Amazon Fucktard Theater 2: Fucktard Boogaloo

Yes, it’s time once again too look at those people who haunt the dusty corners of Amazon.co.uk with their disturbingly odd taste in films. The kind of taste that makes Orson Welles cry, Stanley Kubrick tear his hair out and Daniel Day-Lewis drink your milkshake. Drink it all up. Sorry, just re-watched There Will Be Blood.

Anyway, let’s get into it. Vincent Salernitano asked me yesterday to find out what people said about Howard the Duck but I’ve decided to rewatch the film before I pass judgement on the people’s reviews so that will have to wait. Instead I’m going to do something a little different from yesterdays edition and do one in which I look at people who review good films with one star. Here’s Lou Almighty’s Pulp Fiction review to get us started:

“I'll never understand why this film walked away with all the awards it got and was so hyped. PULP FICTION does not live up to any such expectations. Supposedly cool it is just senseless banter most of the time, not really funny but utterly ridiculous, with sudden explosions of violence. If you're looking for a black comedy try THURSDAY - a supposed copy of the Tarantino-style, but far better than anything he made.”

Jesus fucking christ. Everything about this review screams of a person crying out for attention. From the pseudo-intellectual writing style to the recommendation of another film even though anyone with any sense has given up reading the review at this point. Guess I have no sense. Yes, as I think we all know, Pulp Fiction is just senseless banter punctuated with violence. It has no redeeming qualities whatsoever. I’ll admit I’ve never seen Thursday so I can’t comment on that but I honestly get the feeling that whenever someone says something doesn’t live up to expectations over ten years after the film is released, there are part of that weird backlash crowd that hates something just because everyone else loves it.

Now on to a childhood classic, one that I think most people remember fondly, Steven Spielberg’s story of the Like-Christ-But-Better-Coz-He-Gets-Drunk alien, E.T. Ramsey Tupper writes:

“Spielberg making money out of making children cry isn't my idea of a good film. The special effects are terrible, even when it came out they looked ropey, but again it serves to fool children. I couldn't be happy about making my money from making kids cry, and then be able to sleep at night like Spielberg does. ET himself is a plasticy Mother Teresa without lippy on, Elliot is annoying as characters go and the whole alien thing is silly. Fire in the Sky is a better alien film than this.”

What the fuck, Ramsey? Have you no soul? No whimsy about you at all? E.T. is like a woman who didn’t wear lipstick without lipstick on? Also the title of this review is Alienist mushy moneymaker. Alienist? Does he mean it’s offensive to aliens? And he thinks the whole alien thing is silly? Seriously, it’s one of the few films where aliens aren’t trying to blow the shit out of us and not being destroyed by drunken pilots and computer viruses. Really, this whole review reads like it was written by someone who never watched the film, heard it made people cry and saw a picture of E.T. What a fucking idiot.

Ok, now a more modern film, recently released on DVD and Blu-Ray, the Dark Knight. Wether you thought the film went on too long or not, I don’t think you can really say it’s a bad film. But Mr. B Hurren disagrees. In a review titled, Utter pants!!! Totally Dissapointed, he writes:

“OK - This may seem harsh, and all due respect to the dead (Heath Ledger), but I found this to be absolute rubbish, I will not be watching this again.

OK, firstly, the good points: Both Ledger and Bale were excellent in their roles. I cannot fault how brilliantly acted the twisted joker character was, and the bat costume was better than Batman begins.

OK, the Bad:

1. The film was way too long.

2. The story structure was terrible. The hero didnt get the girl, infact Harvey Dent was so superior to Batman, it might as well have been called "Harvey Dark Knight!"

3. Who has ever given a dam for Commisioner Gordon? "Batman teams up with Commisioner Gordon to stop the Joker!" I mean come on! The only reason they made such a big deal about commisioner Gordon was because Gary Oldman no doubt wanted to feel "important!!"

4. Fancy using up the two most popular villains in the batman enterprise and wasting TWO FACE in a very pathetic 30 minute send off!

5. Batman ended up nowhere. There was not a scrap of progression. All his friends (like Morgan Freeman) left him, the girl who he loved died, and Batman was to be hunted forever more!!!

OVER ALL: Again, my condolences to the dead, but i really cant see how a sequel could be made from this. This film totally killed my interest in Batman. I mean, it's called the Dark knight, but there wasnt anything gritty or dark about him. Yes it was realistic, but the first fight scene was in a car park!! I mean what ever happened to the brilliant Tim Burton style 'gothic myst' and 'atmospheric darkness?' Or some thunder and rain effects? This film lacked any imagination.”

Oh, where to begin with this, let’s go point by point.

1. Ok, I know a lot of people feel this way but I disagree. Simple as that. Nothing to fucktarded yet.

2. The hero didn’t get the girl? Harvey Dent was superior? Well duh, dipshit. Harvey had to be a better example for the city than Batman in order for Bruce to have any hope of giving up the bat mantle and ending up with the girl. Then when the girl and the hope of Harvey’s saving the soul of the city are taken away, it makes the story that much more powerful.

3. Who ever gave a damn about Commissioner Gordon? Well I did, actually. He’s a vital part of this story especially considering that the Joker is so good at what he does, it does take all three heroes to capture him and even then it’s not enough.

4. Well, kinda agree here actually. Two-Face was kinda rushed. Of course if he’d been allowed to have more time to explore his story the film would have been longer and you’d have bitched further. As for the idea of keeping Two-Face’s story for the next film, well, maybe.

5. Batman ended up nowhere? He’s being hunted by his friend, another friend and his former love interest are both dead and it’s likely that Gotham City as a whole hates him. That’s a pretty big jump from a heroic figure.

OVER ALL: My condolences to the dead but I really can’t see how a sequel could be made from this? What the fuck does this mean? Is it referring to Heath Ledger’s death? What does that have to do with whether or not a sequel will be made? Make sense man!
You’re complaining that first fight scene was in a car park and you dislike the fact that it’s a more realistic approach? I suppose you’d prefer a fight in the sewers with hench-penguins and a giant rubber ducky. (Disclaimer: I like Batman Returns but come on…)

So there you have it. Fun times. See ya next time.