Movie Reviews: Do you take them to heart?

[Parasondox]

To insult Starship Troopers, is to quote war with Parasondox.

Reviews. No not gaming reviews, that's another storm on the other side of this website. I am talking about movie reviews. They can divide your mind in about less than 5 mins on whether a movie you are dying to see is good or not. Actually, there are two ways to go about it.

Firstly. You are about to see a movie you have been hyped about for months, years in fact. But before you go, you check out what your favourite reviewer/commentator has to say about it. Judging by their thoughts on the film, would it affect you going in to seeing your most anticipated movie?

OR

Secondly. The movie is out now, you are ready to go. You have seen any reviews yet because you want to go in with a clear thought. You have seen it. Your mind is made upon your final verdict of the movie. You then go home to see and compare what other reviewers have said. The majority comes up with an opposite opinion to yours about the movie. Would their review still affect how you feel about the movie?

OR

Thirdly. You don't give a f*** either way and you have always made up your own mind. "But Rotten Tomato said..." who gives a fuck about what they said. It's my opinion and enjoyment.

Tell us about times that either one of those scenarios has happened to you. Also thoughts on if any movie review you read or watch, affects the movie you are about to see or have just seen.

 

[Dirty Hipsters]

Usually if I read reviews for a movie and a bunch of reviewers talk about how smart the movie is I tend to end up going into the movie and just ripping the plot to shreds and end up thinking that it's the stupidest thing I've ever seen.

The problem is that if I'm expecting something smart I pay more attention to the plot and the more attention I pay the more small holes I find that end up adding up to the whole scenario not making very much sense.

That's something that happened to me with Snowpiercer. Everyone seemed to be wetting themselves over how smart the movie was and when I went into it and just saw nothing but stupidity, dumb plot contrivances, characters acting like morons, and bullshit plot lines that don't go anywhere.

Maybe I would have liked the movie more if I had just expected a dumb action movie.

 

[PainInTheAssInternet]

I tend to not read reviews. Instead, I go based on trailers. I find they are fairly accurate in displaying how much I'd enjoy them.

When I do read reviews, I read several to get a good feel for it. Reviews don't affect my opinion much. When they run contradictory to mine I take that into account and try to see how they came to that conclusion. A good example of this is Alien Cubed. I really enjoy that movie but it is largely decried as the movie that should have killed the franchise but instead began the downward spiral. However, I attribute that initiation to Aliens since the force of nature that is the titular creature was reduced to a bullet sponge, so that's one common mark against A^3 taken away. The second one that is popularly echoed is that the movie is far too dark for it's own good. I counter that with 1) That's the point of the movie and realistically the only way the franchise could have ended and 2) Alien and Aliens were no walks in the park either.

There have been many cases where movies that have been praised are ones that I find very difficult to watch due to boredom and movies that are cursed by the larger audience are ones that I enjoy.

Today, I make even more of an effort to understand other opinions and still don't let them change mine. A huge problem with the modern internet culture is that in the face of the ability to access hundreds of well thought-out opinions, the desire to outright suppress any one that someone doesn't approve of has become rather endemic.

 

[BloatedGuppy]

I am generally of the opinion that one is under no obligation to listen to reviews whatsoever. However, if you persistently ignore review aggregates under the presumption that critics are stupid or "you'll make your own mind up" or any of innumerable other reasons given for declaring war on critics (most typically the true reason is one time a critic said a mean thing about their wub-wub and they've carried a grudge ever since), then I'm of the opinion that you're a bit of a blockhead. If absolutely nothing else, reviews can provide information that can help guide a purchase, even if that information is "I always disagree with critics". If that's the case, then 0% reviews for Ecks vs Sever would mean it was right up your alley, and you'd be well advised to steer clear of universally acclaimed titles.

 

[Queen Michael]

To me it's always determined by why they diss it. They think it's just a brainless slugfest? I'm going, like, yesterday! They think it's unfunny? Okay, that'll make me think twice.

 

[Sniper Team 4]

I stay away from movie reviews of any type of movie I want to see. If a movie is coming out that has caught my interest, I will see it before I check out anything else. After that, I will look at quick reviews just to see what the rest of people think. Usually I find my opinion lines up pretty well with reviews. Stuff that I felt was lacking is mentioned, while stuff that I thought was great was mentioned.

