Why Do You Care if Critics Hate the Movies You Like?

Published 4 years ago by , Updated August 7th, 2012 at 9:39 pm,

critics header 2 Why Do You Care if Critics Hate the Movies You Like?

[With all the heated discussion over our Green Lantern review (and pretty much any other superhero movie these days), we thought it might be an opportune time to resurrect this article from last year – Ed.]

“Opinions are like armpits – everyone has them and some of them stink,” so the old adage goes. This phrase rings doubly true when it comes to movie critics and their reviews of films.

The word “critic” is derived from the word “critique” which is defined by Dictionary.com as “a criticism or critical comment on some subject.” Film critics in general simply critique a movie based on their personal feelings and experiences. Why then do people get totally upset when a review for a film goes in the complete opposite direction of their personal experiences?

In other words: Why do people care if critics hate the movies they like?

In my recent review for Dinner for Schmucks, I was literally raked across the coals (OK not literally) for giving the film a poor score that others felt was not justified. For example: “You have no idea what comedy is.” or “I pity you for lacking a sense of humor.” or “You have no soul and are a worthless coward who hides behind words to attack hard working people making a film.” Alright, I sort of embellished that last sentence and quoted it out of context but something similar was actually said to me.

These are all good people who have absolutely nothing invested in the film beside two hours of their time and a few dollars from their pocket; so why are they adamantly defending a movie that amounts to nothing more than a toss-away summer comedy?

critics freud Why Do You Care if Critics Hate the Movies You Like?

I think the answer is more or less buried beneath the complex layers of the human psyche. Everyone wants to feel like they’re a part of what is conceived to be the winning group or side. No one wants to be associated with a conceived bunch of losers (except maybe Zoe Saldana *bum-dum ching*), so every time someone attacks something we’ve aligned ourselves with, our first instinct is to defend it – whether it is a political view, a friend or family member, a beloved sports team or even something as contrived and ultimately meaningless as a film – if we love it and someone attacks it, then we WILL defend it!

It used to be that movie going audiences would live or die by the professional movie critic. At one point, the mere direction of a thumbs up or thumbs down from famed and influential movie critics Gene Siskel and Roger Ebert would be enough to make or break a film. Of course, back then no one had the ability to quickly spout off a remark on their blog page and voice a contrary opinion.

Now, thanks to Al Gore, we have this thing called *deep booming, echoing voice* The Internet!

The internet has given anyone who wishes to share their critiques with the world the ability to share their thoughts on a particular subject via a personal blog, a FaceBook status update, a short Twitter message or, if they are really lucky, a medium-to-high profile blog and/or news column.

It used to take days for word of mouth to spread regarding a film and now it take minutes or even seconds (depending on whether you use the AT&T cell network *zing*). Of course, every rose has its thorn (thanks Poison) and just like the Internet can be used to respond to a reviewer with enthusiastic agreement, it can also be used to put forth a scathing rebuttal.

critics angry mob pitchfork Why Do You Care if Critics Hate the Movies You Like?

Reviewing a film can often be a tough row to hoe and, if they are lucky, the reviewer can find their opinions falling in lockstep with the opinions of their peers; they can also find their review on the opposite of popular opinion, which opens their review (and subsequently the reviewer) up to criticism.

Of course, whether a film is good or bad is purely subjective and while one reviewer might enjoy a light-hearted romance comedy about a love triangle involving a bartender, an extreme mountain biker and a nun, another reviewer might be completely turned off by that concept and both reviews will ultimately reflect those feelings.

A few recent examples of this would be Roger Ebert’s half-star review of Kick-Ass, Cole Smithey’s C+ review of Toy Story 3 and pretty much anything Armond White reviews in general (the guy seriously liked Jonah Hex). See what I just did right there? I, along with most of the reviewing community, gave Jonah Hex a horrible review and I just dismissed White’s opinion because it didn’t mesh with mine. That’s not very nice of me to do is it?

Ebert’s scathing and often times sanctimonious review of Kick-Ass caused such an uproar in the fanboy circles that the Godfather of all movie bloggers, Harry Knowles of Ain’t It Cool News, wrote a response to Ebert calling him out for his controversial and sometimes hypocritical views on this and other films.

