I just watched Die Hard: With a Vengeance. I enjoyed it now more than I did 17 years ago when it was first released. However upon looking at Rotten Tomatoes, Die Hard 3 scored a 50% while its crappy PG-13 sequel (quartet?) scored over 80%. Either these reviewers are on crack, or movie critics are about as useful as wearing white gloves in a Ketchup factory.
Last edited by Acupuncture; 08-04-2012 at 10:09 AM.
I think you nailed it with reviewers sucking. I never trust pro reviews of any movie that comes out. They are mostly crap and hold no weight for me. I go by what my friends say if they have seen it and by what the reviews say that are solid fact and never their "opinion" on if it's good or not.
With individual reviewers, you need to have an idea what sort of movies they do, and don't, like as the same movie can get anything from 2 to 5 stars depending who the critic/reviewer is.
Bit surprised at the RT, though, as that would have been over a wide range of people.
Huh ?
Rt shouldn't be used that way.
I look at RT but then there are those few reviewers that I respect and trust more like Anthony Lane, Roger Ebert, Richard Roeper, AO Scott and Magnola Dargis.
Of course, I finally decide if the film is good or not but reading the reviews later is entertaining and helps you see things from a different perspective.
Indeed, it's good to find certain critics that share your same taste in movies. Having that said, I feel there is a noticeable stigma of giving certain films a bad review simply because it is "artsy" or caters to grass-eaters like Sparafucil. For example, Moonrise Kingdom received nearly flawless reviews, and that movie was ****ing horrible.Originally Posted by reactivator11
Last edited by Acupuncture; 08-04-2012 at 10:07 AM.
There are about 350 variables that mean that individual movie reviews are one of the most subjective things on the planet. Also, there is no such thing as a professional reviewer, half the time they don't even have a journalistic qualification.
I only pay attention to aggregated scores with a large pool of scores.
Last edited by dangermoose; 08-04-2012 at 12:50 PM.
I do believe though that there is a certain higher order way to see films.
You might say Moonrise Kingdom, assuming I have seen it, I might call bullshit and say you just didn't understand it.
At the same time reading for example Roger Ebert's or Anthony Lane's criticism, I might disagree or agree but still understand their view of it.
I think that leads to developing a better mindset to appreciate film.
If I can maybe explain myself better.
If we disagree on a film, I think that only a higher level of criticism can be accepted, ie. Just saying a film is boring is not gonna cut it.
Last edited by reactivator11; 08-04-2012 at 01:52 PM.
I bought a DVD of it years ago and it seems the UK release had scenes missing and dubbed parts.
The Die Hard franchise is one of the many things GOOD to emerge from the 80's. I onyl read reviews be it games or movies just to see what people think, I dont use them to sway my opinion on whether I should buy or not.I do what I want and always have.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote