MovieChat Forums > Mary (2005) Discussion > This film prooves how flawed imdb is

This film prooves how flawed imdb is

posted 15 years ago by jasongrimshaw
6 replies | jump to latest

While of course I am not denying anyone's right to dislike this film, the fact that there are umpteen reviews claiming it does not make sense or even is incomprehensible shows that in publishing user reviews, sites like iMdb are actively damaging film making by allowing people who do not understand or do not engage with material a forum to insinuate that a piece of work has no value.

Don't get me wrong, Im not saying anyone should necessarily like this film, and I know I'll get the enevitable response of "everyone is entitled to express their opinion" or that Im being elitist (perhaps, is that necessarily a bad thing?). But allowing people to comment out of context does damage the reputation of a film and film maker. What qualifies anyone to publish a comment on this site?

[–] polysicsarebest 15 years ago

Hm. You raise some good points, but imdb is kind of a reflection of "reality"... note it says "user reviews", not professional critic reviews... meaning your buddy could review this film. I agree that the imdb is such a huge public forum that it is potentially damaging for a film... but people don't have to base whether they want to see this film or not on someone's opinion either. THat's also their choice.

[–] murad23 14 years ago

Jason,
you ask: "What qualifies anyone to publish a comment on this site?"
In response one might ask: "What qualifies someone to make a extremely poor film?"

Frankly the director ought to be taken ut and tarred and feathered for such poor work. Look at Juliette Binoche's performance. Without a doubt, the worst of her career even if she is on screen for just a few minutes.

No wonder this film was ignored even in its home country of France.

[–] Tyler_Durden_pt 14 years ago

I think it's a very good film. I don't get the IMDb rating.

Then again, "The Usual Suspects" is a very poor film (it's terribly flawed, pretentious and pointless) and it's considered one of the best ever by IMDbers. "Donnie Darko" is a pretentious mess and it's also highly voted.

"Mary" is the film "The Da Vinci Code" fans would love if they had more than half a brain. It's a reflection upon serious and interesting historical and religious issues, and it's filled with great acting.

So it's really a matter of taste and opinion. And catholics voting 1, I guess.

[–] jasongrimshaw 14 years ago

The film was given a very limited release in France but won very positive reviews.

It won several awards at the Venice Film Festival.

Finally in an interview for The Village Voice, Binoche talks about how good she thinks this film is:

http://www.villagevoice.com/2009-09-08/film/fall-guide-juliette-binoch e-talks-paris-and-dancing

Murad, I think your post above is proof of exactly my opening point.

[–] przgzr 13 years ago

It's still a matter of democracy.

Aside from the fact that I agree with your attitude, I disagree with your post. A couple of days ago I found a thread started by a poster who was defending a killer - in fact, demanding that people stop "harassing" him on these boards quarter of century after his crime - and she was attacked in dozens of replies, with almost not a single peaceful and friendly word. All those replies were in the range from calling her a moron to telling her to go and live with him so she would be killed as well. I defended her right to express her opinion (not defending the murderer!), she should be at least free to post her opinion if (literally) hundreds of posters on different threads are free to compete in finding the most cruel and bloodthirsty punishment for the killer.

Now I must avoid hypocrisy and have to say that this is an open board too. Unfortunately by far most of the populations can't like this movie. It need enough brain, it needs education, it needs free mind, free spirit, it needs so much that brainwashed audience of soap-operas and plotless action movies can never have. Modern Hollywood producers have created a worldwide dispersed audience that makes the standard and (not so) slowly turns movie-lovers to zombie-like creatures who will be able to consume only their endless empty clones of (already) empty movies.

And most of IMDb posters belong to this hollywoodised audience (in fact, they are still among the high class, elite among them, they at least know to write and use computers). So it must be expected that movies like "Mary" won't get many positive reviews. However, those rare still non-infected individuals (like the few in "28 days later") can tell from the style of the reviews who has written it. If they say that a movie is a rubbish and has to be avoided or even better burnt in the open fire, you'll know the posters level. If they give bad marks because the movie is slow and impossible to understand, has a story line hard to follow, check his other posts, that's someone who probably praises every Segal-Lundgren-Stallone-etc work of art. And then decide which review you'll trust. As most of readers preference equals the former poster's ideals, they can't like movie like Mary anyway, so why bother with such posts? You and me and people like us will know how to distinguish them from reviews that will really tell us something important.

[–] Felidire 13 years ago

The film made perfect sense. Personally, I thought it was so blatantly horrible, unstructured, weak acting, bad plot, poor script, and to top it all off, the worst ending i've seen in at least a decade - and i've seen a lot of bad endings..

I rarely come on here to vote, but this one absolutely merited a 1/10.

The best part of this movie... Was seeing the facial expressions of my family & friends, when I told them that it got 6 stars.