Of course, this also depends on where I get the review from. For instance, I'm not going to trust a film critic with a high-brow reputation if he gives a review on, say, Avengers 2. He's not the target audience, and therefore his opinion is not going to line up with what I see. This works the other way too.

 

[Fieldy409_v1legacy]

Sort of, I've LOVED some movies everyone seems to hate, but I don't usually risk seeing something I'm interested in with bad reviews straight away in the most expensive way, at the cinema. I usually wait till it's cheap if I'm interested but it has bad reviews. I kinda regret doing that with Pacific Rim. I read some bad reviews and skipped it to watch on Cable TV and now all I think when I see it is gosh I wish I'd watched that on a big screen!

 

[Sleepy Sol]

Nah, reviews for movies aren't really going to affect what I watch or don't watch.

I'm typically only interested in a very small handful of movies these days. I think the last movie I actually watched in theaters was Miyazaki's The Wind Rises when it was doing its little run. Basically, only really bother to see certain Marvel movies and animated Disney movies at this point. The Wind Rises was a bit of an exception to that pattern, though even it was distributed by Disney here.

 

[Conner42]

It's kind of happened to me...like, Now You See Me...that movie that everyone has forgotten. Everyone seems to have forgotten about that movie, but, when I saw the sneak preview of it, I thought it was fine. Like, yeah, dumb, maybe. But, during the visceral thrill of the whole thing, I have to admit that it was entertaining in some form.

Reviews are more about creating a dialogue than anything else. I try to watch movies before I read critics' reviews because it can color my perception in pretty strong ways. For instance, I still follow Moviebob and he reviewed Chappie in a spoiler-filled review. But, he said it was ambitious even if sort of a mess. So, I can expect to at least sort of like it.

I think it's the discussion that matters. I like movies that people don't usually like and I hate movies that people seem to really like. Does it matter? Yeah, in way. But, only in the sense that some people are the reasons why some movies are made in the first place. I'm not mad at some movies existence(unless we're talking about Avatar, because, holy shit, I'm never going to forgive what that movie did to me) and, in some ways, I can appreciate it. Sure, Trans4mers might have been the biggest mess ever, but it's effective in some sort of way.

It's the kind of thing that I wish video games were a part of. It's why I think video game journalism has a problem, yet, Gamergate is far from the solution. I want different opinions to take form, even if it's contrary to my own.

Because, truly, that's what art is all about.

 

[FPLOON]

It's kind of happened to me...like, Now You See Me...that movie that everyone has forgotten. Everyone seems to have forgotten about that movie, but, when I saw the sneak preview of it, I thought it was fine. Like, yeah, dumb, maybe. But, during the visceral thrill of the whole thing, I have to admit that it was entertaining in some form.

Holy shit! I remember taking my best friend to see that movie for his birthday because we kind of saw it as the Ocean's Eleven of magician-based movies... and we both came out of it loving it...

OT: For me, movie reviews don't really persuade me to watch something anymore than I already do now... However, since I am someone who would rather go to the movie theater with friends than by myself most of the time, I do have that one friend who would go from "hyped" to "dissapointed" if even a single review (preferably from someone he's follows regularly... on YouTube...) says that it's not that great of a movie or, dare I say, a "bad" movie to them personally... The worse part about it is that he's usually the one who's more available to go the movie theater in the first place, so at times it ends up being better to just wait until it ends up on DVD/Blu-Ray despite me wanting to support a movie that probably got the raw end of the critical deal after its initial release... (Kinda wish I had a specific answer to back that last part up, but I digress...)

Anyway, the moral of the story is that movie reviews don't effect me the same way they do to others, but I still look at them either before or after watching a particular movie because I probably like the person who's doing the review in the first place... Also, I got to start watching more movies in theaters by myself because I could have seen Gone Girl already, for example...

 

[Fox12]

If reviews are overwhelmingly negative, then I pay attention. That said, they need to make strong, educated points. If all they say is ROFL SuCkS then I don't really care.

