1st real Bad Review - Bloody-disgusting.com

[MinionZombie]

If you came here just to complain and come back time and again about this single issue, then you're not welcome. We're a constructive community. If you came here to actually be a part of the forums, then go about your business, but for cryin' out loud leave this issue be, let it lie already.

[radiokill]

I had nothing to do with emails though. You're confusing 2 different people. I agree that he should be proud that he had a goal and accomplished it. I offered my advice as to what can help him the next time around...Make some shorts first, THEN take on the feature. It will realy help him work out the kinks and help him learn to tighten up the story. It's only my advice, but anyone that puts something out for judgment then they should expect that not everyone is going to like it for a variety of reasons. yeah, but after somebody spends 7 - 15 grand on something that they want to make to have something to be proud of and excercise their creativity and share something with the world, whose goal is not to make money but to act on passion....It's really harsh and lame to just say this sucks that sucks and that sucks cut and dry, in harsh way that is not constructive. it's gonna provoke anger and everyone knows that. and then to come here and i try to save face by defending your statements to the only people you know of that regularly interact w/ him on friendly terms, you're just being a b*tch. You really owe the man an apology.

[LouCipherr]

Wow, I've been gone for a few weeks and look what happens. I agree with Dj - I have no problems sucking up bad reviews. Sh*t happens, not everyone is going to like the film and we certainly didn't expect everyone who watched it to like it. Personally, I felt more people would dislike it than like it - and much to my surprise, I was totally incorrect. The problem we have here is, a reviewer on B-D who was either not paying attention to the movie when he watched it, or, he was so disinterested or turned off by the movie he didn't pay attention to what was going on and wrote a half-assed review. Either way, it's really no big deal. His review shows his compentancy as a reviewer, and I think that's all that needs to be said on the subject. The simple fact that he got over half of the facts wrong in his review should let the review and his ability to do said reviews stand clear. It's all good, and it doesn't bother me one bit. His abilities as a reviewer are crystal clear. When I see someone who gets over half of the facts wrong on a movie, I just chalk it up to "this guy doesn't know jack sh*t and didn't even pay attention to the movie" and I move on, totally discrediting the review. Allow me to reiterate for those who come here just to start trouble: I DO NOT discredit a review because it's BAD - I discredit reviews that show that the reviewer obviously had no interest to begin with or is just totally clueless. LC

[MinionZombie]

Well said Lou, well said. While Deadlands has its problems, there is nothing that can't be improved upon in future - especially with Deadlands 2. Personally, I found the feat of what you guys set out there to achieve was impressive, it was a ballsy move. There is refinement and finesse in areas to be found in due course ... but then again, if someone who is (or at least appears to be) completely jaded is tasked with reviewing it, then it's best left tossed aside. A bad review can be taken, but a bad review which is bad for the additional reason of being inaccurate and ill-considered doesn't deserve to be paid any measure of attention, well, okay a little bit of attention for some jolly good bitch slapping fun. That mistake-laden review was the Pan & Scan of film write-ups.

[Danny]

Wow, I've been gone for a few weeks and look what happens. I agree with Dj - I have no problems sucking up bad reviews. Sh*t happens, not everyone is going to like the film and we certainly didn't expect everyone who watched it to like it. Personally, I felt more people would dislike it than like it - and much to my surprise, I was totally incorrect. The problem we have here is, a reviewer on B-D who was either not paying attention to the movie when he watched it, or, he was so disinterested or turned off by the movie he didn't pay attention to what was going on and wrote a half-assed review. Either way, it's really no big deal. His review shows his compentancy as a reviewer, and I think that's all that needs to be said on the subject. The simple fact that he got over half of the facts wrong in his review should let the review and his ability to do said reviews stand clear. It's all good, and it doesn't bother me one bit. His abilities as a reviewer are crystal clear. When I see someone who gets over half of the facts wrong on a movie, I just chalk it up to "this guy doesn't know jack sh*t and didn't even pay attention to the movie" and I move on, totally discrediting the review. Allow me to reiterate for those who come here just to start trouble: I DO NOT discredit a review because it's BAD - I discredit reviews that show that the reviewer obviously had no interest to begin with or is just totally clueless. LC thats about all you need to say to end any argument right thar'

[N2NOther]

