anyone use this site to judge a movie if it’s worth watching?
I usually do, but I was debating what to watch tonight: Doomsday, The Bank Job, or Shooter.
I’ve seen Shooter and love the movie, probably one of my fave Mark Wahlberg movies.
The Bank Job received a 78% rating, while Shooter got 48%.
I can’t fathom the Bank Job being that much better, but for Shooter to only get 48% is weird to me.
anyone else really like or hate the movie?
Shooter is in my collection, as is Doomsday. I found Doomsday to be a good way to kill 90 minutes. That and I just love looking at Rhona Mitra. I avoid Rotten Tomatoes, and other critics for that matter, as I am simply into movies for the entertainment value only.
[quote]jehovasfitness wrote:
anyone use this site to judge a movie if it’s worth watching?
I usually do, but I was debating what to watch tonight: Doomsday, The Bank Job, or Shooter.
I’ve seen Shooter and love the movie, probably one of my fave Mark Wahlberg movies.
The Bank Job received a 78% rating, while Shooter got 48%.
I can’t fathom the Bank Job being that much better, but for Shooter to only get 48% is weird to me.
anyone else really like or hate the movie?[/quote]
The bank job is better.
I will use it when I’m trying to find out info about a movie I’ve never heard of before, but I’m talking more about those smaller independent films and stuff like that.
Major and wide releases I try not to look at any reviews until after I’ve seen the movie. I will sometimes check out rottentomatoes.com to see if my thoughts on a movie are consistent with how others thought about it though. Not that it changes my opinion about it. Sometimes I like being one of the people that likes a movie that everyone else hates or vice versa.
I didn’t think Shooter was anything special though. Not a huge Walhberg fan these days.
I like using Rotten Tomatoes a lot, kind of like using Metacritic for games. I agree with Vader, though, I don’t really judge buying a game or seeing a movie off of reviews, though.
As for Shooter or Doomsday, I never have and never will see either one… because they look terrible. The same goes two-fold for any Jason Statham movie.
Rotten tomatoes is pretty harsh on ratings. If a movie is one dimensional, like just an action movie with no like side plots or complex characters for example, it will get a low score even if it’s a badass action movie.
I won’t rely on them for much of anything other than basic movie info.
I hate most movie critics. I think most of them try too hard to get noticed so they will bag on a decent movie just so they stand out.
I like movies in general. I will personally be more lenient on some of them simply because at this point, I don’t expect much groundbreaking new material.
If it’s REALLY good (like Ironman), I have no trouble getting the word out on my own.
I check IMDB for my movie ratings, people like me and you usually give them the rating, and most of the time i agree with them.
Bank job was pretty good, shooter was alright but the plot was not that great, and doomsday was alright i guess, kinda stupid, not as good as resident evil IMO…
But if you want something fucking great, check out revolver (its gonna leave you like WTF), Snatch and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels… All of them are funny, have action and great characters…
If you feel like going out to watch a movie, check out RocknRolla, also like to add these are mostly filled with British characters as they were made my Guy Ritchie, but they are great… Also some of these have Jason Statham which is my favorite kickass action movie guy…
I think RT has the most accurate ratings as far as aligning with my own sentiments, but sometimes I try to avoid the site so there is no ‘bias’ in my own rating. I’ll watch the movie first, then look it up on RT to see if I would’ve agreed with the critics.
Usually, I do agree.
I think Rottentomatoes is pretty accurate in its ratings:
it gave Dirty Harry 97%
while it gave Herbie: Fully Loaded 41%
No one is going to argue with those scores.
I go to RT all the time and it definitely influences me. If 100 critics hated Max Payne, they are probably on to something.
Shooter > The Bank Job
I think the format for the reviews on Rotten Tomatoes is particularly useless because it is based on an average of many different critics. A movie rated 45% might mean that some people really loved it, and some really hated it. I would have no way of knowing where I fall until I actually see it.
Rotten tomatoes does help a little bit to decide which movie is better to see, however it always comes down to that one person’s opinion.
Even though Shooter got a lower score than the Bank job. I liked shooter way better…
You can also check out imdb.com for rating scores…
Lots of elitists on the RT site… I use IMDb. If it’s above a 5.8 on IMDb and is over a year old, it’s worth watching.
All the new movies get the fanboys giving in perfect 10’s.
RT has too many folks watching movies for the ‘artsy’ aspects of it… stupid shit.
I thought that Shooter was ok, but I think The Bank Job was such a better movie.
And im a Walhberg fan, but The Bank Job was just a more solid script. And it proved Statham could carry a movie without kicking anybody in the head or driving a black german sports car.
I too use IMDB, but I take most peoples opinions with a grain of salt.
I thought Shooter was great, and I’m a big Wahlberg fan too. Bank Job was a different kind of movie, but also excellent.