Movie Reviews
 

Anyone actually pay attention to these when deciding on what movie to see?

I don't, i usually take the opinions of my friends over Ebert's.:D

sometimes. if i think a movie will be crap, i'll read a review and maybe rethink things. if i think a movie will rock, i'll usually watch it regardless of what anyone says.

I take the reviews with a grain of salt and go if it is interesting for my interests. I wouldn't willing open up a review to read it. Not everybody has my interest for movies...

I go to 3 places for opinions on movies.

-www.mrcranky.com
-The critic for the local newspaper. I do the opposite of what he suggests
- here of course :D

I usually read IMDB's review blurbs that they have every Friday in the daily Studio Brief. I might click on one of the reviews from time to time if what they said sounded interesting.

But they don't have a big affect on whether I wanna see a movie or not. I'm usually just curious to see how true my impressions of a film (from ads and trailers) are. And I guess a review can nudge me bit towards (not) seeing it, but my decision isn't not made or broken by just a review.

I read alot of reviews in newspaper, on TV, and Online, but more for my job than anything. I base my wanting to watch a movie on absolutely none of them.

I trust my friends opinions of movies over movie critics. They know what I like, I know how they rate movies... it all works out.

i usually check www.rottentomatoes.com this site has reviews from a whole bunch of movie critics. i usually read those before i watch a movie because it has so many different opinions...

I go by Ebert's movie reviews. I've read every single review he's did since 1985, and after reading every damn one of them I have to say that he nails it perfect. I realize that some people watch movies for only entertainment, and that's fine. But I want a quality movie that delivers a message or a bigger picture. If Ebert gives a movie less than 3 stars out of 4, I simply won't see it. Every time I do, I find it being exactly how Ebert said. People say movie critics are crap, and that you should form your own opinions...well, why form my own opinion if I can read someone who I know will be the exact same as mine? I can save time and money. I don't have to pay to see a shitty movie, and I can use the time to watch a good movie.

The same goes with videogames as well. Electronic Gaming Monthly and IGN have very, very good reviews that I'm used to and trust. If they say a game is good, I buy it, and I'm NEVER disappointed. If I con myself into buying a game that they gave bad reviews, it always sucks. It's as simple as that.

So, if ya don't want to believe that movie/game critics are trustworthy, go spend your money on MIB2 or play Enter the Matrix simply because you were looking forward to it. It's sure as Hell not my time and money that's being wasted. :)

-Lasereth

Yea, I use rottontomatoes too, good site.. but other then that, i dont base my decision really on anything. If it looks good to me, ill see it. Regardless of what others say, to hell with them!

I almost always check Rotten Tomatoes too. Usually if it gets a good rating there, chances are I'll enjoy it. Of course I still form my own opinions. I don't automatically like a movie because critics said I should. In my "Unpopular Movie Opinions" thread I just posted earlier that I was let down by the Tomatometer when I watched Bend It Like Beckham.

Also, it's good to know the difference between movies that will be critically acclaimed and movies you just want to see for plain fun. Most critics won't give certain brands of movies a second thought when reviewing them. Sometimes I just want to watch a movie with stupid, immature humor. Those movies usually don't score too well.

I watch a trailer on Quicktime, and if the movie appeals to me, I will go see it or rent it on DVD. I am my own critic. I don't need someone to tell me if I will like a movie or not.

I use RottenTomatoes and MetaCritic equally. I wish there were some way to personalize them and kill off some of the reviewers, though - a few consistently skew the numbers with their bad, bad columns.

I usually enjoy Ebert's reviews too, and I have a similar movie-going philosophy as you do (bigger message, etc.). But I don't agree with following a review so strictly as to have such a rule as yours. Just out of curiosity, when was the last time you read one of Ebert's reviews just *after* seeing the movie? One thing I've noticed, is that if I read a review before seeing a movie, I make sure to notice the flaws that the review brought up. But other times, when I read a review afterwards, the flaws that were mentioned went by me unnoticed.

Also, about videogames: I think it's a slightly different situation. There's more of a universal good and universal bad with videogames, which most everyone can agree with. Also, describing the main elements of a game is easy to do, and from that, a reader can determine if they would like to play it. There's not much "interpretation" going on, as there is with movies.

Yeah, I actually never read Ebert's reviews until I see the movie. I check the star rating and if I was interested in seeing it and it got more than 3 stars then I usually see it. Ebert does enjoy screwing up plot details sometimes (I guess it comes from seeing 15 movies per week at the theater), but his reviews are always acurate on the rating aspect. So don't worry about me looking for the bad aspects of the movie; I never read his reviews until I've seen it. I always agree with Ebert after I've seen it, as well.

I know that videogames are a different spectrum than movies, but it's also easier for people to say that a game is good when it's not. Or better yet, whether a game is entertaining or if it's quality. You'd be surprised at how many people out there will play a game simply because they're fans of it despite it sucking horribly. I hate to use the Enter the Matrix example again, but a few of my friends played it right when it came out and would NOT admit that it was a bad game simply because they're Matrix fans. I read IGN and EGM's review on it, and am successfully not wasting my time on it. EGM gave it a 3 out of 10...how can someone say that it's a good game? Just because it has an Agent in it doesn't mean it's a good game.

I think it may actually be less divided than movies when it comes to bad/good videogames. Most gamers have a hard time of determining which games are good and which games they're playing just because they were looking forward to it, bought it, and now don't want to feel ripped off. Hell, I used to do that. I played a PSX game called Felony 11-79 for MONTHS before realizing that I didn't really like it. I was playing it because I spent $50 on it and didn't want to waste my money. I began noticing the flaws in it. Sure enough, I read the reviews, and it got a 5 out of 10 from most reviewers. This is where movie and vidoegame critics shine: they can see through the effect that a game or movie has and see it for what its worth.

If someone wants to see a movie based on entertainment only, that's fine. If you want to play a videogame simply because you're a big fan of a series, that's fine as well. But don't say that critics don't know what they're talking about, because they do. They don't rate them on the fact that YOU like the Matrix or YOU like Tom Green, they rate it on the quality and thoughtfulness of it. That's why Enter the Matrix got bad reviews and why Ebert gave Freddy Got Fingered 0 stars out of 4. Like I said earlier, there's a bunch of people that will argue that Freddy Got Fingered is one of the best movies of the year simply because it's funny. It may be funny, but that's not what critics are rating a movie on.

-Lasereth

I don't listen to critics mainly because they're very pretentious. They always seem to like movies that bore the shit out of me and hate the movies that I like.

I think Ebert is a piece of shit. Ebert is a lot like a paid bitch for the movie industry. He always gives two thumbs up to movies that put ads on his show. I mean, he liked gangs of new york. that move sucked royally.