http://blogs.indiewire.com/criticwire/dark-knight-rises-critic-receives-death-threats#.UARpqt_mE0Y.twitter

Marshall Fine, who definitely pans TDKR in his review, has gotten in just one morning a deluge of vitriol his direction.

Before anyone accuses me of being anti-TDKR as my reason for posting this, all of the horrific anti-woman remarks people online lobbed at Amy Nicholson for her lukewarm review of The Avengers were also utterly appalling. (She's already several many anti-woman remarks about her 3.5/5 review of TDKR, a movie she says on Twitter she "mostly liked.")

It's not solely a Marvel vs. DC thing either. The responses to Beasts of the Southern Wild have ranged from "transcendent" to "a Republican fantasy about FEMA/Katrina." The responses to The Amazing Spiderman have been either #TeamRaimi or #TeamWebb-- it's not about the actual storytelling or editing or anything regarding the films themselves, it's just "which version wins." Prometheus was either a muddled piece of shit or a piece of brilliance "the haters didn't get." One can only imagine what Quentin's new film will receive, not to mention the inevitable PTA "this is the best film of the year!" vs. "this was overrated!" debate.

My question is this: ... has this sort of reactionary divide gotten worse with the Twitter age, with all of the journalists trying to write their review first and in 140 characters to get the most retweets? Not to mention the abundance of new outlets requiring journalists and critics all trying to make a name of themselves? We've talked about this issue in OKS regarding ESPN and sports journalism once or twice, I believe-- is it an issue regarding the Internet Age and society at large and not simply art criticism, but any form of public form commentary/analysis?

OR has it always been like this, since the days of Kael and Sarris (who certainly fought each other), but because there are more voices now and everyone's thoughts are at our fingertips, it's merely more in our face? Is it actually a more reactionary, more horrifically divided marketplace... or does it just feel that way with so many empowered internet users?

Just some thoughts today while seeing the inevitable wave of

"Dark Knight embargo is gone!" ---> "Hooray, Dark Knight reviews are amazing! Fans are overjoyed!" ---> "Boo, a few mixed Dark Knight reviews and fans are being assholes." ---> "Fanboys need to stop being dicks to film critics!"

I don't think it's just fanboys.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

shit ain't complicated.

the sooner we figure out how to effectively filter the random, intransigent hate from our electronic communications, the better we'll all be for it.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

I remember back in the days, I'd get my film news and reviews from magazines. Often times, if I'd disagree with the review, I'd also think the writer was an idiot. In 2012 however, you can let them know you think so. It's pretty interesting, scary yes, but interesting nonetheless.

￭￭￭￭

Obviously you'll recoil at a negative review of a favorite actor or director's new project, and a state of denial if you love all their other work is totally understandable...

... I just always wonder how folks call critics idiots for what they wrote before even seeing the film. It's SO much easier to do a response takedown of what one believes is a shortsighted, unfair, or agenda-based review once you've seen it.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

I'd say no. I mean perhaps with comic book films, although there weren't that many being made back then, or anything else that's a huge franchise with a huge fanbase. I think what gets people so invested in these films is the fact they can follow every single part of development.

I myself am a huge Batman fan, and have followed the development of every proposed Batman film since Batman Forever. For Batman & Robin and Batman Triumphant, I had to read the scoops in the magazines every month, which often times would be false rumors. But nowadays online, you can follow SO much. I had read the Batman Begins script before the film came out for example. I think that kind of investment is what makes people respond like that.

I think a site like Rotten Tomatoes is great, but would possibly be even better without commenting abilities.

￭￭￭￭

Apparently, they're strongly considering going to a Facebook login so that comments are no longer anonymous, largely due to the hate speech and threats made in the last 24 hours. I feel like this will help... a lot. At least on that site, lol.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

>... I just always wonder how folks call critics idiots for
>what they wrote before even seeing the film.

Not at all hard to do, really. Sometimes the criticism can be so baseless or off the mark, you don't need to see the film to see it for what it is. Opinions, in my view, can certainly be wrong, depending on how they're framed and the basis used to form them. It's still their "opinion", however when it's contextually inaccurate, it's hard to give it the "well, that's your opinion" pass.

Sometimes, it's flat out wrong, and criticism that doesn't honestly deal with the content or expressed intention of said content falls into the "that's just my opinion" category, where rhyme and reason are thrown to the wayside in favor of using the "opinion" shield. That's just flat out an intellectually dishonest cop out, and IMO this doesn't always require the reader of the review to see the film (or any other medium, for that matter) to see through paper thin critiques that aren't relying on a firm foundation.

>easier to do a response takedown of what one believes is a
>shortsighted, unfair, or agenda-based review once you've seen
>it.

It is. Absolutely. However, I don't believe it's necessarily impossible to do so credibly without seeing the film. From time to time, criticism can be so flat out dumb that seeing the film isn't necessary. Cy Young pointed the issue with Amy's Tom Hardy critique, and his take is a valid one.

