[Entertainment] Critics Stunned by B-Holo

Critics Stunned by B-Holo

The release of Oh John Ringo No 2 was expected to be met with derision from critics and mockery from the masses. One more to add to the line of horrible, schlocky action movies released in the wake of the Reaper War. Contrary to expectations, the line of customers walking out of the movies midnight release last night admitted to being 'stunned' by the movie's quality.

Movie Critic Aish T'Rala said, "I was floored withing a few minutes of the opening credits starting. I expected something along the lines of the first Oh John Ringo No, a terribly written, acted and directed action holo, but Ringo 2 was simply amazing. Brilliant writing, amazing acting, and directing that hasn't been equaled for the better part of a decade."

The source of the surprising quality of OJRN 2, something only rumored about during pre-screenings, was revealed when an enterprising reporter got hold of novels and children's books that OJRN director Malix Coreus published after the original's complete flop. To galactic amazement, both the reporter and subsequent critics have praised the books as being 'surprisingly well-written', with Tanaya D'Vax saying "They're entertaining, well plotted and have amazing characters. I can't quite believe that this is the man wrote the first John Ringo."

The novels, as well as Oh John Ringo No 2, have approached the top of bestseller lists since the news broke.

He, I haven't been to the movies in a while. Sounds like valid entertainment and I guess I wouldn't matter if I never saw that first movie.

I'm still skeptical. There's no actual explanation of why this is SO well written.
But, hey, a good movie out this year? That is quite seriously a first.

Riiiiiiiiiight.

How the shrell do you redeem a franchise that starts with Grover Norquist overthrowing the 2019 UNAS regime (in Siam)?

I preferred the first one, schlocky action vids have an appeal all their own. Any of you seen "Kill, Justicar, Kill!" That's a terribly made movie but damn if it ain't entertaining.

Ah well, still probably find the time to see this anyway.

I actually saw the first John Ringo, well, a vid of it, me and Callius had a drinking game counting the number of times the government did something pointlessly evil on screen while someone or the other praised Norquist as the messiah.

We didn't last twenty minutes.

My guess is, they probably ignored the original source material entirely, except for keeping the name on in the hopes it would attract attention due to the first film's infamy.

That's my theory though, I'd have to see the film myself to prove it. Which I might do.

What was wrong with the first movie? I liked it quite a lot. The action scenes were amazing! They really pulled you right into the middle of things, and then shocked you out of it with some amazing explosions. What more could you ask for?

Sanity.

A plot.

A budget.

Dignity.

Sanity.

Can't blame a movie for having a poor budget, just means they have to be more creative with the effects. The stunt men they used were brilliant, did you see what that one guy did during the hovercraft chase scene? That was actually him doing that, no fancy film tricks or anything, just a guy in a hovercraft pulling off some amazing moves.

As for the other things you mention. I thinks that's more you nitpicking everything than anything else.

Well, I guess this can be seen as a heartwarming tale of how responding to criticism and improving because of it can make even the most horrid writers incredible.

call me old fashioned, but maybe some competence from the director, cinematographer, editor, screenwriter, and the actors.

Not familiar with human history (at least not enough to answer this on my own). Was this one any more accurate?

It's... certainly got a better plot, though. I mean, goddess, the plot in the first.

y'all're a buncha fuckin' prudes

Ha! Good to see I'm not the only here who can appreciate a good film without nitpicking it.

man, nitpickers’re dumb fucks

if da story’s consistent’n shit, why da fuck should you care

That's the problem.. The first movie wasn't consistent, it was a sequence of action scenes with no real logic.

This movie… just on the plot, this was a very good movie.

blah bloo blah bloo dis show don't make sense ter me boo hoo hoo hoo hooooooo

Too much exposition would have gotten in the way of the action! Not all movies have to handhold the audience through every single plot point, sometimes you just gotta be willing to figure it out as you go along.

There was nothing to figure out with the first movie. It was a badly-written, badly-directed, badly-researched mess of a vid without a shred of competence about it. Sometimes a bad vid is a bad vid.

Perhaps I'll watch the second. Or perhaps the first so my fiancé and I have something to laugh at.

Oh, the first is well-worth watching if you just want a laugh. It's bad, but so much so it's hilarious.