The Rover

For any discussions at all relating to the movies

Re: The Rover

Postby leadcounsel » Sat Jan 24, 2015 2:20 am

A score of 6.4 out of 10 is nothing to brag about. On a graded scale with an "A" being 90%+, a "B" being 80-89%, a "C" being 70-79%, and a "D" being 60-69%, and anything below that an "F" for failure, this film scores a "D"... A "D" is the worst passing score in a grading scale.

On that same scale and Rotten Tomatoes, Mad Max gets a 95%, a solid "A."

While there are some good reviews, I'll say that I don't put much stock in commercial reviews - everyone can be bought, connections, helping aspiring artists, etc. I doubt very much that folks who are "names" are going to be very critical of an up-and-coming...
leadcounsel
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 12:11 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby MWFV8 » Sat Jan 24, 2015 3:07 am

The problem with percentage reviews or average scores is that they really don't tell the full story. A lot of good movies are polarising and that's evident for The Rover when looking through the scores. In this case of this production, critical reviews tend to get tougher as generally critics like to try and trash the director's efforts after a previous surprise success. There's also the Patterson effect to consider here, Cosmopolis suffered this badly when his fans watched that film and didn't get what they were expecting. But then countering that, there will be critics who aggressively back him as being better than most people think too.

Classic films tend to be scored retrospectively by their cult fanbase and thus perform very well on ranking sites.

Generally good reviews can't be bought, especially by indie productions. If there is a very highly influential person involved in the production then maybe a panel can be influenced at a festival. There is astroturfing where fake audience reviews are posted, that's well within the whelm of all prodcos, distributors, and actors.

So basically review scores are not to be taken too seriously unless there's a mass of opinion one way.

But it all comes back to subjectivity. I've watched plenty of critically acclaimed films that I thought were pretentious garbage.
"Wrong, we fight for a belief. I stay."
User avatar
MWFV8
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 2:06 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby leadcounsel » Sat Jan 24, 2015 9:51 am

MWFV8 wrote:The problem with percentage reviews or average scores is that they really don't tell the full story. A lot of good movies are polarising and that's evident for The Rover when looking through the scores. In this case of this production, critical reviews tend to get tougher as generally critics like to try and trash the director's efforts after a previous surprise success. There's also the Patterson effect to consider here, Cosmopolis suffered this badly when his fans watched that film and didn't get what they were expecting. But then countering that, there will be critics who aggressively back him as being better than most people think too.

Classic films tend to be scored retrospectively by their cult fanbase and thus perform very well on ranking sites.

Generally good reviews can't be bought, especially by indie productions. If there is a very highly influential person involved in the production then maybe a panel can be influenced at a festival. There is astroturfing where fake audience reviews are posted, that's well within the whelm of all prodcos, distributors, and actors.

So basically review scores are not to be taken too seriously unless there's a mass of opinion one way.

But it all comes back to subjectivity. I've watched plenty of critically acclaimed films that I thought were pretentious garbage.


Good general points. I'll say that Tarantino for instance made films on both ends of the spectrum... from creative genius instant cult classics to total garbage. Miller is perhaps another example.
leadcounsel
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 12:11 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby roadwarriormfp » Sat Jan 24, 2015 3:06 pm

leadcounsel wrote:
I don't see anything in MM that is really implausible. It's a very realistic vision of a world that has begun to collapse and why it has been copied a zillion times to both good and largely bad results. The people all behave as you would expect. Crazy street gangs exist today, so no stretch they'd exist later. Natural laws and human behavior are very consistent with reality and it is a film that is nearly flawless and you really have to dig deep to find flaws and criticism (the car blower issue, some minor plot holes that are mostly irrelevant, minor editing stuff). But on balance it was a ground breaking movie that is now nearly 40 years old and still head and shoulders above most modern films. It was about story telling, acting, real stunts, and honest raw believability. Hence it is a film that will stand the test of time. It has a 95% review rating on Rotten Tomatoes... and I can't imagine the moron that doesn't like MM.


The on/off blower ..... not real or possible.
smashing into the bongo van and coming out with a new radiator... not possible
When Max drives off the road after the toe cutter is run over, NOT POSSIBLE without destroying the entire lower half of the spoiler....
The engine in Maxs van siezes too quickly... Max catches up within seconds of the car breaking down.
Do you want me to go on?

The acting in some areas is poor....

Miller himself said words to the effect "it the best B grade movie"

Mad Max scores highly now due to its cult status.
It had a lot of "firsts" in the film

MM flopped in the USA on its release! It was a dismal failure due to the voice overs mostly.
It wasnt until MM2 came along that people wondered about MM1 and it was re-released without the voice over.
We are 100% snafu....
User avatar
roadwarriormfp
 
Posts: 3293
Joined: Sat Jul 10, 1999 7:10 pm
Location: Suncity, Australia

Re: The Rover

Postby mahenoguy » Wed Jan 28, 2015 5:29 pm

the Rover was fucking awesome . I can understand your disappointment if you were expecting a explosive action film...but knocking the Acting...really? unrealistic as opposed to Mad Max...REALLY? the Music industry had a bit of a Low-fidelity revolution in the last decade...perhaps there is a market for the same in the Movie industry as well , and I don't mean more low budget indie films ...but big studio , low budget films for the nostalgic market .but as has been well pointed out , movie market audiences have expanded and I think that massive action / effects translates easier across multi - lingual audiences . shame though .
User avatar
mahenoguy
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby MWFV8 » Thu Jan 29, 2015 1:25 am

mahenoguy wrote:the Music industry had a bit of a Low-fidelity revolution in the last decade...perhaps there is a market for the same in the Movie industry as well , and I don't mean more low budget indie films ...but big studio , low budget films for the nostalgic market .but as has been well pointed out , movie market audiences have expanded and I think that massive action / effects translates easier across multi - lingual audiences . shame though .


