What is Reddit's opinion of
Rotten Tomatoes?
From 3.5 billion Reddit comments
➔ Rotten Tomatoes website
By popularity on Reddit, this Service is:
100 reviews of this app found across Reddit:
I find it hilarious how it only got a 65% on rotten tomatoes, despite being such a great film.
It came out right after Gibson went all antisemitic*, so it's clear what happened with its reception.
The documentary was absolutely amazing. 96% on RT.
I felt so bad for Huma. He seemed detached of any empathy in that shown to friends/family.
Instead, he just "accepted" responsibility - and continued to push forward in his political field. However, he did nothing to fix his personal issues, and apologize directly to Huma.
I feel like both Huma and Weiner married each other not out of love - but rather out of political motivations. They had a kid shortly after getting married. Huma overlooked it. Not once, not twice, not thrice, but... I forget what number were at now. It's high.
I cannot believe he hasn't learned his lesson yet. He's an amazing Democratic politician. Was great friends with Jon Stewart. Everytime he's on Bill Maher - hes eloquent and passionate about the issues hes presenting. For that reason, I gave him a pass.
However, this latest "nude" - is just dissapointing. And with his son.... I don't know anymore man.
The fact that his last name is Weiner, is just...sigh... you can't make this stuff up.
There's is a South Korean movie about a person like this. It's a great movie! Weird as hell, but great. It's called Castaway on the Moon.
It's also about a guy who jumps off a bridge in order to kill himself, but lands on an island where nobody can see him, and which he can't get off of.
Rotten tomatoes has become a safe space for uncomfortable themes and questionable dialogue.
I noticed over the past several months movies that had "PoC" antagonists had rotten ratings due to how racist and problematic they were.
IE: London has fallen & no escape .
Should Rotten Tomatoes step in as well? Trying to shut down a movie because you don't agree with its message is despicable, but if the movie just isn't that good to begin with, what can you do?
The Witch, The Lobster, 24, 10 Cloverfield Lane, Hail Caesar, Love and Friendship, The Nice Guys, Sing Street, The Conjuring 2, Last Man on the Moon, among many others have done well this year. There have been some disappointing releases in terms of franchises, but still lots of great movies.
Edit: You can always check out the Rotten Tomatoes list for top movies this year if you're looking for good new releases. It's not a perfect website as we know, but it looks like about 90 titles have been "Certified Fresh" so far.
Just look at the Rotten Tomatoes page. 85% audience 46% critics. Normally only cheap action films like Transformers or the like have such a discrepancy.
Also here's the "Critics Consensus"
>Though it sports good intentions and benefits from moments of stellar dialogue and a talented cast, The Newsroom may feel too preachy, self satisfied, and cynical to appeal to a wide range of viewers.
Sure it's a bit preachy, but so is just about everything Aaron Sorkin has ever done. I don't think any of the people I know would have described it as cynical. If anything it was optimistic about the way journalism could be. I guess when you make money by counting page views and have no foreseeable change on the horizon, that becomes cynical.
> half arsed
I think everyone is demonizing the "reboot" concept, and this is really what you're afraid of. Don't forget how many decent reboots there have been. James Bond (Casino Royale anyway), Star Trek, and Batman just to name a few off the top of my head.
Meanwhile there's shitty half assed original shows all the time. No one complains about them. They just ignore them and let them die to the depths of time.
What's the difference then? Possible unpopular opinion: Because you think that the new Ghostbusters somehow makes the original one worse. It doesn't. Just pretend it doesn't exist. Boom. Problem solved. No one forced you to watch it, no one forced you to care.
Edit: I got about a million replies about how bad Star Trek was.
Here's essentially objective proof that you're just being elitists and you're proving my point about how you think that a reboot (even a critically acclaimed one at that) intrinsically makes your favorite show worse. Guess what? It doesn't. Star Trek was, by all measures, a pretty damn good movie, and you only think it wasn't because it isn't the show you're circle jerking over. Get over it.
I have also replied to I think all but 2 comments. So if you still think I'm wrong, I invite you to read my replies and reply back. I'd love to discuss this. I like when I'm the devil's advocate and actually believe in what I'm saying.
Christian Bale is awesome in this movie, but a lot of critics hated it. Probably because it came out along side The Matrix. The concept to me is just very interesting.
There really does not need to be an Uncharted movie, the games are big enough cinematic experiences themselves.
