Two Alternative and Highly Informative Reviews of "Cowboys & Aliens" - Page 3

Lumenskir · 08-01-2011, 09:51 AM

Quote:

This is all the more hilarious because you didn't put any "I think" "I thought" or "I believe"s in your first post either. Taken literally your first post makes the statement that you can scientifically prove that the movie is only a third as entertaining as an image of a cowboy and a flying saucer and that the temperature must be 108 degrees Fahrenheit for it to be worth watching.

You seem to be under the impression that I'm aiming to impart some sort of subjective op-ed, when in fact my function is more akin to a reporter delivering facts in as objective a way as possible. People's interpretation of those facts is where subjectivity comes in. So when I say that this movie and its carbon copy characters and dismal action is an atrocity on par with Zombie Ronald Reagan rubbing his zombie member across Picasso's Guernica, you can take that statement to the bank as the truth and do with it what you wish.

Karrrrrrrrrrrresche · 08-01-2011, 09:53 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Lumenskir

You seem to be under the impression that I'm aiming to impart some sort of subjective op-ed, when in fact my function is more akin to a reporter delivering facts in as objective a way as possible. People's interpretation of those facts is where subjectivity comes in. So when I say that this movie and its carbon copy characters and dismal action is an atrocity on par with Zombie Ronald Reagan rubbing his zombie member across Picasso's Guernica, you can take that statement to the bank as the truth and do with it what you wish.

I can take a handful of lint and string to the bank and act like it's money but they're still not gonna let me deposit it.

Marc v4.0 · 08-01-2011, 10:01 AM

only on the Internet

Quote:

Ok, I'll fall on this sword. The movie was instead objectively atrocious, in that it had aspects of an objective atrocity. Like, Pol Pot taking a dump on the Baby Jesus's eyes level of atrocity.

Quote:

my function is more akin to a reporter delivering facts in as objective a way as possible

for Fox News, maybe

tacticslion · 08-01-2011, 01:49 PM

While I'm subjectively being very entertained by the devolution of this thread, might we be better served by - instead of arguing our own merits and others' fallacies - adding to the merits and fallacies of the movie in question?

Also, I dunno, I haven't seen the movie, probably shant, but not because of reviews, but rather time. Prepping for baby takes time. So does movie. Movie loses. Subjectively, of course.

Edit: alternatively, I think, it would be quite entertaining to watch people arguing their own arguments' fallacies and others' arguments' merits, all, of course, subjectively!

Lumenskir · 08-01-2011, 03:04 PM

I just found out that the little annoying kid in this movie was the same kid who played Ohng in M. Night's Airbender movie.

brb gotta vom

Magus · 08-01-2011, 05:05 PM

But I liked when that kid attacked the alien's weak point for massive damage!

Anyway, I liked the movie. It reminded me of the other five or six science fiction action movies I saw this summer and I can't really discern a major difference between this movie and X-Men or Thor or Captain America (other than...genre? If superhero movie is different from sci-fi). I certainly liked it better than Green Lantern or Transformers 3. Also it had Harrison Ford, who was pretty good in it and played more of a "villainish" character for once (but with a heart of gold out of the blue, for some reason). He's Harrison Ford, after all.

In fact I liked it so much I have already come up with the name of the sequel: Cowboys and Aliens 2: Defend Fort Knox!.

Probably the worst part of the movie was the big battle scene, as Lumenskir mentioned. The aliens literally kill like ten humans a piece before even breaking a sweat, and even adding in the Indians that inexplicably join the party, there was no way they could have survived, let alone "win" by forcing the aliens to leave Earth, since logically all the humans should have been dead within about five minutes. Instead more and more extras seemed to show up out of the blue only to be murdered.

There were also a few plot holes and dropped threads, as mentioned, of course, but again, reminds me of most of the action movies I've seen this summer.

However, I liked the movie as a whole. I certainly don't feel like my time was wasted like it was with Green Lantern.

Lumenskir · 08-01-2011, 05:44 PM

I was personally conflicted throughout the whole of the last fight, because I always try to root for the non-stupid side in every movie fight.

So, on the human side, we have a bunch of morons standing around in the open shooting at the 90% bulletproof aliens without aiming. We also have a bunch of morons shooting bows at the 100% arrowproof aliens, although at least then we know when they've made a worthless hit.

BUT, on the aliens side, EVERY ONE OF THEM HAD A BLASTER. They literally could have just sat on the main ship and picked off everyone they could see. Instead they just went feral and didn't kill Harrison Ford as he spent like fifteen minutes sitting out in the open cradling his Indian son surrogate.

I started to just root for Team Out Of Nowhere Killer Meteor.

E: Ok, now that I think about it, the aliens are clearly the stupider side, seeing as they apparently mastered FTL travel and have been 'studying' us for however long and still resorted to idiot tactics. So good job winning by default, humanity.

Krylo · 08-01-2011, 08:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Karesh

Edit2: I've begun work on a formula to objectively prove Monty Python's Life of Brian is the best Monty Python movie. Progress is slow.

That is because you're trying to prove a false premise.

Fifthfiend · 08-01-2011, 09:26 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Smarty McBarrelpants

Haven't seen it but allt he reviews have led to me believe its not just aliens and cowboys having a super fight with ridiculous over the top stock characters and cheesy 50s special effects which is how I would have made it.

I would have used modern CGI special effects to ape shitty 50s special effects as closely as possible.

Basically I am saying I would spend four hundred thousand dollars per minute of screentime to create the most breathtakingly realistic nearly-invisible strings holding up my incredibly realistically CGI'd fake-looking alien spaceships that have ever been captured on film.

synkr0nized · 08-01-2011, 09:27 PM

Stupid aliens and a go-nowhere-plot was made tolerable by James Bond and Han Solo. And a few beers.

But I mean don't spend money on this. Go to Captain America instead if you are choosing among the two.

08-01-2011, 01:49 PM	#24
tacticslion Regulator Join Date: Feb 2006 Posts: 1,842	Humbly for your consideration. While I'm subjectively being very entertained by the devolution of this thread, might we be better served by - instead of arguing our own merits and others' fallacies - adding to the merits and fallacies of the movie in question? Also, I dunno, I haven't seen the movie, probably shant, but not because of reviews, but rather time. Prepping for baby takes time. So does movie. Movie loses. Subjectively, of course. Edit: alternatively, I think, it would be quite entertaining to watch people arguing their own arguments' fallacies and others' arguments' merits, all, of course, subjectively! __________________ Make the best decision ever. I look forward to seeing you there! You should watch this trailer! It's awesome! (The rest of the site's really cool, too!) I have a small announcement to make. And another! Last edited by tacticslion; 08-01-2011 at 01:51 PM. Reason: For FUN and PROFIT

08-01-2011, 05:05 PM	#26
Magus Archer and Armstrong vs. the World Join Date: Apr 2005 Location: Pennsylvania Posts: 7,164	A massive "crab battle" on the whole, really. But I liked when that kid attacked the alien's weak point for massive damage! Anyway, I liked the movie. It reminded me of the other five or six science fiction action movies I saw this summer and I can't really discern a major difference between this movie and X-Men or Thor or Captain America (other than...genre? If superhero movie is different from sci-fi). I certainly liked it better than Green Lantern or Transformers 3. Also it had Harrison Ford, who was pretty good in it and played more of a "villainish" character for once (but with a heart of gold out of the blue, for some reason). He's Harrison Ford, after all. In fact I liked it so much I have already come up with the name of the sequel: Cowboys and Aliens 2: Defend Fort Knox!. Probably the worst part of the movie was the big battle scene, as Lumenskir mentioned. The aliens literally kill like ten humans a piece before even breaking a sweat, and even adding in the Indians that inexplicably join the party, there was no way they could have survived, let alone "win" by forcing the aliens to leave Earth, since logically all the humans should have been dead within about five minutes. Instead more and more extras seemed to show up out of the blue only to be murdered. There were also a few plot holes and dropped threads, as mentioned, of course, but again, reminds me of most of the action movies I've seen this summer. However, I liked the movie as a whole. I certainly don't feel like my time was wasted like it was with Green Lantern. __________________ The Valiant Review

08-01-2011, 09:27 PM	#30
synkr0nized synk-ism Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: throughout the Wired Posts: 6,857	Well, they were 10%, but yeah just a few :/ Stupid aliens and a go-nowhere-plot was made tolerable by James Bond and Han Solo. And a few beers. But I mean don't spend money on this. Go to Captain America instead if you are choosing among the two. __________________ Find love.