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. How weird, its Roger Eberts bday today. Happy birthday old man!! :)

  2. Am I the only one who liked Norbit and Transformers II, but hated Rango?

  3. I remember two summers ago when Transformers Revenge of the Fallen came out. My indignation was not because critics didn’t like it, but because many of those reviews essentially called that those of us that liked it bottom-dwelling, scum-feeding simpletons that are single-handedly responsible for the fall of Western civilization.

  4. Audiences don’t care. It’s about being entertained. Hence, why bad reviewed movies make money and Oscar nominated films often do not! Not every film produced needs to be an Oscar contender.

  5. Like someone said before me, I’m not rich so I use critics reviews to help me narrow my choices between seeing it now, seeing it when it’s cheaper, or seeing it on DVD.

    Screenrant, since I have found it has been my go to place for news and reviews because I usually agree with the writers on here. So whenever something I don’t agree with is said, I take it with a grain of salt but I try to debate the topic.

    Now I haven’t seen Green Lantern yet, but I want too. I read Kofi’s and some of my friends reviews, and what was mentioned before that the SR team was split on the film so I was and still am wary to watch it.

    But I do have to critique Kofi, I understand that you are disappointed with the film and it’s your right to tell us how you feel about the film, but saying that people who are 10 years old or younger will be the only ones to like it is harsh to the people who do like it. I guess from my point of view is that when you are on a site like this that is viewed reguraly by many people, you need to balance critique and personal feelings so that it won’t cause too big of an uproar. (And I’m only pointing you out because your review was the last one published.)

    I think in all, people care about what critics thinks and say because of a variety of reasons. So it’s up to both the critics and readers to understand each other and not go to war when either say something that the other doesn’t like.

  6. Mostly it has nothing to do with wanting to be on the Winner side !
    What an idea anyway !!!

    You critics can reach thousands of people,
    and many people have no own opinion,the are like sheep’s listen to the Critics.
    So what happens next,the do not go to watch the movie,
    and the movie could fail at the box office,and that means..no sequel !

    So Of course I am mad when you guys make a film bad I really enjoyed,
    and because of poor reviews there is no second part !

    Like Rocketeer,Van Helsing,League of extra ordinary Gentleman and so on !

    Sure it’s a matter of taste,but that is a reason why some people care what you guys say about a movie they like,cause you reach people with that you say !

    Sadly !

    • There’s always word of mouth. Obviously, just because a critic doesn’t like something, we can sometimes refer to our friends’ opinions as well.

      Having this “second opinion” has determined when I decide to check a movie out for myself.

      For instance… Green Lantern is actually a perfect example. Where the critics seem to hate this movie, most of my friends actually seem to enjoy it.

      So I’ll see it for myself.

      • Sorry, meant to say, “just because a critic doesn’t like a movie, doesn’t mean it is curtains for it” – sometimes I type faster than I think.

  7. I have started to read reviews based on how the opinion reflect on me. If a reviewer dislikes all the use of CGI , then his negative may be my positive for I like creatively used CGI.

    Some reviewer may call a set of characters racist while I laugh at how obviously the characters are a commentary of stereotypes found in the media.

    You need to read the reviews an understand why you or may not disagree.

    But I agree that when a reviewer is uninformed and heavily biased(I hate this director or this actor)….then we got a problem.

  8. Irony rips through this whole post. Here’s my version of it. I agree with a lot of this post. However, I disagree with finding a critic you agree with and listening to them to when they don’t like a movie. I dislike that as you learn nothing.

    I agree with Ebert more than 85% of the time and even now I agreed with his Green Lantern Review (especially the part about being better than Thor). However, I do not read his review first as I learn very little from it. I actually rarely read it since I can see it in the TV Promo Trailer if it’s positive. :) I want to read opposing or interesting reviews from unknowns who may not get quoted so I learn something.

    That’s how I found ScreenRant! Seriously. Thanks for the very interesting postings since I found you close to a year ago.


  9. i liked this article. When I was 15 yrs. old I read a bad review of The LoSt BoYs and vowed not to take what critics said to heart. I loved that film,anyway, and nothing some critic in a magazine said ever took any of that love away from me.

  10. i liked this article. When I was 15 yrs. old I read a bad review of The LoSt BoYs and vowed not to take what critics said to heart. I loved that film,anyway, and nothing some critic in a magazine said ever took any of that love away from me.

  11. As a rule I listen to only ONE movie critic, and that is me. I’ll see a movie if it looks good to me, and vise versa, if I think the movie looks stupid I don’t see it.

  12. I don’t see why people are responding to Kofi’s review so negatively. I have had time to read it over and over, as well as the comments, and have come to this conclusion:

    1. Kofi’s review in no way insulted anyone. He spends the first paragraphs telling readers that he is a fan and that he wanted this movie to be great. I saw the movie and could have some unflattering things to say about the cast and crew, yet Kofi refrained from doing so, no one is called a “hack” or an “idiot”. In the last paragraph he writes that the movie could only be enjoyed as mindless fun by 10 year olds, because the Green Lantern character is not mindless, not fodder for toys and merchandising. The mythos is one of the most Sci-fi and “smart” comic book franchises. MovieBob on the Escapist actually told viewers that if they must see this movie, to see it during the week to hurt the films weekend box office. Never on this site or in Kofi’s review does he or anyone go as far as to ask fans to contribute to a budding film franchise’s demise.

    2. The people responding negatively to his review only do so for one of two reasons. They either don’t like Kofi or his review of the pile of crap they call a Green Lantern movie because he called it for what it was, while they try to convince themselves they like it (which no one should). The movie had real problems, and he names many of them, and people bashing earlier movies which have turned out to be critical darlings, are mad that the one film they wanted to be great, isn’t. The other reason is that they are just being wusses. If your feelings are hurt by that review, I can’t comprehend how many of those people made it through life without crying everyday. If one’s feelings are hurt by an informative, thoughtful breakdown of the films many flaws, and few positive aspects, then good luck in the real world, because the world will hurt you worse and in more ways than one review.

    3. Vic, Kofi, or any other reviewer should never have to apologize for a review, especially one as tame as the Green Lantern review. These guys are self-proclaimed fans, and even make their case in the comments where the rest of us can spar with them, but we as readers should never hate or throw so much spite at a reviewer because at the end of the day, it is their opinion which when aligned with ours, we often praise. Film is subjective, and we as film fans should respect these guys for putting forth their respected, professional opinion, even when they know it will receive backlash.

    So that is my take on this whole debacle, some people just need to realize that these reviewers are fans too. If a review upsets you or hurts your feelings, you need to toughen up and show some respect to these guys on this site. Your hating on a reviewer isn’t going to change his mind. Stand your ground Vic and Kofi, keep up the good work.

  13. It’s funny cause some of you in here cling to critics views like your life depended on it. Take a look at the Pirates films. Only the first was “critically acclaimed and the rest not so much….but are the films done well to entertain? That’s why the made a boat load of money. Look at the Hangover. It’s a silly comedy that was cheap to make and it made a boat load of money. Was it nominated for Oscars and critically acclaimed everywhere? No. It’s all about being entertained in a good way. Critics positive or negative reviews are only used to when it benefits someones argument for a film or not.

  14. Roger Ebert, i love to hate most of your reviews, but Happy Birthday all the same :)

    • WOW! why do people care?
      PEOPLE CARE BECAUSE CRITICS HAVE A JOB – to inform the public about which movies ARE GOOD and which ARE BAD. Critics aren’t just supposed to give false reviews – how is it possible that even the best movies have bad reviews from 20 critics? It’s their “opinion”? Well, their review isn’t for them. It’s to inform the public. They have that JOB BECAUSE of the public.

      So why do people care? Use your common sense, please.

  15. Critiques can be both subjective and objective at once. Even though you can get great feedback from a critique, the majority of what you are hearing is based upon personal opinion. While attending college to become a graphic designer, I participated in roughly thirty to forty critiques a week. Regardless about the truth behind certain observations, we sometimes try to protect the things we like.

    When it comes to movie critics, I disagree with them about 90% of the time. Movies are meant to ‘entertain’ a wide variety of individuals.

    “The Island”, “Clash of the Titans” (New), “The Time Machine” (New), “Star Trek V: The Voyage Home”, and “Chrysalis” (French) hit a balance between action and philosophy. All those movies were slammed with bad reviews. While critics were judging them for a lack of drama, they missed each movie’s moral lessons and worldliness.

