i love criterion
i own laserdisc copies just to frame and hang over my bed and fap to the box art
they decide whats quality for me and my art faggy friends
so shut up reed for being different from us criterion constructed cinematic connoisseurs
if it aint criterion its crap

Also, the effects are amateurish even by the standard of when the film was made. Its an artistic choice to have them that way as it fits with the entire “through the looking glass” concept of the film.

I’d say the script is bizzare because its Asian, similar to how I chalk up your eating habits and your esoteric fridge to the same genetic issue.

To use the phrasing of a “film snob”, you, Mr. Farrington are a BUMBLING BUFFOON!

You’re insane. You’re a man on the internet who I’ve never met and for some reason I love you and hate you all at once even though I don’t even know you and with all that said, YOU’RE STILL CRAZIER THAN I AM!

CGI doesn’t always mean better! Creativity is always more charming than soulless computer work. Guillermo Del Toro, Terry Gilliam, Jean Pierre-Jeunet and countless others have proven this time and time again!

Watching the amazing and varied effects in this film is one of the most entertaining parts! Your problem is that you see everything from a sterile and technical standpoint. You don’t seem to appreciate artistic value in any way. Just because something isn’t cutting edge doesn’t make it bad. As Jay has said on the podcast, it’s more interesting to see the craftsmanship on display in an older effects film. It’s the reason New Star Wars blows and old Star Wars is beloved by millions.

As far as the screenplay goes, it’s esoteric because that’s the intent of the entire film. It’s like a child’s ghost story but with a distinctly Japanese flavor.

I guess saying that kind of stuff is more film geekery/snobbery and I’m only proving your point but if you’re going to look at every film from a quasi-Michael Bay perspective of “more and bigger effects = good” then you’re probably talking to the wrong people with Filmjunk. It’s a MOVIE BLOG! PEOPLE COME HERE TO TALK ABOUT MOVIES!

When you love film and everything about it, the standard theater fare stops being your gauge for measuring other films. Quality stops being judged by gloss and effects and starts to be judged by imagination and creativity. As I said before, you don’t seem to actually really like movies all that much and you definitely don’t have a passion for film in general so why try to come here and speak for the “general audience” all the time? Generally the people here don’t care what “most people” like or don’t like.

Jay’s review isn’t baiting anyone except the people who enjoy Filmjunk and most of those folks seem to take his opinion fairly seriously because they understand that he knows his shit and that when he says something’s good it probably is.

Sorry if that pisses you off…

I know there is an audience for this type of film; otherwise, Criterion would not have released it. I am not part of that audience. fatbologna, I am only expressing my subjective opinion of its entertainment value. I consider this whole review to be “baiting” because I’m sure there would be more people who hate this film than like it.

I apologize for generalizing. Even Criterion makes mistakes (or can be stupid sometimes).

I certainly got the Raimi-before-Raimi vibe when watching HAUSU! It’s an eye opener for someone who always thought that Raimi did what he did ‘first’ The two films are certainly complimentary to one another.