|
|
Greg Follender
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 4:46pm
They are piggy-backing prime time advertisements for this film on the promotional commercials for the DVD release of \"SAW V\" now in New York City... interesting. TONS of exposure for this sort of thing...
It seems you'll have your feedback soon enough, Chad;)
|
The Red Clover
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 5:51pm
To be completely honest I could give a fuck-all as to who reviews what film. In the whole business of critiquing movies and this goes for music as well critics have become less objective and more subjective which only means your review applies to those who have the same tastes in either genre as you. There are of course notable exceptions as some movies or some music are just so outstanding that it appeals to just about anyone who sees it. Saying someone needs a \"brain transplant\" or insulting their credibility because they enjoyed something is far from necessary and a far departure from a forum of debate. It's a tad too 3-year old.
I loved it. This is not a reflection of my intelligence or IQ, or whether or not I'm a fan of musicals (I in fact like the occasional musical or two) what it means is just that. I loved it. So what if you didn't. There are a few indicators in the review that you weren't going to like the movie going into it anyway so I think the review is a tad unfair and should be a little less subjective.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 6:32pm
Dude -- shut the fuck up. Get over it. We've established that everyone has their own opinion and blah blah blah. We are discussing the differences between different film sites and majority vs. minority. You wouldn't understand sarcasm if it hit your inept ass over the head. My God. I am tired of getting lambasted by semi-retarded fucksticks who can't understand when someone is being humorous as opposed to being a douche. Jesus.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 6:33pm
I think the anemic box office gross for this film speaks volumes. It must not have been TOO grand a cult hit because it never seemed to earn more than $1000 a day while in release. I saw it in a theatre with around 12 people.
|
The Red Clover
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 6:40pm
Aww, that's cute. You think cussing makes you an adult.
|
Chad
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 6:41pm
That box office card doesn't work, at all... it received zero publicity and... well, let's let Wikipedia talk:
The film opened in a limited release on November 7, 2008. Originally it opened on 7 screens in the cities of Chicago, IL; Mobile, AL; Charlotte, NC; Kansas City, MO; Toronto and Ottawa, Ontario, Canada. The film took in $3,250 per screen on its opening night.
So, yeah, it's not going to bring in millions when it's playing in seven theaters across the country and gets zilch for publicity thanks to the same genius who pulled this same stunt with The Midnight Meat Train. However, it must have done something right...
Because of strong ticket sales \"The Repo! Road Tour\" will expand to Cleveland, Portland, Baltimore, and Seattle and a \"Repo! Road Tour Part 2\" is scheduled to play in five different cities from December 4 to December 8.
|
Tristan
|
Posted: January 16, 2009 at 8:27pm
Exactly what Chad said. The box office numbers don't mean a fucking thing. Some movies go straight to DVD and are sensational. Meanie, in my opinion, you're losing this one and reaching out for anything you can grasp onto. Ticket sales? Please. It's 2009. Theatre ticket sales don't mean a fucking thing at this point. I've seen maybe 1 movie in the last 4 months, but I'm up to date on almost everything playing right now.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: January 17, 2009 at 10:38pm
I've lost many before and I'll lost many more yet -- REPO is not one of them. Box office doesn't mean anything? Had the box office numbers been overwhelmingly positive, it probably would have received a better push. They were not strong and it did not. I don't know how ANYONE can say box office doesn't mean anything. Ludicrous.
|
Chad
|
Posted: January 17, 2009 at 11:03pm
How could they have been strong without publicity and more screens? That's like me telling you that you're a hack filmmaker because, well, how much money has your work drawn? You can't make money off a film if you're only showing it on a very few screens, and you can't make money if nobody knows about it. However, with that said, reread the last paragraph of my last post - if it had completely flopped in those few theaters, why would they expand it to more?
Also, box office does help build name value for those attached to a film, but it's certainly not indicative of the actual quality of the film. How many pieces of shit have pulled in millions, and how many 10/10 releases have flopped?
|
Crispy
|
Posted: January 17, 2009 at 11:31pm
This movie was entertaining as hell. ASH's voice is fucking killer, he needs to start a band so I can hear more lol. Seriously dude, not liking the movie is one thing, but I find it mindboggling how anyone can hate it as much as you do. 9/10 from myself.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: January 18, 2009 at 1:48pm
It is obvious you're going to keep trying to explain WHY this film is good, but you're never going to be able to make me believe that (A) the songs were well done, because they were not, (B) the performance were good because they were not or (C) the production quality was good because it was not.