    Critics focus too much on drama. When you walk into a movie theater, you should expect an entertaining and sometimes nonsensical ride. ‘Movie magic’ is all about popcorn. ‘TV magic’ is all about drama and popcorn. Get it?

  16. Ebert hated Toy Story 3 boy I bet he took some hits on the chin about it OH LMAO

    • He gave it 3 out of 4 stars. How did he hate it?

  17. The only time I have a real problem with critics is when you are reading their review and you can tell then didnt even see the movie.
    Heres an example: Thor just came out and most reviews were positive. The ones that were not had things in them such as. “Dr Blake stricks his cane on the ground to become thor.” or “Balder and the Warriors three” And sometimes they say it probably happened.

    Critics also are in a world that is changing on them. With the internet and sites like this one they cannot just write a column once a week or film a 3 minute TV spot. More has to go into it because the public will find out if they are full of it now.

    • My head hurt trying to understand this post.

  18. A critics review means nothing to me,that is,their ultimate sense of wither they thought is was overall good or bad…double that for the so called stars given.

    What is important to me is the review itself,the contents,that the reviewer give a good in depth analysis of the what points he’s trying to make,be it good or bad

    thats what a good review is positive and negative points and an analysis of how that reviewer came to those conclusions as well other things like plot cohesion acting qaulity…and very important for me,in the case of adaptations,how far they bastardize the source material.

    Last thing that’s important is that the reviewer use some professional lingo,I’ve see a couple reviews where a reviwer seem liked he was just talking to some dude by the water cooler about his thought on the move “Yeah is sucked cause” ….i don’t go back to that place much….

    So what i do is read more that 1 review extract information from them all and build myself a picture of how this game,movie or whatever i’m reading the review about might be like…added into the mix as well are my own thoughts experiences and knowledge.

    • Reviews are irrelevant to a movie if you ask me. I haven’t read one review that makes me believe that the reviewer actually paid attention to the film.

  19. Saw this self-indulgent article a year ago and it’s just as silly now as it was then. Critics, of all people, should recognize that they are not above criticism themselves. If you can’t take the heat, get out of the kitchen.

    • Hear, hear.

    • It’s funny that you wrote this on this website.

      Vic whatever his name is from this site banned my brother from this site just for pointing out that his analysis of a movie left a lot of points out that proved Vic had no clue of what he was talking about.

      I don’t know what movie it was, because my brother was banned months ago, before I even found this site. He told me not to bother with this site, because it’s a site where if you don’t fully agree with the admins, you will be banned.

      • Gary,

        You’re a liar. We never ban anyone for just disagreeing with us. It takes a LOT to get banned here – usually ongoing personal attacks whether it be towards other commenters or writers here, or repeated use of profanity despite warnings.


    • R Still,

      So a reviewer criticizes a MOVIE, and that in turn means you can attack the critic PERSONALLY? Is that how it works?

      Because of course you have a vested interest in the success or failure of a movie, right? Because it’s your child or something you created and you must defend it at all costs against the Hun-like hordes of evil critics (who themselves, apparently, are not allowed to have an opinion)?


      • No, people don’t get upset with critics opinions (If they’re smart!), but they have a problem when the critic takes it too far into personal opinion and starts marking things down that are just flat out unfair. Critics that do their job, inform the public of a films strengths and weaknesses and do so in a fair manner, while infusing personal opinion, because not everyone likes every sort of film and therefore shouldn’t get carried away with bad mouthing an action/superhero/sci-fi/drama/etc movie that they already don’t like simply because of the genre.

        I for one don’t care for films that I consider to be made “simply to win an oscar”. I.e. Biopics/Inspirational Dramas like Seabiscuit/Aviator/Milk/Blind Side/Precious etc. I think they are good films with production value but personally I think they are dry and completely uniform in their execution with very little creativity or conceptual furthering of film as an art. I KNOW, because this is how I feel, I don’t review those films. I think people ask that critics have this quality, unless you’re a niche writer who uses your vulgarity or “I hate Everything” mentality to get readers and have those readers subscribe to you for it.

        For example.

