Mrs Brown's Boys D'Movie

Zubeneschamali

OldRio wrote: »

It seems someone likes it.

Not Mark Kermode, anyhow (warning, review contains audio clip from the movie which is pathetically unfunny).

OldRio

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Not Mark Kermode, anyhow (warning, review contains audio clip from the movie which is pathetically unfunny).

£4.3 million on one side. Crushing review by Kermode on the other.


Life must be so difficult for O'Carroll.;)

Tipsy McSwagger

JP Liz V1 wrote: »

I saw Glenda Gilson mentioning it in the same league as The Snapper :eek:

The Snapper has aged really badly so she is probably right that both films are shyte.

Zubeneschamali

OldRio wrote: »

Life must be so difficult for O'Carroll.;)

Good luck to him, he seems like a good guy, and I'm pleased that Mrs. Brown is such a success for him.

e_e

I think the people crying out "begrudgery!!!!" need to realize that there's a difference between hating a film and hating the people who've made it. I have no issue Brendan O'Carroll being successful and beloved by audiences but it doesn't mean that I or anyone else can't legitimately dislike the film/show. It's very frustrating to me how people are put into boxes for their opinions and that goes towards both those who love and hate this franchise.

ancapailldorcha

e_e wrote: »

I think the people crying out "begrudgery!!!!" need to realize that there's a difference between hating a film and hating the people who've made it. I have no issue Brendan O'Carroll being successful and beloved by audiences but it doesn't mean that I or anyone else can't legitimately dislike the film/show. It's very frustrating to me how people are put into boxes for their opinions and that goes towards both those who love and hate this franchise.

There've been similarly awful films that haven't drawn the amount of hatred this film has. I've not "cried begrudgery" but over 95% of the posts here are people saying that it's not their cup of tea or worse. I tend to completely ignore threads about films I've no intention whatsoever of seeing.

e_e

What are some of those "similarly awful" movies? I doubt they were as insanely over-marketed as this one too. You tend to even feel stronger in your dislike for something when it's all over the radio, tv, cinema, internet and plastered on public places.

I say this as somebody who is so far indifferent to the Mrs Brown thing too, but I've had similar experience of strongly disliking a movie/show and then having to put up with it repeatedly. Let them dislike it all they want, it's not gonna invalidate your like of it.

ancapailldorcha

e_e wrote: »

What are some of those "similarly awful" movies? I doubt they were as insanely over-marketed as this one too. You tend to even feel stronger in your dislike for something when it's all over the radio, tv, cinema, internet and plastered on public places.

I say this as somebody who is so far indifferent to the Mrs Brown thing too, but I've had similar experience of strongly disliking a movie/show and then having to put up with it repeatedly. Let them dislike it all they want, it's not gonna invalidate your like of it.

I tend completely ignore and forget about them. The Keith Lemon film springs to mind.

I take your point regarding the marketing. I think I saw a couple of ads on buses and the TV for Keith Lemon and that was more or less it. I don't watch TV anymore as the current house doesn't have one and the local buses don't have a huge amount of ads, or maybe it's been pushed a lot more in Ireland.

e_e

Ah yeah that seemed to be a special kind of awful though. Even Kermode made a point of saying that Mrs Brown was superior.

To be honest, I find this show perfectly okay for ridicule. It reminds of the spoofed comedy "When the Whistle Blows" in Extras. Replace any criticism for that fake comedy for Mrs Brown's Boys and you wouldn't notice the difference.

sabat

I just find it depressing that those 800,000 viewers also have the right to vote.

sabat

sabat wrote: »

I just find it depressing that those 800,000 viewers also have the right to vote.

Ah in fairness comedy, like most things, is utterly subjective. I can appreciate what a good film is, but I also enjoy watching Con Air. It doesn't make them bad people for liking it.

Ipso

Tipsy McSwagger wrote: »

The Snapper has aged really badly so she is probably right that both films are shyte.

I saw it not too long ago and it still was excellent. Gilson should stick to acting surprised in front of cameras.

constitutionus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Not Mark Kermode, anyhow (warning, review contains audio clip from the movie which is pathetically unfunny).

i love listening to mark but the guy seriously has a problem with pure entertainment.

theres not a single film i liked in the last decade that he found tolerable.

personally i feel sorry for the guy. been a double whammy for him . mrs browns boys last week is like a dry run for this week....

....the new transformers film.

Zubeneschamali

constitutionus wrote: »

theres not a single film i liked in the last decade that he found tolerable.

He liked "Pacific Rim", while admitting it was a big dumb popcorn movie.

e_e

constitutionus wrote: »

i love listening to mark but the guy seriously has a problem with pure entertainment.

This is just not true at all.

Hell 2 of his top 3 films of 2010 were huge blockbusters.

constitutionus

name one that not a del torro film.

and by the way i didnt say blockbuster, i said "entertainment".

e_e

constitutionus wrote: »

name one that not a del torro film.

and by the way i didnt say blockbuster, i said "entertainment".

Films that were designed to pull in and entertain a large audience yes.

What's your definition of entertainment? I can't help but think your argument is flawed when you put MBB up as the standard.

Zubeneschamali

constitutionus wrote: »

and by the way i didnt say blockbuster, i said "entertainment".

Ah, so a movie about giant robots fighting alien dinosaurs is too snooty and highbrow to be "entertainment"?

e_e

I kinda hate the word "entertainment" in regards to movies because all it really means is "This distracted my attention for the runtime". It's not really a great thing in itself, it just means bells and whistles with no imagination or passion behind it to me. It makes me think of something bland and calculated like X Factor instead of a film being genuinely thrilling, scary, engaging or funny like some of the best movies out there.

constitutionus

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Ah, so a movie about giant robots fighting alien dinosaurs is too snooty and highbrow to be "entertainment"?

ask kermode.

he bearly liked it. and thought it sucked when it got to that part.

Zubeneschamali

Kermode thinks Toy Story is the best film trilogy ever made!

Fine, he doesn't like the movies you like. He doesn't like all the movies I like, either.

But he certainly isn't down on "entertainment".

constitutionus

and toy story is common fare ?

you dont seem to be getting what im saying. im not saying he's against blockbusters or sucessful fiilms , im saying he's got no notion of what general entertainment is .

he simply doesnt get why someone would like something like the OP. Mrs Browns boys. and thats cause its pure old fashioned comedic entertainment.

itll be the same this week with transformers. i hate what bays did to that franchise but its undeniably visually entertaining. thats what the audience is going for, and thats the stuff kermode goes asleep at.

johnny_ultimate

You know why critics have high standards? Because they have to watch everything - from the small arthouse releases to the major blockbusters. So they're in a good position to be able to call out the dreck and separate what they feel is the good stuff, and frankly it's important they're there to try and flag the best and criticise the worst. Obviously it's all subjective from viewer to viewer and critic to critic, making the whole argument a bit redundant: Kermode's tastes are different to all of ours. But if you're hopping between screenings of Spring in a Small Town or The Golden Dream and Mrs Brown's Boys over the course of a week, naturally you're going to notice a pretty different level of quality there and respond accordingly.

And just to clarify - difficult, challenging, deathly serious films are 'entertaining', just in a different way. I often feel watching some brainless genre nonsense has been a complete waste of my time since I got nothing but a few empty thrills from it, whereas I could spend long hours watching a very slow and sombre film and come out feeling refreshed and engaged in a far more satisfying way. And it can be the total opposite too, depending on the quality of the film in question.

Finally, Kermode is the wrong person to be picking on - of all the major and respected critics out there, he has something very close to a populist perspective, and won't dismiss blockbusters or genre fare out of hand. I'd call him a 'glass half full' sort of critic. If he gets annoyed or bothered or otherwise animated by a film every so often, that comes out of his clear passion for all things film. For every film he rips apart, there's another that he celebrates with a childlike enthusiasm.

e_e

constitutionus wrote: »

but its undeniably visually entertaining.

I'd say that's at best very deniable, unless your definition of visually entertaining is "headache-inducing and incomprehensible cluster****."

The problem with you constituting (very apt username in that case) what is and isn't entertaining is that it's all relative and subjective. Some people find great cinematography, themes, story and performances more entertaining than the very broad humor of MBB. Even speaking personally what is often put under the umbrella of "entertainment" is just the opposite for me.

AnonoBoy

constitutionus wrote: »

theres not a single film i liked in the last decade that he found tolerable.

I'd say that says more about your taste in films that any problems on Mark Kermode's part to be honest.

Sandyred7

Brendan o' Carroll is a genius. He makes a lot of people laugh their pants off while he is laughing all the way to the bank. Tell me, what is wrong with that? Fair play to him I say!

Sam Kade

Sandyred7 wrote: »

Brendan o' Carroll is a genius. He makes a lot of people laugh their pants off while he is laughing all the way to the bank. Tell me, what is wrong with that? Fair play to him I say!

A lot, people who laugh at that tripe are very easily amused, I fear for their sanity

sh1tstirrer

Sam Kade wrote: »

A lot, people who laugh at that tripe are very easily amused, I fear for their sanity

I vote this post of the day

Shane-KornSpace

Saw the movie today and I hated the whole experience.
The audience were annoying. Guy beside me answered his phone. Couldn't believe it.

Then when Irma Bike came on to the screen, he looks and me and says "Thats your wan from fair city".

Wow.

The jumping from location to location during the chase scene really ruined it for me. In fact, that whole chase scene ruined the movie completely. One minute she's in North Dublin City, then in fooking Dundrum!