I dont get critcs

[bobobo22]

I mean to me it just seems like EVERY movie that gets made is panned. And when i read the reviews it makes me wonder, well you think after watching so many films, this is the way movies are. To put it in better terms, Its like they are eating a sweet piece of candy and hate it because its not spicy enough for them. Well every candy is sweet, itll never be spicy.
Not every movie will have an incredibly strong back-story. You can't expand on characters in 2 to 3 hours. I mean what do they expect every once in a while is there a good movie that they actually like. All im saying is for them to stop being dicks and accept what movies are and give them better ratings. Honestly, what the hell are they comparing movies to nowadays? Every time a new i see a trailer i think, wow that looks good and it is yet these 4mid 40 year old douchebags are like "Oh, Stupid no plot and no talent in actors." Well i don't see you making a movie now do I.

All in all i think critics have a lack of imagination and need to accept that movies aren't what they think they are. Plus I wanna know what the fuck they are trying to compare them to?

[Maverick-Alex]

People enjoy bitching about things, it's relevant to their interests.

[OddlyPoetic]

They aren't douchebags. They're doing nothing but expressing opinions. I agree too. Most American Movies are terrible these days.

[Sensationalism]

That's why I never read those. I just go by whether I think I'll like it and whether my friends enjoyed it or not.
It's weird when critics take a movie that is supposed to be light and funny and complain that it isn't serious and elaborate enough.

[Sanjay]

Critics are paid / volunteer to point out flaws in movies or other things that the general public might not like so the directors don't make the same mistakes in future movies.

[Maverick-Alex]

At 11/1/09 10:35 PM, OddlyPoetic wrote: They aren't douchebags. They're doing nothing but expressing opinions. I agree too. Most American Movies are terrible these days.

While the decreasing quality ratio of American films is an undeniable truth, one can but wonder if they enjoy ravishing on nitpicking every single thing no matter how trivial.

Maybe that's why I don't go to the cinema frequently.

[bobobo22]

I mean sure you have your bad movies, but there are good movies that many critics still pan and its like EVERY movie, can they just like something for once?

[MonkeyV]

Person critiquing critics for critiquing people.

[OddlyPoetic]

At 11/1/09 10:42 PM, bobobo22 wrote: I mean sure you have your bad movies, but there are good movies that many critics still pan and its like EVERY movie, can they just like something for once?

Okay what do you mean by "Pan"?
What makes a good and bad movie is entirely subjective. A particular critic might not actually like most of what comes out. Critics are supposed to give their true opinions based on their standards.

[bobobo22]

pan= in a sense it means rape or just like trashed.
Sure they can give their opinion but why must it always be negative, and also Oddely poetic, you and i always have fights in threads, guess we're just exact opposites.

[OddlyPoetic]

At 11/1/09 10:50 PM, bobobo22 wrote: pan= in a sense it means rape or just like trashed.

Well, that must be your own slang then, i've never heard Pan in that sense before.

Sure they can give their opinion but why must it always be negative, and also Oddely poetic, you and i always have fights in threads, guess we're just exact opposites.

We aren't fighting. We're discussing. If were trading insults, then i'd say we're fighting.

Well, maybe their opinion is always negative? I've seen critics give tons of positive reviews before. You're generalizing too much

[tarahloveshentai]

Critics feel they have the right to 'notify' the public whether a movie or tv show or whatever is worth watching, why and why not.

I hardly ever read what they have to say because I don't go to the movies that much and I'll see what I was to see. I rather read (good) critics by everyday people than some hot shot.

The only movie I was let down about was, "Where The Wild Things Are." I thought it was going to be good after a couple NGers talked about it but I hated it.

[Samen]

At 11/1/09 10:38 PM, Sanjay wrote: Critics are paid / volunteer to point out flaws in movies or other things that the general public might not like so the directors don't make the same mistakes in future movies.

True true true. Their job isn't to say how good or bad something was, that's a reviewer's job. A critic simply says what he or she thought was wrong about the experience.

[bobobo22]

At 11/1/09 10:53 PM, OddlyPoetic wrote:

At 11/1/09 10:50 PM, bobobo22 wrote:

d i always have fights in threads, guess we're just exact opposites.

We aren't fighting. We're discussing. If were trading insults, then i'd say we're fighting.

Trust me i just went over most of my posts. You and i fight ALOT.

[ThePhantomGamer]

I never listen to critics.

[OddlyPoetic]

At 11/1/09 11:11 PM, bobobo22 wrote:

We aren't fighting. We're discussing. If were trading insults, then i'd say we're fighting.

Trust me i just went over most of my posts. You and i fight ALOT.

Not saying we haven't. But we aren't right now.

[Yamor]

I wish more films were great like The Shawshank Redemption. I think they have just seen some very good film so they don't understand when some aren't just flawless. It's kinda like how sirloin isn't very good once you've had filet mignon a few times.

