pathetic hopscotch review (1 Viewer)

[george kaplan]

http://www.dvdfile.com/software/revi...hopscotch.html Why the hell do they give dvd reviews to people who don't like the films? Nobody looks to these reviews (except possibly for Ron's ) to look for a critique of the film. We check them out because it's a film we like and we want a review of the dvd (picture quality, sound, extras), not a review of the film. A recap of the film is fine, but bashing it is just stupid. If I want to listen to a critic, I'll listen to Roger Ebert, not [name removed].
Hopscotch doesn't register with this guy because the Cold War is over. I'd hate to see his review of Casablanca since WWII has been over even longer.
He also thinks Hopscotch is the 'least worthy film ever released by [Criterion]'. Huh?
Cmon dvdfile. I seriously doubt that anybody is going to read this review except those of us who think that Hopscotch is a great film. So why give the review to an person who doesn't understand the film, and says 'don't call it a comedy' (which is exactly what it is) and who is just going to alienate the intended audience. Or do you and he honestly think that people who've never seen this film bypass Ebert, Maltin, IMDB, etc. to make their decision on whether to see this film based on the opinion of [name removed]?
[/rant]
EDIT: I removed the reviewer's name on the off-chance that he is a member of the HTF and I don't want to accidently say anything negative about a member here.

 

[Lew Crippen]

Don't hold back George, tell us how you really feel.

 

[Patrick McCart]

DVD reviews really shouldn't put down the film when it's the DISC that is supposed to be reviewed.
Now...if the reviewer is actually going to review the film, that's not a problem. I'd love to see Roger Ebert do DVD reviews. No "big fat mono" comments, I'm sure of that!
DVD File is one of the best review sites, but the movie part really should just be a little less "personal comment" type.
Older movies are NOT dated: they're aged. Think of it like wine...it gets better with time.

 

[Tino]

I just read the review, and not having seen the film, I didn't think the review was "pathetic". He actually said some vey positive things about it. Doesn't the reviewer have a right to express his feelings on the film since he is reviewing the DVD (film included)? Would you be so upset if you agreed with him?
Also, shouldn't this be in the Software section?

 

[Kevin Leonard]

Why the hell do they give dvd reviews to people who don't like the films? Nobody looks to these reviews (except possibly for Ron's ) to look for a critique of the film.

Then why didn't you skip the film review and go straight down to the audio/visual information?

 

[Michael Taylor]

...shouldn't this be in the Software section?

I don't think so, he is objecting to the movie review, not the DVD review. Just my 2 cents...

 

[Walter Kittel]

Speaking for myself, I prefer reading reviews by folks who aren't exactly big fans of the work in question, because they are less likely to "sugar coat" or gloss over any perceived flaws in the disc, transfer, etc.
BTW, the DVD File review was hardly "pathethic". While the film struck the reviewer as inconsequential, the review did effectively communicate the strengths and weaknesses of the disc. George, you know better than to seek affirmation from a review of a DVD.
- Walter.

 

[george kaplan]

I was just going to let this die, but since it's been resurrected, I'll respond briefly.

That's an interesting take. I can certainly understand that, although to be honest, for myself if the person so underappreciates a film that I think is worthwhile, my gut reaction is not to trust their opinion about the transfer. How carefully are they really listening or watching if they don't like the film. And they sure as hell aren't likely to be able to tell me how it compares to the ld, or an earlier version of the dvd. Finding out if a new release of a dvd has significant picture improvement to replace the old dvd is probably my number one reason for reading on-line reviews, but it requires watching the film twice, carefully.

 

[Andy Sheets]

I have felt more and more over the last year or so that dvdfile has been getting more testy about the movie review sections of their dvd reviews. I'm not sure if they're trying to be provocative or if the reviewers just really don't have much of a knowledge of film. Particularly in the cases of classics or cult films, it's striking how often they just don't get what they're reviewing. They're less like critics and more like "guys who like movies"
For instance, I read a couple of reviews of old Peter Cushing horror films recently and was amused to find the reviewer basically saying that as far as he was concerned, Cushing will always be Grand Moff Tarkin from Star Wars and aren't these old horror movies he did kind of silly? I admit it irked me to see an IMO excellent actor like Cushing getting critiqued from that standpoint. OTOH, it's nonetheless interesting to get a bit more of a "Joe Sixpack" perspective on old movies, just to see how differently those movies can be perceived. I don't necessarily *like* it, but it's interesting I just don't take their reviews seriously when it comes to assessing a movie's place in history from a more critical perspective.