And of the 16 movies Shawn Levy's directed, the highest rated one on Rotten Tomatoes is at 59% rotten.
Exactly. The movie currently holds a fresh rating on Rotten Tomatoes but reddit's probably going to say that the positive reviews are all from people who "don't trash any movies" or "don't want to be sexist" and all of the negative reviews as people who "aren't afraid to be honest" instead of the truth that this movie isn't as bad as they want it to be.
Hunt For The Wilderpeople - IMDB - Rotten Tomatoes
A story of a young boy put into foster care in rural New Zealand and the following adventure of him and his new foster Uncle as they trek through the countryside pursued by the authorities and an overzealous social worker.
I loved this film, thought it was fantastic. Has some quite serious and sad circumstances underlying the story but the character and humour of the film manages to keep you in a lighthearted and upbeat mood. I laughed all the way through. Some lovely moments of the NZ scenery and great performances by both Julian Dennison and Sam Neill.
Ron Klain, part of her debate prep team, knows what he's doing.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ron_Klain
He's one of those behind the scenes players that don't get as much attention as they deserve.
Edit: If you're interested in Ron Klain, I highly recommend the movie, Recount. Kevin Spacey plays Ron Klain and he's pretty much the main character.
That Indiana Jones Fan-Film that accidentally got released in theaters because someone thought it was a real movie got a 77%
> When Gawker Media was sentenced to pay Hulk Hogan $140 million in damages for publishing his sex tape, it was seen as a victory over snarky New York media. Now, with the revelation that the lawsuit was secretly bankrolled by Silicon Valley Billionaire Peter Thiel in retaliation for an article that outed him as gay, the case has become a symbol of something else: a shadowy war on the press that’s being waged by wealthy individuals and companies, with a boost from social media.
Or maybe the context should be a reaction against an arrogant self-entitled press that is sticking it's nose into individuals private business and private personal lives and making their existence hell. Theil was perfectly entitled to keep his personal life private for any reasons he wanted too.
Maybe the real question should be why it takes the wealth of a Peter Theil to fight back, and why can't a less wealthy person protect themselves as well. And why the press can get away with it so often
Honestly I think RT's scoring system is terrible, I don't get why anyone would use it over Metacritic.
They just take the exact same reviews, but RT simplifies everything over 60% as a like and everything under 60 as dislike.
It works okay for movies that naturally fall around 60%, but at the high and low end you just get super polarized scores where the final number is entirely determined by the outliers. For things above 90% the RT score is just a measure of "How uncontroversial is this movie?" You'll find nature documentaries and such at 95+% RT score where the average critic score is only in the 70s.
Every time I've checked, about 1/3 of the movies currently in theaters are over 90%. It's 33/86 right now, and 7 have a full 100/100. The scores are so inflated on the high end that they had to scrap the tomatometer and use an entirely separate system to make a top movies list.
Edit: Right now, the top movie in theaters by tomatometer is Jar ar Ingrid with a perfect 100/100 and an average critic score of 7.7/10. The avg user score is even worse.
I mean it only got 47 positive reviews out of 48 (the new york post didn't like it).
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/13th/
It's also not really about Trump. It's a documentary that traces the history of slavery to mass incarceration today, from a respected filmmaker. It's neither a "hit piece" nor anti-intellectual -- so not sure what synopsis you're reading....
Edit to add: Alan Peterson (Director of Hillary: The Movie and *Fahrenhype 9/11 - a truther doc) is no Ana DuVernay (Director of 13th and Selma). I promise you, she doesn't need "Dark Money" to make a documentary about the history of African Americans in this country. That's like saying James Cameron needed "dark money" to make Avatar because it thematically dealt with climate change.. You can disagree with the conclusions of her film, but this isn't in the same universe as counterfactual propagandistic garbage docs. It's just qualitatively a very different work. Maybe you should watch it before ignorantly shooting from the hip.
That 26% means that around 1 in 4 critics liked it. It's not a grade.
The Rotten Tomatoes average grade for Suicide Squad is 4.7 out of 10, or 47%.
Yeah, where was this outrage over the mediocre robocop remake?
