Support NeoGAF

[Nintendo Switch]

There are exceptions, (fast paced movies that are almost universally beloved) but generally speaking movie reviews are written by old people for old people. The slower paced and more boring a movie is, the more good reviews the movie seems to get.

The reason I think this happens is because people unquestionably slow down as they age. Their cognitive processing slows down, their dopamine levels drop, and as a result they prefer slow paced movies and slow paced music that gives them time to take things in.

And the top critics, the most experienced critics are those that have been doing movies reviews for many decades, so they tend to be older.

There are countless movies I enjoyed with 20% or less on rotten tomatoes and countless movies that bored me to death with a 80% or more on rotten tomatoes. Have others had similar experiences? Or do more of you find yourself agreeing with the critics?

 

[prag16]

I more or less agree. I find myself hardly ever being able to trust movie reviews (in terms of how predictive they are of my own enjoyment). I think your premises might have some validity. I'd also add that I can't stand how damn pretentious and pseudointellectual professional reviewers can be (applies to music/games too at times, but never as bad as movies). I get immediately suspicious any time the critic review consensus is much higher than the moviegoer consensus. In general I'm far more likely to enjoy something that the opposite, high moviegoer but low critic scores. Screw the critics. They've told me some of the worst movies I've ever see are good. One example comes to mind of something I saw recently. Drinking Buddies (2013). Cast seemed pretty good. Tomatometer said 83%. I figure okay, I'll give it a shot. One of the biggest wastes of a couple hours of my entire life. Sure enough, audience score was only 49%.

 

[Kotzen Ducha]

Lately? For sure.
TLJ is a particularly heinous offender as there's little redeemable about that mess.

 

[prag16]

Lately? For sure.
TLJ is a particularly heinous offender as there's little redeemable about that mess.

I actually liked TLJ (despite having several major complaints about it). But yeah, the almost universal unqualified glowing praise from critics was ridiculous, as it turns out, may of which went on to then shit on people who didn't like it as just whiny fanboys and/or basement dwellers. Pathetic.

 

[kunonabi]

Depends. Reviews centered around the art of film I tend to agree with outside of some art house pics and and genres that critics just dont care for. I can't stand younger film "critics" since they're mostly concerned with whether or not films conform to their politics more than anything else.

Going off my top 50 list for 2017 the highest rated film I ranked was 99%, the lowest was 42%, and the average score was 82%

 

[Doom85]

I actually liked TLJ (despite having several major complaints about it). But yeah, the almost universal unqualified glowing praise from critics was ridiculous, as it turns out, may of which went on to then shit on people who didn't like it as just whiny fanboys and/or basement dwellers. Pathetic.

Trust me, a decent amount of those who disliked/hated TLJ hardly acted more civil, I've been insulted plenty of times (and one person just flat out told me to kill myself) for loving The Last Jedi. Also, I'm having trouble seeing many RT critics attacking people like that. A few, sure, but many? Also, why was it ridiculous? A lot of critics loved the movie. I mean, I thought Thor: Ragnarok was fairly good but nothing remarkable (in fact, I think Thor 1 is a better movie) but it's got a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's fine with me.

Also, I don't exactly find the audience score that reliable sometimes. Not to be mean, but sometimes the phrase "you didn't get it" is fair to describe certain people on certain movies. It Comes at Night was an excellent suspense/horror film from last year and critics gave it an 88%. Audiences though gave it a 44% and I can't help but suspect quite a few of them didn't understand what the movie was going for. I mean, after the movie ended I was talking to this one couple and explained what I thought the theme was and they completely didn't catch on that during the movie. And lord knows I could tell from the looks on people's faces that I may have been the only one in the showing of mother! last year that understood what the movie was about. And it's not like one should feel bad for not understanding a movie but if I relied on general audiences' reactions to films like these I would miss out on quite a few movies that require you to read between the lines.

 

[mrkgoo]

If you're going to say age is a contributing factor to movie experiences I think you'd better give us your age.

Cognitive processes slow down so olde people like slower movies and music?

I mean sure, our tastes will change a small we age, "mature" is what I would say, but I don't think it's because our reasoning slows down.

 

[bitbydeath]

Not many horror fan reviewers out there so I’ll say yes to often disagreeing.

If you're going to say age is a contributing factor to movie experiences I think you'd better give us your age.

Cognitive processes slow down so olde people like slower movies and music?

I mean sure, our tastes will change a small we age, "mature" is what I would say, but I don't think it's because our reasoning slows down.

Generations would be more accurate.

 

[Dice]

All the time. People really seem to really enjoy total garbage and/or not understand films that actually have good insights or do interesting things.

 

[prag16]

Trust me, a decent amount of those who disliked/hated TLJ hardly acted more civil, I've been insulted plenty of times (and one person just flat out told me to kill myself) for loving The Last Jedi. Also, I'm having trouble seeing many RT critics attacking people like that. A few, sure, but many? Also, why was it ridiculous? A lot of critics loved the movie. I mean, I thought Thor: Ragnarok was fairly good but nothing remarkable (in fact, I think Thor 1 is a better movie) but it's got a 92% on Rotten Tomatoes. That's fine with me.

Also, I don't exactly find the audience score that reliable sometimes. Not to be mean, but sometimes the phrase "you didn't get it" is fair to describe certain people on certain movies. It Comes at Night was an excellent suspense/horror film from last year and critics gave it an 88%. Audiences though gave it a 44% and I can't help but suspect quite a few of them didn't understand what the movie was going for. I mean, after the movie ended I was talking to this one couple and explained what I thought the theme was and they completely didn't catch on that during the movie. And lord knows I could tell from the looks on people's faces that I may have been the only one in the showing of mother! last year that understood what the movie was about. And it's not like one should feel bad for not understanding a movie but if I relied on general audiences' reactions to films like these I would miss out on quite a few movies that require you to read between the lines.

Haha, what. I think you're grossly overstating the merits of It Comes At Night as some sort of intellectual think piece. Slow, boring, and predictable. And yes, I "understood" what they were going for. 4/10 imo. Don't know anything about Mother!

While you're certainly correct in some cases, in the case of The Last Jedi this isn't gonna work. People upset about shitty plot contrivances and Luke's character assassination among many many other things have legitimate gripes that can't just be dismissed as "durrr you didn't get it" or "you are dumb" or "lol stfu fanboy".

And yeah, plenty of professional reviewers did plenty of scoffing at the "fanboys" who had complaints while marveling at how intelligent they themselves were for embracing all the questionable masturbatory stuff Johnson did. That's where the pretentiousness comes in, which I hate in reviewers.

 

[ickythingz]

Yes. I have noticed reviewers often write their reviews with personal agendas that further their career. I do not blame them, they are looking to get ahead. When they do this it is obvious to me all the time and invalidates their opinion. I gave up on any sort of movie review a long time ago. If I want to see the movie I'll just watch it. I really don't need to have someone tell me if something is good or not. I can do that just fine and much better. Black Panther and The Last Jedi are perfect examples of the corruption I am referring too. No honest, real reviews (the movies sucked, there is no other way to put it). Critics are just pandering now.

 

[mrkgoo]

Revie

Yes. I have noticed reviewers often write their reviews with personal agendas that further their career. I do not blame them, they are looking to get ahead. When they do this it is obvious to me all the time and invalidates their opinion. I gave up on any sort of movie review a long time ago. If I want to see the movie I'll just watch it. I really don't need to have someone tell me if something is good or not. I can do that just fine and much better. Black Panther and The Last Jedi are perfect examples of the corruption I am referring too. No honest, real reviews (the movies sucked, there is no other way to put it). Critics are just pandering now.

ws aren't meant to tell you whether something is good or not, and certainly not whether you'll like it or not. Rather, reviews are just giving an opinion. You can agree or disagree at your own discretion.

The best way to approach reviews if you're looking for impressions that will inform you of whether you want to watch some or not, from critics or otherwise, is to find someone or site whose tastes align most with yourself.

I fondness it best just to get overal
Impressions (hence why I like impressions threads on forums and aggregators) just to see if I find a particular movie sounds like what I'd enjoy or ignored I find the premise interesting and then go see them myself.

