What's Up With Movie Critics?

[Jeremy1983]

I saw a TV spot for Underworld: Rise of the Lycans last night and some critic said it is "The best of the Underworld Trilogy!"

Granted, I haven't seen the film. But why is there always some douche critic that hails a crappy sequel as better than the original. It happens EVERY TIME a sequel comes out.

Does this annoy anyone else?

[Crim122]

It gets on my nerves when a movie has a 0% on every critic website yet when they play a trailer they tell me how good it is.

Quit lying, your movie sucks.

[P@t_Mtl]

I don't really read, listen or hear what critics have to say usualy.

But it's true. But I once heard somewhere that many of these so call critics, specialy in newspapers did not even exist? They are just name use to promote a movie?

I was trying to find it but stuck at work, I saw that in 60 minutes some years ago.

[[1080-p]]

Originally Posted by Crim122

It gets on my nerves when a movie has a 0% on every critic website yet when they play a trailer they tell me how good it is.

Quit lying, your movie sucks.

what irks me are stupid critics that just want to trash movies
alot of sequels are better better then originals

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by [1080-p]

what irks me are stupid critics that just want to trash movies
alot of sequels are better better then origanials

I am speaking of stupid movies like New In Town and Jumper...though Jumper got a few good reviews.

I have only seen a few sequels that I liked better than the original.

[Jeremy1983]

Originally Posted by [1080-p]

what irks me are stupid critics that just want to trash movies
alot of sequels are better better then originals

Yes, SOME sequels are better. But even if they aren't (Scary Movie, Underworld, Rocky, Spiderman 3, Matrix, Saw, etc, etc, etc) there is always some "professional" movie critic who says Basic Instinct 2 is better than the original.

[Jeremy1983]

Originally Posted by Crim122

I am speaking of stupid movies like New In Town and Jumper...though Jumper got a few good reviews.

I have only seen a few sequels that I liked better than the original.

New In Town is still at 00% Tomatometer

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by Jeremy1983

New In Town is still at 00% Tomatometer

Well it has that annoying Renee chick in it, I can see why...she is terrible.

[Sussudio]

a lot of times these types of quotes come from various movie review websites, some of which want to promote their site and will therefore write something positive about a movie to do so.

other times pay attention to how much words are twisted in these quotes, especially with the use of the "..." for example, a review might say "what could have been the best film of all time falls short when it needed to truly make an impact" and the quote slapped on a poster or preview changes it to say "...the best film of all time...truly makes an impact" very misleading...

[Blu Titan]

Originally Posted by Crim122

Well it has that annoying Renee chick in it, I can see why...she is terrible.

She looked and acted worse than terrible in Appaloosa.

[dabouck5]

Has any one else noticed that Peter Travers from Rolling Stone is basically quoted on like 70% of movie covers saying how great the movie is...

[Mannyfresh84]

Originally Posted by Jeremy1983

I saw a TV spot for Underworld Evolution last night and some critic said it is "The best of the Underworld Trilogy!"

Granted, I haven't seen the film. But why is there always some douche critic that hails a crappy sequel as better than the original. It happens EVERY TIME a sequel comes out.

Does this annoy anyone else?

You mean you saw a TV spot for Underworld Rise of the Lycans right? I hear what you're saying but it's just promotion. There is nothing we can do about it so why waste time getting annoyed over it. Traffic annoys me but getting pissed about it isn't going to make it go any faster. BTW, I saw Rise of the Lycans and it was pretty awesome. Movies like Underworld don't really need great reviews to get people to see them as they generally already have a specific target audience.

[JamesKurtovich]

I get sick of the reviews and stars on the covers of certain movies, and they're almost always from the same source. As if they're paid a premium for their comments.

"5 STARS. AN AMAZING ACTION PACKED THRILLER THAT'LL BLOW YOUR SOCKS OFF!!! - Peter Travers, Rolling Stones Magazine"

[dabouck5]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

I get sick of the reviews and stars on the covers of certain movies, and they're almost always from the same source. As if they're paid a premium for their comments.

"5 STARS. AN AMAZING ACTION PACKED THRILLER THAT'LL BLOW YOUR SOCKS OFF!!! - Peter Travers, Rolling Stones Magazine"

exactly. Peter Travers should just not review movies altogether. It would seem he hasn't even seen half the movies he allows his name to be on the covers for.

[Jeremy1983]

Originally Posted by Mannyfresh84

You mean you saw a TV spot for Underworld Rise of the Lycans right? I hear what you're saying but it's just promotion. There is nothing we can do about it so why waste time getting annoyed over it. Traffic annoys me but getting pissed about it isn't going to make it go any faster. BTW, I saw Rise of the Lycans and it was pretty awesome. Movies like Underworld don't really need great reviews to get people to see them as they generally already have a specific target audience.

You are correct. Edited.

[Jeremy1983]

Originally Posted by dabouck5

Has any one else noticed that Peter Travers from Rolling Stone is basically quoted on like 70% of movie covers saying how great the movie is...

Yes, Peter Travers has ZERO credibility as a film critic.

[MarkJ801]

My guess is that with movies like Underworld 3, they used the critics quote way out of context. They probably said something like, "This movie blows, but at least it's the best of the three." - And so they use only the last part of that quote.

[Blu Man]

I don't care what critics say either way.

[toef]

Originally Posted by dabouck5

exactly. Peter Travers should just not review movies altogether. It would seem he hasn't even seen half the movies he allows his name to be on the covers for.

I think he does an ok job. I like that he's not afraid to give a movie 0 stars.

Sometimes, however, I feel like he gives a movie a higher score than necessary, just to appear hip (like giving 4 stars to Borat and Dodgeball).

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by JamesKurtovich

I get sick of the reviews and stars on the covers of certain movies, and they're almost always from the same source. As if they're paid a premium for their comments.

"5 STARS. AN AMAZING ACTION PACKED THRILLER THAT'LL BLOW YOUR SOCKS OFF!!! - Peter Travers, Rolling Stones Magazine"

rollingstones is about as legit as MTV lol


I just hate when they put a million reviews on the cover of a movie, like the cover of Let The Right One In looks so bad because of the big reviews on it.