THE BORE

General => The Superdeep Borehole => Topic started by: Bloodwake on December 28, 2007, 04:51:12 AM

Title: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Bloodwake on December 28, 2007, 04:51:12 AM
http://bestof.ign.com/2007/movies/18.html (http://bestof.ign.com/2007/movies/18.html)

300 as Best movie of the year.

I know, I know, I shouldn't be expecting anything from them, but seriously, 300 was possibly the worst movie I've seen this year. It's probably tied with Transformers, which beat out Sunshine for best Sci-Fi film.


I just needed to post this. IGN is fucking distinguished mentally-challenged.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 28, 2007, 05:43:27 AM
It was pretty obvious after they gave it a 5/5. Now I really really like 300, but come on. IGN got a special early screening of the film, and I'm sure that influenced the rating. IGN isn't the only publication guilty of this practice, which is why I laugh at GAF's "outrage" over Gamespot.

It's not even the best action film of the year
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: demi on December 28, 2007, 06:01:41 AM
let's take a stand and filter out all of IGN and their corresponding websites
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Vizzys on December 28, 2007, 06:57:07 AM
let's take a stand and filter out all of IGN and their corresponding websites

that'll teach um
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: The Sceneman on December 28, 2007, 07:53:15 AM
wtf 300 was a fucking turd, the homo stuff made it ok but it was technically appaling
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Gay Boy on December 28, 2007, 09:11:58 AM
IGN giving mainstream trash movie of the year? SHOCKING! Their movie rumors also tend to often be really off and shitty.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Powerslave on December 28, 2007, 09:41:12 AM
lol at people giving shit about ratings and reviews
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: captainbiotch on December 28, 2007, 09:57:37 AM
:bow ign :bow

:bow 300 :bow

:bow gerard butler :bow


:rofl  :'( eb filmfag tears falling on keyboards  :'( :rofl
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Gay Boy on December 28, 2007, 10:15:42 AM
meh. Its cool to hate it at EB now. When I was saying it was average at best the weekend it came out I got shit for it. People began to realize the truth though.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: captainbiotch on December 28, 2007, 10:20:42 AM
High five!
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Gay Boy on December 28, 2007, 11:11:25 AM
In terms of blind pure action fun movies I feel Shoot 'Em Up was superior to 300 in almost everyway. Shoot 'Em Up was far from a great film but it did better what 300 tried to do in terms of pure action guy movie insanity.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Mupepe on December 28, 2007, 11:18:37 AM
Nah, 300 was incredible on a first viewing with friends. 

Watching it by yourself afterwards is a complete mistake.  This movies probably displays the worst pacing ever.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Gay Boy on December 28, 2007, 11:19:55 AM
Nah, 300 was incredible on a first viewing with friends. 

Watching it by yourself afterwards is a complete mistake.  This movies probably displays the worst pacing ever.
:bow

I like Gerard Butler. Too bad he is playing Snake in the new EFNY remake. :( Such a poor match.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Mupepe on December 28, 2007, 11:23:14 AM
wait, what??  they're doing an EFNY remake?????

why not Kurt??!!??!!
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Gay Boy on December 28, 2007, 11:30:51 AM
No one should ever play him but Kurt. :(

It's like John McClane and Bruce Willis. I can't see how it can be separated at all.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Mupepe on December 28, 2007, 11:33:05 AM
well i mean, wtf?  It's not like Kurt can't do it.  Why in the world would you ever choose anyone else?
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Rman on December 28, 2007, 11:47:21 AM
Not really surprising giving the types of movies they focus on.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 28, 2007, 01:47:28 PM
The even bigger travesty than naming 300 as the Best Movie of 2007?

Best Sci-Fi Movie of 2007: Transformers
Runner-up: Sunshine

*projectile vomits all over IGN's face*

Transformers was a high-powered, explosive, bombastic turd of a movie. Paprika and Sunshine were the only two Sci-Fi movie of note this year. The Man From Earth was interesting too, but I'm not to pretend that more than 0.000001% of people even heard of that, so we'll skip it. The Last Mimzy was a better Sci-Fi movie than Transformers. FAR better.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Joe Molotov on December 28, 2007, 01:53:14 PM
All things considered though, I guess their movie pics aren't that surprising.

(http://i17.tinypic.com/89jczmr.jpg)
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: bud on December 28, 2007, 01:57:38 PM
The even bigger travesty than naming 300 as the Best Movie of 2007?

Best Sci-Fi Movie of 2007: Transformers
Runner-up: Sunshine

*projectile vomits all over IGN's face*

Transformers was a high-powered, explosive, bombastic turd of a movie. Paprika and Sunshine were the only two Sci-Fi movie of note this year. The Man From Earth was interesting too, but I'm not to pretend that more than 0.000001% of people even heard of that, so we'll skip it. The Last Mimzy was a better Sci-Fi movie than Transformers. FAR better.

yeah, sunshine was amazing, despite the lame twist. and the soundtrack is killer.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: TVC15 on December 28, 2007, 02:14:24 PM
300 was a big dumb fun movie.  Movie of the Year, fuck no.  But fuck, look at the rest of IGN's year end movie shit--nearly all of their picks are like, absolutely terrible.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: FlameOfCallandor on December 28, 2007, 02:15:17 PM
300 was good but forgettable.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Van Cruncheon on December 28, 2007, 02:26:24 PM
300 was goofy, over-the-top spectacle. any attempts to "read" it like real cinema would have led you to the conclusion that eugenics are great and the polyglot mocha hordes are to be feared, but i'm pretty sure that wasn't the goal of the director. take it for what it is: a crazy, stupid thrill ride. it's fun!
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 28, 2007, 02:30:05 PM
Its a good movie. What I find more amazing is how PD participates in our collective shock, after writing so many bizzare movie reviews himself.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Eel O'Brian on December 28, 2007, 02:31:19 PM
It's got giants and mongoloids and oiled-up dudes wrasslin and screaming and chopping at legs and arms while that enya-sounding music plays, and that's about it.  Thumbs up!
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Eel O'Brian on December 28, 2007, 02:35:59 PM
Oh, and titties, slight though they may be!

Two thumbs up - your butt!
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Van Cruncheon on December 28, 2007, 02:36:52 PM
mmmm, titties
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Mandark on December 28, 2007, 02:49:41 PM
I didn't even enjoy 300 as a popcorn flick.

But I'm scared to tell that to people, lest they think I'm homophobic.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 28, 2007, 02:53:50 PM
Its a good movie. What I find more amazing is how PD participates in our collective shock, after writing so many bizzare movie reviews himself.

I likeded 300 but come on, it's not a MOTY candidate. I haven't seen many movies this year but I have seen Bourne Ultimatum, Zodiac, and Hot Fuzz - all of which are better than 300
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: The Fake Shemp on December 28, 2007, 02:57:56 PM
I didn't even enjoy 300 as a popcorn flick.

But I'm scared to tell that to people, lest they think I'm homophobic.

I'll never take you seriously again!
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Mandark on December 28, 2007, 03:26:44 PM
300's working title was Tom of Finland Goes to War.

True story.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 28, 2007, 03:29:55 PM
its just, PD has proven again and again he shouldnt talk about movies. I AGREE its probably not movie of the year, but not when PD says it. I just feel dirty
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Phoenix Dark on December 28, 2007, 03:38:58 PM
But you don't have to be a 12 year old over it. Look, we agree 300 is a fun movie with some cool visuals - BUT it's not MOTY quality. It's not like you're agreeing with Ron Paul here
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: FlameOfCallandor on December 28, 2007, 03:40:18 PM
But you don't have to be a 12 year old over it. Look, we agree 300 is a fun movie with some cool visuals - BUT it's not MOTY quality. It's not like you're agreeing with Ron Paul here

Why are you brining ron paul into this thread are you trying to shit this thread up. Jeeze now FoC is gonna post a bunch of Ron Paul stuff in here Rabble Rabble rabble
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Bloodwake on December 28, 2007, 03:41:45 PM
The even bigger travesty than naming 300 as the Best Movie of 2007?

Best Sci-Fi Movie of 2007: Transformers
Runner-up: Sunshine

*projectile vomits all over IGN's face*

Transformers was a high-powered, explosive, bombastic turd of a movie. Paprika and Sunshine were the only two Sci-Fi movie of note this year. The Man From Earth was interesting too, but I'm not to pretend that more than 0.000001% of people even heard of that, so we'll skip it. The Last Mimzy was a better Sci-Fi movie than Transformers. FAR better.

Oh, this is definitely true. Fuck. Transformers and 300 are tied for worst travesty to be released in theatres this year. FUCK. Transformers made my eyes bleed.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Mandark on December 28, 2007, 03:57:20 PM
Just think of the list as "Movies that gel the best with our target demographic" and everything starts to make more sense.

Then mentally file IGN in the same place you put Maxim, and you won't have to worry about them anymore.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: The Sceneman on December 28, 2007, 05:53:08 PM
Its a good movie. What I find more amazing is how PD participates in our collective shock, after writing so many bizzare movie reviews himself.

lol, owned
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: The Sceneman on December 28, 2007, 05:53:58 PM
The even bigger travesty than naming 300 as the Best Movie of 2007?