While I may disagree with a critics review of a movie, I certai t wouldn't say they are flat out wrong or pandering. Everyone is entitled to their opinion.

 

[mrkgoo]

Not many horror fan reviewers out there so I’ll say yes to often disagreeing.



Generations would be more accurate.

Sure.

I'll still disagree with the notion that there's a correlation between how slow and boring a movie is with how well it's received by an older generation.

 

[Warm Machine]

The OP is acting pretty ageist. I'm 43. I've seen 1000s of movies. The issue is that critics are not railing against pacing, they are railing against seeing a movie that is not as good as something else in a similar genre that they have already seen. When a critic is 60 years old plus their tastes have changed to wanting something more challenging and a lot of movies are akin to going through the drive through at McDonalds. You'll likely find something like Black Panther isn't anywhere near as good as you think it is when put up against the titans in the genre, especially when you factor the era of its production into the equation. The biggest question mark I have as of late was watching Phantom Thread and it couldn't hold a candle to any single episode of The Crown photographically or even in its own drama. I barely remember what happened in Thor Ragnarok, but 12 year old me would have thought it was incredible. Movies are not unique in this way. People bitch at games being too easy all the time but any game could be someone's first game ever, so take an opinion with a grain of salt

 

[It's Jeff]

Not that often. Usually I won't disagree that much unless I'm being talked down to or being told I didn't get it. Occasionally a movie review decides to call me out for some shit I wasn't thinking in the first place. From the New York Times:

Our ‘Ghostbusters’ Review: Girls Rule. Women Are Funny. Get Over It.

I never said they don't or that they're not. They do and they are. I won't get over it because they weren't funny in THIS movie. And I'm sure not a fan of your fucking insinuations, so how about slowing your roll with the accusatory bullshit for one minute?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movies/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig.html

 

[mrkgoo]

The OP is acting pretty ageist. I'm 43. I've seen 1000s of movies. The issue is that critics are not railing against pacing, they are railing against seeing a movie that is not as good as something else in a similar genre that they have already seen. When a critic is 60 years old plus their tastes have changed to wanting something more challenging and a lot of movies are akin to going through the drive through at McDonalds. You'll likely find something like Black Panther isn't anywhere near as good as you think it is when put up against the titans in the genre, especially when you factor the era of its production into the equation. The biggest question mark I have as of late was watching Phantom Thread and it couldn't hold a candle to any single episode of The Crown photographically or even in its own drama. I barely remember what happened in Thor Ragnarok, but 12 year old me would have thought it was incredible. Movies are not unique in this way. People bitch at games being too easy all the time but any game could be someone's first game ever, so take an opinion with a grain of salt

I totally agree! Good way of putting it.

(I still like Thor: Ragnarok and Black Panther ;p)

 

[SirKicksalot]

>tfw Armond White is the only critic I sort of pay attention to

At least he's interesting.
I think I stopped caring about critics when I discovered how utterly wrong they were about Speed Racer.
I also had the displeasure of working with filmology students who train to be critics. They're a miserable lot. I remember a teacher was using The Grey in class and some asshole was asking why are they wasting time with C-movies instead of art movies. Also these people don't know shit about making movies. I had to work with them in editing. It's incredibly frustrating. These people are stuck, prisoners of academic dogma. I seethed with rage for weeks. The worst part is that I know they didn't learn anything. They just glanced over the fact that their input, based on what they're taught in movie analysis, has nothing to do with the reality of making movies.

 

[prag16]

Not that often. Usually I won't disagree that much unless I'm being talked down to or being told I didn't get it. Occasionally a movie review decides to call me out for some shit I wasn't thinking in the first place. From the New York Times:

Our ‘Ghostbusters’ Review: Girls Rule. Women Are Funny. Get Over It.

I never said they don't or that they're not. They do and they are. I won't get over it because they weren't funny in THIS movie. And I'm sure not a fan of your fucking insinuations, so how about slowing your roll with the accusatory bullshit for one minute?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movies/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig.html

Yeah. Embarrassing. And the movie was trash btw. My wife and I couldn't finish it. We turned it off one night, and the next night I said, "Want to finish it?" and she looked at me like I had five heads. Probably about the third movie all time that we've put on and not finished (though there are plenty others that we should have).