>It is. Absolutely. However, I don't believe it's necessarily
>impossible to do so credibly without seeing the film. From
>time to time, criticism can be so flat out dumb that seeing
>the film isn't necessary. Cy Young pointed the issue with
>Amy's Tom Hardy critique, and his take is a valid one.

(first off, you mean Christy)

I think it's easy to see that she's not saying Bane should be sexy. She's saying Bane is a one-note character, and it's not Tom Hardy's fault, because he's shown his ability to be appealing in other films, using traits like being sexy or charismatic (everyone keeps leaving out that she says charismatic, lol).

Now, you can disagree with the assessment of Bane being one-note, but that's a valid criticism, as is the assessment that the material lets down Hardy and not vice versa.

She is not saying "OMG BANE SHOULD BE SEXY LULZ!" Far from it, really.

The only two tactics I've seen critics take that I immediately dismiss:

1. Bland praise. You can tell a writer is trying to get quoted in ads. Nothing specific is ever really mentioned, just lots of adjectives. Peter Travers is often guilty of this.

2. Wanting the filmmaker to have done something different. Now, if Lemire had said, "Hardy is sexy, so they missed a valuable opportunity to make Bane sexy," that's VERY different than what she ACTUALLY said. You have to judge the film on its own merit. If you don't like the director's take, say so. Don't talk about missed opportunities or other films by other directors who did the same thing better (I do think talking other entries in a series is fair game). Armond White always does that-- "Toy Story 3 covers the same ground as (insert 1970s film here), but without the same wit and melancholy etc."

Neither Fine nor Lemire did either of these things. I highly doubt Bane is one-note, but it's a completely fair take for a critic to have on a character.

Plus, commenters aren't nitpicking one point in an entire Lemire review, they're saying, "This is why women shouldn't be critics" and "Fire this cunt." But that's a different, larger issue.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

is pointless. I think she really missed some parts of this film.

￭￭￭￭

Whenever I find myself flabbergasted that someone thought a performance was hollow or shitty, I remember having spoke to multiple people I respect who thought Ryan Gosling's performance in Drive was one-note. It reminds me how wildly subjective performance interpretation really is.

(And no, I'm not trying to start a debate about Gosling in Drive again, lol.)

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

To Will High folks from the beginning of the internets, but now you can interact with folks in a way that you were never able to in the pass. Twitter and all the other outlets that allow damn near anyone to comment on what you write its just access that folks have never have with the same amount of anonymity it just makes for a bad situation.

Especially with a movie that is as marketed as this one, as well as hyped as this one. Folks are just losing their shit.

Get out the room,
http://getouttheroom.podomatic.com

http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Situation Podemy love

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/situation-podemy/id620232249

Situation Podemy : www.situationpodemy.wordpres

In the past you had to write a letter, post it and hope that someone would read it or even publish it. Nowadays it takes you 1 minute, even less, and you're pretty damn sure they'll see it. If they don't then others do, and will entertain it.

￭￭￭￭

From thousands of miles away.

the amount of people who flock to inflammatory words has always been high, but now they can see it on their phone on the shitter, on their computer screen while taking a conference call at work or alternating between hating and fapping. shit is too easy

Get out the room,
http://getouttheroom.podomatic.com

http://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/get-out-the-room/id525657893

Situation Podemy love

https://itunes.apple.com/us/podcast/situation-podemy/id620232249

Situation Podemy : www.situationpodemy.wordpres

They'd probably get bored and go back to watching TV or something.

People have access now and there's a decent chance that if they write something really stupid, they might get retweeted or a little attention.

----
NBA MOCK DRAFT #1 - https://thecourierclass.com/whole-shebang/2017/5/18/2017-nba-mock-draft-1-just-lotto-and-lotta-trades

that was basically just this. it had Milo Bloom, the editor of the Bloom Beacon, interacting with an angry reader saying lots of angry, dumb nonsense that barely makes sense, then wraps it up by saying "welp, it's all there in the letter, anyway" and Milo's punchline is "yep, verbatim."

so yeah, I thought the exact same thing -- it's not new, it's just easier to proliferate these days. editorial cartoonists found time to lampoon the same knee jerk morons back in the early '80s, too.

I should prolly take a pic of that one and stash it somewhere on the 'net, it was pretty interesting to me how 30 years later we're still scratching our heads over the same phenomenon.

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

for the simple fact that I hadn't seen it (which I did) and that I broke the embargo and was hurting the film. Meanwhile, where were all these fuckers when the film dropped?

