-
Add Bookmark | Recommend this book | Back to the book page | My bookshelf | Mobile Reading
Free Web Novel,Novel online - All in oicq.net -> Romance -> film master Text Chapter 531 What a carnival
Previous page Return to Catalog Next page
- The media public really didn't expect Ye Wei's long response to be so sharp. He seemed to make sense in every sentence, and he also had an extra shield, David Merrick.
Teacher Grace Aisi, who taught Ye Wei, laughed and sighed after hearing this, a typical viy prank! The person being teased was almost going crazy, but he could still justify himself: "I'm here to show you what misleading is! And since what 50-year-old David Merrick did is praised as a classic, it is still deception. I have been in the audience for six months. At the age of 18, I didn¡¯t lie to anyone. I just made a fool of myself in one day and watched you make a fool of yourself. Why is it bad?¡± Whoever wants to scold him now has to give him a reason first? .
Everyone naturally noticed the humor in his writing. The most intriguing ones were undoubtedly the passages that made fun of popular sports movies. Fans commented on him on the comment board:
"An old man" obviously refers to "Million Dollar Baby", which is also a "coach-player" movie. The coaches in such movies are usually troubled losers, "an old black man who served in Shawshank Prison" Who else could "Coach" be than Morgan Freeman? He played God in the fantasy comedy "The Impostor". He was smiling and not scary at all.
Freeman is also one of the two boxing coaches who teaches the heroine to box in "Million Dollar Baby" (Oscar for Best Supporting Actor), the other is Clint Eastwood (Oscar Best Actor nominee) , "hair like white wool" should refer to him. Ye Wei calls their coaching duo "Pandas", half black and half white.
Taking an Oscar-winning best picture to represent the proliferation of politically correct sports movies, this homophonic joke from coach to gucci to prada to panda is really ironic to the extreme. Many movie fans labeled it "lol", not only because of the humor, but also because the article gave a wise response to the main questions raised by film critics, which cannot be said to be unreasonable.
There is also the confident statement "The film critics will praise me twice more this year". The media knows this and can use it to make news! Just today there were voices criticizing Ye Wei for not filming "Winter's Bone" properly and spending all his time and thought on making trouble. He messed up "Soul Surfer" like this and still dared to say such crazy things.
But Ye Wei seemed to be doing this intentionally to expand attention. After the prank he directed and performed, more people were involved in the war of words, and it even became a hot search list on Google News. It used to be an ordinary film criticism controversy, but now it has developed into entertainment gossip.
The film critics who have been criticized are probably trembling with anger. Lou Ramnik didn't know anyone else, but he himself was really angry. He had scolded so many filmmakers, and this was the first time he was being teased. It was as if he had really committed some stupid, shameless thing!
Irving Grabman, who has been teased many times, cannot be in a better mood. He is 47 years old and an important member of the New York Film Critics Circle (a critic for more than 30 mainstream New York publications). When he started writing film reviews, Ye Wei is not born yet.
Before waiting for any reaction from the film critics, Ye Wei simultaneously updated an article titled "It's time to evaluate the film critics", indicating that the media is welcome to reprint it.
Movie fans laughed excitedly when they saw it, this is viy¡¯s killer! The media were also in an uproar. This time it was not just Graeberman who made a fool of himself:
¡¾For a long time, filmmakers have only been rated by critics, and audiences can only look at whether they give a thumbs up or a middle finger.
So which film critic should we trust? Whose movie reviews are the most reliable? Whose is the worst? Who is the advertising machine, who is the mediocrity, who is the most "cinematically cold", who is the most passionate, who is the most venomous, who is the most cliche, and who is the most fair and strict, and whose reviews still hold on to the honor of being a film critic?
In order to clarify these issues, our team worked day and night this weekend to seek knowledge. By analyzing real data statistics on Metactic and Rotten Tomatoes and analyzing film critics, we got some interesting results. Since the film critics have worked hard but few people care about them, we have prepared some trophies to reward them. Who will win the Critics Award for Dumbest? It¡¯s time to review them! ¡¿
Ye Wei's team targeted the 50 most influential film critics who are currently active in the public eye. They are all members of the North American Broadcast Film Critics Association (the BFCA Award is one of the most important Oscar indicators in recent years). Sean Edward The others were ignored as usual.
How to evaluate it? The team used Metactic's 60-point score to roughly classify a movie as good or bad, to find 200 good movies and 200 bad movies from 1996 to 2006, that is, the last ten years, and all 50 film critics I have seen about 50 good and bad films, only a few more.
