Written by DAVID KEYES
featuring guest speaker DUSTIN ROSE

September 23, 1998

On September 9, 1998, Reynolds High School’s newspaper The Reveille printed David Keyes’ article entitled “Summer Movies Save 1998 Film Industry,” the wrap-up for 1998’s summer season of movies. It’s print sparked debates between Keyes and readers of this newspaper, and one such person was Dustin Rose, who, too, writes currently for the Reynolds High School newspaper The Reveille. His debate is for “Armageddon,” which, most realize now, was rejected by CINEMA film critic David Keyes.

In the exclusively first-recorded film debate of The CINEMA’s existence, Dustin Rose and David Keyes defend and ridicule these two different opinions. Guest speaker, Dustin Rose of The Reveille staff, will speak in the italics below. The CINEMA’s very own film critic David Keyes, will defend his opinion of “Armageddon” in bold.

Armageddon is one really bad movie. How can one enjoy such a picture when special effects scenes are disconnected from the rest of the movie and seem like they’re cut and pasted together like some sort of coming attractions trailer?

It is a wonderful movie that is full of many exciting features. The star-studded cast worked extraordinary together and the dialogue covered all areas of drama. It had drama, adventure, humor and romance. The only problem was the special effects, which were a little corny and got a little loud.

I’d like to know what you find amusing or entertaining about movies that have perverted characters, an uninteresting story and crummy camera movements. You said that the special effects scenes were corny, but what about the treatment of characters here? Didn’t you think some of them seemed a little ‘macho’ for the material?

Well obviously I wasn’t the only one that liked it. You think that the characters were too much, but what about Liv Tyler’s role? Sure, she was a strong character, but she also had a soft side. Even Ben Affleck shows a soft romantic side here. It contained all of the qualities that make a good movie. I wouldn’t call it the best movie of the year but you can’t crap all over it. I think that you should open your eyes and realize that it wasn’t that bad. The problem with you is that you have seen way too many movies.

The problem with you is that you have low standards. Liv Tyler was so flat in her role that she made Ben Affleck’s look almost decent. Besides, after seeing “Good Will Hunting,” Ben Affleck seemed FAR down the hill from his true acting talent. It’s hard to live up to the power of the role in “Good Will Hunting,” but even he should have his standards, and it seemed like the only thing he had on his mind with “Armageddon” was the paycheck.

I wouldn’t call it the best movie, but gosh darn it, why can’t people enjoy half-way decent films anymore? Sure it’s not at the classic status. The script wasn’t even comparable to “Good Will Hunting,” so I can’t see why you would compare Affleck’s performance to that. But it wasn’t a totally worthless movie. If you look at how much it made this summer you would notice that I’m not the only one to think that it was at least OK.

Obviously you’ve never seen “Deep Impact.” It seems like whenever a disaster movie comes along, there’s always a similar one right behind it. The only difference is that “Deep Impact” was neatly done, and actually had some decent character development rather that just overdone special effects. “Armageddon” failed in every area because it neither provided decent characters nor decent special effects scenes, not to mention the fact that the story was pathetically cloned from “Deep Impact.”

And how can you say that I shouldn’t compare Affleck’s “Good Will Hunting” performance to this one? One of the aspects of film criticism is to compare an actor’s past performances to current ones, no matter what material has changed. I will compare every Ben Affleck performance to this one, and regardless of what you say, he could have done a whole lot better. Take his partner, Matt Damon, for example. He recently starred in “Rounders,” a dull movie, but his performance wasn’t that bad. The same goes for “Saving Private Ryan.” If Damon can continue his great acting, so can Affleck. But he didn’t.

So are you that moronic to say that script doesn’t matter? There is only so much that an actor can do! What about Nicholas Cage? He did really good in “The Rock,” “City Of Angels” and “Con-Air.” He had a completely worthless performance in “Leaving Las Vegas.” Does that mean that we should make him eat out of a hog’s trough? No! You have to admire that his performance wasn’t worth of taking him out and hanging him from the nearest tree!

I did not say that. All I was saying was that Affleck could have had a decent role in “Armageddon,” but he was just as stiff as the script. Heck, even he was okay when he was in “Dazed And Confused,” and that’s one of the worst movies I have ever seen. Cage could have been good in “Leaving Las Vegas,” but he wasn’t. The script shouldn’t determine how an actor’s performance should be. It all depends on the person who fills the role.

Having been an actor for a couple of years, I have realized that there is only so much that the actor can do with a worthless script. I personally don’t think that the script was that bad. It isn’t as good as “Good Will Hunting,” but not many are. “Armageddon” has some entertaining qualities in it. It isn’t perfect but it doesn’t suck.

If there are things entertaining about it, then they must not be very noticeable. It must have been the fact that “Deep Impact” was so enjoyable and that “Armageddon” was predictable, not to mention confusing. You must admit that some of the dialogue and story involving NASA was a bit disorganized. You have a right to like what you want, but that won’t change the fact that I hated it. Maybe, if you saw “Deep Impact,” you wouldn’t have enjoyed “Armageddon” so much. Now that’s a disaster movie!

Well, even though I didn’t see “Deep Impact,” I have talked to a lot of people that have seen both and the majority said that “Armageddon” was better. I also have hear that the production of “Armageddon” started way before the production of “Deep Impact.” So, maybe it was “Deep Impact” that was the rip-off.

It doesn’t matter. The fact remains that “Deep Impact” was better (at least in my view). People have a right to their opinions, and if they liked “Armageddon” better, fine—I don’t care. In film, we all have different opinions. That’s the purpose of film debate.