[6r0undZ3r0]

Don't trust the critic, he's a cynic. Make the call for yourself.

[2good2b4goten]

At 11/1/09 10:33 PM, bobobo22 wrote: All im saying is for them to stop being dicks and accept what movies are and give them better ratings.

They are accepting them for what they are. Majority of them are shit movies that deserve shit ratings.

[Ass-Crumb]

So let me get this straight, you're criticizing critics for saying that all movies are terrible.

Yeah, that's not true at all. Sure, there are terrible critics that give all movies bad reviews, but frankly if movies as stupid as Step Brothers and Across the Universe or Saw can get lukewarm reviews instead of getting panned like they deserve then I'd say you're totally wrong.

[Hoeloe]

I think the answer to this problem is very simple:

OP likes shit movies.

[HeavenDuff]

At 11/1/09 10:35 PM, OddlyPoetic wrote: They aren't douchebags. They're doing nothing but expressing opinions. I agree too. Most American Movies are terrible these days.

True.
When EVERY critrics hate EVERY movie... I think that the problem probably is that most american movies are shit these days. Stereotypical and grotesque caracters. Predictable and uninteresting story. Cheaps copies or remakes of other movies. And cinema nowaday is following commercial trends. So there is no creativity in the selection of music or shooting angles. No experimental work. It's just the same recipe that they use in all movies.

I'm not saying that american movies are all bad though. There is still some great movies coming out :)
I thought Yes Man was a great movie

and Knowing with Nicolas Cage was a great... no in fact it was an horrible movie... probably the worst movie I've ever seen.

[HeavenDuff]

At 11/1/09 10:47 PM, OddlyPoetic wrote:

What makes a good and bad movie is entirely subjective. A particular critic might not actually like most of what comes out. Critics are supposed to give their true opinions based on their standards.

Not entirely. If a movie as no kind of logic or no plot whatsoever... than it's a bad movie...
I mentionned the movie Knowing in my previous post. And any "intelligent" person who saw the movie will tell you that from the middle of the movie to the end (cause the first half was great) there was no logic at all in the movie and that everything that was built in the plot during the first half was completely destroyed in the second half. Best example is the predictions list... that was made 50 years ago in the movie. Everything elements in the movie are revolving around all the story of this list. But when you realise that the list is completely useless to everybody in the movie (and especially to the ones who made it...) you just realise that the movie is in fact "BAD".
Not bad in a subjective way. But really really BAD!

[SteveGuzzi]

You know what they say about opinions.

They're like assholes... everyone has one, they all stink, et cetera et cetera et cetera.

[ZOMGALIENS]

That's why I only watch movies that I think look good.

[Chocomilk]

What about nostalgia critics?

u c wat i did thar?

[EclecticEnnui]

At 11/1/09 10:33 PM, bobobo22 wrote: I mean to me it just seems like EVERY movie that gets made is panned. And when i read the reviews it makes me wonder, well you think after watching so many films, this is the way movies are. To put it in better terms, Its like they are eating a sweet piece of candy and hate it because its not spicy enough for them. Well every candy is sweet, itll never be spicy.

Not every movie that gets made is panned, even ones made within the last few years. Browse through Rotten Tomatoes and you'll see.

Not every movie will have an incredibly strong back-story. You can't expand on characters in 2 to 3 hours. I mean what do they expect every once in a while is there a good movie that they actually like.

Yes, you can develop at least the main characters in that time frame. In fact, if you don't, your movie may get criticized for having hollow characters with little or know reason to care about. It all depends who's watching it. A critic may forgive the hollowness of characters if there are other reasons he or she enjoyed the film, like its action, suspense, etc. However, if the consensus on RT says something like "lack of character development", then you may want to take note, depending on how you like your movies.

All im saying is for them to stop being dicks and accept what movies are and give them better ratings. Honestly, what the hell are they comparing movies to nowadays? Every time a new i see a trailer i think, wow that looks good and it is yet these 4mid 40 year old douchebags are like "Oh, Stupid no plot and no talent in actors." Well i don't see you making a movie now do I.

I don't let trailers pick what I wanna see. I actually use RT and IMDb more often than not, so I get a strong feeling of what the overall opinion of a movie is. It's actually helped me. Within the last two or three years, I've hardly seen a bad film. This doesn't mean I always go with the flow, opinion-wise, but at least my experience with movies is better than before.

All in all i think critics have a lack of imagination and need to accept that movies aren't what they think they are. Plus I wanna know what the fuck they are trying to compare them to?

I think critics generally compare movies to other ones they love in the same genre. There's nothing wrong with it. I've done it myself with reviews in my sig.

There's an in-depth article you can read called When We Were Jerks: On Film Criticism and Hate Mail that answers some things you mentioned, at least from their point of view. One also wrote a book on film criticism.