If you came here just to complain and come back time and again about this single issue, then you're not welcome. We're a constructive community. If you came here to actually be a part of the forums, then go about your business, but for cryin' out loud leave this issue be, let it lie already. I'm sorry...I didn't read the rule that said there was a limit to how many times an issue can be discussed negatively... Again, here's the thing, one last time...I came here to lurk, read the inaccurate comment, and felt it was only fair that one or the parties represent themselves on the issue since it was completely misleading. I then chose to defend my position after I was questioned. As long as it continues I should be allowed to respond...If the issue is dropped then I will drop it was well. I have, since joining, posted in a few other threads. There's not enough time in my day to really have a go at this forum yet. Sorry. yeah, but after somebody spends 7 - 15 grand on something that they want to make to have something to be proud of and excercise their creativity and share something with the world, whose goal is not to make money but to act on passion....It's really harsh and lame to just say this sucks that sucks and that sucks cut and dry, in harsh way that is not constructive. it's gonna provoke anger and everyone knows that. and then to come here and i try to save face by defending your statements to the only people you know of that regularly interact w/ him on friendly terms, you're just being a b*tch. You really owe the man an apology. I owe him an apology for stating clearly what I didn't like about the movie? Are you kidding? I NEVER said "this sucks and that sucks" in a harsh way. But I also am not going to say something positive about something I don't see much positive about. The thing I did see as a positive was the FX make-up and I said so. You interact with him as friends or on friendly terms. I interact with him as a consumer of his product. I would venture to guess that NO ONE here is 100% sunshine and smiles 24/7 when it comes to movies. I'd even bet that more than the fair share of you complain and criticize films here. So that's ok because the filmmaker isn't a member? Ok. It was never my intention to disrupt the forums but to clafiry a post that was misleading and false. With that I hope to be done.

[HLS]

If you came here just to complain and come back time and again about this single issue, then you're not welcome. We're a constructive community. If you came here to actually be a part of the forums, then go about your business, but for cryin' out loud leave this issue be, let it lie already. I agree. It is pointless and annoying.

[radiokill]

Originally Posted by Didn't See It Coming First off I would like the thank Gary for getting the DVD out so quickly...As soon as I got it, I popped it in... And so much for the positive...I appreciate the effort put into this but man, it was REALLY bad...The script, the acting, the editing, the sound, the score all of it just bad... Not one character worth rooting for, not a single chilling moment, nothing. I was honestly bored to tears and the actual movie is barely 60 minutes long...The side-story has the most awkward ending, hell the movie itself has an awkward ending... I'm not super lenient with low-budget films because there are SO many examples of great ones over the history of the horror film...Sure these guys put a lot of effort into it, but when the finished product is this bland and dull, well, it hardly seems worth it... I wanted to like it, **** I paid $15 for it, but ultimately I didn't...At all... The ONLY possible plus is the FX were decent...I know how tough that is and for something like this it's probably touger, none of them are standouts, but they did well with what they had... I actually feel bad saying this but I would only give this movie a 1/10...Take that as you will. Giving the "I can't believe how terrible this is" reaction to an average joe who spent as much money making something as an an automobile costs is quite harsh. You called his first name and thanked him for the speedy delivery, so you expected him to read it, and then you continue with your "You won't belive how bad this is" rant. So, yeah, that was harsh. So that's ok because the filmmaker isn't a member? if it's not under similar circumstances to this, then yeah!

[Danny]

I'm sorry...I didn't read the rule that said there was a limit to how many times an issue can be discussed negatively... which is why that friggin "why people dont like land of the dead" threads up to like 30 something pages now

[radiokill]

which is why that friggin "why people dont like land of the dead" threads up to like 30 something pages now

[LouCipherr]