Cole Smithey and Armond White (who appears to have a form of movie review dyslexia) were the first people on Rotten Tomatoes in the entire world to give Toy Story 3 a rating that wasn’t fresh, which was ceremoniously frowned upon by critics and bloggers alike in almost an instantaneous fashion. Cinema Blend, /Film, Pop Eater and others all rallied around what they thought to be a critical injustice. In other words – they all defended what they liked against what they perceived as an attack.

critics ebert smithey white Why Do You Care if Critics Hate the Movies You Like?

Again, why is it even important that a film review, good or bad, agrees with our individual opinions? Ultimately a handful of overly-aggressive reviews does nothing to deter the general movie-going audience from attending a film. Kick-Ass was hailed by the fanboy community while bringing in an impressive world wide box office gross of $96 million, even though Ebert hated it; Toy Story 3 is a huge blockbuster success even though Smithey railed on it and Jonah Hex appropriately failed even though White adorned it with kudos.

So what does this all mean in the grand scheme of things? Nothing, really; the true purpose of a review is to give the reader a look at how they may or may not enjoy a film based on someone else’s experience who shares their viewpoints.

Bottom line: If a critic doesn’t share your opinion on a film, don’t take that opportunity to rip into them; just find yourself a critic you do agree with and in the end you’ll enjoy your movie experience a whole lot more.

Let us know in the comments how you feel about critics who generally don’t agree with your opinions on movies.

Follow us on Twitter @Walwus and @ScreenRant.

Get our free email alerts on the topics and author of this article:


Post a Comment

GravatarWant to change your avatar?
Go to Gravatar.com and upload your own (we'll wait)!

 Rules: No profanity or personal attacks.
 Use a valid email address or risk being banned from commenting.

If your comment doesn't show up immediately, it may have been flagged for moderation. Please try refreshing the page first, then drop us a note and we'll retrieve it. Keep in mind that we do not allow external links in the comments.

  1. Personally, I read reviews before seeing a movie that I’m second guessing to see in the theatre. If say Green Lantern, I don’t read GL comic books, I’m not a big fan of CGI heavy movies, I don’t like Ryan Reynolds, and the trailers didn’t give me enough of a reason to see it. But the build up on some sites tell me it’s going to be a good movie. So what do I do? I read a review (personally, I think Roger Ebert share my taste in movies) and maybe it can change my mind. But after reading Ebert’s review, it makes me think I was right all along.

    But say Nolan’s upcoming Batman movie. I am a big Batman fan, I liked (or loved) the first two movies from Nolan, I am a big fan of realism in movies, plus I like Christian Bale and Morgan Freeman. So, what’s the need for reading a review? I wouldn’t even care anyway since I’m a fan.

  2. Here’s the thing. Everything in this article is correct, at least as pertains to a review of a movie.

    The problem in many cases where negative reviews are concerned is that the reviewer is not reviewing the movie so much as they are reviewing the audience.

    A perfect example of this is Ebert’s review of Fanboys. In the course of his review, he was not content to speak negatively of the film which not only would have been his right but also his job. Rather he felt the need to take shots at not only the sort of people that are the basis for the main characters in Fanboys but also to ridicule basically anyone who might like the movie.

    That is wholly inappropriate and something that it seems like film critics do far too often.

    Bottom line? If you want to say that Movie X is the dumbest piece of drivel since Movie Y, well that’s fine. I might not agree with you but I have no problem with you having an opinion that differs from mine. However if in the course of listing X’s many flaws as you see them you also carry on, at great length about how any one who professes to like X is clearly a mental defective and perhaps should have all the sharp objects hidden from them then you are out of line and should be called on it.

  3. So I think that Kofi wrote that 100% pure cynicism filled review of Green Lantern just as a lead into this article.

    How about a proper review of how the movie really was because I went back and read it again and I’m seeing all kinds of things that are just ridiculous to mention. For instance… In the first battle between Hal and Hector… Kofi said that it was totally out of nowhere

    “(I would still like to know how Hal Jordan, doubting himself as a Lantern, knows to show up for his first big fight with Hector Hammond. Suddenly he’s just there in Hammond’s lab, no explanation why or how.)”

    I’m sure sir Kofi noticed that the ring sounded off that there was danger nearby with two clear and noticeable chimes…

    So yeah I’m thinking that that review was just created to set up this one…

    • @Tyler – I wrote this a year ago bud.

      • Ok well my bad, but still man, that was a terrible review. Not just because of the reasonings mentioned in your article but because of how bad it was.

        I just expected more from SR.