        Many people hate Michael Bay, and while I don’t agree with most that is said, I understand why. However, when people start calling him the worst director ever and make critiques titled, “Is there room for Michael Bay in the world of Chris Nolan and the Dark Knight?”, It’s gone too far. Michael Bay is good at making Entertaining action movies that one can enjoy after a hard days work when they’re brain dead and don’t want to be enlightened by 2 and a half hour cinema. I prefer the enlightened material, but there is always a good place in my heart for good old fashion shoot em up fun. One critic went as far as to say Transformers 3 is just a bunch of refrigerators bouncing into each other, and went on to bash the cg, film, bay, and the moments of his life he lost. That is completely disrespectful to the people who put in the time to do the cg for that film. Whether or not a critic likes the story or actors or director, to make a statement like that about the cg is unforgivable. It’s these types of statements about film that make people upset.

        Critics use to be held in the spotlight when I was younger, but they have fallen into infamy for such blatant trespasses against their craft. They have traded in their class for a moment to be in a hot and edgy debate. Of course when you speak in generalities as I am doing you have to admit that it is just that. A generality. Like every rule there are exceptions and not every critic is guilty of these actions. Critics aren’t evil, they just aren’t above rebuke. Pay it forward.

      • I think were i draw the line is were critics insult fans of a movie and call them idoits for liking it. I mean look at transformers. Yes they are terrible films, but they always call them idiots, I mean critics take things to far. I mean with critics, its like the south park episode
        “the tale of scrotie mcboogerballs”, sometimes when movies are just for pure fun, critics disect them and if they cant find anything they just make stuff up.

        • Dan,

          Please point out a review on this site where we refer to people who like a movie we dislike as “idiots.”


  20. I like reading crtics reviews of movies, however i never let them stop me from seeing a movie i really want to. Sometimes i may be influenced to wait for dvd but in most cases ill just go regardless of whether it gets 1 star or 5. I think critics generally know what they are talking about (geez, they should have watched enough movies to be able to!), however when it comes to genres like comedy its pretty hard for everyone to agree since we all have a different sense of humour, right?

  21. I find it shocking at how people can like ‘Green Lantern’ It was really bad.My theory is people like it because A.)They like the comics B.)Expectations were lowered because of the reviews c.)It was something they never seen before a.k.a aliens with cool rings.
    I look at reviews to gauge my expectations of the movie. Most of the time the critics average out to the right response.

    When it doesn’t, I really don’t care. I’ll like King Kong Lives and I won’t give a damn of what people think.I like me some 2001:A Space odyssey, and don’t care if people say it’s boring. I listen to experienced critics or people I know that know about what goes into a Great movie. I don’t listen to ‘Nick the polish warrior’ about what he thinks about how awesome the remake of nightmare on elm street is.
    people need to learn not to take critics so seriously
    Stay Classy Screen Rant , I’m Listening :)

    • I hate “The King’s Speech”, I don’t care how many Academy Awards it wins.

      I hate “The Godfather 1 & 2″, because they are highly over-rated.

      You are making a point, but here is my point. My point is that for every movie that you hate, there is someone who likes it. For every movie that wins an award, there is someone ticked off that it won said award.

      It’s amazing that people actually get paid to give reviews, considering how it’s just their opinion. ANYONE can do it.

      Here’s a quick review of Fast Five:

      Saw this film four times before, three of which contained the exact same cast with the exact same premise! The only difference is they capatilized on the popularity of Dwayne “The Rock” Johnson to boost figures. Unrealistic car chases and action sequences, just like the previous 4 films.

      See, anyone can do it.

  22. The only argument I have to make on your title of this article is this. Critics are people who get payed to watch a movie and judge it, its their actual job to make a accurate descriptions of movies so then general audience has a better idea of what they are getting in to. They are not supposed to be bias and put their own true feelings in a review in my opinion, that’s why they are the professionals who r supposed to be above all that.