Then based on their personal average rating on Metactic, compared with Metactic's average film critic rating, average audience rating, and Rotten Tomatoes average audience rating, they were divided into three categories: good, bad, and overall. This is how Provide reference results for how well their film reviews are written.
For example, a film critic has reviewed 100 good movies, and the average score is 80 points.It's a bad movie, with an average score of 65 and an overall score of 72.5. The three comparison items are 65 points, 68 points and 70 points respectively, which means that this film critic, who is 2.5 points higher than the most enthusiastic Rotten Tomatoes user, is talking nonsense every day, or is used to scoring and writing reviews. Let¡¯s get excited first. In short, any Rotten Tomatoes user knows better than him how to judge whether a movie is good or bad, and any sentence is more objectively critical than his review.
Ye Wei wrote in the article: "The more movies we sample, the better it can explain the problem. I originally wanted to count at least 500 movies per person, but due to time constraints, I can only count 100 movies, but it is in line with science and will be completed if necessary in the future." He also It is said that Roger Ebert is not among the 50 film critics, because Ebert, who won the Pulitzer Prize, will not compete with his peers for these awards, but Ebert's evaluation will still be announced.
The horizontal column chart lists the evaluation results at a glance. Everyone in the media can see that Owen Graeberman ranks high in the first place. His average rating in each item is higher than that of his peers and ordinary viewers, and Not a little higher the good score is 90.6, the bad score is 73.09, and the overall score is 81.45, which is 16.3% higher than its peers (the bad score is even 24.3% higher)! 9% higher than Rotten Tomatoes audience! All the best.
Ye Wei commented: [Owen, it¡¯s you again! But why are we not surprised at all? Maybe this is Entertainment Weekly style, although we don't know what it is. Perhaps because the lack of competitive environment has worn out Irving's brain power, during the statistical process, we found that he gave "Justice Strikers" a B+, "If Simpson can continue to rise after hanging up her short shorts, This won¡¯t come as a surprise.¡± Jessica Simpson, keep an eye on your short shorts, someone¡¯s got an idea. Owen also rated "Lords of Dogtown" a, "a rare myth of youthful rebellion." The bigger myth is that they all scored higher than "Goodfellas"'s b. We will ignore "Little Miss Sunshine", which was rated C. After all, this kind of example would not be surprising to Irving. Take it, Owen, you deserve the Idiot Film Critics Award. ¡¿
While the fans were laughing, someone went to check it out, and it was really like this. The two Oscar-nominated films for Best Picture, "Goodfellas" and LMS, respectively scored 96%, 97%, 97% and 95% on Rotten Tomatoes. Graeber Mann gave b and c. And Ye Wei quoted his film review sentence "it-pson's-star-keeps-ÈÕprivng-long-after-shoot-has-mixed-up-her-short-shorts." Right there, Graeberman's original intention was He praised Simpson for his good acting and that he could be an actor without having to show off his sexiness. When viy explained it, he laughed to death.
Many people suddenly understood why Ye Wei caught Graeberman making up jokes. It turned out that there was already an inside story. No wonder they disliked the praise he gave "Soul Surfer".
This award is not only the review champion, but also identifies all the film critics who are surprisingly high. Ye Wei continued to award awards with his vicious words. The second most stupid person was Steve Purcell of the Tampa Bay Times. He only lost by a narrow margin, 16% higher than his peers and 7.8% higher than the audience. %.
[With the highest negative rating of 74, no one can compare to Steve in his insistence on praising bad movies, saying that "Blue Passion" is "a complete blast!" Considering he lives in sweltering Tampa Bay, that's pretty cool. A carnival indeed. Sometimes he will make some incredible moves. He commented on "Children of Men", "This is a well-thought-out gunfight adventure film, well shot." Then he rated it b. It's probably not his fault that he's not clear-headed, it's just that it's too hot. ¡¿
Purcell also gave SS a B-, saying that although he praised it as "quite interesting, bright and encouraging", he "was left to complain about its flaws as a critic".
Third place is Lisa Schwarzbaum, another film critic from Entertainment Weekly, who scored 12.7% higher than her peers.
"It is precisely because of Lisa's presence that Owen does not seem so embarrassed in his workplace. They are like the Green Hornet and Kato. Under the leadership of Owen, Lisa has tried her best to be critical in "Entertainment Weekly", but people always like it a little bit. Lisa is definitely a big fan of Britney Spears. She praised "Time Travel" with b+ praise, both the content and the comments were appalling. "Country Road" is "Britney was brought to the big screen safe and sound, and the 20-year-old superstar girl we all love is on the highway to fame." This 2002 teen movie was intended to make Britney a star She became a movie star, but we haven't seen Britney's second movie so far. Maybe she was in a car accident. (Don¡¯t get me wrong, I¡¯m also a huge Britney fan, oh baby, baby.)]
Followers were so amused by Ye Wei's off-key jokes that even Xiao Tiantian made fun of her. She was so mean-mouthed! Rumor has it that he and Justin Timberlake are good friends
It was indeed an epic war of words! Viy fans don¡¯t care who he is kidding, this is really a carnival!
Viy attacks almost all mainstream film critics with a clear and well-founded mouth. The explosive firepower is completely overwhelming.
The reviews were indistinguishable. Two film critics from the Los Angeles Times praised ss as "gangbters"'s Kenneth Turan is in the middle of the pack with little danger, only 4.1% higher than his peers; Betsy Sharkey, who has not reviewed SS but has called "Carrie" a "disgrace", is ranked In fifth place, the score is 10.7% higher than peers and 4.3% lower than the audience, showing limited credibility.
[Betsy Sharkey is an enigmatic figure. During the years when she was still writing for the Chicago Tribune, she praised many bad movies, such as one that even Irving Graberman rated as C-rated. "Scream 3" was criticized as "the only thing this movie kills is your time" and was called a masterpiece. We don't know exactly why Betsy screamed, but it certainly had nothing to do with panic. Oh, and she often takes low-rated romantic comedies to the next level. ¡¿
Everyone can see that Ye Wei is sarcastic about Sharkey not understanding horror movies and seizing the opportunity to vent his anger for "Carrie".
??After reviewing these excellent idiot film critics, there are mediocre film critics. In 2004, Stephen King published an article criticizing Richard Corliss and a group of other film critics for their mediocrity. Even good and bad movies can be rated appropriately. The person who received the most mediocre film critic this time was Corliss of Time Magazine. Statistics show that his rating is closest to the public, with several values ??differing from each other by less than 0.1.
¡¾Incredibly accurate, it refers to Collis' psychological grasp of the ordinary audience. He is a mirror to the American people. So there is no difference between Collis's movie review and the conversation you hear from a stranger in the movie theater, or even asking a random child in kindergarten for his opinion. Like my 5-year-old sister, she can also say "Harry Potter" and Goblet of Fire" "a great movie." If Irving were to comment, "the only thing that comes from reading Collis's article is a waste of time" and a waste of paper. ¡¿
Claudia Pugh of USA Today came in second and third place with 0.2%, and Kirk Honicutt of The Hollywood Reporter followed with a narrow gap of 0.3%. Their film reviews are all in a safe-first style and are almost all nonsense.
Both gave SS a mid-range score of 2/4, saying it was good, but could have been better, and that its religious tone prevented them from giving it a favorable rating.
"Ye Wei's humor is in the wrong place, and his irrational attitude leaves people speechless." Pugh said in a film review dispute. Now faced with the cold data, I wonder what Puig thinks? She seems to understand rationality as mediocrity. It is difficult to find short shorts in her movie reviews. It is not impossible. She praised "Farm" as "a sweet, gentle, and funny movie that warmly entertains young audiences." I I just happened to watch this comedy that was criticized by film critics. How can I put itPugh also gave the highly praised "Christmas Elf" a two-star rating, "not annoying but too sweet like syrup."]
??¡¾When Honnikov gave negative reviews to movies like "Moulin Rouge", "The Pianist", "Frida", and "The Secret Life of the Dentist", was there really nothing wrong with him? ¡°The film lacks specific personal moments that allow the audience to enter the story and identify with the characters,¡± he said of ¡°The Pianist.¡± But Hornikett has the ability to average out the ratings from the pile of bad movies. After watching "Spicy Baby" which Schwartzbaum rated as D and Pugh gave it 1.5/4, he thought, "This may be high-glycemic garbage." Food, but an inspiring team of rising young actress Britney Murphy and hunky-dory Dakota Fanning will make you forget about those dangerous sweeteners. "No wonder you don't like the dentist. ¡¿ - Didn't finish reading? Add this book to your favoritesI'm a member and bookmarked this chapterCopy the address of this book and recommend it to your friends for pointsChapter error? Click here to report
- Previous pageCatalogNext page