Best Sci-Fi Movie of 2007: Transformers
Runner-up: Sunshine

*projectile vomits all over IGN's face*

Transformers was a high-powered, explosive, bombastic turd of a movie. Paprika and Sunshine were the only two Sci-Fi movie of note this year. The Man From Earth was interesting too, but I'm not to pretend that more than 0.000001% of people even heard of that, so we'll skip it. The Last Mimzy was a better Sci-Fi movie than Transformers. FAR better.

yeah, sunshine was amazing, despite the lame twist. and the soundtrack is killer.


yeah the soundtrack was awesome, anyone got a link to a torrent?  ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;) ;)
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: brawndolicious on December 29, 2007, 12:14:55 AM
I tried watching 300 for 5 minutes on joox. started around the beginning, saw no action after one minute (they tried to fit story into it!) so I skipped forward a lot to some shit about how all spartans are warriors and that thebans make pots and that that's so gay and then I just gave up and closed the tab.  do not get how anybody actually sat through the movie.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: MrAngryFace on December 29, 2007, 12:30:55 AM
Well most audiences are composed of distinguished mentally-challenged fellows
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: brawndolicious on December 29, 2007, 12:38:17 AM
I know, I watch movies too.  I loved chuck & larry, this was drab.  pedestrian as some say.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Trent Dole on December 29, 2007, 01:43:59 PM
You know you could've just said 'IGN fucking sucks' and it'd still be true.  :shh
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: brawndolicious on December 29, 2007, 03:06:21 PM
Ever since they added the babes channel, you know they were going to go down in quality.
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: recursivelyenumerable on December 29, 2007, 04:17:26 PM
Quote
\300 was goofy, over-the-top spectacle. any attempts to "read" it like real cinema would have led you to the conclusion that eugenics are great and the polyglot mocha hordes are to be feared, but i'm pretty sure that wasn't the goal of the director. take it for what it is: a crazy, stupid thrill ride. it's fun!

Slavoj Zizek was apparently led to a different conclusion! (http://www.lacan.com/zizhollywood.html)

Quote
Zack Snyder's 300, the saga of the 300 Spartan soldiers who sacrificed themselves at Thermopilae in halting the invasion of Xerxes' Persian army, was attacked as the worst kind of patriotic militarism with clear allusions to the recent tensions with Iran and events in Iraq - are, however, things really so clear? The film should rather be thoroughly defended against these accusations.

There are two points to be made; the first concerns the story itself - it is the story a small and poor country (Greece) invaded by the army of a much larges state (Persia), at that point much more developed, and with a much more developed military technology - are the Persian elephants, giants and large fire arrows not the ancient version of high-tech arms? When the last surviving group of the Spartans and their king Leonidas are killed by the thousands of arrows, are they not in a way bombed to death by techno-soldiers operating sophisticated weapons from a safe distance, like today's US soldiers who push the rocket buttons from the warships safely away in the Persian Gulf? Furthermore, Xerxes's words when he attempts to convince Leonidas to accept the Persian domination, definitely do not sound as the words of a fanatic Muslim fundamentalist: he tries to seduce Leonidas into subjection by promising him peace and sensual pleasures if he rejoins the Persian global empire. All he asks from him is a formal gesture of kneeling down, of recognizing the Persian supremacy - if the Spartans do this, they will be given supreme authority over the entire Greece. Is this not the same as what President Reagan demanded from Nicaraguan Sandinista government? They should just say "Hey uncle!" to the US... And is Xerxes's court not depicted as a kind of multiculturalist different-lifestyles paradise? Everyone participates in orgies there, different races, lesbians and gays, cripples, etc.? Are, then, Spartans, with their discipline and spirit of sacrifice, not much closer to something like the Taliban defending Afghanistan against the US occupation (or, as a matter of fact, the elite unit of the Iranian Revolutionary Guard ready to sacrifice itself in the case of an American invasion? The Greeks main arm against this overwhelming military supremacy is discipline and the spirit of sacrifice - and, to quote Alain Badiou: "We need a popular discipline. I would even say /.../ that 'those who have nothing have only their discipline.' The poor, those with no financial or military means, those with no power - all they have is their discipline, their capacity to act together. This discipline is already a form of organization." In today's era of hedonist permissivity as the ruling ideology, the time is coming for the Left to (re)appropriate discipline and the spirit of sacrifice: there is nothing inherently "Fascist" about these values. (...)
Title: Re: IGN shows that they fucking suck at rating movies
Post by: Van Cruncheon on December 29, 2007, 07:53:52 PM
that is awesome.