• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

MMA-GAF |OT4| BangBros

Status
Not open for further replies.

ShaneB

Member
The Transformers movies are fucking TERRIBLE. I found Avengers boring, but I HATE the transformers movies, watched the first one, skimmed through the second, and never watched the third.
 

Chamber

love on your sleeve
You can say fuck movie reviews all you want pasty, truth is they reflect movie quality and word of mouth more often than not.

Avengers has a 92% on RT, and 1.5B at the box office. There's no way to twist it, people loved that movie.

But fuck movie reviews and fuck Avengers.
 
i was reading the Man of Steel thread and Blade has like, a mid 50% rating on that Rotten Tomato site.

if there's evidence critics don't know shit, it's right there, cause Blade is grade A stuff.
 
i was reading the Man of Steel thread and Blade has like, a mid 50% rating on that Rotten Tomato site.

if there's evidence critics don't know shit, it's right there, cause Blade is grade A stuff.

I mean not really... I really like them, and they are stylish but I mean those movies aren't really doing anything aside from "vampires bad", "vengeance", "fight".
 
Because it kids, teens and manchilds still like to see Big Robots throwing down and Michael Bay knows just the right style to make it shiny.

There's nothing to it, Transformers success isn't like "incomprehensible". For example, if On Stranger Tides was the first movie in the franchise and it had done 1b, then it would be incomprehensible because really, almost everybody thought it was a shit movie.

Critics get it wrong all the time? I don't see that.

Blade Runner
2001


EDIT: and these shit was happening back when people went to college for film theory. These guys now a days are just people that wanted to get into movies for free so they made a site. Very few are respectable.
 
All the time = Movies released before you were born?

I rest my case.

Those are the two biggest. A lot of the 80's action flicks that are loved now were shit on back in the 80's. However if you want recent:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_episode_iii_revenge_of_the_sith_3d/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thor/

Both shit movies that were sold off of hype. Just pay attention to the media before these big movies are released. No movie that is as ugly and boring as Thor should have any good reviews.
 
See nothing wrong with those links. Neither is a "shit" movie, and considering what I've heard from Man of Steel, they both pack more emotional resonance.

Sorry Kaep, maybe you just don't understand movie viewers and critics. Even though yes, some movies will be misunderstood... but the likes of Man of Steel and Transformers are hardly the flag holders of such state of reality. Try not picking shit bubble gum movies (in the case of transformers at least).
 
Those are the two biggest. A lot of the 80's action flicks that are loved now were shit on back in the 80's. However if you want recent:

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_episode_iii_revenge_of_the_sith_3d/

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/thor/

Both shit movies that were sold off of hype. Just pay attention to the media before these big movies are released. No movie that is as ugly and boring as Thor should have any good reviews.

The Thing (82) was panned when it came out and is arguably the best sci-fi horror movie of all time (ok, Alien is better).

i don't read reviews and don't give a shit about movie goers impressions, fuck that noise.
 
Viewers will watch anything they are told to watch. It's one of the first things you learn in a media advertising class. You know why everything in a movie is shown in trailers? Because people want to know what they are getting themselves into. Viewers don't want surprises. They want to be entertained for a small time because their lives suck.

A critics job is to review what is in a film. That's it. They aren't there to tell people what isn't in a film. They are there to say what is wrong and what is right with a film. Shit, Ebert once said if he was talking to one of his peers and they said "I'm looking forward to X movie" he lost respect for them because they already formed an opinion and just need to see the movie to justify their beliefs. Truffaut felt the same way.

You have modern critics kissing ass to directors on twitter trying to get free tickets. Big name critics too. Even though I don't like Devin for BD he is 100% right about his contemporaries.


EDIT: The only reason I picked Transformers is because those are shit movies that get people in the seats. So who is wrong?

Modern critics are summed up nice here:

http://www.marketwatch.com/story/10-things-movie-critics-wont-tell-you-2013-05-31?pagenumber=1


Now I don't agree with all of these points but it does touch on my problems with critics now. In my mind Film criticism died April 4, 2013.
 
That's why the connected world is so great, and sites like RT can give a much better evaluation of general opinion than it was possible before.

Which is why picking up movies from 30 years ago to prove critics don't know shit is just mind boggling. Check IMDB, check RT, check box office, check week to week drops.

"Viewers will watch anything they are told to", welcome to fallacious arguments 101. Viewers will watch ideas they are sold on. Or a simple look at big budget bombs from the last three years, is more than enough for that argument to fall apart like a house of cards.

It's all about indicators, and critics are a valid and good indicator of a movie's general quality, with standard margins of error.

We will always align our beliefs with what suits us anyway, truth is for most people the opinions of others only matter when they align with our own. And articles about the failing state of an "industry" are a dime a dozen every decade playboy, no need to wave them around like they mean shit.
 

Vio-Lence

Banned
Jerry what's more likely?

Option 1 or 2

1) A nationwide conspiracy to give the new Superman movie poor ratings because they're out to get WB/DC Comics.

Or

2) A Zach Snyder movie being an attractively shot piece of shit?
 
That's why the connected world is so great, and sites like RT can give a much better evaluation of general opinion than it was possible before.