 

[JohannCK]

I usually find myself at least understanding reviews I don't agree with in most cases, and in some cases I can totally see why a movie is really good and should get good reviews while not liking it myself (for example 2016's Silence made me feel very uncomfortable and I would never want to see it again, but I recognise that that was the entire point of it and that it's thus hugely successful in doing what it sets out to do).

While I do understand why they might feel the need to do that, I do feel like film critics can be a bit too hard on "fast food" type films that aren't trying to be anything else than dumb action movies, though. It seems unfair to group outright trash like Suicide Squad or Transformers with, say, Justice League or BvS.

But then of course there's outright bullshit like:

Not that often. Usually I won't disagree that much unless I'm being talked down to or being told I didn't get it. Occasionally a movie review decides to call me out for some shit I wasn't thinking in the first place. From the New York Times:

Our ‘Ghostbusters’ Review: Girls Rule. Women Are Funny. Get Over It.

I never said they don't or that they're not. They do and they are. I won't get over it because they weren't funny in THIS movie. And I'm sure not a fan of your fucking insinuations, so how about slowing your roll with the accusatory bullshit for one minute?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movies/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig.html

The Ghostbusters remake was atrocious and I can't help but feel that most of its good reviews came due to silly American politics. Hell, the Robocop remake (Robocop being made in China, Robocop starting off silver but then some corporate suit says they should paint him black to make him look "tactical" because kids like that) was funnier, and also a way better movie to be honest, it didn't deserve to get bashed as hard as it did.

 

[It's Jeff]

The Ghostbusters remake was atrocious and I can't help but feel that most of its good reviews came due to silly American politics. Hell, the Robocop remake (Robocop being made in China, Robocop starting off silver but then some corporate suit says they should paint him black to make him look "tactical" because kids like that) was funnier, and also a way better movie to be honest, it didn't deserve to get bashed as hard as it did.

If you're to believe sites like Rotten Tomatoes, almost 75% of critics gave Ghostbusters a positive review. Three of four. I shudder to think female leads in Robocop would net that movie a 75%.

Yeah. Embarrassing. And the movie was trash btw. My wife and I couldn't finish it. We turned it off one night, and the next night I said, "Want to finish it?" and she looked at me like I had five heads. Probably about the third movie all time that we've put on and not finished (though there are plenty others that we should have).

That's pretty exclusive company. I'd love to know the other two films that got the cold shoulder.

 

[pramod]

Everyone has a political agenda now, even movie reviews. It's a sad state of affairs.

 

[JohannCK]

Everyone has a political agenda now, even movie reviews. It's a sad state of affairs.

I feel like in cases like Ghostbusters a lot of them don't even have their own agendas- They're just tiptoeing because they don't want people to start screaming at them about being racist or sexist or whatever-ist.

I watched Black Panther with a friend and when we discussed it after he joked that it's a good thing that we both liked Black Panther because if we didn't we might be racist.

 

[PedroPanache]

Yeah. Embarrassing. And the movie was trash btw. My wife and I couldn't finish it. We turned it off one night, and the next night I said, "Want to finish it?" and she looked at me like I had five heads. Probably about the third movie all time that we've put on and not finished (though there are plenty others that we should have).

I remember watching it last year with my sister. We were both big fans of the original, and we kind of knew going in we were in for a big disappointment, but it was far, far worse than either of us had expected. The original felt unique, had an identity all of its own and contained a sharp, darkly funny script littered with great quotable lines and memorable moments. The new version had none of these qualities, wasted four good actresses with a script that was too loose, didn't respect why the dynamics of the original worked so well, not to mention it looked garish and cartoonish. It's an awful film. When you seperate the politics from the film, what you're left with is a pitiful, deeply unfunny movie that misunderstands the basic premise, fails to acknowledge the power dynamics of the original crew is why so much of that films works. You can't just replace them with women, flatten the groups hierarchy and just tell them to ad-lib their way into laughs. It just doesn't work for that series. That's not to say the original idea for the reboot was bad, it was a great hook in fact - an all female crew - but it was so lazily and thoughtlessly implemented, that it just served to waste four great actresses who have done much, much better work in other films.

