MovieChat Forums > The Boondock Saints (2000) Discussion > Why such a difference between audience a...

Why such a difference between audience and critic ratings???


Just came across this movie for the first time about a week ago and just watched it for a 3rd time. First time I was kind of confused with the accents being hard to comprehend, but this time I put on closed captioning for the scenes the brothers were in. An action packed, entertaining, funny, yet far-fetched film. I was just wondering why the big discrepancy between critic reviews like Rotten Tomatoes it has a 20% critic score and Metacritic 44. But on IMDb it's a (perhaps a bit overrated) 7.9 and 92% audiences on Rotten Tomatoes liked it. I would probably give it a 7.5, cause it did keep my attention throughout and the acting was great for the most part except for the accents being a bit distracting at times and some parts were far-fetched or else I'd give it an 8. Anyway, why do you think this is? The summary on Rotten Tomatoes says "A juvenile, ugly movie that represents the worst tendencies of directors channeling Tarantino". Ok...maybe a bit juvenile but it's not ugly. More of a film that is a guilty pleasure and cult classic for many fans. Guys going on a killing rampage to rid the city of "bad guys".

It's still wrong...but I'm sure everyone has thought at one time or another about murderers, rapists, etc. "god I would just love to go out and kill that person and perhaps even torture them before that". So I think the critics are definitely wrong there. It's more of an idea or fantasy not something that would actually happen in real life, so I wouldn't call it "ugly". And just because they show the investigators at the crime scene before and then go back and show the actual crime, or have Smecker (Dafoe) in scenes where he isn't actually there physically. I really got no sense that this movie was trying to be like Pulp Fiction or Resevoir Dogs. It's just how the movie is set up and I think it's done well. Anyway, guess I kind of answered my own question, but it's definitely one of the biggest differences in opinion between critics and audiences I have seen in awhile.

reply