        • Well he was very excited for this film since whenever lol so his expectations were sky high the same as some other ppl I would like to think. It didn’t live up to his expectations and it was something he held close to his heart judging from his posts about it b4. Tho one the flip side other ppl love it but wanna bash him for his harsh review. If you like the movie then someone else’s opinion should not matter.

        • Tyler, it even says that this article was from last year in the opening paragraph…

  4. Critics say Grandmas Boy was terrible, but I thought it was hilarious. Everyone has different views, so the only critic you should listen to, is yourself.

    • ^what he said

  5. Its not so much whether or not a critic likes a movie, its more the way the review is written that I take issue with. I was irritated by the green lantern review because it was an attack on the film instead of a calm analytical review of the merits and faults of the film. People look to critics for a professional view of the film and when it seems like the review was written by an angry teenager it is frustrating.

    • Totally

    • I agree, not analytically at all.

      Read like it was an angry, bitter 15 year-old kid ‘reviewing’ it.

  6. I always use to let a movie review decide whether i watched the movie or not until recently when i watched Shutter Island. Absolutely loved it and it didn’t get good reviews to say the least.

  7. Everyone needs to take a chill pill lol.

  8. First I am going to agree that Dinner for Schmucks was crap. Worth a watch, maybe? Depending on the dollar amount, age of person, and profession. Yes I agree that some want to go with majority rules but not all. I have been saying that GL was going to be crap since the beginning. Now I have people mad at me and trying to discredit me on the internet because I am saying “hey I said this and the critics said this and I am still going to see this like I intended all along” yet for some reason I have no credibility, as if someone who has seen it and does like it has credibility. Most people that I have spoken to on the internet in the past months have been the biggest skeptics, yet I am the one who is questionable? People hate to be proven wrong, people are infantile. I am infantile and why would I want to be wrong, If you love a fictitious character for more than half of your life and a movie comes out about them you have a whole lot invested. A whole lot to dismiss or embrace, I feel like with GL there was a whole lot of both, this is what has made it so difficult. That and you add in Marvel movies as a factor this year and all of the debate on the internet to find out that the crappiest Marvel crap movie is superior in ratings to the only DC offering this year. Does not help that many paranoid fanboys believe that the reviews will stifle future projects. DC will perfect their offerings much like Marvel is doing to please their audience, I havent been given a reason to think otherwise. There is still money to be made, and Lantern will still make money. They will build upon this. I just wish more would admit the faults so we can fix them rather than deny them. I have grown up with Batmand and Superman movies all around me and now I finally have decent Marvel films to look forward to. We arent in differnet boats. We are just on different teams on the same boat. I wish I could speak my mind and talk trash or however you want to put it without people taking me so seriously and I am just a guy who likes to type in movie forums so I cant imagine what it would be like to be the author/s of this site because it is sad that people take it so seriously. I am 26 and all of those years I have had comic books, ten bad movies wont keep these studios from producing ten more. Thank you guys for the good site and reviews and for watching your movies with expectations. The GL review was a bit intense, a bit too personalized, but this is coming from someone who has not seen it. I all so plan on seeing it as intended despite your review even though I expected this movie to be exactly what your review says it is, so what does that say about me? or a general audience? and does this site truly deflect or inspire people to see films that it reviews? I plan on seeing a movie when I hear about its creation. Then I read the reviews, then I see it. Sleep tight and dont sweat it. Fanboys are harsh as I am one that thinks he is reasonable and I am insane so good luck with future CBM reviews, they better be good, Maybe five sentences, picture, dialogue,setting, costumes, pacing?

    • I would have liked to have read your rant but it was just too badly formatted. Please consider the use of paragraphs and spaces to make it more legible in the future.

      And no, before you take the safety off, this isn’t me having a go at you, this is me offering advice.

      Take it or don’t. IDC

      • Cant argue you that for I agree with you. I get carried away with typing a response and after it posts I see that I have typed way more than I intended.

  9. Yes I do care if critics blast a movie I love because then chances are the movies is going to do bad and the genious writer/directors chances at making another masterpiece is lowered by distributors…example, I loved suckerpunch but due to poor reviews (and zack snyder, I got ur back!) Can’t even make the darn sequel to 300 cause of the bad rep he attained from watchmen and suckerpunch. So yes, I flippin care

    • LOL havent you even read history …. the 300 delayed the Persians while the Greeks placed defence to win the war. They paid for the salvation of their country with their lives. It was the first time the Greek city states started having a unified Greek identity not to mention their government laid the foundation for the western world..

      so what 300 – 2 LOL

      • I think the movie made it pretty clear that they all died, so I’m not sure why you’re attacking him, especially since they are making a sequel. Last I heard they were calling it “Xerxes” (sp?), though I think that might’ve changed.

