MovieChat Forums > Alienated (2015) Discussion > You people are pathetic

You people are pathetic

posted 8 years ago by Thrill_KillZ
17 replies | jump to latest

I was well on my way to watching this potentially entertaining flick, but what to my wondering eyes did appear, but 12 puppet account reviews and my joy disappeared.

Filmmakers/friends FFS find some integrity, that 1/10 vote in the top 1000 voters, that is my gift to you, take it, love it, cherish it and maybe learn from it. 

Edit: So in the spirit of not rating films I have not seen, even if it was shilled to death by douche bags, I attempted to watch this proclaimed masterpiece and I honestly have to say that I watched this for the full 80 minutes and the way these people were delivering their lines to each other, it was like they were seriously mentally handicapped(but weren't). Absolutely NOTHING happens, NOTHING, just bad dialogue. That just might have been the worst 80 minutes of film I've ever bared witness too in 10,000 films, like the Halley's comet of bad film. They should have a -10/10 option coded in just for this film.

Alienated is what viewers will feel after watching this drivel.

[–] TheCountDracula 8 years ago

Dude, well spotted! Why are the filmmakers stooping so low as to review their own movie? 10/10?

💀 "That fückin' Flowers." - Lucas Davenport

[–] abbycatt 8 years ago

Oh yeah! Bravo, you sleuths! They obviously also made fake websites to write fake positive reviews for this movie. Oh, and they also created fake film festivals to give themselves 7 fake awards. You guys are geniuses.

[–] abbycatt 8 years ago

Oh my god, I am SO SICK of your people getting online to post about how all good reviews for a movie you disliked must be fake accounts from people associated with the film. None of you great revealers EVER have proof of such a thing. Nope. All we get is your amazing hunch that since *you* didn't like movie, nobody possibly could. Prove what you say, or STFU.

This film played at festivals and the IMDB page links to 5 external reviews, all of which are positive. Are you suggesting that those reviews are people who fabricated entire websites just to get in a positive review for a film they worked on? Or are these reviewers paid off?

This film won 7 different awards at festivals around the world. Was this also part of the conspiracy of the filmmakers?

You're an idiot.

[–] TheCountDracula 8 years ago

Oh, and they also created fake film festivals to give themselves 7 fake awards. You guys are geniuses.

Nah, we just have experience.

💀 "That fückin' Flowers." - Lucas Davenport

[–] abbycatt 8 years ago

...with no evidence. But by all means, keep posting the cliche comments.

[–] TheCountDracula 8 years ago

While we don't have any direct evidence, what we do have is compelling circumstantial evidence that strongly suggests that the reviews are not 100% kosher. Thrillz Killz and I have real-world knowledge of such things. We are both experienced movie critics (no, not user reviews on IMDb) and festival judges. Based on our experience we can make an educated guess on who wrote said reviews.

This is the finest example I've ever encountered. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2366127/reviews One of our writers had to withdraw his review after getting death threats from the Hells Angels because he dared to point out the reviews were all bogus. The film was terrible!

I know this has nothing directly to do with the matter at hand, but are you religious? Do you not believe, say, the Theory of Evolution is real, for example? I do actually have a point with these questions.

💀 "That fückin' Flowers." - Lucas Davenport

[–] ofumalow 8 years ago

Abbycat, no one is disputing that the film has had positive reception at festivals and has good external reviews here. But the filmmakers are shooting themselves in the foot by having a dozen "user comment" reviews from people who all mysteriously, miraculously have never posted an IMBD review before--always a reliable sign of "puppet" reviewers, or whatever you want to call them.

Seriously, overkill in this department is going to turn off viewers like me who are otherwise intrigued by the movie. Why can't filmmakers just wait for real people to post comments, rather than stack the deck with their friends, family, crew and aliases? Because it's always obvious. Users know how to click on a poster's name and see their history--and what conclusion to draw when, surprise!, there is no history before the movie they all now happen to be praising to the skies. Your own evading that fact by simply repeating "There's no evidence" and citing the external praise (which, again, no one has disputed) sounds like just another insider ploy that doesn't do the film or our skepticism any favors, either.

[–] TerrorDementia 8 years ago

I like it when the review comes from someone who was in or worked on the movie --- and they're dumb enough to use their own name to create the account to write the review.