  23. good points amigos y amigas… i’d like to put it this way: we are annoyed when a reviewer takes on a film or genre they’re not equipped to comment on with any knowledge or depth. many of the big-name, mainstream reviewers haven’t been able to write reviews of superhero or genre films because they didn’t grow up with comics, sci-fi, or whatever. so their comments were superficial, bone-headed, or ill-informed. and so naturally fans went to the websites or forums where their favorites were discussed without the condescending attitude.

    i agree with the point regarding the jaded or overloaded views of the critics in contrast with someone in the audience who maybe sees a few films a year at the theater. we are much more involved and perhaps willing to be swept along; or perhaps for some of us we are blazingly critical of how our $10-12 plus popcorn was wasted!

    and of course we will be prepared to defend the films we relate to. my example: home on leave from an army base in korea, i saw ‘gladiator’ at an empty matinee show. naturally i could relate to the story of the soldier away from home for so long~ when maximus relates the exact count of the days he had been away from home and kissed his little figures good night i got misty-eyed. i went home enthralled, only to look up the reviews on line to my shock and disappointment.

    how could they send someone to review ‘gladiator’ who had never been a soldier away from home?

  24. I could very well ask why does the author care if people criticize the critics?

  25. I’ll do the thinking around here, Baba-Louie! I have not seen GL yet, but will buy the DVD good, bad, or otherwise. I cannot believe from the clips I saw that the film was as bad as everyone says, and I bet after seeing it, I will still think the critics are way over-blowing the bad points. I am hoping for GL #2, GL #3, The Flash, and many more. So all you nay-sayers shut up, get outta my way, and let’s get on with making the sequels!

  26. I don’t mind when reviews are bad. I just hate when reviewer’s biases make a review feel like a rantastic whine fest. The GL review was horrible. I can’t believe that the review and I saw the same movie. I thought that enough stuff was there to follow what was happening. I am not a huge GL fan, and I missed all of the Brightest Day garbage which talked about all of the emotions that color other kinds of power rings. Also talking about those Other emotions didn’t need to happen as it had NO bearing on the story.

    Also the 3d of the Film was actually quite good. I have an eye condition that causes most 3D to cause me severe headaches. For this film I didn’t get a headache. Neither did my friend who doesn’t have that condition.

    So NO I don’t care if you agree with me or not, but I would hope that you as a movie reviewer could look at a film and be more subjective. Try to not get caught up in the minutae that doesn’t matter. What I want to know when I read a review is if the Film was fun, does it have huge plotholes that you can drive a truck through. Does it use it’s characters well? Are the Action Scenes any good. Is there good character growth? See when I go to see a movie based on a book or a comic, I realize that it won’t be exactly like the comics. It may have pieces of many different phases in the comic history, it may make up new history. That’s the nature of film.

  27. The ending of this article is ridiculous: just find a critic that you agree with? What is that?

    I don’t mind negative reviews. As a film critic myself, I have certainly written negative reviews of movies that others liked. I at least get my facts together and present my opinion in a fashion that makes sense, also trying to find positives in the film without insulting the filmmakers, the actors, or the fans of the film and/or genre. Ebert, however, comes off as sanctimonious and pretentious, and it has progressively gotten worse as he has aged.

    Ebert’s main problem is that he sees too many movies and he simply cannot keep them straight. So he didn’t like Thor, so what…others didn’t as well. But you’d think that someone of his stature would at least get the facts right. His review was filled with factual and technical inaccuracies, and he was rightfully lambasted for it. He issued a follow-up article about it, where he was even more sanctimonious than before.

    This article does at least get something right: we don’t have to take Ebert’s word as gospel any longer.

    • “The ending of this article is ridiculous: just find a critic that you agree with? What is that?”

      Few people read moview reviews because of their literary merit or entertainment quotient. Most of us read reviews because it can help us decide whether we should go watch a particular movie or not. And since critics have widely varying opinions, if I can find a critic whose likes and dislikes match my own, I would rely on his/her reviews more than others. How is that ridiculous?

  28. You gave Dinner for Schmucks a bad review. You are the critic I will now follow.

    That’s the first movie in a long time I quit watching.

  29. What’s funny about critic’s reviews are that there are so many people who don’t form their own opinion. They base whether or not they see a movie depending on what the “professionals” have to say about said films.

    Even the Academy doesn’t know what it’s talking about half of the time. There have been movies winning all sorts of awards, and I can’t sit through the whole film because it’s so boring, I can’t keep my eyes open.

    My real question is, why do people who review movies get so butthurt when people enjoy the movies they hate?

    • One word – Readership. Later in life people soften their reviews or “round off the edges” to tick off less people to keep their readership up. I’m not saying SR does this, but there are those that do.