Also, if Bill Murray clearly doesn't want to be there, to the point where he just wants to sit in a chair and listlessly stumble through his lines with dead eyes, then maybe you really don't him to be in your film. His cameo was awful. None of it was funny. He was in the film because of reasons. It didn't work. Anyway, mini-rant over; it just disappoints me that the film was such a massive misfire.

 

[Graven]

Overall yes, since, im simple minded when it comes to movies. I feel like movie reviews are getting more pretentious as the time passes. It seems like people want the movie to align with their own philosofies, ideas or beliefs. At the end of the day, when i watch any movie all i hope is that it entertains me, it is that simple to me. This is carrying over to gaming reviews as well unfortunately.

The movie No Escape(with Owen Wilson) for example, i very much enjoyed the movie because it's very intense and kept me hooked, however, i've came across some reviews bashing it for being xenophic and prejudiced. That movie does not makes me think less of south asian people one bit, at the same rate that i don't think more of americans when countless hollywood movies try to paint them as virtuous heroes.

If i want a more serious intellectual insight based on reality i'd rather go check some documentaries, or books or a lecture by an specialist.

 

[Nintendo Switch]

Not that often. Usually I won't disagree that much unless I'm being talked down to or being told I didn't get it. Occasionally a movie review decides to call me out for some shit I wasn't thinking in the first place. From the New York Times:

Our ‘Ghostbusters’ Review: Girls Rule. Women Are Funny. Get Over It.

I never said they don't or that they're not. They do and they are. I won't get over it because they weren't funny in THIS movie. And I'm sure not a fan of your fucking insinuations, so how about slowing your roll with the accusatory bullshit for one minute?
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/07/15/movies/ghostbusters-review-melissa-mccarthy-kristen-wiig.html

Ghostbusters Reboot was panned by everyone here on OldGAF but it was a movie that I actually enjoyed quite a bit. The actresses were funny and it far exceeded my expectations given how poorly it was reviewed.

I also enjoyed Death Wish (I think it had a 7% on RT but screwed it, watched it anyway and liked it), Robocop (Reboot), the original Transformers 2007 and am looking forward to watching Ready Player One and Pacific Rim 2.

I guess I disagree with GAF consensus even more than I do movie reviews.

 

[Takuan]

I haven't particularly cared about professional reviews for quite some time now. I have a pretty decent grasp of what I'll enjoy and it doesn't bother me if someone feels different. Critics view their subjects through a different lens, and although diverse perspectives can be interesting, they don't impact my media consumption habits.

That said, I've noticed a lot of posturing / pandering / virtue signaling in entertainment media in the past year or so (definitely longer than that for gaming media).

 

[TheShadowLord]

like games, it has to do more with the score than the actual review. But that is just my perspective of it.

 

[Doom85]

Ghostbusters Reboot was panned by everyone here on OldGAF but it was a movie that I actually enjoyed quite a bit. The actresses were funny and it far exceeded my expectations given how poorly it was reviewed.

I also enjoyed Death Wish (I think it had a 7% on RT but screwed it, watched it anyway and liked it), Robocop (Reboot), the original Transformers 2007 and am looking forward to watching Ready Player One and Pacific Rim 2.

I guess I disagree with GAF consensus even more than I do movie reviews.

Yeah, I thought the new Ghostbusters was decent. I wouldn't call it good per say, but the bad and good balanced out evenly to me. I can enjoy it more than Ghostbusters 2, as one of my least liked elements in fiction is retconning the ending in a nonsensical or unsatisfying way. Riiiiiiight, so four scientists managed to make tons of holograms of ghosts (and one zombie/skeleton) appear, constructed a massive robot designed to look like the Stay Puft Marshmallow Man, and create an earthquake as well as a thunderstorm centralized entirely over a single skyscraper (insert your Simpsons' "Aurora Borealis" jokes here)?! Is that the story the mayor told the public to convince practically all of New York that the Ghostbusters faked the entire incident? Seriously? Nothing in the new movie is as insulting to my intelligence as that nonsense. Doesn't help that 2 just does Ghostbusters 1 again just not as well. Ghostbusters 2016 does some repeating too but at least it's with new personalities.