It was never my intention to disrupt the forums but to clafiry a post that was misleading and false. With that I hope to be done. What's truly misleading is the B-D's reviewer and how he reviewed the film. He was wrong on more facts than he was correct. Dj just pointed to the article and stated that although he didn't mind a bad review (and I certainly don't either, as stated in my post above), this guy at B-D's review can't be taken seriously due to the inaccuracies of the facts in his review. So what, exactly, did you need to clarify? The fact that Dj exaggerated 10 pages instead of two in his one post? C'mon, regardless of your opinion of the movie, the review at B-D was so far off base how could it possibly be taken seriously? Hell, it wasn't even US that complained about it - it was people we knew in the movie and people involved that read it and said "WTF? Did this guy even WATCH the movie?" What did you expect Dj to do? Just sit back and say "whatever..." If the facts were ACCURATE, then I'm sure that's the stance Dj would've taken, however, that was not the case at all. Feel free to post all you want, but the bottom line is, that guy reviewed our film half-assed and got called out on it and then acted like a child even though Dj's initial response was very polite, even thanking him for taking the time to review the movie and saying we appreciated the fact they took that time to review it. If you don't like the movie, then that's perfectly fine and none of us would have a problem with that, but you seem to be defending someone who had NO CLUE WHATSOEVER about the film but surely didn't mind trashing it. When any filmmaker sees something like that, of course they're going to call them out on it - and Dj did - and very politely at first. It escalated because of the childish and immature behaviour and response from the bozo at B-D that did the review. Look, if you hate the movie, great. Say so, tell us why in a constructive , non-demeaning way so we know where the faults lie from your perspective, then sell it to someone else on ebay (or throw it in the trashcan) and let it be. There's no reason to drag this sh*t out for 3 pages trying to defend your position. You don't like it, that's ok, and none of us would give you any grief whatsoever if you posted a bad review - but to continue to drag it out like this? :shakes his head: to each his own I guess. The bottom line is this: BD's review was so inaccurate it cannot be taken seriously. You didn't care for the movie either, which is fine, and bad reviews we do not mind. What we do mind is inaccuracies in the review. Dj posts every review - good or bad, right here on HPotD. We're strong enough to take even the harshest review because we know damn well not everyone is going to like it... but get the fu*king facts right if you're going to do a review. (that is directed at BD, not you, N2NOther) The more I think about this, the more it makes me laugh. How would ya'll love it if I posted a review of Land of the Dead and said "man, it's a shame all the main characters bit the dust at the end" - don't you think I should be expecting some kinda backlash for an idiotic statement/review like that considering that's not even what happened in the movie? "Wow, Riley was a great sidekick, and Big Daddy was the best human character in the film!"

[N2NOther]

What's truly misleading is the B-D's reviewer and how he reviewed the film. He was wrong on more facts than he was correct. Dj just pointed to the article and stated that although he didn't mind a bad review (and I certainly don't either, as stated in my post above), this guy at B-D's review can't be taken seriously due to the inaccuracies of the facts in his review. So what, exactly, did you need to clarify? The fact that Dj exaggerated 10 pages instead of two in his one post? And that all I said was that the movie sucked and that should be good enough repeatedly until he pried my gripes out of me...I'm not that way at all, and seeing as how so many people like the movie, it's only fair that they see the other side of the coin. C'mon, regardless of your opinion of the movie, the review at B-D was so far off base how could it possibly be taken seriously? Hell, it wasn't even US that complained about it - it was people we knew in the movie and people involved that read it and said "WTF? Did this guy even WATCH the movie?" What did you expect Dj to do? Just sit back and say "whatever..." If the facts were ACCURATE, then I'm sure that's the stance Dj would've taken, however, that was not the case at all. I read the review today and it doesn't seem ALL that inaccurate save for the time it takes for Zombies to show up...And exaggeration of 9 minutes as if that is going to mean much in the grand scheme. Everything else seems pretty spot on GIVE OR TAKE...Actually it reveals a bit too much for my taste, even though I've already seen the film Feel free to post all you want, but the bottom line is, that guy reviewed our film half-assed and got called out on it and then acted like a child even though Dj's initial response was very polite, even thanking him for taking the time to review the movie and saying we appreciated the fact they took that time to review it. I'm not sure what the problem is when it concerns me. The only thing I share with the reviewer as far as I know is our opinion of the film. If you don't like the movie, then that's perfectly fine and none of us would have a problem with that, but you seem to be defending someone who had NO CLUE WHATSOEVER about the film but surely didn't mind trashing it. When any filmmaker sees something like that, of course they're going to call them out on it - and Dj did - and very politely at first. It escalated because of the childish and immature behaviour and response from the bozo at B-D that did the review. Wait. I must have missed a lot...Or one of us did. I'm not defending that guy other than the fact that he's entitled to his opinion. Whether you like how he worded it or not. Did he post here or are you refering to the email response? Look, if you hate the movie, great. Say so, tell us why in a constructive , non-demeaning way so we know where the faults lie from your perspective, then sell it to someone else on ebay (or throw it in the trashcan) and let it be. I did say why. But, everyone voices their opinion in a way that suits them. I never said that everyone involved wasn't talented or insulted anyone involved with the film at all. And I still haven't. There's no reason to drag this sh*t out for 3 pages trying to defend your position. You don't like it, that's ok, and none of us would give you any grief whatsoever if you posted a bad review - but to continue to drag it out like this? :shakes his head: to each his own I guess. It's only continuing for 3 pages because people keep commenting on it. A conversation will only last as long as it's geing engaged. The bottom line is this: BD's review was so inaccurate it cannot be taken seriously. You didn't care for the movie either, which is fine, and bad reviews we do not mind. What we do mind is inaccuracies in the review. Dj posts every review - good or bad, right here on HPotD. We're strong enough to take even the harshest review because we know damn well not everyone is going to like it... but get the fu*king facts right if you're going to do a review. (that is directed at BD, not you, N2NOther) Again, I'm not sure how much of the review is inaccurate at this point. From what I understand, it was changed? The more I think about this, the more it makes me laugh. How would ya'll love it if I posted a review of Land of the Dead and said "man, it's a shame all the main characters bit the dust at the end" - don't you think I should be expecting some kinda backlash for an idiotic statement/review like that considering that's not even what happened in the movie? "Wow, Riley was a great sidekick, and Big Daddy was the best human character in the film!" There is nothing in the review that is even remotely like that. At all. Let's try and be realistic here. Giving the "I can't believe how terrible this is" reaction to an average joe who spent as much money making something as an an automobile costs is quite harsh. You called his first name and thanked him for the speedy delivery, so you expected him to read it, and then you continue with your "You won't belive how bad this is" rant. So, yeah, that was harsh. Sorry but that wasn't even remotely harsh. I thanked him because I delt with him when I purchased his film and he sent out quickly. In case he was reading it and to let other people know that if they order it, it will get there fast. But what I said, while not positive, wasn't a rant. A harsh rant would have been "God this movie is a piece of **** and all those involved should die in a fire" etc. Now, I can't presume to predict what people will find offensive unless it's universally so, but no, it certainly wasn't harsh. But, truth be told, you think it's harsh. Judging from the Gary's response, I don't think he did. if it's not under similar circumstances to this, then yeah! Sorry I don't do double standards. That's ridiculous.

[DjfunkmasterG]

I read the review today and it doesn't seem ALL that inaccurate save for the time it takes for Zombies to show up...And exaggeration of 9 minutes as if that is going to mean much in the grand scheme. Everything else seems pretty spot on GIVE OR TAKE...Actually it reveals a bit too much for my taste, even though I've already seen the film That review was very inaccurate. In that he had Brian listed as Dave, and Dave Cooperman as a producer, not too mention many other details that were very inaccurate. The original review is posted in this thread. Only after pissing and moaning about the blatant incompetence of the reviewer did they finally correct the issues.

[MinionZombie]

Agreed, I was quite taken aback about how off that review was, I thought to myself - was this guy even awake when he was running this DVD through? And 9 minutes is a pretty long time, you don't round up from 22 minutes to half an hour, you round down to 20 minutes. If you're writing a review, I would have thought the first thing you'd (and I'm meaning whoever in general) wanna do is make sure your facts are correct. It's not the odd mistake, it's a swathe of assumptions, harsh criticism, over-expectation and outright mistakes.

[N2NOther]

That review was very inaccurate. In that he had Brian listed as Dave, and Dave Cooperman as a producer, not too mention many other details that were very inaccurate. The original review is posted in this thread. I looked through the thread and didn't see the original review. No biggie. I completely understand wanting to clarify certain factual things a review may have gotten wrong such as cast and crew. Other than that it seems, seems that you are making excuses for your film. Personally I would never do that. A film is a film. If some people find it successful then so be it. If not, so be it. If other people are ok with saying "well he had no money" then that's fine. I'm just not built that way. Only after pissing and moaning about the blatant incompetence of the reviewer did they finally correct the issues. Well sometimes it takes pissing and moaning for justice to be served. He fixed it and all is right with the world. Ok maybe not the world, but this particular issue. ONE last thing. Something was mentioned about not listening to the commentary. That shouldn't be necessary either. I'm just saying. Agreed, I was quite taken aback about how off that review was, I thought to myself - was this guy even awake when he was running this DVD through? And 9 minutes is a pretty long time, you don't round up from 22 minutes to half an hour, you round down to 20 minutes. Ok. Fair enough. But seeing as how there are no chapters on the DVD and there is an introduction. plus other things the first zombies don't actually attack until around the 26 minute mark so I can see where he might have said that. But you do see the zombies walking around a few minutes before that. If you're writing a review, I would have thought the first thing you'd (and I'm meaning whoever in general) wanna do is make sure your facts are correct. It's not the odd mistake, it's a swathe of assumptions, harsh criticism, over-expectation and outright mistakes. But the criticism is harsh. It's the nature of the beast. These people don't review films to give nice criticisms. They donate X amount of their time to watching a movie and as I said, I'm sure everyone here has given their fair share of "harsh" criticisms to a movie they flat out hated. It sucks to know that someone hated something you worked your ass off for but such is filmmaking. Before this goes into another back and forth...I've said what I needed to and I sincerely wish you the best of luck on your next film...I am being 100% sincere when I say that you should make some shorts and really learn to do that well before taking on another feature.