Oh wait it was a white guy
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1200731-robocop/ https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/ghostbusters_2016/
Somewhat controversial opinion, but I actually liked the prequels more than the recent Disney movie. The prequels needed a lot of work, don't get me wrong. And I didn't feel this way on first watch. There is a LOT that went wrong in the prequels. Midichlorians, Jar Jar, I don't like sand, I have the Higher ground. It seems to me like Lucas doesn't quite understand how dumb or how smart audiences are, so he often makes things too blunt and straightforward, when good film making requires a certain subtlety. But the story itself is creative and interesting, and adds a LOT to the original trilogy. Basically it's like a good joke, with horrible delivery.
The new movie is exactly the opposite. It is very well made, but it is ultimately much like other Disney movies, formulaic and unoriginal. It's an old joke, with incredible delivery.
I think Lucas is a very creative guy with a strong ability to seed great stories. I think he needs a partner with a firm grasp on what works and what doesn't to sort through his mistakes. I think that's why Spielberg and Lucas were such a good combo, because that is exactly what he is good at.
Side note. I just wanted to point something out to you. Did you know Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull is considered a successful movie. It grossed over 786 million AND it did well with critics. It currently has a 77% on Rotten Tomatoes. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/indiana_jones_and_the_kingdom_of_the_crystal_skull/
I usually like Rotten Tomatoes on a whole but I don't like how much of the attention is given to the overall percentage rating. Let's look at Man of Steel and Thor The Dark World.
So Man of Steel has 55% and a nice big rotten sign next to it. The Dark World has 66% with a nice big fresh sign next to it. Yet they both have the exact same movie rating, a 6.2/10. Yet Man of Steel is regarded as shit and The Dark World manages to get away with a pass because it got a fresh rating, despite having the exact same rating to it. For me the worst part about a comparison like this is that The Dark World is essentially getting that easy pass because "ah well, at least it was fun" when in my opinion it loses out to Man of Steel on just about every category.
Not that this is a MCU vs DCEU thing, but I just don't think if movies have the same rating they can be different. Maybe a critic thought an extra ha ha joke made it entertaining or whatever, like come on now. Just have it be equally weighted. Like would Man of Steel have gotten a fresh, would The Dark World have gotten a rotten? Who knows, but it's the same rating therefore it should be the same score. If we throw in top critics then MOS was more liked anyway.
> - A kind of Chinese Pulp Fiction with a political pulse, it adds up to a powerful portrait of desperate individuals driven to extremes by official corruption and runaway commercial development.
> - It's a movie that's bitterly violent, both physically and emotionally, and a tremendous exploration of the have-nots in a society that is mostly known for its haves.
> - This masterwork is set in contemporary China, where the gulf between those able to maneuver (or manipulate) the country's economies of change and those left behind or defeated by the seismic shifts widens.
> - In two decades of moviemaking, China's Jia Zhangke has examined the damage of his country's explosive growth with a poetic sense of outrage. With his latest effort, the implied violence bubbles over.
For movies with a female protagonist I always add back in 50% of the rating to make up for the 50% of the population that hates women.
For example Steel Magnolias is sitting at 69% on Rotten Tomatoes, instead of its true rating:
69% + 0.5(69%) = 103.5% approval
> These characters consistently bring in large profits and solid reviews so it’s easy to see them dominating the film industry when the big 2 or even the trinity (Wonder Woman) all grace the screen together.
Ha
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/batman_v_superman_dawn_of_justice
Mel Gibson isn't as blacklisted as you'd think, he just directed a new film that's getting really good reviews called Hacksaw Ridge and starred in another with similarly good reviews called Blood Father.
The [OTHER] here is Japan, I am not sure if it is any other Netflix regions.
This movie was shot in one month, had a limited release 4 years later, and was reviewed by almost nobody.
While the available scores aren't good at all (Rotten Tomatoes 20%), this movie is unique, the perfect length, and certainly worth a watch if you're in the mood for a suspenseful film.
Down Periscope. Hilarious comedy that my whole family (5 children, all grown up now) would watch and rewatch. Funny thing is that Kelsey Grammer has said it's his worst role but it is actually very funny. Definitley worth your time. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/down_periscope/
> The Rotten Tomatoes "Certified Fresh" sticker
Yep, they license it out now. Great free advertising for them. Interestingly, they also license out the Rotten Splat logo. Not sure how many folks will be interested.
The second Tesla Master plan title was a spoof on this ridiculous 90's movie https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hot_shots_part_deux/
Elon said at the Gigafactory Party last night that no one got the joke.
In the movie the villain is Saddam Hussein, both the Tesla Master Plans and the Hot Shots movie are taking on an evil oil regime.
My favorite Rotten Tomatoes review is on the movie 'Wild Hogs' and the review just said "No."
Edit: Here's the link, just scroll down a bit and you'll see it.
It's not going to help, but it won't hurt the box office either. At this point though, this is such a wild card I can't tell where it will go.
I'd be a lot more worried for Free State of Jones, sitting on a 0% on RT as I write. Might be the worst bomb of the summer at this point since Popstar.
You're not alone. Warcraft has a 77% audience rating on RT (and it was at 83% after the first weekend) and a 7.4 on IMDB. Like most of the internet, this sub is pretty melodramatic when it comes to movie quality; movies are either amazing or complete shit.
I require them to watch the Mandatory Induction Video. https://youtu.be/avaSdC0QOUM
Before they're allowed take command, they must watch the Mandatory Training Film. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/captain_ron/
That's true, but the site seems pretty transparent about their score since they link to all the reviews. Their 31% rating for Suicide Squad is based on 121 reviews and you can look at each individual review here:
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/suicide_squad_2016/reviews/
I don't care enough about Suicide Squad to read 121 reviews to see if they truly match the 37 "Fresh" and 84 "Rotten" score that RT came up with.
EDITED: To fix link.
The current Tomatometer score is 74% with 43 reviews. Ghostbusters will likely end up in the high 60s or low-to-mid 70s when the dust settles. Which will be higher than Batman v Superman (27%) and Warcraft (29%).
It definitely shows its true self in the second half of Season 1.
Exhibit 1: Season 1 Rotten Tomato Score=56
Exhibit 2: Season 2 Rotten Tomato Score=100
Exhibit 3: Season 3 Rotten Tomato Score=100
Every single published critic liked it in seasons 2 and 3. But look at season 1 chronologically. The people who watched the pilot or just the first three episodes turned in their reviews first and panned it...6 of the first 9 are bad. Those who watched the rest of the series required more time and gave it good reviews...6 out of the last 7 are positive.
The first really good episode is #6. The first really great episode is #8.
Look, I know I'm defending a company on the internet and it's silly but some of the things you said are not quite right.
I mean, you don't have time to watch two Marvel movies a year?
Gradual drop in quality? Civil War, Winter Soldier and Guardians of the Galaxy were all better than all Phase 1 movies in my opinion. Also this.
Yes! I'm watching The Nice Guys tonight (stars Ryan Gosling and Russell Crowe) which I got from the library.
This morning I went downtown to a TIFF screening of "La La Land" with Emma Stone and Ryan Gosling.
I've declared today my unofficial Ryan Gosling Day! haha
It's got an average rating of 4/10 on Rotten Tomatoes, though this is from a small sample size straight from the Toronto Film Festival. It's likely to go up when the wide release comes but it's still quite brutal.
Just in case anyone hasn't...
BUCKAROO BANZAI
It's a madcap scifi comedy about an impossibly talented scientist who fights to save the world from an alien invasion... amazingly entertaining.
Cast of 1000s: Peter Weller, John Lithgow, Jeff Goldblum, Christopher Lloyd, et al
Book of Eli (48%). I thought this movie was entertaining and honestly pretty good. Obviously not amazing but I was surprised by its score.
This is a terrible movie, I watched this on HBO over the summer. I'll leave the rotten tomatoes link https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/vice_2015/ 4% is right about where I would put this movie, both Willis and Jane phone in their performances, along with cinematography that makes any prime time TV show look like an Oscar contender. I would skip this movie.
Ridiculous. Roeper is one of the most respected critics of this day and age. God forbid he disagree with (semi) popular opinion. God forbid a critic ever does that.
I blame Metacritic, Rotten Tomatoes and other movie review aggregate web sites. I go on to my movie app to pick tickets and there's a rating by every single movie. Low initial ratings scare away people who might actually enjoy the movie. A lot of movies with low ratings have their overall 'user ratings' go up when the thing goes to Netflix and Blueray.
Like if a movie has an 80 or up, people go to it. If a movie has a 70% like Popstar well now suddenly no one is going to see it. 70% isn't a bad rating for a movie, it's certainly not the 40% that Batman v Superman got. But it's a death blow, not bad enough to be a terrible movie but not good enough to be one people will watch.... eternally doomed to being a quick to Netflix film that won't have the negotiating power of higher end films.
Movies like this end up being unusually super popular on Netflix but no one sees them in theater.
It's one of the best movies I've ever seen. If you want to check it out, don't read any reviews or anything about it, because it will spoil big stuff. Also, Joss Whedon helped write it and it has a 91% on Rotten Tomatoes.
Good ones, too, according to his recent Tomato scores. He just can't set foot in the United States without very real risk of being imprisoned for that child-rape he plead guilty to that one time.
They need to start vetting their directors far better. Neither Snyder nor Ayer have a particularly great track record - especially the former but even the latter: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/celebrity/326392049/
The absolute madman. The king of mindfuckery even included a mind step to warn that they were entering mindfuckville. The critics don't understand that the numbers in this magnificent scene served as foreshadowing for Warcraft reviews, paralleling with the first number of the shill critics' score and the second number of the true fans' scores. Get ready to dock people because we're approaching Nolan levels of Mindfux.
The general audience might be put off by the slow pace of the film and its more artsy nature.
The issue for cinephiles might be that it is a remake of a critically lauded foreign film. Generally, Hollywood remaking classics is frowned upon.
That's my guess. Personally, I agree with you. I think it is fantastic.
Yes. There's a 2-part HBO documentary about Richard Kuklinski, a hitman who worked for the mob. IIRC he killed over 30 people before he was arrested.
The Iceman: Confessions of a Mafia Hitman (1992)
The Iceman Confesses: Secrets of a Mafia Hitman (2001)
They're lengthy interviews from when he was serving a life sentence in prison. I think they're available on DVD and maybe you can find them on YouTube.
33% on Rotten Tomatoes, 6.6 on IMDB, and 42 on Metacritic.
Apparently not well received critically, and also came out as a loss or just barely broke even.
Critics get early screeners and so reviews for it are out already; it has a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. I guess it might be early for OP to have watched it all, but the critical consensus is that it's very good.
I dunno dude, the guy wrote the screenplay to chronicle for fucks sake, I believe he just might be someone who knows story structure well enough to make up a good but disorganized pitch on the spot.
Vox article sums it up perfectly:
>Abedin has clearly had enough of her husband’s shtick — she has spent much of her six-year marriage to Weiner watching a performance she’s grown increasingly tired of seeing.
The documentary this gif is from is actually really good! Karma is a bitch.
Go take a gander at the LibCucks on Rotten Tomatoes attacking the film as right wing propaganda without addressing a single issue the film raised.
Edit: ok it's not the same film.
When I first saw this, it felt like one of those spoof trailers. Like no way this was real. I just finished watching him on House of Cards, then the next day he's in a remake of a 10 year old flopped movie?
Someone either had a huge paycheck or some bad blackmail on him
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/independence_day_resurgence/reviews/
Its getting some really good and really bad reviews. I thought critic showings wern't until opening day?
Also Free State of Jones is at a 0% so far :( Still want to see that though.
77% on Rotten Tomatoes. Their summary:
> Though the plot elements are certainly familiar, Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull still delivers the thrills and Harrison Ford's return in the title role is more than welcome.
The Spy Who Came In From The Cold: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059749/
And The Tailor of Panama: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tailor_of_panama/
The Ipcress Files: http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0059319/
Just checked the current RT page and no reviews are missing, it's just that there are different reviews shown on the first page which don't have excerpts. But all the reviews are exactly the same, none have been removed as far as I can tell.
I have been always fascinated by movies with just one actor. Buried, All is lost helped me quench my thirst. I'm adding Locke to the list. Fantastic acting by Tom Hardy and I loved his characterization. The whole ride, 36 phone calls, different emotions in different calls. Loved the movie and would recommend it to anyone.
I didn't say he wasn't overtly anti-religious (I'm a fan of his stand-up, he very clearly is), I said not all of his work was about atheism. Like /u/nvrules27 said, it was not advertised as a movie about religion. When it became a central theme, that's when the movie went downhill. It came off as overly abrasive and it just wasn't as funny as the beginning of the movie. Reviews reflect this pretty clearly.
You can read marginally negative user reviews for Vikings season 4 here: http://www.metacritic.com/tv/vikings/season-4 Interestingly, rotten tomatoes users give a very different picture, rating season 4 as broadly on a par with previous seasons: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/vikings_2013/s04/
At least the critical receptions were not bad, 73% on Rotten Tomatoes and 60% on Metacritic.
Like most are saying, It sounds like the 1986 cartoon Ghostbusters. Had a quick check on the LaserDisc Database and it seems they only released one LaserDisc of the franchise, which was also a movie, called Ghostbusters: The Revenge of Prime Evil.
Here's a link to the movie on RottenTomatoes, there's not much information, but the cover might jog your memory?
Do not be alarmed by that critic review bullshit. You mean to tell me that Kingsglaive was a worse movie than This
With that said, the movie is pretty good and sets up alot of FFXV. I cant wait to see how it pans out in the game. For example, something happens to suddenly anger and enrage a character, but the result of said rage isnt in the movie, that is gonna be in the game. Go in expecting a cliche movie about FFXV in order to showcase that world and its politics so you know it before playing.
it's actually doing quite well so far, 70% on rotten tomatoes from 10 critics reviews.
A lot better than i expected, i'm still not going to watch it though.
It's fairly common for the audience score to be much higher than the audience score. The audience score is basically an internet popularity poll, where fans can brigade the score up. The critic score is much more rigorously compiled.
For an example, see the latest Tarzan - 35% critic, 67% audience. Even Nine Lives has a 42% difference between audience and critics. The general audience tends to be much more forgiving.
RottenTomatoes. Seven reviews, all of them positive. 100% score. Dreadcentral also praises the film.
I see no reason to rag on Bloody Disgusting for the review when it pretty much says the same thing as other reviews do.
I think it might actually be quite good. The shaky cam is less shaky, and the last half of the film seems to be gory, claustrophobic and pretty scary.
It went up. Now it's at 35% lol It's something. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/suicide_squad_2016
Actually wait. The Rotten have stopped. It was 33 1 hour ago. And it's still 33. But the Fresh went up by 3. Interesting. If it keeps getting more Fresh it'll keep going up. There might just be a small glimmer of hope after all.
Look at Hillary's America: 17% by reviewers, 74% liked it. https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hillarys_america_the_secret_history_of_the_democratic_party
Yeah, it's pretty clear who is pumping up Ghostbusters.
Yes im sure all 160 positive reviews are SJW feminists shills who are trying to push a narrative.
Be real with yourself for a second. You and the rest of the reddit need to deal with the fact that most critics think it's a fucking decent movie. You can cry about "omg le sjw feminism so cancer" but to be in such denial that you think it's a terrible movie and all the reviews are shills is just really sad.
Rotten tomatoes reports 91% of 66k users want to see it. I suppose some will change their minds after the first reviews come out but I wont be surprised if this movie makes profit.
Some people just cant go without seeing the next movie in a huge franchise even after knowing its shit. Other people like me just want to watch a trainwreck live.
Warcraft in the USA: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/warcraft/
How it did in China: http://www.cinemablend.com/news/1523259/warcraft-has-made-an-insane-amount-of-money-in-china-get-the-details
This movie has 33% rating out of 9 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. Critics are calling it 'boring'. Too early to tell, but probably not very good actually... https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_promise_2016/
Professional movie critics completely shit all over the movie whereas most of the public actually liked it, with a significant amount rating it much higher than average.
Edit: Check the Metascore vs the User Score at Metacritic. And the Tomatometer vs the Audience Score at Rotten Tomatoes
assisti The Big Short e esse filme é ótimo, se gostou de The Wolf of Wall Street, vai gostar das quebras da quarta parede com explicações complexas sobre a crise de 2008, a edição do filme combina perfeitamente com os diálogos, mas recomendo ter paciência, por que o filme tem muitos termos complexos que pode criar desinteresse ou perder o ritmo do filme.
Careful though, once your mind is fucked - you can't unfuck it.
Tough call, but right now it's Red Army. Have in mind that I'm from Brazil and I knew absolutly zero about Hockey or Hockey history.
For me it's a really good depict of what being a great man is. Not that macho bullshit, but having convictions and owning your mistakes. It's absolutly beautiful, funny and heartwarming.
Pacific Rim set out to be a dumb fun Japanese style monster movie and it succeeded. Not sure why you linked Suicide Squad because Pacific Rim actually had decent reviews - https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/pacific_rim_2013. Pompeii was shit though so I'm not sure why you included that one.
Yea, don't mean shit to me.
One of my favorite comedy movies, Super Troopers, has a 35% on RT: https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/super_troopers/
So I hope its just shitty critics and the movie is atleast decent. I thought BvS wasn't as bad as people claimed, so still have hopes for this one.