At this point I'm so well read, and I've seen so many films, that my opinion is at least as informed as any professional critic, and is actually a lot more informed then most. I take their opinions as peers, then, and not as some elite guard that knows more then me.

As for the second and third scenario, I make up my own mind. If someone mentions a plot hole I didn't notice, then yes, that hurts my opinion of the film (and it should!). However, a great film is a great film, period. I had this happen with Interstellar recently. I don't care what those philistines at Rotten Tomatoes say, that film was a masterpiece of modern film, and blended the human and intellectual aspects of storytelling almost seamlessly, despite an admittedly sometimes weak third act.

 

[Parasondox]

If reviews are overwhelmingly negative, then I pay attention. That said, they need to make strong, educated points. If all they say is ROFL SuCkS then I don't really care.

That's another thing I failed to mention. When a review stops being a review but just turns into a rant because certain movies affected their nostalgic mind. Instead of looking at what the film produced, they just get a bit too personal. I could name a few reviewers like that but I think we know who that would be.

 

[HardkorSB]

I look up the reviewer's reviews of movies I've already seen to see how different our taste in movies is and then do my best to judge his/her reviews based on that.
If I don't know the person reviewing, I try to look for thought out arguments, logic and reason.
I don't really look at percentage points.
If the movie has negative scores all across the board but I like the premise or the trailer, I will look up why it's getting the hate before dismissing it.
Same with good scores because there are a lot of movies that most people seem to like which I don't.

Sometimes I'll see a movie without looking up the reviews (Recently, Edge of Tomorrow which was a pleasant surprise) but most of the time, I will try to get a general feel of the movie before i'll spend time/money on it.

 

[Smooth Operator]

I used to just go with whatever friends were seeing, the movie didn't really matter it was just a social thing.
But now that my time is limited and movies end up on DVD real fast I really don't have any "most anticipated" nonsense going on, I'll check reviews if there is something really stellar and maybe go see that one in theatres.
For the most part however I prefer to sit down with my own copy on my own time, sharing the room and being bothered by another 50-100 people was never an appealing concept. Also those fuckers at theatres are pushing more and more adverts before and after the movies... ************ if I'm paying full price you will not ad spam me.

 

[Kalashnikov2092]

Eh, reviews just lead me to pick whether I'll see a movie in theaters or not. It always comes down to my own opinion in the end, so I still watch a good majority of movies that interest me. I just pick which ones that are worth seeing at the cinema by early reviews.

 

[Darth Rosenberg]

It depends, and I'd say everyone who gives a damn about films has experienced all those scenarios, and then some.

Ultimately, a 'review' is nothing but one person's subjective opinion - it doesn't really matter whether they're Mark Kermode [https://www.youtube.com/user/kermodeandmayo/featured] (he's a leg[end]), or some random guy at a bus stop (I don't take buses, but, y'know... I'm sure that's happened to someone). The only thing that really matters is whether or not anyone can express their opinion in a way that I can at least see where they're coming from.

Even with films I love - Cap 2/The Winter Soldier being a recent example - I can see faults or deficiencies in reviews and feedback; I think that film's one of the best comicbook films I've ever seen, but to say it 'critiqued' anything related to surveillance states is going a little OTT. It was certainly intelligent, but it didn't really have depth, per se. It used themes as text, not subtext, and I was more than fine with that.

Sucker Punch is a film I regard as a bit of an underrated, misunderstood, and daringly bleak gem, but I can understand how many see it as they do.

...oh, anyone being snarky against Terrence Malick films can get me on the defensive, but even then, as with Sucker Punch, I can certainly get why some dismiss him in the way they do. If you're not down with whispered narration and lingering close-ups of flowers/faces/pavements/lampshades/stems of grass/etc, then Malick's brand of reflective existentialism is not going to please you.

Jeremy Jahns gave relatively negative reviews to both [http://youtu.be/Bi4Ll-q3N_Q]Drive and Killing Them Softly [http://youtu.be/g-E1nojqj2A] - two films I rate quite highly. But, he has the humility and self-awareness to amid that they have their audiences, and as films in their own right they're very well made. No 'fan' can really get pissy with that kind of approach, so kudos to Jahns.