That's exactly what we're on the cusp of now. The time hasn't looked so good for indie features since the nineties.
"Wrong, we fight for a belief. I stay."
User avatar
MWFV8
 
Posts: 1089
Joined: Sat May 15, 2004 2:06 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby blackmocco » Thu Jan 29, 2015 8:12 am

I loved it too. Watched it twice in a row. Guess I'm not half the critic leadcounsel is.
"...and it was here in this blighted place, he learned to live again."
blackmocco
 
Posts: 268
Joined: Tue Oct 31, 2006 2:26 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby leadcounsel » Thu Jan 29, 2015 11:53 pm

Saying you liked it tells someone nothing really. Can you discuss why, or address the deficiencies noted?
leadcounsel
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 12:11 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby mahenoguy » Fri Jan 30, 2015 2:21 am

I didn't address the deficiencies you noted Leadcouncil because I didn't actually see them as deficiencies . there are many things I loved about this film...most of which have already been mentioned by others in previous posts so "Ditto "is about all I can say without going over old ground . I have always loved Guy Pierce ...his scope as an actor is really quite brilliant and speaks for itself . I could see we were never going to agree about this film so I didn't see the point in having an academic debate over Apples V's Oranges . We are obviously seeking different things from our cinematic experiences which is fine with me , doesn't make either of our opinions Invalid though . Don't think because I didn't give a scene by scene review that I payed any less attention than you , I guess my expectations are just not as high as yours...which to me ( no offence intended ) seem a little unrealistic . I feel The Rover is subtly stylised to try and lift the viewer out of reality and into it's world and any conceived notion that this makes it unrealistic is sadly missing the point . I'm not claiming it's an arthouse film , but what would be the point in making it if it was exactly the same as Mad Max ? it would just be another shitty rip-off . It is a little funny that you might call "Noted Deficiencies "in Mad max "Minor editing stuff " or " plot holes which are largely irrelevant "yet completely write this film off for the same reason . As I'm sure I have mentioned before...most of us on here saw Mad Max as kids and comparing it to films we have watched with more cynical adult eyes .
User avatar
mahenoguy
 
Posts: 178
Joined: Tue Mar 09, 2010 9:00 pm

Re: The Rover

Postby leadcounsel » Fri Jan 30, 2015 7:27 pm

mahenoguy wrote:I didn't address the deficiencies you noted Leadcouncil because I didn't actually see them as deficiencies . there are many things I loved about this film...most of which have already been mentioned by others in previous posts so "Ditto "is about all I can say without going over old ground . I have always loved Guy Pierce ...his scope as an actor is really quite brilliant and speaks for itself . I could see we were never going to agree about this film so I didn't see the point in having an academic debate over Apples V's Oranges . We are obviously seeking different things from our cinematic experiences which is fine with me , doesn't make either of our opinions Invalid though . Don't think because I didn't give a scene by scene review that I payed any less attention than you , I guess my expectations are just not as high as yours...which to me ( no offence intended ) seem a little unrealistic . I feel The Rover is subtly stylised to try and lift the viewer out of reality and into it's world and any conceived notion that this makes it unrealistic is sadly missing the point . I'm not claiming it's an arthouse film , but what would be the point in making it if it was exactly the same as Mad Max ? it would just be another shitty rip-off . It is a little funny that you might call "Noted Deficiencies "in Mad max "Minor editing stuff " or " plot holes which are largely irrelevant "yet completely write this film off for the same reason . As I'm sure I have mentioned before...most of us on here saw Mad Max as kids and comparing it to films we have watched with more cynical adult eyes .


Eh, looking at Mad Max - made in the late 1970s on a shoestring budget of $100,000 as we all know - part of the masterpiece is that it is quite believable with very few editing errors and nothing implausible or impossible. We can really try to pick MM apart, say the rig hitting Toe Cutter with Max right on his tail, and Max veers off at the last second. But that is easily explainable because we SAW Max do the same thing to Night Rider. Max's attention was forward and TC was looking behind him, so Mad had the extra time to react whereas TC did not. The handgun shot long distance to Max's knee... again unlikely but not impossible. Other examples like the super charger are not mechanically impossible because nothing is mechanically impossible. The actors had real motivations. The characters were empathetic. The physics were real. Chases and gunplay were realistic.... Keep in mind that in today's dollars, MM cost about $500,000.

Now looking at the Rover, I'll ask you re-read my criticisms and think thoughtfully about the film. The Rover cost $12 MILLION, or 24 times what MM would have cost in todays dollars. And the issues jumped off the film at me, nearly every few minutes I had issues with the mechanics, acting, believability, probabilities, behaviors, motivations, etc.
leadcounsel
 
Posts: 166
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2014 12:11 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General Movie Discussion

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 2 guests


cron