You really seem to love repeating the same words over and over again, as if it makes your point stronger (it doesn't).
If the fictional premise of a fictional TV show based on a fictional comic book centered around a fictional universe doesn't make sense to you, then it sounds far more like you've a problem separating fiction and non-fiction. Like I said above you're applying your real world views and understanding and applying them to a universe where they aren't applicable. I can't imagine the fun you must be when going to the movies, or watching TV shows, or playing video games, or listening to the lyrics of songs, etc..
Have you stopped to consider that not all of the information has been told to us? Why does Genesis reside in Jesse without issue? Why could it be summoned out of him later in the show, but not earlier? Why did it explode out of the tin after it was captured? Where is Deblanc? Eugene? Where is god? What makes Genesis so powerful? In what way(s) is/are Genesis more powerful than god?
Those are all questions that, as far as I understand, are unanswered right now. It doesn't go against the story, nor does it mean the show has plot holes in it. It's setting itself up for seasons to come, to further invest the viewers in the show.
Holy shit, I've been listening to these guys since I saw <em>The Guest</em> I had no idea they're from Austin.
BTW, The Guest is on Netflix, and it's a great film.
Oh boy, this is awesome for followup questions for u/TPL_on_Reddit -- thanks!
Summaries make multiple references to how many other libraries in the world have a certain item in their collection. How is this information accessed, and is it available to the public?
The 2014 report on Camp Harlow makes me wonder why such a film was chosen for the collection in the first place. When attempting to add an item to the TPL's collection, are librarians required to write up a case for the value of a particular item? Are these cases for acquisition reviewed? Are the notes surrounding item acquisition kept for future reference, and are they available to the public? Understanding the logic of acquiring this film might be interesting.
How much did the TPL enjoy getting the complaint about Dr. Seuss' Hop on Pop?
According to Rotten Tomatoes, most reviewers seem to really like it, earning it a 77% tomato-meter score. Do you know of another review aggregation site that is showing different results?
Note: I don't have a vested interest in this movie either way, I'm just super sick of people politicizing it in both directions.
According to rotten tomatoes, Gravity is WAY better than Interstellar. I enjoyed both, but I actually did like Gravity more. One is less "sci-fi" than the other one (although they both are, though Interstellar demands more suspension of disbelief). Scientifically speaking... I won't spoil anything, but Interstellar has gorgeous imagery and more weirdness to it, while Gravity is too grounded to be accurate, but still enjoyable. One tells a huge story; the other one, a small one.
I say watch both.
Honestly there really wasn't that much wrong with Superman Returns. All in all it was a pretty good movie and even has a decent rating. The major problem with the film is it stayed to close to the Donner/Reeves series when people wanted to see a big Superman fight. Of course then MoS went way to far in that direction, so I guess we should be careful what we wish for.
If you want to watch a movie about this happening you can thanks to the magic of Hollywood.
URL has a line through it so I could try my best to prevent spoilers: ~~https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/predestination/~~
<em>Dawn of the Planet of the Apes</em>
I'll save you a google, this is the sequel. I loved Rise and did a fist pump at the theater when Caesar shout "No!". Then I became totally obsessed with all those folks who tried to raise chimps as children back in the '70s. The filmmakers obviously did their research!
This one? Nothing but stock characters and cliche situations.
"The Castle"
It's a classic, one of the highest regarded Australian comedies ever. Let me know what you think of it if you watch.
The first time I saw the trailer, I couldn't believe it was for an actual film. I've been expecting this thing to flop for months now.
All that being said, reviewers are not panning it nearly as hard as I would have expected
http://www.metacritic.com/movie/sausage-party
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/sausage_party/
Reminds me of the mockumentary "And God Spoke" where Ray, the guy playing Jesus, is heavy into method acting.
Director (trying to get Ray's attention): Ray!
Ray: ...
Director: Ray! Hey, Ray!
Ray: ...
Director: Ray? Oh, Jesus Christ!
Ray: Yes?
Revisionist History, it's a podcast by Malcolm Gladwell. It has incredible production value and tackles a variety of subjects.
The Man in The High Castle presents an alternate history where the Nazis won the war. Great show. The characters in the show are fully developed and there's not a boring moment in it. I've started the show expecting to fully hate the Nazis presented, but by the end you will understand so many perspectives.