------------------------------------------
America from 9:00 on: https://youtu.be/GUwLCQU10KQ

Can you imagine what the world would be like if the internet was around for Citizen Kane (IF YOU DON'T LIKE IT YOU SHOULD CHOKE ON A DICK AND DIE) or The Godfather (HEY FUCKTARD, COPPOLA COULD HAVE EASILY CUT 45 MINUTES), let alone the all-time action films like Magnificent 7 (FUCK YOU, KUROSAWA BETTER) or The French Connection (WILLIAM FRIEDKIN IS RACIST!)

and of course
look at these things:
Recent show - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hyNJgTalegs
Recent article - http://www.rapconqueso.com/2012/05/underneath-willie-evans-jr/
New Tough Junkie https://itunes.apple.com/us/album/missing/id594220223

people like this around , it just there are so many different ways for people to give their opinions or critiques on different media forms but there are also just as many people to hate ,dislike, and act a psychotic fool towards those same opinions or critiques.
__________________________________________________________
http://agoonieneversaysdie.wordpress.com <--(film)

HPE YOU DIE IN A HOVERCRAFT ACCIDENT CHOKING ON A MIXTURE OF GREEN SUNNY DELIGHT AND JOLLY RANCHERS!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! !

http://www.bleedingcool.com/2012/07/17/how-the-dark-knight-rises-got-a-critic-banned-from-rotten-tomatoes/

also, critics can add their own review to the site? i mean I'm sure there's some criteria, but I had no idea.

Rotten Tomatoes percentage isn't the end of the world and shouldn't affect your feelings about a film.

Plus, it was literally up for under two hours.

And in those two hours, he got well over a hundred comments about how he must be insane because TDKR was obviously going to be better than B&R.

So the commenters don't even read the reviews. So they kinda made his point for him.

He's been waging war against RT for a while now, so it's not just this-- it's all the disparaging tweets and references in articles. He's a really good critic though-- one of my favorites online.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

I stopped following Snider on twitter since he seemed to be a bit too full of himself and often misguided in his attempt to make arguments.

It doesn't surprise me that he tried this foolish attempt at making a legit point.

----
NBA MOCK DRAFT #1 - https://thecourierclass.com/whole-shebang/2017/5/18/2017-nba-mock-draft-1-just-lotto-and-lotta-trades

http://www.guardian.co.uk/film/filmblog/2012/jul/17/dark-knight-rises-capitalist-superhero

￭￭￭￭

... Batman has always been one of the most politically conservative superheroes in memory, haha. He's a billionaire who can't trust the government officials to get things done so he does them himself. Doesn't get more conservative than that.

I haven't seen it though, so I can't comment on the Occupy Wall Street references.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

and he uses his OWN wealth for the greater good and puts himself at risk doing it.

dude's liberal as fuck.

>and he uses his OWN wealth for the greater good and puts
>himself at risk doing it.

Batman is one-man privatized security. Instead of others funding his missions, he funds himself. He hides how his corporation spends their money so that no one can find out what Fox is making him. He promotes those who meet his special interests within the company to keep his secrets safe.

I mean, in the last film, he used a technology that invaded privacy because he believed it was necessary to save lives from terrorism. Sound familiar?

Just because this incarnation isn't a killer (yet-- haven't seen the new one, so can't comment on his tactics here) doesn't mean he's a lib. His tactics are textbook conservative.

"Endure, Master, endure. Take it. They'll hate you for it but that's the point of Batman. He can make the choice that no one else can make - the right choice." The burden of being a billionaire-- struggles with being the only one who knows what's best for the people, even when they don't know it themselves. Doesn't sound very lib to me.

(By the way, you could debate this all day, so I won't-- but I'll say that Guardian article is far from the only one being written about this film or about the franchise in general being conservative.)

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

you said 'always.' which is simply not the case. conservatives could argue all they want about what they think they do - that's meaningless.

i completely agree that Bale Batman is a fascist. it's not true to the spirit of batman.

I'm not familiar with the history of Batman comics and could've chosen my words more carefully.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

Morrison's current Batman is more liberal
Miller's Batman is exactly what Longo is describing -- a right wing wet dream

it's actually a pretty interesting debate to me, because I think it can definitely be interpreted both ways

___________

HOPE!
https://vine.co/v/i7JjIBL3Qix
https://vine.co/v/i7JtqEFwxDu

I think the right-wing interpretation is wrong. Punisher is the 'right-wing' Batman - and not just because he kills but because he's getting 'revenge' and pleasure from it.

Batman uses his own resources (that he didn't earn) to help the greater good. It's a sacrifice. Plus I'm sure Alfred gets good benefits.

And he's a single Dad.

>I think the right-wing interpretation is wrong. Punisher is
>the 'right-wing' Batman - and not just because he kills but
>because he's getting 'revenge' and pleasure from it.

Nah, im as liberal as the next dude, but its unfair to paint repub's as vigilante's, lol. Even their stance on the death penalty is more of a 'deterrent' then actual vengeance.

Historically Batman is pretty goddamn conservative though, it's not as if philanthropy is against the Republican ideal (well it is, but not on paper, lol).

they cheered when ron paul said people should be denied healthcare.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

especially drug addicts and the poor.

They're contemplating switching to a Facebook login so that anonymity is gone, or at least minimized. They're also serious about banning those making death threats or hate speech, which is a nice change for them.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide

His one out of four star review of TDKR is peppered with such delectable tidbits as Bane's voice being "mumblecore," so apparently Nolan had him improvise his lines in the style of an indie character study.

I might not read it til after though, as Reed famously opened his Cabin In The Woods review with what happens at the end.

My movies: http://russellhainline.com
My movie reviews: https://letterboxd.com/RussellHFilm/
My beer TikTok: https://www.tiktok.com/@thebeertravelguide