I don't trust Roten tomatoes anymore. I use the IMDB score as a judge nowadays. If it has 6.5 or higher, I might consider spending $10 to see it. If it is 8.5 or higher, I will almost definately spend the $ to see it.eggdog14 said:Haliwali said:I don't walk out of movies... then again, I tend to only watch good movies.
Same here. One can generally tell beforehand whether a movie will be so colossally bad it will drive you out of the theater. Anyone else use my RottenTomatoes rule?
Basically, if it's above a 70, and you think it looks good, it's probably worth seeing in theatres.
Below a 70 and you think it looks good, rent it. . . maybe.
I'm not saying a follow critics to the ends of the earth, but, it's saved me money in the past. (see: Hancock, Spiderman 3)
and gotten me to see surprisingly-good movies (Hellboy was actually entertaining.)
and yes i just realized those are all superhero movies.
huh.
I was going to link to IMDB [http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0190374/] myself... Irons is a repeat offender as far as cheezy dragon flicks go. Heck, that flick is one reason I stayed away from Eragon, both the flick and the game. (The trial of the game is another. Hey, if it's free I'm willing to test my preconceptions.)GothmogII said:Nope, here ya go: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dungeons_&_Dragons_(film)BlazeTheVampire said:Someone mentioned a D&D movie... with Jeremy Irons? I believe you're thinking of "Eragon." I've seen most of the D&D movies (even the bad SciFi Channel ones) and none of them have been high-enough budget to afford Jeremy Irons. I suppose I could be missing one somewhere, but I'm rather sure you just saw a dragon and assumed D&D.
Was rather fond of it at the time, and yus, Jeremy Irons is there and awesome :3