What Abbycat doesn't understand is that if people like me see that virtually all the 9 or 10 reviews are obviously (or likely) from people involved with the film (or related to those people), it is a definite NO WATCH. After all, if the film was really that good, why do all these people with a stake in it need to come and rate it the highest any film could possibly be rated?

Sorry Abbycat, I always pass on those films, because they've already shown that the film cannot stand on its own.

[–] Thrill_KillZ 8 years ago

None of you great revealers EVER have proof of such a thing. Nope. All we get is your amazing hunch

Prove what you say

Their IMDb profiles say it all dear child, as you see every single one of their IMDb profiles are COMPLETELY BLANK aside from this stupendous film.

"Critic Reviews" are often pity reviews given by anyone with a website who you freely distributed your film out to. If something is crap it should be 100% unbiasedly reviewed as such and there are tons of .whatevers that dish out rosy reviews in order to keep getting more free entertainment. I quit writing on IMDb because of the utter lack of authenticity for the user reviews on this site, take the 12 user reviews posted here as a perfect example. This site has lost credibility because of this, every film that this occurs on chips away further credibility, currently the site administrators are not monitoring this properly, hopefully soon measures will be taken to stop this kind of exploitation.

Do you have any idea of how many podunk film festivals there are? This film got inflated attention due to the fact one it's three cast members died right around the time it played, yes that sh!t happens. It's kind of like paying your respects to an actor who was well known for having been in the business for 35+ years.

When 17 reviews are in for a film with 22 votes something is amiss, even a dimwitted little soul like yourself can see that I hope.

Your views and words are very naive, consider yourself educated and piss off.

[–] TheCountDracula 8 years ago

Dayam!! You told dat crazy sympathy poster!

💀 "That fückin' Flowers." - Lucas Davenport

[–] abbycatt 8 years ago

No. I am new to his planet and I am totally unaware that there are endless amounts of small, insignificant film festivals. Haha! I fail to see how that's relevant here though.

London Film Awards festival has been around for around 60 years and is one of the world's leading international film festivals.

Cinema on the Bayou Film Festival has been around for 11 years and is a continuation of another film festival that was on going during years previous to 2005. It is connected to long standing distro companies in Canada, and the Canadian Film Board. The festival has shown HUNDREDS of films over the many years it's been in existence.

AND.... the Los Angeles Independent Film Festival Awards has been around since 1995 and is a qualifying festival for the Academy Awards!

So, maybe next time do some research before explaining to me something totally irrelevant to the subject at hand. Idiot.

[–] Thrill_KillZ 8 years ago

Did You Know?

Trivia
The final onscreen appearance of 'Taylor Negron'.

The man died in January 2015, this got attention, hell they even went as far as putting on the main IMDb page.

You wouldn't get the big picture here if it was tattooed on your forehead. Your rant about the reviews was obliterated by fact yet you're too damn stupid to know when to STFU

[–] scyphe 8 years ago

You may visit 50 film festivals a month. That doesn't change the fact that some of us have experience with spotting fake accounts/reviews (with ease at that in this case since the insincerity of the accounts, reviews (a single review for the accounts in this case) and account-#'s were blatantly obvious in many ways).

I'm not even talking about the movie or it's qualities (if any), I'm joining those who are tired of seeing so many movies with fake reviews to inflate the score. Whatever the reason be it economical or increasing status it ruins what's left of the trust when it comes to reading reviews and scores on IMDb.

[–] dreamcop25 8 years ago

I have to agree, Have you seen the movies like the Scyfy original movies or their like. Someone gives them great ratings and we all know by heart, Yes they are so bad they are fun but are far from Great movies (def not more than 4 stars out of ten or what not). It shouldn't take much to nitce the fake accounts unless the person protecting the fake accounts is friends or has worked for said director or company and looking to keep in good graces (IE typical Hwood brown noser)

[–] ATMinotaur 8 years ago

It does look suspicious, as especially when all or the majority at least the good reviews are from people who have joined imdb between 4 and 7 months ago.

[–] kay_rock 8 years ago

You can ALWAYS tell the difference between a shill review and a real review. You can usually even tell which participant's family/friend/agent is writing the review.

Movies are IQ tests; the IMDB boards are how people broadcast their score.

[–] CaliGuy310 8 years ago

I made the mistake of watching half of this poorly written and produced film. You guys correct about the reviews being fake. Filmmakers NEED to STOP doing this crap! This is 2016, not 1996. Shady marketing tricks for shady filmmakers.