• jordanlund@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    22
    arrow-down
    8
    ·
    1 year ago

    User reviews are trash. Most people have no idea what makes a movie “good” or “bad”.

    • BleatingZombie@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the same time, people drastically conflate “good” with “entertaining”. Most of my favorite movies are not “good”

      • diffcalculus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Transformers, all of them. Love those movies, but they’re not getting academy awards.

        My favorite is people who complain about them because they’re not believable. Yes, the movie with the robots from outer space didn’t stick to science 100% of the time.

        • BleatingZombie@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I have the same gripe with video games. Who cares if it’s not historically accurate that there’s a woman fighting? Guess what Tommy, none of us fought in World War 2 either!

          • 𝔼𝕩𝕦𝕤𝕚𝕒@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            Part of it is how much of the sales pitch stressed the accuracy. Dont tell people you’re making something “as historically accurate as possible” and then flagrantly disregard it.

            Like making concessions is one thing. In cod ww2 red dot sights are unlockable because frankly iron sights suck. Not historically accurate but gotta give players some kind of magnification to see at medium/long range.

            But every gun getting a Silencer (not even suppressor lmao you can straight up make an LMG near silent) Disregard of reality. Cod ww2 didn’t like…sell itself on its historical accuracy, but these were just 2 examples to show it.

    • RobotsLeftHand@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      1 year ago

      It’s all subjective. The only way a critic can be helpful is if you become accustomed to their tastes and how they communicate them. It’s why Rotten Tomatoes CAN be a helpful tool but is so misunderstood as to be useless.

      If a movie gets 10% on RT, but you’re in the 10% that fucking love that thing then that score means nothing.

      • Lucidlethargy
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        1 year ago

        I wish I could use my Trakt account to find an avid critic similar to my tastes. That’d be cool…

        Because, yeah, critics usually suck. They will tell you a movie is great, and the vibe can be so shitty sometimes. Like, ruin your whole night levels of depressing or pretentious.

        • RobotsLeftHand@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Sorry for the very late reply, but I’m hoping you’ll still get this: Find movies where you feel like you’re in the minority for liking. Then find critics who feel the same way as you. Root through their review archives till you find at least a couple other films where you both agree on fringe films. When you’re done you should just have a couple critics left. Read them consistently and hopefully one or more will be your long term go-to.

          This is how I found my absolute favorite critic, Walter Chaw. The summer X-Men 3 came out alongside Live Free Or Die Hard. Both got similar RT scores, but I hated XM3 and loved Die Hard. Decided that any critic who felt the same as me would understand me. Was one of the best decisions I made.

    • Laticauda@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I mean, it’s entirely subjective. I tend to trust audience scores more than critic scores personally.