81% on RottenTomatoes. I don't know if those 81% were glowing and gushing or barely above the "I didn't feel cheated out of my money... barely" category. But yeah Scott Pilgrim didn't do poorly with the critics.I was under the impression Scott Pilgrim got a lot of really good reviews.
Basically this. Don't use Metacritic for anything, use Rotten Tomatos, especially since Metacritic only accepts reviews that use a ten point scale. Rotten Tomatos "did you like it or not?" system cuts to the heart of the matter a lot better.81% on RottenTomatoes. I don't know if those 81% were glowing and gushing or barely above the "I didn't feel cheated out of my money... barely" category. But yeah Scott Pilgrim didn't do poorly with the critics.
Did I miss like three pages of this thread here? I thought it was about Scott Pilgrim.I wasn't talking about Rotten Tomatoes, I meant the usual type of critics that are listed to bash movies that don't do well commercially. I'm still loving how enjoying bad movies for being bad = bad taste in film. I guess my love of Shawshank Redemption, Unbreakable, The Warriors, The Dark Knight, Forrest Gump, Blade Runner, Children of Men, Dr. Strange Love, Full Metal Jacket etc means nothing. Gotcha.
Quality doesn't always mean monetary success, though. Moon is an amazing sci-fi movie but no one's heard of that. Dark Knight wouldn't have made half the money it did if it wasn't for Ledger dying. And don't quote me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Shawshank, Unbreakable, Children of Men, Warriors and Blade Runner did very well theatrically when they first came out.I wasn't talking about Rotten Tomatoes, I meant the usual type of critics that are listed to bash movies that don't do well commercially. I'm still loving how enjoying bad movies for being bad = bad taste in film. I guess my love of Shawshank Redemption, Unbreakable, The Warriors, The Dark Knight, Forrest Gump, Blade Runner, Children of Men, Dr. Strange Love, Full Metal Jacket etc means nothing. Gotcha.
Exactly. Thank you.Quality doesn't always mean monetary success, though. Moon is an amazing sci-fi movie but no one's heard of that. Dark Knight wouldn't have made half the money it did if it wasn't for Ledger dying. And don't quote me if I'm wrong, but I don't believe Shawshank, Unbreakable, Children of Men, Warriors and Blade Runner did very well theatrically when they first came out.
And yet it got my point across just fine...Basically this. Don't use Metacritic for anything, use Rotten Tomatos, especially since Metacritic only accepts reviews that use a ten point scale. Rotten Tomatos "did you like it or not?" system cuts to the heart of the matter a lot better.
Just because you like a shit sandwich doesn't mean you wouldn't like a regular one, does it?I wasn't talking about Rotten Tomatoes, I meant the usual type of critics that are listed to bash movies that don't do well commercially. I'm still loving how enjoying bad movies for being bad = bad taste in film. I guess my love of Shawshank Redemption, Unbreakable, The Warriors, The Dark Knight, Forrest Gump, Blade Runner, Children of Men, Dr. Strange Love, Full Metal Jacket etc means nothing. Gotcha.
Didn't you defend Sucker Punch as a good movie?!I'm still loving how enjoying bad movies for being bad = bad taste in film.
You say it, yet your posts show that you don't understand that at all.Just because you like a shit sandwich doesn't mean you wouldn't like a regular one, does it?
I love it. A LOT. I've watched it close to 30 times since the DVD came out (Including watching the 4 different commentaries 3-4 times each). But I don't even get the people who call it Edgar Wright's best movie, let alone those who call it THE best movie ever. Even when I say best opening sequence ever, I sayit without really meaning it. I'm sure if i thought about it I could name off several others.it was good, but I didn't quite get all the "BEST MOVIE EVER!!!!" people.
Man, EXACTLY this. I think in order to really appreciate it, you need to see it at least twice, because the first time, you aren't going to really pick up on the intricacies relationships, and they actually seem much more shallow on the first viewing in my opinion.It's a fun move that on one side is a crazy surreal action movie and on the other side is a surprising insightful look at relationships.
It's not the "best movie ever" but I love it dearly, and it was my favorite movie from 2010 even if it wasn't the best one I saw from last year.
Thiiiiiiiiiiis is incredibly wrong. Batman was still Batman. Begins made something around $200m domestic with villains no one had heard of. Dark Knight was snowballing after the success of that one, plus adding the Joker, one of the most iconic villains/characters in history.Dark Knight wouldn't have made half the money it did if it wasn't for Ledger dying.