do u believe in critic reviews?

1. 62

   pisean282311posted 14 years ago

   i have found some good movies rated poorly by critics while some bad movies being over promoted..

   replyreport
   1. 55

      Tariq Khan 4 youposted 14 years agoin reply to this

      yes i do believe in this. it gives progress and improvement

      replyreport
   2. 0

      Stevennix2001posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      whether you agree with a film critic or not.  the simple fact of the matter is even though most critics do have PHD's in film and have watched almost every genre of films in general, the simple truth is that it's just an analytical opinion.  Not a regular opinion, but an analytical one as there is a difference.  The only real difference between an opinion and an analytical opinion is this.
      
      there both basically opinions, but an analytical opinion is basically where you break down a movie to it's simplest context.  Like what's the moral of the story?  What's the director/writer trying to say?  Does it work?  Do the special effects (if any) enhance the story or does it merely distract from it?  Are the actors convincing?  This is just a general example of what some critics would probably ask themselves, then try to write up an analytical opinion.
      
      Where as just an opinion, is basically if some guy/girl watches a movie and says, "whoa, that movie f***ing sucked"  or "that film rocked."  I know many of you will argue and say they're both basically the same thing, but they're not.  In fact, Im damn sure Peter Travers and Roger Ebert don't just watch a movie and say, "this film totally sucked" without analyzing every aspect of the film.  Where as the casual viewer like yourselves I doubt seriously ever do most of the time.  For if that was the case, then "Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen" and "The Twilight Saga:  New Moon" would've royally bombed in theaters.  Not trying to put down anyone who liked those movies but if people had analytical opinions then those movies never would've gotten the success they didn't deserve.
      
      However, having said all that.  Although an analytical opinion is much more thorough and detailed than a normal opinion on a film.  One could argue that they're both basically the same, and in a sense they are.  One just happens to analyze things a bit more deeper, while the other doesn't.  However, both in the end once you break it down to their most simplest contexts are just opinions in the end.  Therefore, it's really up to you if you want to listen to their opinions on films. 
      
      For me personally, I always follow Roger Ebert and Peter Travers.  Although I don't always agree with them on every movie.  Like I know the film, "Kick-Ass", was given a poor review by Roger Ebert, but I liked it.  However, I agreed with him totally on "Green Zone", as that film was so under rated.  Then we get to Peter Travers, who wrote a lot of reviews I agreed with like "She's Out Of My League", "Kick-Ass", and many others.  However, I didn't agree with him on the remake of "The Wolfman", as I thought it was much better than he described.  Although I think Roger Ebert liked the remake far more than I did though.  lol.  You see it's really matter of opinion though.  If you want to follow the critics you can.  However, if you believe they don't know more about films than you, then just don't read them. 
      
      It's basically that simple.  Seriously, why even bash critics for slandering a film you like?  I mean you liked it right?  isn't that all that matters?  Who cares what they think if you liked the movie?  Like I said before, it's just an opinion...an analytical opinion..but still just an opinion.  Therefore, my advice to you is this.  instead of bashing critics for doing their job, then just don't listen to them.  Besides, nobody is putting a gun to your head telling you to follow every word they say.  If you liked the movie and they thought it sucked, then who cares?  if you liked it, then that's all that matters.

      replyreport
   3. 68

      CarltheCritic1291posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      Some critics are just tell you their professional opinion about a movie that they saw, and are sometimes good sources of information to go to, when deciding whether or not to go see a movie that looks really good or really crappy. I personally am a film critic, and I agree that there are some movies that many film critics say that are really bad, which turn out to be good movies, and vice versa. The important thing is that you enjoy the movie, and that you had a great time watching it, because that is what movies are made for.

      replyreport
2. 59

   Betty Reidposted 14 years ago

   I like critic reviews.  It's an opinion from someone who knows a lot about movies.  However, it depends what the critics say in particular.  For example, I read that Transformers was not so good, but my friends really wanted to see it, I went anyway.  Plus I knew Transformers was popular, so I was curious to see it for that reason.  Also, I read that Avatar had a dull plot and possibly racist theme, but good special effects, so I agreed to go see it, but insisted on seeing the 3D version.

   replyreport
3. 61

   optimus grimlockposted 13 years ago

   Never pay attention to them, there pointless. If I want to see a movie I'm gunna see it!!!

   replyreport
4. 64

   Greek Oneposted 13 years ago

   only the ones I write.. and that's just because I respect what the author has to say

   replyreport
   1. 0

      Stevennix2001posted 13 years agoin reply to this

      lol.  no offense greek, but that sounds like an OBVIOUS biased opinion there.  lol.

      replyreport
5. 82

   Rafiniposted 13 years ago

   No, I don't.  I'm critical enough and I don't need their high-falootin ideas floating through the air into my head when all I want to do is go see a movie I'm interested in for whatever reason. 
   
   They can keep their criticisms to themselves, unless they want to point out animal cruelty on the set or something like that...

   replyreport
6. 63

   wingedcentaurposted 13 years ago

   Good Day Pisean282311
   
   I view the movie critic as a consumer reporter, and as such, he serves an important function. It is his job to use his best critical judgment to tell us whether or not a movie is worth seeing. Is it worth it spending our ten dollars (twenty with refreshments) to see this or that movie? This is especially important in the midst of this recession.
   
   We "work hard for the money," as the song says. Unless you are a member top layer of the bourgeoisie - who can light their cigars with hundred dollar bills - you, like the rest of us, cannot afford to waste it on a bad movie.
   
   Of course, opinions differ. Even a movie reviewer you respect can come to a starkly different conclusion about a film than you do. Nevertheless, I think movie reviewers, in general, are a positive resource.

   replyreport
7. 59

   Sparhawkeposted 13 years ago

   I dont really pay all that much attention to critics reviews, especially when they are plastered all over an advert for a film...why should I care if Empire gave 5 stars to some 4th rate teen whiny movie?
   
   I much prefer to listen to what people like me say about a film...
   
   I do agree with the critics about Shawshank though...that was a fantastic film along with Dances with Wolves so they do get it right sometimes

   replyreport
8. 58

   Glimmer515posted 13 years ago

   I will take a look at the critic review but whtever they give a movie it wont make or break my choice to see it. Usually word of mouth advertisment makes me figure out if i wanna see a movie or not

   replyreport
9. 57

   Vargtornaposted 13 years ago

   If by 'believe' you mean, 'do I respect them?,' then yes -- if I'm reading said review after(!) the movie. I hate going in with someone else's opinion freshly branded into my mind. I hate upcoming movie reviews, for example, but I love comparing others opinion against mine (although, my opinion's a stubborn asshole and probably won't budge) after viewing the movie.

   replyreport