Crazy Movie Review Site

[debrand]

purityandprecision.com/2011/04/movies-by-genre.html

Alice in Wonderland

Alice in Wonderland is a bizarre Burtonesque mishmash of sly occultism, morbidity and half-articulated bad philosophy. While in another movie some of the questionable elements might have been resolved by appealing to fantasy, this one heads off that possibility with Alice’s climactic realization that Wonderland (including its occultism, morbidity and bad philosophy) is real.

Reading some of these reviews, I wonder if the writer comprehends the difference between reality and fiction. Of course, the character in a fictional work is written so that they don't usually realize that their world is not real. I am not certain what this particular critic wants to happen in Alice in Wonderland

Despicable Me

In this review, the writer complains that the main character is too bad and then complains that the little girls don't do what he wants them to do. If someone is bad, why would it be good for the little girls to obey him?

Fiddler on the Roof

Antisemitic. It isn't that he just dislikes the movie but the review is very anti semitic.

The religion, however, is not only not Christianity, it’s hostile to Christianity, and the movie’s heroes are not merely non-Christian, they’re avowedly anti-Christ. Portraying a destructive religion in such a strongly positive light that it’s impossible to like the movie without compromising essential Christian beliefs, Fiddler on the Roof is nothing more than unbelief disguised as faith, and legalism disguised as tradition.

and

This means that any religious expression on the part of the Jewish characters is not a positive element, but an offensive negative element, just as serious and just as wrong as any other false religion.

The Hobbit

Gandalf declares that “Saruman believes it is only great power that can hold evil in check, but that is not what I have found. I have found that it is the small, everyday deeds of ordinary folk that keep the darkness at bay, small acts of kindness and love.†This is balderdash, and worse, unchristian. Ultimately, only God can hold evil in check, and that most certainly is “great powerâ€.

:evil-eye:

As an aside, Gandalf’s statement that “true courage is about knowing, not when to take a life, but when to spare one,†is unbiblical and nonsensical. Time after time, God commands people to be “courageous†as they take the lives of their enemies (not as they spare them).4 Also, “courage†isn’t about knowing what to do at all.

Shesh. Next Gandalf will be telling those hobbits that they should turn the cheek when someone slaps them.

Mulan

For: pervasive worship of false gods, pervasive cross dressing, filial rebellion, moral confusion, comical suicide, and feminism

[16strong]

From the Hunger Games:

As an aside, feminism also shows up in The Hunger Games. For much of the movie, guys and girls are treated as if they were the same thing—namely, guys. However, both brains and skills end up being disproportionately greater on the female side, and while Peeta is shown to have tremendous physical strength (far beyond what a female could naturally attain), his key ability is completely discarded in favor of numerous displays of Katniss’ prowess.

:shock:

[browngrl]

Turns out a lot of my favourite movies are not Biblical. So I could use this site by picking movies they hated.

[chissprincess]

I never thought I would see the day when someone would criticize The Hobbit and Lord of the Rings for this kind of stuff. Personally I would rather have Gandalf as the one against whom I calibrate my moral compass than the God who heads this blogger's version of Christianity.

[sea_gale]

Check out their standards. purityandprecision.com/2010/01/standards.html I can't think of anything that might get past that.

Language

G-d

G-d

G-d

G-d

f-cking

G-dd-mn

d-mn

d-mn

d-mn

d-mn

d-mn

d-mn

d-mn

d-mn

h-ll

h-ll

h-ll

h-ll

h-ll

h-ll

a--

a--

a--

a--

a--

b-stard

b-stard

bullsh-t

[sparkles]

Some fundies have really made an art form out of offense collecting.

[artdecades]

Oh shit, I am going to go down the rabbit hole on this site.

Also, they are against the words "golly" "gosh". I thought gosh was fundy approved.

[artdecades]

This site is pretty amazing and snarkworthy. I want to note that while they will censor words like hell, damn, god, and shit, they use the n-word without censorship. They also use the words "n*gro" and "colored" seemingly without realizing these are also slurs (see the Lincoln review). good christian values

some of my personal favorite highlights so far

About Back to the Future

Marty is able to erase humans with souls (including himself), who were living in 1985, from existence - leaving them to annihilation, not an afterlife.

Batman Begins

There are thousands of bats.

and? why is that an issue?

Hunger Games

Because even with his known cruelty Katniss has no legal or moral right to kill him, this is at worst murder, and at best a positively-portrayed form of assisted suicide.

actually, within the universe, she has more than enough legal right to kill, she is encouraged to do so

The Lion King

One of the (male) comic relief characters creates a diversion by confessedly “dress[ing] in dragâ€, wearing a skirt and a flower over his ear. The cross dressing is completely unjustifiable.

Les Mis

The main character, Valjean, is portrayed as having been forced to steal bread to save another person’s life. Another character, Fantine, is portrayed as being forced to take up prostitution for the same reason. These and the other situations in the various characters’ lives, where they are forced to choose between two sins—no other options—are fictional, and are false. God is faithful, and he will not let us be tempted beyond our ability, but he has promised that with the temptation he will also provide the way of escape. In real life, there is always a way to escape sin. Les Misérables, in excusing the characters’ sins simply because the movie makers gave them no alternatives, calls God a liar and a promise-breaker.

the mental gymnastics to reach this conclusion, jeez

The Matrix

Neo is a professional computer hacker. He is a professional criminal. He admits to being guilty of “virtually every computer crime we have a law for.†In 1999, when the movie takes place, computer crimes would include piracy, theft, fraud, hacking or intercepting private information, destroying personal, commercial and government computer systems, and distributing child pornography - and, before the story even begins, Neo has committed “virtually†all of them.

Neo is a hacker, so he is also a child pornographer. OBVIOUSLY

[DefraudedByPlaid]

Since the Botkins haven't told me whether or not it's okay to see Frozen, maybe I'll find the answer here.

[16strong]

Oh shit, I am going to go down the rabbit hole on this site.

Also, they are against the words "golly" "gosh". I thought gosh was fundy approved.

Gosh begins with the same two letters as God, which makes it automatically derivative. Can't use any word as an exclamation that starts with G or J. :roll:

[Trynn]

Since the Botkins haven't told me whether or not it's okay to see Frozen, maybe I'll find the answer here.

See it. SEE IT. SEEEEEEEEE IIIIIIIIIIIT.

I will seriously go all caps lock ragey if the Botkins say anything stupid about that movie.

[GeoBQn]

The religion, however, is not only not Christianity, it’s hostile to Christianity, and the movie’s heroes are not merely non-Christian, they’re avowedly anti-Christ. Portraying a destructive religion in such a strongly positive light that it’s impossible to like the movie without compromising essential Christian beliefs, Fiddler on the Roof is nothing more than unbelief disguised as faith, and legalism disguised as tradition.

Yes, how dare the Jewish characters be hostile to Christianity when their Christian neighbors allowed them to live in peace and harmony in Anatevka forever, with no problems whatsoever.

Oh, wait . . .

[GeoBQn]

Brace yourselves. She wrote a review of The Diary of Anne Frank.

The poor family relationships started getting to me at that point; not so much because they were so poor, but because they were so irritating. Anne’s mother has to appeal to Mr. Frank to get Anne to do anything, and Anne can’t get along well with her mother or her sister; Peter’s mother teases him coarsely; her husband mocks her; she tells him to “Shut upâ€.

Yes, surely this was the author's problem for creating such irritating characters. Who wrote this again?

Again, I generally like to think that character flaws will be addressed during the course of a movie, and my hope is often justified. But when, in the next scene, Peter’s mother wishes aloud, in front of everyone, that she had met Mr. Frank before she married her husband, and then brazenly kisses Mr. Frank on the mouth… I just couldn’t take any more. I quit watching The Diary of Anne Frank after about fifteen minutes. I’d already filled half a page with negative content, even with my small handwriting, and there were still two and a half hours left in the movie. It wasn’t a requested review, so I didn’t have any obligation to keep watching for anyone else’s sake, and it seemed to me that, even if I knew somehow that things got better after that point, there wasn’t any kind of turn-around the characters could undergo that would help me stomach Anne’s disrespect and ostentation, the grating family clashes, the language and Peter’s mother—all put together—any better.

It's about people who died in the Holocaust. How could things possibly get any fucking better?

[indygirl76]

Oh shit, I am going to go down the rabbit hole on this site.

Also, they are against the words "golly" "gosh". I thought gosh was fundy approved.

purityandprecision.com/2010/02/minced-oaths-and-what-they-mean.html

Please see the above (CRAZY SAUCE LONG) list of "minced oaths," which are apparently just as unacceptable as the real thing... :geek:

[crazyforkate]

Christian movie reviews are my secret guilty pleasure, and this one sounds like a doozy. How can they get so much...wrong? Just so totally wrong? An incredible example of not seeing the forest for the trees.

[happy atheist]

From 101 Dalmatians

A puppy sticks out its tongue at someone.

:pink-shock: :naughty:

[permanentproblem]

I posted about this site in the "Fundies and A Christmas Carol" thread. As soon as I saw this thread's title, I knew which movie site it was going to be! She hates tomboys too, and the fact that the girl in The Polar Express was encouraged to be a leader. It's sad, because the reviewer seems smart (which she would probably take as an insult), but it's interesting to see how their minds work. I started "reviewing" everything through their eyes when I read too many reviews. Nothing is sacred.

[Curious]

I can't imagine living in a world where watching the 101 Dalmatians is not allowed because a CARTOON puppy sticks it's tongue out.

This person does understand that these are for entertainment and the cartoon puppy is not a real puppy bent on the destruction of the human race, right?

What is she doing watching all these evil movies that have magic and whatnot in them anyway? Some of the titles you guys quoted were pretty mainstream.

[crazyforkate]

Can someone please please please try to convince her that The Wolf of Wall Street is a good family film???

[lilith]

Can someone please please please try to convince her that The Wolf of Wall Street is a good family film???

She'd have a heart attack in the first five minutes. How on earth would she explain snorting coke from a sex worker's ass in a polite manner?

ETA- a review site I sometimes watch mentioned that someone had brought a pre schooler to the screening they attended. Now I used to take my nursing babies to mums & bubs screenings of adult movies, but a four year old to The Wolf of Wallstreet? Admittedly, most of it would go over the kids head, but it still seems a bit of a bad choice.

[16strong]

She'd have a heart attack in the first five minutes. How on earth would she explain snorting coke from a sex worker's ass in a polite manner?

ETA- a review site I sometimes watch mentioned that someone had brought a pre schooler to the screening they attended. Now I used to take my nursing babies to mums & bubs screenings of adult movies, but a four year old to The Wolf of Wallstreet? Admittedly, most of it would go over the kids head, but it still seems a bit of a bad choice.

My parents used to take me to stuff like that (and horror films too!) all the time when I was little. They'd just cover my eyes/ears at the bad parts. I turned out just fine. For the most part. :lol:

For additional reference, they didn't take me to the overtly sex-based romantic films or war movies. But if the movie was clearly fictional or only had 1 bad scene, I got to go.

[Mellanya]

She'd have a heart attack in the first five minutes. How on earth would she explain snorting coke from a sex worker's ass in a polite manner?

My friends and I all agreed that he was not snorting if OFF her ass, but blowing it INTO her ass. Now, of course it wasn't THAT visible, but did anyone else see it that way too?

[salex]

My parents used to take me to stuff like that (and horror films too!) all the time when I was little. They'd just cover my eyes/ears at the bad parts. I turned out just fine. For the most part. :lol:

For additional reference, they didn't take me to the overtly sex-based romantic films or war movies. But if the movie was clearly fictional or only had 1 bad scene, I got to go.

My parents took me to see "Bridge Over the River Kwai" when i was 2 or 3 (It was not remotely first run, but it was at a theater). A few years later I asked mom about some parts of the movie, and she was horrified that remembered it at all... she had assumed I was young enough I'd not "get" any of it....

[debrand]

I don't think that the reviewers really understand that fiction isn't real so they get upset over things that seem silly to most of us. Yes, I am certain that they understand the definition of fiction but they seem confused how fiction works. When my kids were young, there were moments when we had to tell each of them, "Just because something is funny on the television or movies, doesn't make it funny or cute in real life." It is part of being a parent in the modern world and raising kids that will function as future adults in this century. I don't forbid programs because they might influence my kids to do something silly like stick out their tongue at me. Instead I talk to my kids about why somethings are funny in some situations but not in others.

The review on Fiddler on the Roof was very antisemitic. The writer tried to side step her dislike of Judaism by saying that she is only against the religion but not the people(she worded it differently) That is the same thing that people try to tell homosexuals. "I don't dislike you. I just dislike everything about you and will accept you only when you change to be more like me."

[MrsYoungie]

Good grief (pardon the swear) she even found something objectionable in Greyfriars Bobby. Gone with the Wind is "not worth watching". I can't even with the Diary of Anne Frank review.

It's like a real life Rod & Tod Flanders has grown up and started reviewing movies. Does she think they should change the facts of a historical movie just to match her (totally bizarre) world view? What fantasy world does she live in?