    • Gi Joe was ripped apart too but that made money with the “summer crowd” and is getting a sequel. Could be similar here.

    • jwalka…

      I (and many others) did not have an issue with Kofi blasting the film. I told him I disagreed with him, but that was just MY opinion, as he had HIS. MY issue was the fact that in his professional review (*cough,I call BULL*), he insulted everyone who did like the film.

      You can criticize a film I like (or praise a film I hate) until you’re blue in the face. Not a problem. We can disagree and remain civilized. Tell me I am somehow inferior because I do not share your view: Problem. MAJOR problem.

      BTW, since you did the same thing Kofi did, but for an even sillier reason, you REALLY should follow your own suggestion from the first line of your comment. 😉

      • Damn. Screen Rant needs to get a “like” button because that was great haha.

        By the way “jwalka”, you need some ice for that burn?

    • Mrs. Outlaw, is that you? :)

  10. “Bottom line: If a critic doesn’t share your opinion on a film, don’t take that opportunity to rip into them; just find yourself a critic you do agree with and in the end you’ll enjoy your movie experience a whole lot more.”

    This is why I like Screenrant. I tend to agree with most of the reviews on the site. If i didn’t, I wouldn’t be here. Take a hint.

    • same here, i think most people use the anonymity that some with the internet to troll people who dont share a similar opinion in regards to anything. i for one like negative reviews, as they give me an insight to how bad a movie is (so i dont have to waste my money). that being said kofi’s review wasn’t downright hatred, he was just upset b/c the movie was a let down in terms of narrative and directing.

      • comes*

  11. I will voice the same opinion I have had about critics for years. The reason Critics hate movies so bad is because they watch all of them. If it is your job to eat hamburgers the 300th hamburger you eat is not going to be as good as the first one. It just gets old. Yeah, some movies are great, some movies suck, watch them all and form your own opinion and don’t just take everybody else’s. Some people say they don’t have to money to watch them all. So watch what you think you will be interested in. If you just wasted your 10 dollars then get on the net and rant and rave about it like everyone else.
    The only problem I have with this article it’s self is this comment… ” If a critic doesn’t share your opinion on a film, don’t take that opportunity to rip into them; just find yourself a critic you do agree with and in the end you’ll enjoy your movie experience a whole lot more.”
    Here is a bottom line for you my friend. If you don’t want your opinion ripped to shreds, then don’t post it on the net. Sorry, but if you want everyone to agree with everything you say then don’t put a comments bar in at the bottom. I do agree that Kofi’s review of GL is a little harsh just off the tip but I haven’t seen the movie yet. Once I have seen the movie I will make my decision on how bad of an article it is and will complain or defend accordingly.

  12. I hear a lot of “why do you listen to a review, why don’t you go see the movie for yourself?”

    Well, they’re ALL missing the point of what reviews are all about.

    The point of a review is for a reader to be informed, and for them to sometimes save money as a result.

    That’s why sometimes you’ll see reviews include whether a movie is suitable for children or not. I can actually attribute skipping out on a few bad movies (such as Alien vs Predator 2) directly to Screen Rant reviews I’ve read, and I thank SR for that. I can also credit SR for piquing my interest on a few movies (such as Super 8 at the moment).

    I think what people need to remember to do is find a reviewer that they agree with most of the time – same tastes, etc. – because there WILL be reviewers that you completely disagree with about a lot of movies. No one thinks completely the same way. To test whether you agree with that reviewer or not, you do have to go see the same movies they see, and see if you agree with them more often than not….

    If the answer is yes, the reader is then compelled to trust that reviewer to be reasonably consistent in his views on movies, and while there may still be some disagreements, the reader can decide for himself whether he wants to risk going to see a movie that his/her reviewer doesn’t like.

    Don’t take it all so personally, guys. These guys review movies because they enjoy sharing their opinions. You read their reviews because you want to see their opinions on the movies. Don’t bash them just because they don’t like a movie.

    If they make statements you feel is unfair, point out why you feel that way and move on. If you REALLY don’t like a reviewer’s work, then by God, why are you still reading it? Find a different reviewer that you DO agree with.

