ForumsPopular MediaRotten Tomatoes - Home Of Idiots

23 3216
NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,063 posts
Farmer

Boondock Saints scored 17% from critics, 93% from audience

Now, I understand everyone has different tastes, and that's okay. But when a person sits down to watch a movie that's beloved by many people, and they fail to see why others enjoy it so much, then the critic fails at their job. If you sit down with a bunch of people who love the movie and you go, "What's wrong with you?", then chances are you're an idiot who doesn't understand what it is other people enjoy. What is the job of a critic? To inform other people not what they personally thought about the movie, but what they believe others will enjoy it. A good critic will try to figure out what types of people would enjoy the movie, and which types wouldn't.

I'm just venting, because the critics for this movie are ***.

  • 23 Replies
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,601 posts
Regent

No he/she doesn't. A critic has to analyse more than what we see, he has to dissect the script properly, the acting, the special effects, and more, whilst most of us get sucked into 2 hours of high octane fun and laughs. Or tears and screams. A critic doesn't need to figure out what we want. Look at Christgau, he dissed most major rock/metal acts, yet he is highly respected. Ebert too.

A critic bases his opinions on his own feelings and thoughts. Why would you care if he or she hates it? It's as if one feels that one's own tastes and preferences are being attacked. Well they are not. Critics are entitled to their own opinions and rightfully so.

They can like a movie that is made, acted worst than a 7th grade Shakespeare production and yet give a bad rating. Or they can dislike a movie like Titanic, but give it a high rating. And we complain incessantly about being sucked into a single zeitgeist of consumer culture and big studio conspiracies?

partydevil
offline
partydevil
5,168 posts
Bard

A critic bases his opinions on his own feelings and thoughts. Why would you care if he or she hates it? It's as if one feels that one's own tastes and preferences are being attacked. Well they are not. Critics are entitled to their own opinions and rightfully so.


i agree whit this. but also that the critics have done a bad job on boondock saints.(if these are the real ratings) if they all fail to see the great things in that movie then i think the wrong critics have been doing it.

Look at Christgau, he dissed most major rock/metal acts, yet he is highly respected.

so if you like rock/metal, than you do not listen to what christgau has to say about it.
the same can be done for the movies critics.
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,601 posts
Regent

so if you like rock/metal, than you do not listen to what christgau has to say about it.
the same can be done for the movies critics.


I respect Christgau, he readily admits if he thinks the group is good, even if he hates the genre.
xXxDAPRO89xXx
offline
xXxDAPRO89xXx
6,794 posts
Count

Boondock Saints scored 17% from critics, 93% from audience


17 and 93? Wouldn't that be 110? I am just losing it? xP
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,601 posts
Regent

They are different ratings. One is from the critics collectively, and the second from users.

Anyway, claiming it's the home of idiots is a harsh generalization, and ad hominem at any rate. It's one thing to disagree violently with critics, which all of us surely have in our lives, and another to go all out with a verbal twelve gauge like some of the users on the RT sites.

rayoflight3
offline
rayoflight3
437 posts
Peasant

I agree with nichodemus. A critic should break down a film/album/book/etc. in a way such that people have an idea of what to expect. Then the layman can determine whether or not he wants to watch/listen to/read it.

And also, the title is a bit misleading, since Rotten Tomatoes only aggregates reviews in an objective way.

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,063 posts
Farmer

No he/she doesn't. A critic has to analyse more than what we see, he has to dissect the script properly, the acting, the special effects, and more, whilst most of us get sucked into 2 hours of high octane fun and laughs. Or tears and screams. A critic doesn't need to figure out what we want. Look at Christgau, he dissed most major rock/metal acts, yet he is highly respected. Ebert too.


Meh, I guess I just hate critics then.

A critic should break down a film/album/book/etc. in a way such that people have an idea of what to expect.


Of course. But when a critic gives something most people enjoy a low score, they give the impression that it's not enjoyable.
pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,991 posts
Scribe

But when a critic gives something most people enjoy a low score, they give the impression that it's not enjoyable.


They give the impression that it is a bad movie, in their opinion.

Most people enjoy Star Wars ep. 1-3...but a critic (or one worth his mettle) will tell you how god awful they are
nichodemus
online
nichodemus
14,601 posts
Regent

Of course. But when a critic gives something most people enjoy a low score, they give the impression that it's not enjoyable.


Yeah I know right. It used to pissed me off, then I realised I could do nothing about it. Life moves on, and more films I like come out, get ripped, but get rewatched. Again and again and again.
landmaster2000
offline
landmaster2000
135 posts
Farmer

TBH, don't agree too often with Rotten Tomatoes. And though critics analyze what we might not see, they often rate movies with bias anyway.

Jacen96
offline
Jacen96
3,113 posts
Herald

You know, I find that I disagree with most ratings done by critics, although, one example of something they did really well on, is Eragon (That film was horrible)

~~~Darth Caedus

NoNameC68
offline
NoNameC68
5,063 posts
Farmer

Yeah I know right. It used to pissed me off, then I realised I could do nothing about it. Life moves on, and more films I like come out, get ripped, but get rewatched. Again and again and again.


Eh, making a thread and calling the critics idiots allowed me to vent. As soon as I hit enter, I didn't feel so bad anymore.
pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,991 posts
Scribe

one example of something they did really well on, is Eragon


One example of something they did really poorly on was The Room..that movie is amazing. Deserves much more then 35%
rayoflight3
offline
rayoflight3
437 posts
Peasant

Why're you guys acting as if critics operate as a single entity? "They did well..." or "They did poorly...." Never mind the fact that you're criticizing a critic for his subjectivity; they each have their own opinions, and other than getting paid to write about movies, they're no different from the regular audience.

And in regards to The Room, you're still in the minority. Only 46% of the audience on Rotten Tomatoes liked it.

pangtongshu
offline
pangtongshu
9,991 posts
Scribe

And in regards to The Room, you're still in the minority. Only 46% of the audience on Rotten Tomatoes liked it.


Well then...obviously the 46% were the only ones that actually watched it
Showing 1-15 of 23