David Writes:
Re Dr. Strange Review
FYI Your sites content seems to be rapidly descending
from, sarcastic, funny & hip to pointlessly bitter & resentful.
What’s up with that?
If feels like you seem to think that everything everyone
puts out across most media seems so creatively boring and lame, that one review
too many might make you go postal.
Take a vacation & lighten up.
Nick Replies: The review David mentions is HERE, but I think it’s safe to say that the reviews are pretty much the same tonally as ever, though better because the quantity AND quality of the writers is better. Jeremy Smith? Russ Fischer? Micah Robinson? Plus all the old guys and a new DVD review crew. I think we’re pretty much the same, though we all channel our rage towards a film in different ways as evidenced by my Halloween review, Wade’s Dr. Strange review, and Russ’s Mother of Tears review.
Emily Writes:
I don’t know if this is
the right "feedback" e-mail – if it isn’t then please tell me or
forward it to the appropriate party. I love CHUD but I just got my 3:10
to Yuma ticket today (THURSDAY) and the movie was for WEDNESDAY. I hate
that every time I request tix from you all, they arrive late. It is a
waste of money for you and then I get disappointed. The ticket was sent
on the 1st, Saturday and even though it is only going to NC from GA
Sunday and Labor Day the mail did not move. Do you get the tickets at the
last second? Could you just send all the tickets to one person that
always shows up and then send e-mails to people telling them to meet
that representative there at the theater? That is how ShakeFire is
now running things. It’s not a perfect system, but it would save you
wasting money and time sending out tix that no one can use.
Nick Replies: It happens that a holiday got in the way of that screening as is sometimes the case when you’re at the mercy of the U.S. Postal Cervix. As for how this works, we got a lot of folks who sent feedback on the screening who were sent the passes the same time you were. Do you live on the Hidden Valley Ranch or is just bad luck? We certainly try. That said, we’ll make a more concerted effort to send passes outside of town ASAP.
Richard Writes:
Blind triumphing of a
film may have an opposite of desired effect. It at any rate doesn’t appear more
engaging than a young man participating in a sandbox. Unclever sexual
references hit the 19-year-old male target audience but lack merit. These
factors don’t help nudge things along to a few oases of sophistication which is
all some – perhaps the average, unangry, unsmiling – would ask for, if they
bothered asking. Competition is thin, second-place darkhorizons isn’t
particularly w/in striking distance (talking my book here, I don’t give a shit
about Aint It) but if one were to long on the frivolous, maybe it’s longing for
the days of Dave Davis.
Nick Replies: I don’t know what this was referencing, but I loved how stream of consciousness it was. Like I wasn’t even needed.
Ji Writes:
Just letting you know that I
absolutely loved every movie you listed in that article. I would have
been interested in some of them out of my own volition anyway, but I actually
wouldn’t have had Running Scared, Equilibrium, and Slither on my radar if it weren’t
for you guys. Now, Wayne Kramer, Kurt Wimmer, and James Gunn are three
guys that I try to keep up with, among many others. You guys at CHUD
really promote the auteurs working today and it’s made a big difference in my
movie-going life. I keep trying to tell my friends and my students (I
teach a Media and Communications class in a high school) that knowing where a
movie (or any form of entertainment/art) is coming from can make a tremendous
difference and that a story is more interesting when someone with a unique
vision feels compelled to tell it (as opposed to merely obligated). Then
again, we have Uwe Boll, so maybe that logic sometimes breaks down.
Anyway,
I can honestly say that I’ve become more media literate because of your site.
No joke. With the school year coming up, and with all the prep work
I’m doing for my classes, I felt that I needed to share this with you.
And, Superbad was the perfect way to end my summer movie season.
Nick Replies: Ji refers to this Steady Leak article about the death of the so-called CHUD CURSE, and I appreciate the comments a whole lot. I’d love to somehow involve the site with your class at some point, sorta reach out to the next wave of Chewers and Trolls.
Brian Writes:
This message is for Ian Arbuckle regarding his DVD review
of Forest of the Dead.
make a better movie, asshole? Then quit jacking off on the internet and do
it motherfucker. You know you have no fucking talent and you couldn’t
make a movie if you if your life depended on it. My movie was
released by Elite. How about yours?
I’ll be waiting asshole.
Nick Replies: This email is proof that you don’t have to be kind, eloquent, or appreciative of coverage to be a filmmaker. I have not seen Forest of the Dead (Ian’s review) for a myriad of reasons, not the least of which being that only filmmakers with the last name’s Romero and possibly Wright deserve to use those words, and now I’m REALLY not seeing it. It’s funny when established filmmakers send us comments or hatebombs (I’ve gotten three in two weeks from people whose work I’ve championed in the past taking me to task) but even funnier when newcomers do it. That old adage about any press being good press goes out the window even though we’re one of very few major film sites to cover the film and provide a link to purchase the film. Some appreciation! Worse yet is the way he treats Ian not with a well thought out, grammar checked letter but just vulgarity and assumptions on Ian’s ability gleaned from one negative review of his work. Also, what’s a waiting asshole? Either way, fuck Forest of the Dead. Ian called it as he saw it and the filmmaker handled it like a playground bully with a load of shit in his diaper.
Pat Writes:
Good morning Nick,
I really enjoy your website and all the different writers,
especially Devin, who I wanted to strangle half the time until I came to the
realization that I was disappointed every time I didn’t see his name at the top
of a story. I wanted to offer one fan’s hopefully level-headed take on the
whole asterisk controversy as well as some of the other running gags on the
site.
The big difference between the asterisks and the stuff like
Accused and Hollow Man jokes is the frequency of their use. The reason I still
laugh at stuff like "Manga-Haired Producer Brian Grazer" is because I
always forget about it until there’s a story specifically about Grazer. Then I
see it and remember and it makes me crack up, like some in-jokes I have with
friends. Lately the "Third act of Batman Begins" references have
begun to take on this sort amusing running gag status. But the asterisks…
it’s almost like every single story has one or two of them lately. Having read
the site for a while it seemed like they just started to pop up out of nowhere
with Devin, which I guess is okay, but now at least four or five CHUD writers
do them, seemingly on every story. And I’ll admit, a lot of times they are
clever (I enjoyed Jeremy just cutting and pasting the Platoon dialogue
yesterday, even though I completely disagreed with his take on it), but every
time I see the * I’m taken out of the story and get caught between wanting to
read the * or wanting to finish reading the article proper. Either way it ends
somehow unsatisfying (as much as movie news can be truly satisfying).
Infrequently, I think the asterisks could work better.
Other than that, I think the site is kicking ass and has really come to
distinguish itself over the course of the last two or three years. Keep up the
Apatow love (as long as he keeps making movies worthy of it) and keep the
Accused jokes flying.
Nick Replies: *.
Drew Writes:
Just wanted to say, you guys are badasses. The Ben
Stiller/Owen Wilson Justice League story made my weekend. At least one website
wants to keep some credibility. Thanks.
Nick Replies: Thanks!
* I think Devin owes you a nice fat cocksuck.