What Is The Last Film You Watched? (Newer Films)

[crocodile 8,000]

So it's not crumbling under its own weight like Interstellar seems to do?

You're already reviewing it, Alex?

Karol

[Hurmm 91]

It's nothing heavy like Interstellar or Inception. You could say it's a blend of Groundhog Day, Aliens, and Starship Troopers. You probably won't like it but it's damn good fun. And yes, every guy who has seen this movie will know that Emily Blunt shot up there. The GIF doesn't do it justice. It looks even better in the film.

[A24 4,331]

So it's not crumbling under its own weight like Interstellar seems to do?

You're already reviewing it, Alex?

Karol

It was in one of the more critical tweets, crocs.

[crocodile 8,000]

I've not read those. In fact, I'm not going to read any reviews or watch anything before seeing it.

My expectations are not exactly high, either. Hopefully, it's enjoyable. But I'm a bit cautious with it.

Karol

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

[crocodile 8,000]

Well, you know. My IMAX tickets are already booked for the opening day. So I'm seeing it either way.

As you know, I enjoy all Christopher Nolan's films to various degrees. But don't want to overhype this one for myself.

Karol

[A24 4,331]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

Are you sure you are only a mild fan? You don't act like one. The other tweets sound like they were written by you.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

You probably won't like it but it's damn good fun.

Actually, I think Cremers would like it (or at least, not hate it), though he probably won't like the third act.

[Quintus 5,399]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

I remember the good old days when people read actual published reviews in which to gauge thorough critical reaction to a movie. Some of them were even in print.

None of this twitter shite.

[A24 4,331]

Actually, I think Cremers would like it (or at least, not hate it), though he probably won't like the third act.

Don't tell, is it a giant air battle?

[crocodile 8,000]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

I remember the good old days when people read actual published reviews in which to gauge thorough critical reaction to a movie. Some of them were even in print.

None of this twitter shite.

Giant air battle?

You probably won't like it but it's damn good fun.

Actually, I think Cremers would like it (or at least, not hate it), though he probably won't like the third act.

Don't tell, is it a giant air battle?

Giant air battle?

You probably won't like it but it's damn good fun.

Actually, I think Cremers would like it (or at least, not hate it), though he probably won't like the third act.

Don't tell, is it a giant air battle?

No. But there is a giant land battle!

Kinda.

Karol

[Quintus 5,399]

You probably won't like it but it's damn good fun.

Actually, I think Cremers would like it (or at least, not hate it), though he probably won't like the third act.

Don't tell, is it a giant air battle?

You probably won't like it but it's damn good fun.

Actually, I think Cremers would like it (or at least, not hate it), though he probably won't like the third act.

Don't tell, is it a giant air battle?

I want to know this too. Is there a giant air battle?

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

I remember the good old days when people read actual published reviews in which to gauge thorough critical reaction to a movie. Some of them were even in print.

None of this twitter shite.

I actually far more value terse reactions from a wide smattering of general audiences than overwrought tirades of opinion from some dude that the New York Times thinks knows a lot about movies.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Jay 37,346]

No, Edge of Tomorrow ends with a more intimate final sequence.

[Quintus 5,399]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

I remember the good old days when people read actual published reviews in which to gauge thorough critical reaction to a movie. Some of them were even in print.

None of this twitter shite.

I actually far more value terse reactions from a wide smattering of general audiences than overwrought tirades of opinion from some dude that the New York Times thinks knows a lot about movies.

These days I trust nobody. Every movie I watch is a chance.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

The final battles in the Transformers movies are always beautifully intimate affairs. Does he mean like that?

[Jay 37,346]

No I mean it's about a smallish group of heroes infiltrating the base of a few of the bad guys. It's not a 45 minute action extravaganza like a Marvel movie.

[A24 4,331]

These days I trust nobody. Every movie I watch is a chance.

I sorta rely on a consensus. When RT or Meta says it's only 12/100 then chances are it's not a masterpiece. Let's see what Edge Of Tomorrow has received ....

90%?!!!!!!!

I'm so there! (even though the positive scores aren't always to be trusted either )

Frack all that, I rely on the trailer!

[KK 3,307]

The trailer for the film is awful and from what I've heard, very misleading.

I still want to check this out, just need the time.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[Quintus 5,399]

There's been loads of RT 'rottens' (40-50s) though which I have thoroughly enjoyed, so I can't even go by general consensus anymore. Friends in life and online here are my best bet nowadays, but that's still not wholly reliable either. I've pretty much turned to judging a 'book' by its cover and if I like the poster art or the central pitch then I'll probably have an eye on it. Hype and province I've grown resilient to.

[Jay 37,346]

I wrote a bit about the film here

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Believe it or not hype doesn't do anything for me either... except for this one. Hell, I've been waiting for it for eight years. I'm just enjoying the ride, shamelessly. Annoying Alex and Pub in the process is just icing on the cake.

[Hurmm 91]

Edge of Tomorrow is a video game movie done right.

[BloodBoal 7,538]

[A24 4,331]

There's been loads of RT 'rottens' (40-50s) though which I have thoroughly enjoyed, so I can't even go by general consensus anymore. Friends in life and online here are my best bet nowadays, but that's still not wholly reliable either. I've pretty much turned to judging a 'book' by its cover and if I like the poster art or the central pitch then I'll probably have an eye on it. Hype and province I've grown resilient to.

The 50s are usually the best ones, Quintus. Greatness (except for when it comes to Nolan, of course) often divides the public, turning them into either extreme lovers or extreme haters.

Alex - enjoying the process as well

[Hurmm 91]

Critics now are getting too lenient anyways. The amount of movies getting 90%+ ratings these days... Pfft.

[Quintus 5,399]

Yeah the higher rated stuff is normally far more disappointing than the 'duds'.

[Uni 306]

Edge of Tomorrow is nothing like M&MS, and I never saw Jumper. I'd say Doug Liman has pretty good range, all his films are fairly different.

Edge of Tomorrow is a lot of fun!

Guardians Of The Galaxy 'not-taking-it-all-that-seriously' fun? Or just non-stop action fun?

Even better . . . it's clever fun. Which is the best kind of fun, especially in a sci-fi piece.

[King Mark 3,631]

These days I trust nobody. Every movie I watch is a chance.

I sorta rely on a consensus. When RT or Meta says it's only 12/100 then chances are it's not a masterpiece. Let's see what Edge Of Tomorrow has received ....

90%?!!!!!!!

well yeah because it's a good movie. Seriously you see the trailer and base your decision to see the film on that? Anyways when you want to be stubborn your the master here.

What Uni said, after the film you feel like it was a clever,entertaining sci-fi movie. Something like District 9

[mrbellamy 6,278]

Yeah the higher rated stuff is normally far more disappointing than the 'duds'.

Doesn't that have more to do with expectation than the actual quality of the movies? If something's hailed a masterpiece or close to it, it's hard not to hope you'll feel the same way. And if something's labeled an utter failure, there's a chance you'll be willing to cut it some slack if it has some merit to it.

Honestly, most of the time I can see where the general consensus is coming from, even if I would pitch my own rating higher or lower. Source Code was probably the most recent film I can think of where I was truly baffled by the acclaim, just could not see it at all. That's pretty rare for me. But I mean, I bet there are a lot of people on here who love that movie.

[King Mark 3,631]

Family friendly movies that don't offend anyone usually get a falsely high tomato rating, like those random CG animated films

Now John Wick (violent action film) is getting a super high rating, and anything with Keanu Reeves is usually slammed. Makes me curious..

[mrbellamy 6,278]

Yeah. You do have to read the fine print sometimes with Rotten Tomatoes...a movie with all 3/5 ratings would theoretically still get a 100%.

[King Mark 3,631]

The Marvel movies also end up rated too high

[mrbellamy 6,278]

Yeah, but again...something like X-Men: Days of Future Past can get a 92% over, say, The Master's 85%...but its 7.6 rating pales to The Master's 8.1. And speaking of John Wick, it's also at 85% right now but with a 6.9 rating.

It's easy to sell the percentages but they don't mean much without the ratings. And even then, it's all a big "so what?".

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

RT is just... crap. What exactly is the point of these "critics consensus" sites? Why do we need to know? What is gained? Can people seriously not exercise sound enough judgement to forecast the quality of a film based on trailers, cast/crew, marketing, etc., and then decide whether or not to see it? What exactly is the function of "critics"? Why should I care that this person has a soapbox from which to broadcast their opinion?

I'm not a fan of professional criticism.

[mrbellamy 6,278]

I don't know. I mean, disregarding the consensus ratings, I like that there are websites like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic where everyone's all in one place. I just feel like there has to be a better and more individualized way to do it than just taking averages. And individual critics can certainly be helpful if you follow someone whose tastes or interests line with yours or who usually has interesting things to say. A well-written review can enhance (if not exactly change entirely) how you view or appreciate a movie. I've often taken notice of certain things in a film after reading a review, or found that I wasn't the only person who noticed something. And of course critics have always been helpful for championing smaller films that might have a harder time finding its audience.

For me, usually criticism is far more interesting after seeing the movie. I can't say I read reviews of something I've never seen, unless I'm just skimming positive ones to fuel hype for something I'm going to see anyway. Most often, I think critics and general WOM have the most influence on movies that I'm just kind of on the fence about. "Trailer looks okay, could be good, could be shit, don't know if I really care to find out." If general word-of-mouth is good, or even just one critic that I respect recommends it, then I'll be more inclined to give it a go. I can't recall any movie that I was genuinely looking forward to seeing and then decided NOT to see it because the critics didn't like it. That would be ridiculous.

[A24 4,331]

well yeah because it's a good movie. Seriously you see the trailer and base your decision to see the film on that? Anyways when you want to be stubborn your the master here.

What Uni said, after the film you feel like it was a clever,entertaining sci-fi movie. Something like District 9

I hope not because I didn't like District 9. This universal Neill Blomkamp appraisal is a bit of a mystery to me, KM. Have you seen Elysium? What a turkey that was! He's just not my kind of guy.

Yes, I base myself on the trailer, word of mouth, RT, who is involved (if it's a director I like), ... you know, a combination of things ... If it's all looks promising, it might end up getting on my list of "movies to see". I rarely go to the theater so putting it on a list means that I'll watch it as soon as it becomes available for home video. My list is very short, but in the end, I'll watch a lot more movies, even those I think will be terrible, like Abraham Lincoln: Vampire Hunter, which I watched on TV last night. OTOH, The Wolf Of Wall Street is on my list and I still haven't seen it. Based on the trailer/teaser, there are three future movies that definitely want to see: Mad Max: Fury, Bats V Supes and Inherent Vice. The first two because they look like comic book movies in visual overdrive, the third one because it's PTA.

Alex

[KK 3,307]

Elysium was pretty bad, but District 9 was great!

[publicist 4,643]

Reading reviews can be fun if they are written by a perceptive person - my wet dream is Malcolm Tucker writing movie reviews, kind of like the good Mr. Canky reviews back in the day - but mostly they are shite. All things considered , i visit cinemas once every three months so why bother?

[Quintus 5,399]

I've not seen Elysium but District 9 was really good in the cinema. I still wish the director hadn't left the Halo project, though. He was ideal.

[King Mark 3,631]

Elysium was pretty bad, but District 9 was great!

[A24 4,331]

I guess we don't have the same taste, KM.

[nightscape94 965]

District 9 is one of those strange movies that I really liked but have no desire to see again any time soon.

[crocodile 8,000]

Maleficent. Oh dear, now this is a really bad film. Feels more like a 90-minute montage than a story - and very choppy at that. Some shoddy effects. And Jolie doesn't quite pull it off to the extent I was hoping.

But... the score is really good, even better than I expected from soundtrack album. And quite well mixed, too. Would like to have it complete and chronological. Makes more sense this way (themes especially) than its puzzling and confusing album listening experience.

Karol

[Sharkissimo 1,973]

Don't worry. There was one vaguely negative tweet out of many dozens, and naturally Alex has chosen to take that one as representative of the truth.

I remember the good old days when people read actual published reviews in which to gauge thorough critical reaction to a movie. Some of them were even in print.

None of this twitter shite.

I actually far more value terse reactions from a wide smattering of general audiences than overwrought tirades of opinion from some dude that the New York Times thinks knows a lot about movies.

That's because you're a fanboy. I care more about the opinion of some critical dude who actually knows his shit, not the ignorant mob. Good critics (and critically-minded viewers) are our last defence against the Hollywood hype machine, without them 'Everything is Awesome', dissenting voices are harassed and the power elite rule the day. That's the world we live in.

[Dixon Hill 4,234]

Well call me a fanboy if you want, but I see it as perfectly logical. When Ebert died I lost interest in critics.

[crocodile 8,000]

I prefer not to put too much stock in either, to be honest. There is just as much bullshitting from esteemed circle of critics as there is in the "gutter" of multiplex audience. Although, different sort.

In other words, read whatever you like for reference and to learn stuff. After all, it's good not to be ignorant. But make up your own mind. That's what it should be for.

Karol - both pompous and pretentious (Quint will be proud)