0% so far on RT


Ouch

reply

That's because critics, unlike majority of average ppl, don't go to the movies for fun or r & r. More importantly, most critics are biased towards art-house films and also favor independent films with smaller marketing budgets, such as The Hurt Locker, against commercial blockbusters.

Personally, if and when I read what others have to say, I prefer film reviewers over critics.

My IMDb credentials:
www.imdb.com/user/ur7441441/comments-expanded?start=0&order=alpha

reply

No, it's because the movie is a massive pile of S@%t.

reply


Nope. The film is just flat out terrible.
----

reply

Personally, if and when I read what others have to say, I prefer film reviewers over critics.

I agree. I read reviews to get a take on a movie. I don't read them to choose if I am actually going to watch it based on them saying not to. After all who the hell are they?

reply

It's up to 5% now.




"We don't make movies for critics, since they don't pay to see them anyhow." - Charles Bronson

reply

[deleted]

Yeah, well Rotten Tomatoes suck. They like boring self-indulgent movies like "Lost in Translation".

reply

Yeah... There's a reason it's THAT low

reply