▲ 48 ▼ Taika Waititi Calls ‘Klara And The Sun’ Critics “Irrelevant, Out Of Touch, Obsolete” Discussion (deadline.com) submitted 5 days ago by TheImpressiveX@piefed.social to c/movies@piefed.social 24 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] RedSeries@lemmy.blahaj.zone 23 points 5 days ago (13 children) God forbid people don't like your movie Taika. permalink fedilink source hideshow 13 child comments replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 30 points 5 days ago (11 children) For some movies, there is a pretty significant difference between critic and audience scores. This is one of them it seems. From my experience many critics can be pretty far off the mark. And it seems to almost always be whether the movie was like they expected it to be, not whether it's a good movie. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 days ago (2 children) This also happens when a director has a following which is hyper focused on loving everything they do no matter what. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago (1 child) Yes. All review aggregators are less than useless. Listen to individual voices you trust to get meaningful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago Review aggregation is for the intellectually lazy that only want to like what the majority already likes. They don’t want to be challenged in any way. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Eldritch@piefed.world 15 points 5 days ago (5 children) A lot of John Carpenter's work was panned by critics. John Carpenter. For fucks sake. They live, big trouble etc. Undisputed classics now. Even if they aren't for everyone. I've always found highly rated films by critics less enjoyable. Often the lower they rated it the better I liked it. It was rare when our opinions aligned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago Yup. The NYT review for They Live: "Since Mr. Carpenter seems to be trying to make a real point here, the flatness of They Live is doubly disappointing. So is its crazy inconsistency, since the film stops trying to abide even by its own game plan after a while." flat? bitch, this movie has the most brutal fist fight ever filmed as a side show, doubly disappointing? what fucking movie did you see? permalink fedilink source parent [–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (2 children) Is the movie like a NYT bestseller with positive critical reviews all over it, or is it something people will actually enjoy? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 child) To an extent, for sure. A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Not strictly entertainment. Judging things on a vastly different criteria than that of your average movie watcher. But I wouldn't doubt that there was some bias or completely gamed nature. Like the New York Times bestseller's list. That shit is gamed to hell and back. Utterly meaningless at this point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 1 point 5 days ago A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Yeah this seems to be what a lot of critics do. And it's just not really helpful to determine whether you might like a movie. Critics are always going to hate the Fast and Furious franchise. And objectively they're not "good" movies by metrics like industry awards and social commentary. But sometimes you just wanna watch some cars go fast, explosions, and family. And reviews need to take that into account, which a lot of critics seem to ignore. In the immortal words of Seth from Superbad, "Well I’m sorry Evan, that the Coen Brothers don’t direct the porn that I watch." permalink fedilink source parent [–] thethrilloftime69@feddit.online 0 points 5 days ago Ok I did enjoy "They Live" but let's not act like it's above criticism. The first half is great, the fight scene is amazing. It makes a great point about propaganda. But the second half of it is a different, not as good, movie. The ending is pretty forgettable. I still recommend it to people, but it's certainly got flaws. permalink fedilink source parent [–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago Critics tend to place more weight on technical things, like shot composition, than audiences do. With splits like this the movie is usually enjoyable, but also have some bafflingly terrible decisions in there that will take one of your friends totally out of the movie that your other friends won't even notice. permalink fedilink source parent [–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago Now show the Rotten Tomatoes page for Rise of Skywalker. permalink fedilink source parent [–] degen@midwest.social 1 point 5 days ago It sounds like people thought it was ok but critics didn't permalink fedilink source parent
[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 30 points 5 days ago (11 children) For some movies, there is a pretty significant difference between critic and audience scores. This is one of them it seems. From my experience many critics can be pretty far off the mark. And it seems to almost always be whether the movie was like they expected it to be, not whether it's a good movie. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 11 child comments replies: [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 days ago (2 children) This also happens when a director has a following which is hyper focused on loving everything they do no matter what. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago (1 child) Yes. All review aggregators are less than useless. Listen to individual voices you trust to get meaningful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago Review aggregation is for the intellectually lazy that only want to like what the majority already likes. They don’t want to be challenged in any way. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Eldritch@piefed.world 15 points 5 days ago (5 children) A lot of John Carpenter's work was panned by critics. John Carpenter. For fucks sake. They live, big trouble etc. Undisputed classics now. Even if they aren't for everyone. I've always found highly rated films by critics less enjoyable. Often the lower they rated it the better I liked it. It was rare when our opinions aligned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago Yup. The NYT review for They Live: "Since Mr. Carpenter seems to be trying to make a real point here, the flatness of They Live is doubly disappointing. So is its crazy inconsistency, since the film stops trying to abide even by its own game plan after a while." flat? bitch, this movie has the most brutal fist fight ever filmed as a side show, doubly disappointing? what fucking movie did you see? permalink fedilink source parent [–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (2 children) Is the movie like a NYT bestseller with positive critical reviews all over it, or is it something people will actually enjoy? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 child) To an extent, for sure. A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Not strictly entertainment. Judging things on a vastly different criteria than that of your average movie watcher. But I wouldn't doubt that there was some bias or completely gamed nature. Like the New York Times bestseller's list. That shit is gamed to hell and back. Utterly meaningless at this point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 1 point 5 days ago A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Yeah this seems to be what a lot of critics do. And it's just not really helpful to determine whether you might like a movie. Critics are always going to hate the Fast and Furious franchise. And objectively they're not "good" movies by metrics like industry awards and social commentary. But sometimes you just wanna watch some cars go fast, explosions, and family. And reviews need to take that into account, which a lot of critics seem to ignore. In the immortal words of Seth from Superbad, "Well I’m sorry Evan, that the Coen Brothers don’t direct the porn that I watch." permalink fedilink source parent [–] thethrilloftime69@feddit.online 0 points 5 days ago Ok I did enjoy "They Live" but let's not act like it's above criticism. The first half is great, the fight scene is amazing. It makes a great point about propaganda. But the second half of it is a different, not as good, movie. The ending is pretty forgettable. I still recommend it to people, but it's certainly got flaws. permalink fedilink source parent [–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago Critics tend to place more weight on technical things, like shot composition, than audiences do. With splits like this the movie is usually enjoyable, but also have some bafflingly terrible decisions in there that will take one of your friends totally out of the movie that your other friends won't even notice. permalink fedilink source parent [–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago Now show the Rotten Tomatoes page for Rise of Skywalker. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 8 points 5 days ago (2 children) This also happens when a director has a following which is hyper focused on loving everything they do no matter what. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago (1 child) Yes. All review aggregators are less than useless. Listen to individual voices you trust to get meaningful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago Review aggregation is for the intellectually lazy that only want to like what the majority already likes. They don’t want to be challenged in any way. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] usernamefactory@lemmy.ca 3 points 5 days ago (1 child) Yes. All review aggregators are less than useless. Listen to individual voices you trust to get meaningful perspectives. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago Review aggregation is for the intellectually lazy that only want to like what the majority already likes. They don’t want to be challenged in any way. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] rafoix@lemmy.zip 2 points 5 days ago Review aggregation is for the intellectually lazy that only want to like what the majority already likes. They don’t want to be challenged in any way. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 15 points 5 days ago (5 children) A lot of John Carpenter's work was panned by critics. John Carpenter. For fucks sake. They live, big trouble etc. Undisputed classics now. Even if they aren't for everyone. I've always found highly rated films by critics less enjoyable. Often the lower they rated it the better I liked it. It was rare when our opinions aligned. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 5 child comments replies: [–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago Yup. The NYT review for They Live: "Since Mr. Carpenter seems to be trying to make a real point here, the flatness of They Live is doubly disappointing. So is its crazy inconsistency, since the film stops trying to abide even by its own game plan after a while." flat? bitch, this movie has the most brutal fist fight ever filmed as a side show, doubly disappointing? what fucking movie did you see? permalink fedilink source parent [–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (2 children) Is the movie like a NYT bestseller with positive critical reviews all over it, or is it something people will actually enjoy? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 child) To an extent, for sure. A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Not strictly entertainment. Judging things on a vastly different criteria than that of your average movie watcher. But I wouldn't doubt that there was some bias or completely gamed nature. Like the New York Times bestseller's list. That shit is gamed to hell and back. Utterly meaningless at this point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 1 point 5 days ago A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Yeah this seems to be what a lot of critics do. And it's just not really helpful to determine whether you might like a movie. Critics are always going to hate the Fast and Furious franchise. And objectively they're not "good" movies by metrics like industry awards and social commentary. But sometimes you just wanna watch some cars go fast, explosions, and family. And reviews need to take that into account, which a lot of critics seem to ignore. In the immortal words of Seth from Superbad, "Well I’m sorry Evan, that the Coen Brothers don’t direct the porn that I watch." permalink fedilink source parent [–] thethrilloftime69@feddit.online 0 points 5 days ago Ok I did enjoy "They Live" but let's not act like it's above criticism. The first half is great, the fight scene is amazing. It makes a great point about propaganda. But the second half of it is a different, not as good, movie. The ending is pretty forgettable. I still recommend it to people, but it's certainly got flaws. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] mojofrododojo@lemmy.world 4 points 5 days ago Yup. The NYT review for They Live: "Since Mr. Carpenter seems to be trying to make a real point here, the flatness of They Live is doubly disappointing. So is its crazy inconsistency, since the film stops trying to abide even by its own game plan after a while." flat? bitch, this movie has the most brutal fist fight ever filmed as a side show, doubly disappointing? what fucking movie did you see? permalink fedilink source parent
[–] RememberTheApollo_@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago (2 children) Is the movie like a NYT bestseller with positive critical reviews all over it, or is it something people will actually enjoy? permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 child) To an extent, for sure. A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Not strictly entertainment. Judging things on a vastly different criteria than that of your average movie watcher. But I wouldn't doubt that there was some bias or completely gamed nature. Like the New York Times bestseller's list. That shit is gamed to hell and back. Utterly meaningless at this point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 1 point 5 days ago A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Yeah this seems to be what a lot of critics do. And it's just not really helpful to determine whether you might like a movie. Critics are always going to hate the Fast and Furious franchise. And objectively they're not "good" movies by metrics like industry awards and social commentary. But sometimes you just wanna watch some cars go fast, explosions, and family. And reviews need to take that into account, which a lot of critics seem to ignore. In the immortal words of Seth from Superbad, "Well I’m sorry Evan, that the Coen Brothers don’t direct the porn that I watch." permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 5 days ago (1 child) To an extent, for sure. A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Not strictly entertainment. Judging things on a vastly different criteria than that of your average movie watcher. But I wouldn't doubt that there was some bias or completely gamed nature. Like the New York Times bestseller's list. That shit is gamed to hell and back. Utterly meaningless at this point. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 1 child comment replies: [–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 1 point 5 days ago A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Yeah this seems to be what a lot of critics do. And it's just not really helpful to determine whether you might like a movie. Critics are always going to hate the Fast and Furious franchise. And objectively they're not "good" movies by metrics like industry awards and social commentary. But sometimes you just wanna watch some cars go fast, explosions, and family. And reviews need to take that into account, which a lot of critics seem to ignore. In the immortal words of Seth from Superbad, "Well I’m sorry Evan, that the Coen Brothers don’t direct the porn that I watch." permalink fedilink source parent
[–] halcyoncmdr@piefed.social 1 point 5 days ago A lot of it comes down to the fact that they are looking for art as they define it in their field. Yeah this seems to be what a lot of critics do. And it's just not really helpful to determine whether you might like a movie. Critics are always going to hate the Fast and Furious franchise. And objectively they're not "good" movies by metrics like industry awards and social commentary. But sometimes you just wanna watch some cars go fast, explosions, and family. And reviews need to take that into account, which a lot of critics seem to ignore. In the immortal words of Seth from Superbad, "Well I’m sorry Evan, that the Coen Brothers don’t direct the porn that I watch." permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thethrilloftime69@feddit.online 0 points 5 days ago Ok I did enjoy "They Live" but let's not act like it's above criticism. The first half is great, the fight scene is amazing. It makes a great point about propaganda. But the second half of it is a different, not as good, movie. The ending is pretty forgettable. I still recommend it to people, but it's certainly got flaws. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] VindictiveJudge@lemmy.world 3 points 5 days ago Critics tend to place more weight on technical things, like shot composition, than audiences do. With splits like this the movie is usually enjoyable, but also have some bafflingly terrible decisions in there that will take one of your friends totally out of the movie that your other friends won't even notice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] njm1314@lemmy.world 2 points 5 days ago Now show the Rotten Tomatoes page for Rise of Skywalker. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] degen@midwest.social 1 point 5 days ago It sounds like people thought it was ok but critics didn't permalink fedilink source parent