so far have come in as rotten. The first one, by the film reviewer of The New Yorker makes valid artistic criticisms that I feel, if I were dissatisfied with the film, I would see as being my exact problems. He has received 530 comments as of right now (7/16/2008, 2:51 pm EST), ranging from purile, childish insults to death threats. I shit you not, death threats.
530 comments of that. I took the time to count. The total number of comments on positive reviews is 249. And that's the total of 53 positive reviews.
Each of the other five negative reviews have more at least four times as many comments on any of the positive reviews (it would be closer to six, if not for a high volume on Ebert's critique). And all of them the same.
No one allows that their opinions are valid, as all of them are reviewers of reputable magazines, as opposed to Emmanuel Levy of Emmanuellevy.com. And certainly no one admits that their points may be correct in areas. The so-called fans of this intellectual, dark, intelligent film are behaving like the troglodytes they perceive everyone else to be.
At the end of the day, we are a species of brutes. I don't mean to say that negatively, it just is what it is. And people who think we aren't are fooling themselves. Even a person with an IQ of 175 and the patience of a saint will, when properly provoked, start swearing like a 7th grader and either start trying to strike you or think about it because you're bigger than he is.
What bothers me is this inherent concept of righteous anger. There is no such thing as righteous anger. Or having the right to be upset. You are upset. It's just a fact of life. And while some reasons for being upset are more understandable, there's never a anger that is justified because of your perceived superior understanding/intelligence/morality on any given issue. It's simply deluded thuggery. Maybe it's thuggery for a noble cause, but it's still thuggery.
I'm as excited as anyone to see this film, but my fear is that this birth of the "artistically valid" comic book film is giving a very vocal, traditionally repressed and angry minority a sort of "righteous anger" when there are other valid artistic voices disagreeing with them, and that it will only end poorly for all involved. I beg all of you out there who see this film, and indeed, the next time you hear anyone who didn't like a film you and most of your friends/the world liked, don't be a dick to the minority. Because if you are, that makes you a fascist. Which is cool, just don't be offended when I call you on it. Own what you are. And everyone who insulted or threatened David Denby is a fascist.
First, I know that people that like the film shouldn't be reading the bad reviews in the first place--and that people who dislike being disagreed with shouldn't look at websites like Rotten Tomatoes.
I also know, however, that we live in a society where somehow, a select group of people got chosen to have opinions that matter MORE than everyone else. Ebert is a reviewer, and therefore, his opinions are more valid and accurate. This is one problem. I never read reviews because I like a lot of things other people don't and I know reading them won't change my mind.
I also know we live in a society that is tired of something "ABSOLUTE" being demanded of everything artistic that is released. I just want to go see Batman and have a good time. Everything we do in our everyday lives is broken down, categorized, critiqued. I think people want the movies to be a release from that.
People shouldn't leave death threats, you're right, that's ridiculous. But I know i'm tired of reading holier than thou reviews that tell me exactly how I should feel about something. I took film classes too. I'm allowed to have an opinion.
So, I understand your frustration, this is simply my counterpoint.
All that means, my friend, is that there exist a certain number of dicks in the world. And this number may be substantial! Anyone threatening violence over a review falls into this category.
I disagree, however, that anyone can be pushed into righteous anger, and even if you won't concede that point than CERTAINLY not everyone can be pushed into righteous anger simply by someone crapping on something they like... right?
If I meet people that don't like Final Fantasy Tactics, I will affect some pretty serious indignity-- but it'll be an affect.
I think Kari's right-- I think the only reason this is coming up is because reviewers are given more cultural capital. A gentleman from the New York Times or whatever "legitimate" publication is no different than Mr. Emmanuel Levy of mremmanuellevy.com, because neither of them has even a shred of power to change anyone's opinion of a film, be that film The Dark Knight or Harold and Kumar Go to Abu Ghraib.
To ALL reviewers, everywhere, I echo The Dude: "That's just, like, your opinion, man."
Or, one could deal with bad reviews the way Messr. Boll does.
http://kotaku.com/gaming/uwe-boll/uwe-boll-wants-to-kick-your-ass-no-really-180214.php
He also apparently challenged Quentin Tarantino to a match. I can't think of anything for frightening than fighting Quentin Tarantino. He probably gave Tyson the ear idea in the first place.