Posted by Neil at 126.96.36.199 on August 24, 2001 at 15:05:59:
In Reply to: I didn't misconstrue, no worries posted by Vincent on August 24, 2001 at 14:15:52:
: Like I said, I can take valid criticism- Mr. Brown's Movie Site gave the film some valid criticism, and so have a few of the reviews on this board and film-411 (like Jeff and Neil), but this guy is criticising things that I think are just wrong, and his "against the grain" comment makes me think that those are his true motives.
I agree. Jeff's review contained a number of criticisms – such as the one regarding speeches made by characters – that I didn't personally agree with, but found to be valid. It's entirely possible for reasonable people to disagree on their opinions about a movie overall, but it's different when a person launches into criticisms that simply don't apply.
The visuals in A BETTER PLACE are terrific. This is quite clearly where Vincent shines. I'm not suggesting that a person couldn't recognize the budget problems from the visuals, but they're still remarkable and more than serve their purpose dramatically and artistically.
The acting, well, I had criticisms of the acting, but certainly nothing more than nitpicks with the leads, both of whom were very natural and honest throughout. Taking aim at the acting overall just suggests that one doesn't understand the craft, in my mind.
And saying the dialogue was imitation Kevin Smith is just bizarre and out-of-tune with reality. I don't think there was one line that suggested that to me. Upon reflection, I can see that there's a tiny maybe that the speech Ryan gives by the water near the end could be argued to have some tiny resemblance to a DOGMA speech, but I think the argument would ultimately be a weak one.
It's something like if someone criticized a Kubrick movie as being too fluffy and insubstantial. In most cases, there could be an argument made of the movie that would have a level of validity, but that would be unlikely to be it.
Post a Followup