>>If Lucas wanted to make a black film in the vein of a
>summer
>>blockbuster, they would do well to release it in summer.
>
>It wasn't really his play, it was Fox that had control over
>the release date. It doesn't sound like you're all that up on
>the fucked up circumstances surrounding this movie, because
>NOBODY wanted anything to do with it.

This may come as a shock to you, but niggas do read. I already know all the bullshit surrounding the movie - my response was in reply to your comment about it being "summer action movie like", which sounds more to me like an excuse for an underwritten movie rather than an actual aim/goal of the production. Which was my point.


>
>>I'm not in the mood to play the "user reviews are a better
>>indication"
>
>....of how well a movie will do financially, which is what I
>was talking about? user reviews are generally a good grade
>higher than the critics, and this is especially true of
>action/big budget/effects driven movies.
>
>So when users give a movie overwhelmingly good reviews, that
>means word of mouth is good, which means, generally speaking,
>financial success.

The movie hadn't even been playing in theaters a good seven hours when you made your reply. A good chunk of those reviews were likely premature. Also, this is an excuse used to combat bad reviews all of the time.

>
>
>>"there's a racist critic conspiracy holding it
>>back" thing today.
>
>I didn't say that anywhere in my post. I said I believe the
>critics are viewing it different in a different light. To my
>recollection- could be wrong I guess- I didn't go near the
>race card in my statements regarding the critics

Someone else in this post or another said that. I was addressing all of the excuses I'm hearing simultaneously.
>
>>I'll still go see it, but it'll be with
>>that same unease I sat down in the theater to, uh,
>experience
>>Tyler Perry's "For Colored Girls" with.
>>Maybe I'll be pleasantly surprised as far as the film
>>exceeding my meager expectations. I have a pretty good
>>tolerance for corn (which is the main thing people say is
>>wrong with the film), so I might enjoy it more than, say,
>the
>>folks at Slant Magazine.
>
>What's so hard about simply having an open mind going in? You
>already seem to have a salty attitude about the movie, about
>any praise the movie recieves, and anything mentioning the
>very clear issues surrounding it.

It's hard to have an open mind about a movie when everyone whose opinion you respect says it sucks.