|
Tweets
Aug 12, 2021 11:55:51 GMT
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 12, 2021 11:55:51 GMT
|
|
|
Tweets
Aug 12, 2021 13:59:49 GMT
Post by mllemass on Aug 12, 2021 13:59:49 GMT
I suppose that the twitter commenter really did read mixed reviews, but that just isn’t an accurate description of the reviews so far. “Mixed” would mean around 60% Fresh, because 59% means Rotten on the Tomatometer.
It just really bugs me because I know that a lot of people rely on word of mouth when decided which movies to see.
|
|
|
Tweets
Aug 12, 2021 15:30:36 GMT
via mobile
Post by Hannah Lee on Aug 12, 2021 15:30:36 GMT
I suppose that the twitter commenter really did read mixed reviews, but that just isn’t an accurate description of the reviews so far. “Mixed” would mean around 60% Fresh, because 59% means Rotten on the Tomatometer. It just really bugs me because I know that a lot of people rely on word of mouth when decided which movies to see. Metacritic does show 9 “mixed” reviews (compared to 25 positive and 1 negative … putting it into the “generally favorable reviews’ bucket) so the tweeter may have read some mixed reviews. But as you and sgev said, lobbing in disagreement with a reviewer’s opinion/reaction to a film - one you, yourself have not bothered to watch - based entirely on “you’re wrong! Because some other reviewers don’t love it” is nonsense and poor form. Film reviews don’t require gathering consensus from one’s peers and individual reviewers are naturally going to have different opinions on a particular film.
|
|
|
Post by mllemass on Aug 12, 2021 16:54:24 GMT
As I’ve mentioned before, Love Actually is one of my all-time favourite movies. I loved it after the first five minutes, and loved it even more by the end. But it got horrible reviews when it came out. I didn’t care, because of course I was going to see a movie with Hugh Grant and Colin Firth!
After all these years, I still love it. When the movie had its anniversary a couple of years ago, suddenly all these film critics were writing article about why it had become a beloved classic. But a few honest critics did remember their harsh reviews from back then, and they still hated the movie! Ha!
|
|
|
Tweets
Aug 13, 2021 17:05:56 GMT
via mobile
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 13, 2021 17:05:56 GMT
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 17, 2021 0:32:24 GMT
|
|
|
Tweets
Aug 18, 2021 17:44:37 GMT
via mobile
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 18, 2021 17:44:37 GMT
|
|
|
Tweets
Aug 18, 2021 23:41:05 GMT
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 18, 2021 23:41:05 GMT
I lost it but I read today a tweet saying this film feels very urgent now and it’s so true. I mean a British (accidental) operative calling his bosses so they accept to rescue their Russian ally trapped in enemy territory. Of course, the characters in the movie seem more decent that the ones in real life! And…Americans and British didn’t helped to the enemies to conquest Russia, of course!
|
|
|
Tweets
Aug 22, 2021 0:57:49 GMT
Post by mllemass on Aug 22, 2021 0:57:49 GMT
Some jerk on twitter (who I’ve now blocked) tweeted that he thought The Courier was boring. That’s fine - it’s his opinion. But he also said that Benedict has “ruined” another movie with his “overacting”, and is always doing something to get attention in scenes.
I know I’m biased, but I never had the impression that he overacted in anything he’s done,
|
|
|
Post by sgev1977 on Aug 22, 2021 1:12:34 GMT
Well, a few months ago I saw a conversation by award pundits saying that it seemed BC has a great role in TPOTD but the question was if he could do BIG like Daniel Day Lewis in There Will Be Blood because apparently he is an actor that never goes big!
By the way, BC could do both big and subtle but I think Jane Campion would prefer “subtle” for this particular role so it was just a crazy people conversation. Clearly, the real question is will Kirsten Dunst go intense like Anna Magnani in Roma, Open City? Why? I don’t know why but… will she?! 😉
So yeah, some people see what they want to see but that guy you mention sounds like troll and nothing more.
|
|