    But any kind of rhetoric is really unnecessary. It just makes you seem like you have no life, to be so emotionally unhinged about a movie review. Don’t be like that.

    • If you are looking to critics to save you money then you will be missing out on lots of good movies. If I trusted everything these guys have to say about movies then I would have missed out on lots of movies that I like. If you agree with everything that SR has to say about every movie then more power to you. As for me, I will make my own decision.

      • I don’t agree with SR on every review (I was a fan of the first Transformers movie, in fact.)

        What drew me to Screen Rant, despite that, was how Vic was able to portray his feelings and opinions about the Transformers movie – he didn’t whine like an immature child who didn’t like what his parents got him for Christmas, but analyzed the movie like a professional columnist. I may have disagreed with him on a few things, but I could understand why he didn’t like Transformers. Not that it discouraged my enjoyment of the movie in the least – it was just interesting to hear his opinion.

        But you missed my point though. I don’t let the critics determine whether I’m going to enjoy a movie or not, but I DO listen to them and I’ll make my own decision as to whether I’ll risk it or not. Preferably a critic that I agree with most of the time.

        I’m not THAT rich. I can’t afford to go to every movie that comes out at the theater. It’s a forced necessity, I’m afraid.

    • Good point. My favorite way to see movies is in the theater. I used to love to go to movies when there were all kinds of theaters that showed old movies, or second run movies, even first run movies weren’t so bad because the highest prices only applied to the evening shows. But money is a consideration for certain.

      And people should just like what they like, and let other people like what they like. Yeah it can get annoying. There are plenty of people bemoaning the lack of non-sequel, non-superhero movies these days. But eventually this trend will taper down again.

  13. Why Do You Care if Critics Hate the Movies You Like? it depends on a lot of thing; the actors, the director, the studio it came from even down to the genre of the film. its like if someone says i don’t like your shirt but its YOUR favorite or color of shirt your bound to defend it but to me 9 times out of 10 the people having a go back at the critic just have to much time on there hands and don’t really understand the concept of only the critics opinion the critic dose not speak for a group/nation/world/universe it just there take on whatever there critiquing and personally i’d just say agree or disagree according to if i saw the movie or not i would give them grief for an opinion tho seems a bit daft lol

  14. The trouble with only reading reviews by someone with the same tastes is that your horizons will never broaden and you’ll remain in your comfortable little box. You might never discover that unsung little gem, what if you’d really like period Russian musicals but never saw one? 😉

    Sometimes certain critics, including some on this site, seem to write purposefully antagonistic reviews in order to increase discussion/hits. I’m not talking about merely negative reviews but reviews designed to encourage arguments rather than discussion.

  15. this article reeks of hectic late night typing with some quick chugs of energy drink thrown in the middle. not that its a bad thing, i’m just saying, high energy jokes

    • shacasa,

      I can’t speak for Paul but I would venture he used a light-hearted style because this is a topic that is generally so heated.


  16. There have been published studies that say the brain reacts to rejection the same way it reacts to physical pain.

    From an evolutionary psychology perspective this helped our ancestors survive by keeping them in tune with the rest of the group. Someone who didn’t feel this way could do or say something that either ostracized them, or simply made it more difficult for them to get along. Over the course of time, in general, it would be more difficult for them to survive and reproduce. For instance, if one must always find their own food and build their own shelters, without the cooperation of others, it takes away from time and energy to conceive and raise children.

    We are all descendants of the survivors. So we have inherited their traits, as opposed to the traits of the ones who didn’t survive.

    Of course, people can inherit more or less of any particular trait. So while it’s important to have some sense of the group dynamic, it could also be a disadvantage to be overly concerned. Likewise, there are advantages to bucking the trends at times.

    Personally I really like RT. I pay attention to it. It’s something I consider. But I’m not religious about it. If I had to solely make decisions based on RT ratings, I think it would mostly steer me right. I’d see some movies I didn’t like, and miss some I did, but my average would be okay.

    That said, I will probably see Green Lantern. Based on the tone of the individual reviews, I think it might be the sort of movie I could enjoy. But I’ll try to see it at a discount. I enjoyed Fantastic Four even though it was really bad and stupid (or because it was). I did not like Thor, and I’ve read lot’s of posters refer to it’s great reviews. But reading the reviews, I found them to be “non-negative” rather than positive. I can’t say it was bad, but it was pretty flat to me. X-men First Class was great.