Which is why picking up movies from 30 years ago to prove critics don't know shit is just mind boggling. Check IMDB, check RT, check box office, check week to week drops.

"Viewers will watch anything they are told to", welcome to fallacious arguments 101. Viewers will watch ideas they are sold on. Or a simple look at big budget bombs from the last three years, is more than enough for that argument to fall apart like a house of cards.

It's all about indicators, and critics are a valid and good indicator of a movie's general quality, with standard margins of error.
How many of those are a good marketing campaign? Look at the new star trek. It didn't hit it's mark and the marketing was blamed. Movies are sold off marketing. Now explain Transformers? Explain the Resident Evil movies? All critically panned. Still make money. Who was wrong about the movie? The masses that flocked to see them or the critics or is it the marketing telling them to go see the movie? There are whole areas of study about how well marketing works. If something bombs than the marketing company did something wrong. Read this. A book on marketing and the psychology behind it.

http://www.amazon.com/dp/0471763179/?tag=neogaf0e-20

We will always align our beliefs with what suits us anyway, truth is for most people the opinions of others only matter when they align with our own. And articles about the failing state of an "industry" are a dime a dozen every decade playboy, no need to wave them around like they mean shit.
Cognitive Dissonance says we can align our beliefs with something even if it doesn't suit us. Read the link. It isn't about the industry. It's about the critics and how they are often wrong.

Jerry what's more likely?

Option 1 or 2

1) A nationwide conspiracy to give the new Superman movie poor ratings because they're out to get WB/DC Comics.

Or

2) A Zach Snyder movie being an attractively shot piece of shit?

I don't care what people think. I'll form my own opinion tomorrow morning. I just can't believe someone thinks a bunch of dorks that made websites are to be trusted. Modern film criticism is one step above video journalism.
 

Vio-Lence

Banned
I liked Watchmen and 300 so I'll give it a shot.

Watchmen was an admirable attempt but ultimately it was a failure. Snyder did a lot of things right, but I think he missed the major beats of the story which ultimately doomed the film. I think it's going to have a nice cult following over time like other interesting failures like Lynch's Dune.
 
So I say that people will go see a movie based on the ideas that are sold to them and you... kinda argue what I'm saying without ever showing why I'm wrong?

Of course marketing is a huge deal, it's how you pass a message. That's just logical. And critics are often wrong, individually.

However the whole collective of them isn't wrong nearly as often. Resident Evil making paper, or Transformers doesn't mean critics are wrong. That's just dumb reasoning.

It's even worse to try and discredit general opinion on a movie, based on the simple fact that the marketing was so good and got you so hyped that your knee jerk reaction is to say critics don't know shit. 2001 and Blade Runner were amazing (even though Blade Runner's version with narration is... not that good), so Man of Steel could be the same!!!!!!

The trailers man, they tellin me the movie is awesome...
 

dream

Member
No, I mean, he's right. As you pointed out, Cormier is sounding disturbingly "yessir massah" there. But how do these guys not have the self-awareness to realize that, in the position they're in, they shouldn't be saying things like this?
 

Vio-Lence

Banned
No, I mean, he's right. As you pointed out, Cormier is sounding disturbingly "yessir massah" there. But how do these guys not have the self-awareness to realize that, in the position they're in, they shouldn't be saying things like this?

cisco or something.

wpid-boy-31.jpeg
 

Gr1mLock

Passing metallic gas
Its fucking 3 am and i cant sleep. miracuosly shes awake giving me tips on falling asleeep. great thank you. No i didnt try just fucking LAYING THERE. Nah im good.....im good...
 

muddream

Banned
No, I mean, he's right. As you pointed out, Cormier is sounding disturbingly "yessir massah" there. But how do these guys not have the self-awareness to realize that, in the position they're in, they shouldn't be saying things like this?

Cormier in 2011 said:
It's hard to miss his chain. It's hard to miss him buying a Cadillac with ostrich skin seats. He has ostrich seats, 'King Mo' in the headrest. I was like, I have to get some of this.

Damn homie

n0Hsc4I.gif
 

Gr1mLock

Passing metallic gas
i kinda like 4 am mma gaf...no cumbr or drm...no face to yell at everyone about games cause he has zero reflexes or any kinda dexterity to speak of. This is sorta nice
 

ItAintEasyBeinCheesy

it's 4th of July in my asshole
6:30 pm 4 me.

Bout to cook up a pork rack and roast veg. Some site said I gotta cook it for 3 hours, was like WHATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT.

Gonna get high/drunk cause its Friday. Vodka, Orange and Guava and lemonade.
 
Just got back from a E3 party that CCP threw, it was pretty cool, open bar and shit at the Standard hotel..

Will be in nerd chat for Fitch/Birkman, praying to Xenu that Fitch gets KO'd again.
 

bone_and_sinew

breaking down barriers in gratuitous nudity
i kinda like 4 am mma gaf...no cumbr or drm...no face to yell at everyone about games cause he has zero reflexes or any kinda dexterity to speak of. This is sorta nice
Our Euro/Asia/Aussie friends are gentler than those on our side of the pond but the downside is this thread moves a bit slower.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom