Support NeoGAF

[brandonh83]

Watching The Heat, it's pretty funny. Feig is clearly a good comedy director and Melissa is honestly a good actress. I wasn't a huge fan of hers to begin with but the more stuff I see her in, I mean I get why Feig likes to have her in his ensembles.

 

[uncelestial]

So I usually go by metacritic instead of RT because RT condenses all reviews to "fresh" or not and the percentage is based on what they deem to be the number of "fresh" reviews (which can be only vaguely positive). Metacritic is a straight up score average.

Ghostbusters 2016 has a 63 on metacritic which is, you know, a low D and not so great, but that is comprised of 11 positive reviews and 9 mixed reviews and ZERO negative reviews. So you would think that means that while it's not triumphantly awesome, nobody is really offended by it or complaining about an abject lack in quality. So I'll take it, I'll be kinda cautiously excited to see it.

The weird thing to me though is that the lowest score on the list, Hollywood Reporter's review, is a) a total pan of the movie, b) provides no score at all, just the written takedown, c) was cataloged on metacritic as a "40" score, and d) referred to as "mixed."

Weird.

 

[brandonh83]

Yeah MC is a bit more specific for sure and thus lower than RT percentages as a result. Spy for example has a 75 MC and 94% RT.

 

[Sanjuro]

So I usually go by metacritic instead of RT because RT condenses all reviews to "fresh" or not and the percentage is based on what they deem to be the number of "fresh" reviews (which can be only vaguely positive). Metacritic is a straight up score average.

Ghostbusters 2016 has a 63 on metacritic which is, you know, a low D and not so great, but that is comprised of 11 positive reviews and 9 mixed reviews and ZERO negative reviews. So you would think that means that while it's not triumphantly awesome, nobody is really offended by it or complaining about an abject lack in quality. So I'll take it, I'll be kinda cautiously excited to see it.

The weird thing to me though is that the lowest score on the list, Hollywood Reporter's review, is a) a total pan of the movie, b) provides no score at all, just the written takedown, c) was cataloged on metacritic as a "40" score, and d) referred to as "mixed."

Weird.

 

[brianmcdoogle]

For people who supposedly follow this stuff, I'm still surprised people don't realize some outfits don't give scores.

I hope to catch this next week or so.

 

[uncelestial]

lol calm down Bernie!

I just don't know how these things work, are human beings kind of taking in the vibe of the no-score reviews and assigning it a score for MC? The 40 seems like a fair enough approximation of THR's review but I have no idea where that number came from.

 

[Zolo]

For people who supposedly follow this stuff, I'm still surprised people don't realize some outfits don't give scores.

I hope to catch this next week or so.

Yeah. It's not that uncommon.

As far as scores go for movies, I tend to look at them in chunks.

90% or above - Usually the best.
70-90% - Good.
40-70% - You'll probably like it if it's the type of movie you enjoy.
20-40% - Questionable.
0-20% - Almost certainly crap (But hey! You may be surprised!).

 

[Mr. Pointy]

So this is the Fast And Furious 6 of the Ghostbusters franchise.

 

[styl3s]

I hope it's as good as reviewers i trust say it is because it's always looked like a super fun movie to me but i am still put off by how some of the cast/crew have been acting towards any real criticism/concerns for it especially the shit from the kimmel show.

 

[GhaleonEB]

So I usually go by metacritic instead of RT because RT condenses all reviews to "fresh" or not and the percentage is based on what they deem to be the number of "fresh" reviews (which can be only vaguely positive). Metacritic is a straight up score average.

Ghostbusters 2016 has a 63 on metacritic which is, you know, a low D and not so great, but that is comprised of 11 positive reviews and 9 mixed reviews and ZERO negative reviews. So you would think that means that while it's not triumphantly awesome, nobody is really offended by it or complaining about an abject lack in quality. So I'll take it, I'll be kinda cautiously excited to see it.

The weird thing to me though is that the lowest score on the list, Hollywood Reporter's review, is a) a total pan of the movie, b) provides no score at all, just the written takedown, c) was cataloged on metacritic as a "40" score, and d) referred to as "mixed."

Weird.

Yeah MC is a bit more specific for sure and thus lower than RT percentages as a result. Spy for example has a 75 MC and 94% RT.

The RT score is just the % of reviewers who rated it positively (as submitted by the reviewer). The rating is what you want look to for comparison to Metacritic. Ghostbusters is currently at 6.6, and Spy is at 7.2, both of which are similar to MC's scores.

 

[cr0w]

I hope it's as good as reviewers i trust say it is because it's always looked like a super fun movie to me but i am still put off by how some of the cast/crew have been acting towards any real criticism/concerns for it especially the shit from the kimmel show.

Honestly if I had to put up with the shit they have had to, I probably would have locked a bunch of nerds in a bunker and set fire to it by now. I don't blame them for being sick of it at this point. You have to call people out on their shit.

 

[Hinchy]

Ghostbusters 2016 has a 63 on metacritic which is, you know, a low D and not so great

Movies don't work on that sort of scale. A 60 is 3/5 stars which in movie reviews is considered decent, not almost failing.

 

[CloudyTuba]

Ouch, that Top Critics score.

In general I tend to go straight to that figure as it tends to reflect my feelings more often and this one isnt looking so hot. But it's still early days so I dont consider it a very solidified figure yet. And there have definitely been many times when I've disagreed with critics so its certainly not the end-all anyway.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Yeah MC is a bit more specific for sure and thus lower than RT percentages as a result. Spy for example has a 75 MC and 94% RT.

OT but I went into Spy and was slightly shocked at how much I enjoyed it despite expecting it to be garage. A guaranteed cult(?) classic. I never saw any reviews or anything beforehand too.

 

[uncelestial]

Movies don't work on that sort of scale. A 60 is 3/5 stars which in movie reviews is considered decent, not almost failing.

Uh? The scale goes up to 100 dude. It works totally fine; no idea what you're trying to do converting to stars but the score makes sense and I've been using metacritic for years.

Honestly I haven't gone out to see a lot of movies that score that low on metacritic, because that would usually dissuade me, but it's Ghostbusters, and I'm curious. I'm picky about what I see so I kinda appreciate that MC a bit harsher (generally).

The RT score is just the % of reviewers who rated it positively (as submitted by the reviewer). The rating is what you want look to for comparison to Metacritic. Ghostbusters is currently at 6.6, and Spy is at 7.2, both of which are similar to MC's scores.

You know I didn't even see that RT also provides a "rating" -- heh. Guess I really never go there much. Thanks though!

 

[Not]

So it's fine. I'm not surprised in the least.

 

[Zolo]

To be honest, I think using a like/dislike percentage is actually better than a score.

 

[Fhtagn]

So it's fine. I'm not surprised in the least.

Yeah neither amazing nor total garbage, but "good enough, I guess" is what anyone without a chip on their shoulder could see this film was going to be from miles away.

 

[KingV]

Watching The Heat, it's pretty funny. Feig is clearly a good comedy director and Melissa is honestly a good actress. I wasn't a huge fan of hers to begin with but the more stuff I see her in, I mean I get why Feig likes to have her in his ensembles.

She's pretty funny once she moves away from slapstick/body humor. I didn't like Spy a ton overall, but she was great when pretending to be the tough ass bodyguard.

 

[QuantumZebra]

.

Movies aren't graded on a school grading system scale.

In school anything below a 60 is failing and essentially 1-60 are all the same = fail.

Film scores employ the entire scale... see: Batman V. Superman

Spoiler

had to

 

[Vire]

Hurray it's middling to mediocre! Just like every other boring blockbuster this year.

Thankfully television has been amazing this year.

 

[A Link to the Past]

The thread that talked about how people were spitting on Ramis' grave actually kind of offended me

I was triggered, if you will

As if that poster presumes to know what Ramis would have thought about this - it ultimately amounts to him using Ramis' death as a convenient bludgeon against "movie he doesn't like, he assumes". He can make such a statement, and no rebuttal of "no Ramis said this" can possibly exist. How utterly ironic it is for this guy to actively disrespect Ramis and his life while criticizing people for doing that same thing (except not).

Hurray it's middling to mediocre! Just like every other boring blockbuster this year.

Thankfully television has been amazing this year.

Eh? 74% is respectable.

 

[vaderise]

So its far from the trainwreck people wanted it to be.
I didn't hate the trailers and i don't even care about Ghostbusters that much so i'll go and see this since it's a Paul Feig movie and i really liked Spy.

 

[Spyder_Monkey]

What if those people weren't sexist? What if they just hated the idea of Ghostbusters being rebooted? Me, I like Ghostbusters, but can't stand Feig's female-led comedies. That doesn't make me sexist, that just means I hate a certain type of comedy.

Whether that means I or anyone else was wrong in the jumping to the conclusion this would be bad, that doesn't mean that all the backlash for this film stemmed form a hatred of women.

This is what I mean by use of GG rhetoric.

"The Reboot looks bad." = "Ethics in game journalsim."

Both those phrases have the exact same intent behind MRA/4Chan fueled misogynist movements surrounded around entertainment. They're one in the same.

Not saying that makes you sexist or woman hating, but maybe you shouldn't step into a minefield while actively denying a minefield doesn't exist.

 

[uncelestial]

Movies aren't graded on a school grading system scale.

In school anything below a 60 is failing and essentially 1-60 are all the same = fail.

Film scores employ the entire scale... see: Batman V. Superman

Spoiler

had to

I know, I'm just saying for ME, I think of a low 60 as "ehh, I'll probably pass; that's a low D." That's a lot of missing points -- these days there are so many entertainment options. In fact I used to do the "squaring technique" to get to the "real score." I think it's from Old Man Murray? For example, if something gets an 8/10 -- square it. That's a 64/100 -- that's how good it really is. I override this system frequently and see stuff I know isn't pulling in great reviews, but a school-scale Metacritic or OMM-squared percentage can really help me separate the wheat from chaff. I'm picky like that.

Eh? 74% is respectable.

Ehh, the *rating* (average score, not the Tomatometer) is 66%, and the top critics give it 43%. I'm gonna see it but it could be better. I'm just glad it's not a shitshow.

 

[QuantumZebra]

I know, I'm just saying for ME, I think of a low 60 as "ehh, I'll probably pass; that's a low D." That's a lot of missing points -- these days there are so many entertainment options. In fact I used to do the "squaring technique" to get to the "real score." I think it's from Old Man Murray? For example, if something gets an 8/10 -- square it. That's a 64/100 -- that's how good it really is. I override this system frequently and see stuff I know isn't pulling in great reviews, but a school-scale Metacritic or OMM-squared percentage can really help me separate the wheat from chaff. I'm picky like that.


Ehh, the *rating* (average score, not the Tomatometer) is 66%, and the top critics give it 43%. I'm gonna see it but it could be better. I'm just glad it's not a shitshow.

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is one of my top 10 favorite films of all time, and it's a 41 on MC.

The Fifth Element? 52.

If I passed on movies because of scoring I would be missing out on some of my favorite films.

--

I'm a fan of the Kotaku method "Play/don't" "Watch/don't"

Much easier and lets the viewer rate it themselves.

 

[Zolo]

It should hopefully be good enough for more spinoffs anyway. Even if I may not necessarily care for this one when I watch it, I may at least like the spinoffs more.

 

[uncelestial]

Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas is one of my top 10 favorite films of all time, and it's a 41 on MC.

The Fifth Element? 52.

If I passed on movies because of scoring I would be missing out on some of my favorite films.

Same here, man. As I said I frequently override if something just piques my curiosity. My favorite movie ever is Crimes and Misdemeanors which only has a 77, which is a score I've totally passed up movies for having.

 

[excelsiorlef]

So; 74% on RT so far. Not great but not bad at all. That's 24% more than Ghostbusters 2.

Im definitely watching this movie.

Better than 2 but not the original was my expectation.

 

[A Link to the Past]

I know, I'm just saying for ME, I think of a low 60 as "ehh, I'll probably pass; that's a low D." That's a lot of missing points -- these days there are so many entertainment options. In fact I used to do the "squaring technique" to get to the "real score." I think it's from Old Man Murray? For example, if something gets an 8/10 -- square it. That's a 64/100 -- that's how good it really is. I override this system frequently and see stuff I know isn't pulling in great reviews, but a school-scale Metacritic or OMM-squared percentage can really help me separate the wheat from chaff. I'm picky like that.


Ehh, the *rating* (average score, not the Tomatometer) is 66%, and the top critics give it 43%. I'm gonna see it but it could be better. I'm just glad it's not a shitshow.

TBH, I was kind of expecting that. I think anyone who was expecting much lower than that were being a little pessimistic. Feig's too good to make a too bad of movie :v

 

[uncelestial]

TBH, I was kind of expecting that. I think anyone who was expecting much lower than that were being a little pessimistic. Feig's too good to make a too bad of movie :v

Yeah, it's batting about where I expected too. In fact, now it makes me wanna watch Spy which I totally have meant to do for awhile.

 

[xevis]

Haven't seen the movie yet but Devin Faraci over at Birth Movies Death is quite positive about it. I think I'll check it out!

 

[adamsappel]

I need my comedies to have somewhat more believability to them to enjoy the humor fully.

I'm assuming you hated the original Ghostbusters, then? Shaun of the Dead, Groundhog Day, Team America, Young Frankenstein, Austin Powers, Beetlejuice, This is The End?

Uh? The scale goes up to 100 dude. It works totally fine; no idea what you're trying to do converting to stars but the score makes sense and I've been using metacritic for years.

A movie that gets 3 out of 5 stars is a 60% on Metacritic.

 

[A Link to the Past]

Yeah, it's batting about where I expected too. In fact, now it makes me wanna watch Spy which I totally have meant to do for awhile.

Spy was great. I didn't even laugh much (if at all), I just kinda simply enjoyed it

 

[Tremis]

I'm assuming you hated the original Ghostbusters, then? Shaun of the Dead, Groundhog Day, Team America, Young Frankenstein, Austin Powers, Beetlejuice, This is The End?

A movie that gets 3 out of 5 stars is a 60% on Metacritic.

Whoa! Good points I guess?

Yeah, suspension of disbelief is a bit more complex than maybe you are giving credit for though. If a movie presents itself a certain way to start, it sets up its own internal logic such that some things feel believable in the given story/characterization, and some things don't.

That's just me though.

Case in point, of your list, not a huge fan of This is the End because it seems to push the "we know we're being funny, tongue-in-cheek" stuff more than I could buy when I watched it. I didn't find the dialogue believable coming from those characters.

Love pretty much all of the others to varying degrees. Ghostbusters is easily my favorite as I feel it presents itself as a sci-fi film first/comedy second.

 

[brandonh83]

Spy was great. I didn't even laugh much (if at all), I just kinda simply enjoyed it

Spy won me over with the poisoned drink.

 

[scoobs]

I am legitimately stunned this movie isn't being panned by critics. Pleasant surprise.. might see it

 

[QuantumZebra]

I am legitimately stunned this movie isn't being panned by critics. Pleasant surprise.. might see it

I can understand that.

I wonder how many people were caught up in the hate storm without knowing it was fueled by what boiled down to "eww girls!" x "my childhood is ruined", and are now going "oh wait, what? its a decent flick?"

 

[CazTGG]

I wasn't expecting it to be as good as the original (then again, what Ghostbusters related piece of media is? Aside from the first movie, the first few seasons of Real and Ecto Cooler, most of the Ghostbusters franchise has had anything but quality to boot), so to hear the new one is good but not great is a relief, even I wasn't a fan of Feig's last comedy, Spy.

 

[Tremis]

I wasn't expecting it to be as good as the original (then again, what Ghostbusters related piece of media is? Aside from the first movie, the first few seasons of Real and Ecto Cooler, most of the Ghostbusters franchise has had anything but quality to boot), so to hear the new one is good but not great is a relief, even I wasn't a fan of Feig's last comedy, Spy.

Btw, echoing this, if people are on the fence about Real Ghostbusters, give the first few seasons a shot. The writing is definitely going for something more than a kids cartoon in most of those episodes. There's great comedy and some genuinely creepy episodes in there so consider checking it out. Very 80s though, so not for everyone.

Edit: the later seasons slowly turn to garbage due to the forced involvement of an outside consulting group, which you can hear about in this video, and can be safely avoided.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OW51PDa_puE

 

[Zolo]

I'm not sure I ever watched real Ghostbusters, but I have heard plenty of people who said they considered it better than the original movie.

 

[Lothars]

TBH, I was kind of expecting that. I think anyone who was expecting much lower than that were being a little pessimistic. Feig's too good to make a too bad of movie :v

Honestly with his attitude towards anyone that didn't like it I expected him to shit out this movie. It looking like he hasn't is more suprrising to me than anything. I am glad reviews are decent for it and hopefully this is a case of bad trailers but I still will be surprised if I like this more than ghostbusters 2.

Edit: Spy was entertaining. he did a good job with that.

 

[Zolo]

I enjoyed Bridesmaids, but I've never seen Spy. I thought it looked good anyways.

 

[Bluth54]

I wasn't expecting it to be as good as the original (then again, what Ghostbusters related piece of media is? Aside from the first movie, the first few seasons of Real and Ecto Cooler, most of the Ghostbusters franchise has had anything but quality to boot), so to hear the new one is good but not great is a relief, even I wasn't a fan of Feig's last comedy, Spy.

The 2009 Ghostbusters videogame and the IDW monthly Ghostbusters comic series are both high quality continuations of the Ghostbusters 1/2 story.

 

[brandonh83]

Went a bit higher up to 76%

 

[adj_noun]

The 2009 Ghostbusters videogame and the IDW monthly Ghostbusters comic series are both high quality continuations of the Ghostbusters 1/2 story.

Oh yeah. The game pretty much is Ghostbusters 3.

I'm so glad they did it before we lost Ramis.

edit: good lord, I just realized how old that game is. I still feel like it just came out.

If you pre-ordered from Gamestop you got a call from a pre-recorded Dan Aykroyd to come get your game. It was so neat.

 

[QuantumZebra]

This makes me happy:

My daughters are too young to take to the movies (3 and 4), but they are super-excited for when it hits home theater.

 

[CadetMahoney]

Personally I wouldn't appeal to aggregate review scores as proof of opinions of the movie is wrong/right.

Jurassic World has a 72% RT and you can't prove that by me that it's a "good/ok*thumbs up*" film by a long shot, it's below mediocre. I'd put it at BvS level. That goes both ways, some films I would consider more enjoyable than JurassicW and be in the 60's.

 

[brandonh83]

Personally I wouldn't appeal to aggregate review scores as proof of opinions of the movie is wrong/right.

Reviews aren't proof unless it sways heavily in one direction or the other, which at that point one could safely assume it's either bad/good.

All it says is that more people liked it than not. That's true for Jurassic World as well.

 

[excelsiorlef]

Yeah, it's batting about where I expected too. In fact, now it makes me wanna watch Spy which I totally have meant to do for awhile.

Do it! So good.