  17. I care because people who haven’t seen the film will judge it based off what critics say instead of deciding for themselves. Thus the film will make less money and the chances of a sequel or even spinoffs will dwindle depriving those who actually did like the film a chance to immerse themselves in said future sequels/spinoffs.

  18. While I’m curious about reviews, I must admit I don’t let them influence me. If I want to see a movie, I see it, and vice-versa. I enjoy movie news and such, but as far as opinions? Too subjective. But the idea of only reading reviews I agree with is pointless. I appreciate seeing things thru others’ eyes. But it is certainly true that, for example, the GL review seemed unprofessional and embittered rather than a reasoned critique. That having been said, the site’s called ‘Screen RANT’, not Screen Mild Commentary.
    In fact, I think the most inflammatory rabble-rouser on the site is whoever writes the leads on the Facebook posts. That person (or persons) seems to delight in stirring up drama, drama that is often completely absent from the articles themselves.

    • We don’t try to stir up drama on Facebook, we try to use lead-ins that will engage people and encourage conversation.


  19. If we shouldn’t care then stop reviewing movies! Its bad enough that someone gives
    a film a bad review for someone else’s hard work, maybe it sucked, fair enough, but when a reviewer downs a movie, talking out his a$$ with no knowledge what so ever of the subject matter that is just wrong!!

  20. There seems to be about three reaccuring things said when a review is negative towards a film that the reader enjoyed.

    1. “This score was unfair” – Please, there no fairness in personal opinion. If the reviewer doesn’t like something, they shouldn’t have to sugar coat the score just because your feeling got hurt.

    2. “If you don’t like it you didn’t get it” – No, some people just don’t like certain things, or maybe in fact they completely got it and that’s why they didn’t like it.

    3. “Welll if all the critics bash it it wont get a sequel” – Sequels are usually granted by b.o. gross not critical success. Look at transformers 2. Besides if a majority of the masses doesn’t like the film, it’s would be only being made for a small percentage of people.

    • @Sin, you wrote:

      “In a review you have to be sensitive to your readers, you have to be careful. You have to acknowledge that EVERYONE has their own tastes in movies. I have liked dozens of movies that were critically hated, and hated plenty of movies that they loved. So while reading a review you have to take everything they say with a “grain of salt” (unless, of course, they are calling you an idiot for liking the movie).”

      I know what your general point is, and in that I agree. But I disagree that a critic must be sensitive to his/her readers. I say a critic just needs to write what he wants to write about a movie and let the chips fall where they may. Just as much as a critic should not call people idiots for having different tastes, readers who disagree should also avoid resorting to such childish behavior.

      Now, I myself do question the motives and mentality of people who go around proclaiming such movies as Transformers Revenge are the best movies ever and wonder if they have much intellect or insight, but in my critique of them, I will lay out the faultiness in their thinking. I will point out the hypocrisy in how, for example, many of them extol the virtues of Michael Bay’s Transformers movies, but then spend much of their time bashing the Twilight series. To me, to bash movies that are not of any interest to you is ridiculous, childish and pointless. I know who the Twilight movies are made for, and so I leave them alone. I might occasionally make fun of Twilight fans just as an amusing side, but I leave it at that. Same goes for the Transformers fanboys, who are just as crazy as female fans are about Twilight.

      The Transformers fanboys who bash Twilight fans remind me of little boys on the playground mocking little girls.

  21. I NEVER read critic reviews until AFTER I’ve seen the movie so for me, they’re ineffective.

  22. Eh… I personally only dislike it when reviewers attack all who enjoyed a movie they disliked. I understand that commenters will go guns blazing toward the reviewer and their just defending themselves but when the reviewer starts lashing out at the audience in his review it just gives the commenter more reason to lash out on the reviewer. I’ve butted heads with vic in the past but i’ve never seen him lash out at the viewer in the review and i’ve always respected that about him.

    One thing I do find hilarious is the amount of heated arguments/comments so far this year and the Transformers 3 review isn’t even up yet lol. I really look foward to your review this year on Transformers Vic… Going to see it regardless but depending on reviews I might/might not see it in 3D.

  23. Part of a critics critique is the all around quality of the film. Whether there is good acting or not is not subjective, or whether or not the quality (such as set pieces or effects) is good or not is not subjective. There are a lot of factors that critics look at that are completely objective. Whether they enjoyed the film is subjective, but just because someone enjoys something doesn’t mean that the movie was good.