Maybe you don't realize, but a film is released into limited release and expanded based on its performance. If the film was in 6 cities and was consistently selling out at every location, it would have expanded even further. It did not. It did not because the film is NOT a cult film, though the filmmakers wish it was. They expanded the film as far as they could before they realized -- \"Hey, it isn't catching on\". Then they yanked it and dumped it to DVD.
And as I stated in my review -- I am not denying some of the vocals were strong. You can't have a musical without some strong vocals, but most were awful. ASH was an exception. Sorvino was an exception. No one else.
|
Chad
|
Posted: January 18, 2009 at 2:58pm
\"I think the film would have done well enough in a wide release, but now it will make close to nothing and then get dumped onto DVD, never to be heard from again. It's a shame. It really is one of the best horror films of the year.\"
That's what you said about The Midnight Meat Train, and that's exactly what happened with Repo - the only difference is that Repo didn't even get the amount of screens as MMT. You enjoyed that one, as did damned near every other horror fan, and it made good money when you think about how much it could possibly earn on those few screens... I read somewhere that, based on the business it did on those few screens, MMT would have hit #1 and made millions if it had got a wide release. Did they expand it? Nope.
You're entitled to your own opinion about the film, I won't deny that (even if you're in the minority), but to try to twist common-knowledge facts into \"proof\" that the film is as bad as you say is just low.
|
grain of sand
|
Posted: January 18, 2009 at 6:35pm
Well, I thought this movie was pretty bad.. But it had it's moments! Coming from a dude who didn't like \"Sweeney Todd\" and only slightly respects the what could be genius of \"Rocky Horror Picture Show\"..
This dude knew what he was doing when he made this movie and that was to appeal to every Hot Topic wearing, Paris Hilton talking, weirdo kids that he could, and he did!
This movie was bad, but for the people who actually enjoy this stuff I can see a whole world of things they would like. To each his own.
I was entertained (premise, set), I just hated the songs and acting.. 5/10
|
grain of sand
|
Posted: January 18, 2009 at 6:36pm
Also, I think this would have done A LOT better had it been widely released..
|
Tristan
|
Posted: February 1, 2009 at 10:22pm
Meanie = idiot.
I loved this movie.
10/10
|
Ginose
|
Posted: February 1, 2009 at 11:14pm
Enjoyed it thoroughly. Good songs, decent story, good characters... the whole movie flowed quite well. Not as good as I wanted it to be but nowhere NEAR as bad as Billy Ray's review makes it out to be.
A solid movie. Would watch again. 7.8/10
|
Cryptorchild
|
Posted: February 2, 2009 at 6:41am
Finally watched it and I liked it.
|
bluemeanie
|
Posted: February 2, 2009 at 10:22am
There's just no accounting for taste these days, really.
|
Ricky Hartman
|
Posted: June 18, 2009 at 8:00am
To bluemeanie....
A friend who shares similar tastes akin to my own introduced this title to me earlier this evening, so I gave it a shot. I must confess that when it first started, I was sorely tempted to eject the disc almost immediately rather than put up with what looked to be two hours of crap. But before I did, I recalled that I wasn't digging \"Sweeny Todd\" either upon viewing it for the first (and subsequently only time) and I decided to stick with it, so I figured I'd extend the same courtesy to \"Repo\" for at least another ten to fifteen minutes in hopes it would get better.
It took about half an hour, but before too long I found myself entertained (and that's the key word here - entertained) enough that I ended up viewing the film in its entirety.
The purpose of film is to entertain the viewer for the duration of its running time. A 90 to 180 minute escape, depending on the film. Yes, some films strive to make a statement or serve a singular purpose in expressing the particular views or perspectives of those behind it, where as others are nothing more than mindless entertainment. Most decent films fall somewhere in-between. There are thousands who were enthralled with doubt. There are also thousands who love \"Howard the duck\" and \"UHF\", and that's fine too....and to those who's tastes lean more towards the former who feel superior to those with the tastes of the latter, there are terms for such people that go without saying.
I watched Repo and I was entertained. Many others can lay claim to the same. Many hated it. For those of whom were, like me, entertained....the film succeeded. For those who were not, the film did not succeed. It's as simple as that. If you didn't like it, you're entitled to your opinion. The fact that others do enjoy it does not make them in any way inferior to those who did not. It's a matter of personal preference.
It's no Dancer in the dark, but I liked it a whole hell of a lot more than the rocky horror picture show.
|
Crispy
|
Posted: June 18, 2009 at 8:47am
UHF rocks
|
|