In terms of a comedy sequel ruining the ending of the first one, I'll say that Blues Brothers 2000 is worse (sure, Belushi's character had to die, but why have Elwood find out right then instead of it being years since Jake's passing? It's unnecessarily depressing especially since Belushi had passed away 16 years ago. And then to top it off, the orphanage was shut down. Oh AWESOME, thanks movie. Sigh.) but Ghostbusters 2 is pretty bad as well.

I don't care for Death Wish (any of them) as it misses the point of the book but that's fine. I actually enjoy all the Transfomers movie, I admit they're not necessarily good movies but I still enjoy them (1 > 3 > 4/5 >2, although ironically 2 has my favorite character in the movies: Jetfire) and hey if people can enjoy the toy commercial that was Transformers G1 I can't say I feel that bad about enjoying the live-action movies. The new Robocop was decent, could have been worse so I was fine with what I got. I'm looking forward to those two movies as well.

 

[pramod]

All I can say is you can still read movie reviews but don't use that as the sole basis of whether you should watch a movie or not. Same thing goes with video game reviews.

 

[ricardo_sousa11]

Yes!

Specially because it seems the 9gag army boasts the review of every super hero movie.

Wonder woman was mediocre, as well as any of the late Marvel movies, specially any of the avengers. Its not even an average movie, its terrible, the story is the same on all of them, the acting is poor, and its not even a beautiful film visually, yet these movies constantly stay at 8s and 9s on all rating websites.

 

[It's Jeff]

Ghostbusters Reboot was panned by everyone here on OldGAF but it was a movie that I actually enjoyed quite a bit. The actresses were funny and it far exceeded my expectations given how poorly it was reviewed.

I also enjoyed Death Wish (I think it had a 7% on RT but screwed it, watched it anyway and liked it), Robocop (Reboot), the original Transformers 2007 and am looking forward to watching Ready Player One and Pacific Rim 2.

I guess I disagree with GAF consensus even more than I do movie reviews.

You're certainly welcome to enjoy it, or any movie for that matter. I actually enjoyed a lot of the visual effects. Taste is subjective by definition. If you're the New York Times, I'm holding you to a higher standard than tossing about accusations in your title. Regarding reviews I disagree with, I do have a problem with this one.

 

[prag16]

Flipping through Amazon video tonight looking for something to kill an hour and a half, I happened upon a 2015 film "Heist". Had a decent cast and I like me some heist films, so I watched it.

Not bad. Not great. Perfectly okay B-movie type thriller, with a couple twist and turns to keep things interesting. Afterward I googled it and found that the critics eviscerated it (granted, low amount of reviews; kind of an under the radar lower budget flick despite the cast). Fuck those pretentious fucks. As expected, ratings (out of 10) almost 3 points higher for viewers vs. critics on both Metacritic and RT. Seriously, I'm baffled as to how these people make a living? Who values their opinions, other than other pretentious fucks that like to circle jerk eachother celebrating how smart they tell each other they are.

 

[generaldane]

I don't read reviews at all wether for videogames are movies, if I see something interesting I just watch it

 

[Bolivar687]

Almost every time I check for newer releases. I see some of the ridiculous scores for these consensus films and compare it to the more sober acclaim given to timeless classics and it's jarring. Really highlights how dishonest the enthusiasm for some of these works is.

 

[Catphish]

Usually I'm in tune with the Metacritic score for a movie; generally within 10 points. But just last night I found myself an exception. I thought a 75 for Dunkirk would have been generous. I had no idea...

 

[F0rneus]

Not many horror fan reviewers out there so I’ll say yes to often disagreeing.

Yup. Just find a couple of guys you usually agree with, and start from there. Like for me, John Fallon (Arrow in the Head). He and me, think alike a lot about horror so he used to be my go to. He kind of doesn't review much anymore.

Even then I disagree with him plenty enough on many movies.

 

[way more]

I haven't found a good movie reviewer since Ebert died. I used to read avclub but now I'm not sure I agree with them. I kind of like how they take no strong stance.