You know what I'm talking about. For the longest time now I've been telling anyone who would listen how completely horrible professional Movie Reviewers are, but if I needed any further evidence, they certainly gave it to me with the critical acclaim given to "It Follows"
It wasn't that the film was completely terrible, but massive plot holes, loose associations and poor editing gave a completely amatuer feel to a decent concept that didn't quite get it done. Before seeing the Rotten Tomatoes page I said it was about a 67, you know that grade you get in school when you passed by the skin of your sack, but not really?
Low and behold, the "Pros" couldn't get enough of it's "clever" concept, which wasn't particularly all that clever and killed by its multiple misteps, to the tune of a 96 score. The fans nailed it though, right in its left cheek.
In the following post I'm going to point out to you in no uncertain terms precisely what a joke that is. Above we see Arnold's go at the Zombie apocolypse got a 34 from fans, which I can understand given that they were all looking for gore and flesh shredding, but got an emotional human spirit story instead. What can I say, people are simple.
But if people are simple and thinking outside of the box in a genre is too much, then how can the ones who are charged with guiding the clueless masses have such a discrepancy in rating the "thoughtfulness" of these two films? Especially when Maggie was by far the better movie. There were no plot holes or major editing issues, and that alone should have made the difference.
If you wanted to say "eh, bad example, Maggie was trash", though, ok. Then what about the Tom Hardy/James Gandolfini drama The Drop? This movie was great and Tom Hardy was outstanding, his character alone a piece of art. The 89 critics score is about right, and yet not close to the 96 for "It Follows"
Not really a Tom Hardy fan though? Ok, that happens. How do you feel about Academy Award nominees? J.K. Simmons won best supporting actor for his role in Whiplash because he was sick! No, literally, his performance may have carried the film, but it left me thinking there has to be something seriously wrong with that guy.
Great film, everyone says so right? Well apparently it wasn't as good as "It Follows". The 94 score given to Whiplash couldn't quite top that 96.
Or what about Birdman, which won Academy Awards for Best Picture, Best Director, Best Screenplay and Best Cinematography to go along with nominations for Best Actor, Best Supporting Actor and Best Supporting Actress among others?
Well the Academy must have missed something, because according to critical acclaim, "It Follows" was the better film in 2014.
Indie films aren't for everyone though. While I loved Birdman and Whiplash both and still can't decide which I thought was the better film, I will only actually go to the theater for the kind of flick that you HAVE to see on the big screen.
I went crazy for Jurassic World. Part of that was due to nostalgia; it reminded me so much of the original film that it put me in a different place and time and reminded me of a different, well, me. According to the critics though, Jurassic World was barely watchable. The main complaint was that it was too much like the original. Remember that line as we get to the end, Jurassic World was crap because it was too much like, but not better than, the original.
By the way, as of this writing, Jurassic World became the third highest grossing film of all time behind only Titanic and Avatar. If only it were even close to as good a watch as "It Follows"......
Everyone love comics these days. Well, everyone except "serious" movie people. I've never heard comics killed so much as I had watching the latest award shows, but Age of Ultron passed $1 BILLION at the box office, so apparently the fans don't agree with the "experts".
That 87 fan rating is probably about what we gave it, and coupled with the sales figures Marvel must be doing something right. That's not the story the "professional" movie watchers would give you though. They gave it a 74, just barely passing. "It Follows" then, logicially, is the WAY more entertaining piece, 96 rating and all.
FINALLY!!! We've finally come to a film, after all the films that we've looked at, that the critics thought was a better watch than "It Follows". Mad Max: Fury Road comes in with a 98.
A 2 hour car chase through the desert with over the top villains came in at a 98. Remember when Jurassic World was too much like the original that it failed to even register a C on the test? Well then what in the hell would you say about Mad Max? That is was so much different? That it was better than the orginals?
Look, I loved Fury Road, but how about a little consistency please.
But all you have to do is take a look at the image above and it's pretty clear how very little professional critics represent the tastes and opinions of the people who actually pay to enjoy these movies, and ultimately, who they're made for.
This isn't to say every one of them are hacks. There are some great film critics who's opinion's are usually very close to mine, and I love to read their work. But just like your friends, some you agree with constantly, others just have no clue of what the hell they're talking about. So your best bet is to find people who you generally agree with and hear what they have to say, disregarding the rest. At the end of the day, none of this is any more than some persons Opinion.......
And you know what they say about Opinions.....
Everyone has one and they usually stink!
You can see what we thought about all of these films here at The Mad Doser Presents fan page on Facebook
