Are """"critics""""" the problem?

Are """"critics""""" the problem?

I thought this movie was fun
But not as good as RocknRolla

Other urls found in this thread:

knowyourmeme.com/memes/donald-trump-s-sad-tweets
firstthings.com/article/2010/04/do-movie-critics-matter
youtu.be/lG2dXobAXLI?t=149
youtube.com/watch?v=sPW5sziS5z0
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Yes. Critics are and always were cancer.

yes

RocknRolla collapsed in the second half of the movie, and much like that, King Arthur does the same. The CGI for the "teleports behind you" excalibur scene at the end was some of the worst shit I've seen in any big budget movie in quite a long time.

Critics are pretty spot on here.

This movie was hot garbage.

?!

My nigga

Hot garbage is better than lukewarm garbage that gets a free pass by most critics

>Are """"critics""""" the problem?
Yes. They don't review films by analysing it and exercising independent thought, they do so by looking at box-office predictions and guessing how the general public will react to it. This is purely a business move as people are more likely to read critics that agree with them.
It makes critics really mad when a badly-reviewed film unexpectedly has a great box-office (see: Suicide Squad).

Of course, films like Transformers are always gonna perform well. But the general opinion amongst anyone that will even think of reading a review is that the films suck. It's cool to hate on Transformers

With regards to King Arthur, it had extremely low box-office predictions so it was an easy film to attack. Because you also have to remember that they HAVE to give some films shit scores so that they aren't seen to be weak critics who just like everything

Even if you like it, you have to admit it's a really uneven movie overall.

Maybe, just maybe, they didn't like King Arthur because it was a shit movie. Just a thought.

When Arthur unleashes the power of the sword it looked like a fucking PS3 game. Please let's be serious, it was an interesting premise that resulted in a giant fart

(((rt)))

These movies aren't all compared to each other. Why are autists not able to get this?

It's a good film. But for the sake of argument;
films in the last few years that were reviewed significantly better than King Arthur:
>Ghostbusters (2016)
>Avengers: Age of Ultron
>Skyfall
>Mad Max: Fury Road
>The Amazing Spider man
>The Amazing Spider man 2

And that's off the top of my head without bringing up all the oscar-b8

Arthur was fucking trash. It was just 17 hours of not giving a shit about Jude Law and his ability to be Aries.

Mad Max Fury Road is a much better movie than King Arthur. Not sure why you felt like mentioning that one as it contradicts your point.

>Mad Max Fury Road is a much better movie than King Arthur
hahahahhahaha
"No"

You ok?

>people unironically think the shitpile that is King Arthur is good
>they think it's better than Fury Road
The absolute state of plebs on this board. Jesus.

This is all very true. Critics strive to control the public opinion so that they can continue to get views.

Unfortunately, too many people blindly accept critics' words as true because "They're professional critics so they must know what they're doing" even though they obviously have ulterior motives, and, in many cases, if you examine the review you'll find that they completely misinterpreted the film. So you have people like DEFENDING the critics. People who couldn't tell you any opinion about the film without regurgitating something they read from a critic. It's sad.

>he likes meme max: furious memery
tell them we sent you

>So you have people like (You) DEFENDING the critics.
Only in the case of King Arthur, which is a bad movie. A broken clock can still be right twice a day.
> People who couldn't tell you any opinion about the film without regurgitating something they read from a critic. It's sad.
You know you haven't said a single thing in defense of the movie, you're just attacking critics. look at these Actual criticism gets no response because you're just a shitposter. Sad.

I clicked reddit but it didn't take me there

>Being so much of a contrarian as to think King Arthur was anywhere near as good as Fury Road, let alone better

You're already on reddit.

>paying any attention to sjwtomatoes

>Taking Rotten Tomatoes seriously

>Sad.

...

You know, all the hate Rotten Tomatoes gets and I never see anyone screencap the audience reviews. Many of them are truly terrible. And I mean opening up the page and looking at the actual text

>Being so much of a contrarian as to think 300 was anywhere near as good as Ghostbusters(2016), let alone better
wew lad

It sure was a Guy Ritchie movie. I think it should have been longer to explain some stuff but overall it was at least entertaining.

The mage was hot and I want to fuck her.

>Sup Forums
My post had nothing to do with politics. You ok?

>strawman
Not an argument.

Well it IS shit. I didn't see any trailers and expected a big budget King Arthur movie, but what I got was a generic action flick with no Merlin and a black Bedivere.

>black Bedivere

Why does that matter? You are aware the entire Arthurian legend is a myth, correct?

"Sad." is a Trump quote.

must be some kind of bot, they must be responding to the sad. part thinking it's a the trump thing, but that just a tin-foiled theory

he's just a shitposter

>Brings up two movies that were never mentioned before in thread for no reason
Are you okay?

Actually, although commonly believed to be a Trump quote, Trump was in fact quoting Edgar Allen Poe.
>the more you know

It really wasn't good.

>Can't deduce the principles of their argument and see that when applied to another situation with the same premises, their argument is exposed as clearly being ridiculous
I want brainlets to leave

see The retard I was responding to said the same thing. Learn how to follow a conversation dumbass. Sad.

>I want brainlets to leave
>As he says King Arthur is better than fury road
L
M
A
O

No, the retard you were responding to said "It's sad." Which is a normal thing to say. "Sad." on its own is a Trump quote.

>"Sad." on its own is a Trump quote.
You've got problems user. Seek help.

You are aware that the entire Arthurian legend takes place in Europe at a certain time and place, correct?

the director is amazing tho, movie was decent

Google it. It's true.

knowyourmeme.com/memes/donald-trump-s-sad-tweets

>if I tell myself Fury Road was good, then that makes it true!
Have fun watching a film with about as much variety as watching a sports match - where you already know which team's gonna win

You are aware this doesn't take away from the original Arthurian legend (which is completely and totally made up despite having pseudohistorical elements), correct?

Digimon Honzo is a good actor anyway, so I didn't see a problem. It's kind of like the manchildren complaining that there is a black Gondorian in that new Lord of the Rings game. It literally doesn't matter.

I watch sports anime all the time and have fun so this isn't a very compelling argument.

It was used long before Trump you silly underage. Good luck with your life. You're going to need it.

>boo hoo i'm getting owned so i'll call my opponent underage
Transparent as fuck. SAD!

>he watches anime
>uses "fun" to describe something as good
My mistake, I assumed you were older than 15. I know, what was I thinking?

Then why not replace the cast with children? Asian children? in wheelchairs? Wouldn't change the story. Ruins the immersion though. Depicting an important figure of European folklore as African feels forced and makes no sense. And no, I'm not "racist" or from Sup Forums, it's just a detail which makes a movie less enjoyable for me.

>you will never be this autistic
You're such a morale booster user.

Oh, sorry, I didn't know I was talking to a 12 year old. I know, I'm 26, I shouldn't waste my time with children on Sup Forums. I'm too much of an adult for this.

You're posting on Sup Forums. You are already pretty autistic.

I see your point but it didn't ruin my immersion because it was a fantasy film with giant elephants and wizards. A black guy somewhere didn't interrupt anything for me.

>he watches anime
>uses "fun" to describe something as good
>tries to take the high ground
>"no u"
kek, keep going
gonna screencap this conversation for the next time some reddit pleb tries to defend fury road

Not as much as you autismo. That's the point. Learn to read my friend.

>N-n-n-n-not as much as you a-a-a-a-a-autismo.
You sound like Trump. "NO PUPPET! YOU'RE THE PUPPET! I DON'T REPEAT MYSELF! I DON'T REPEAT MYSELF! HE STARTED IT!"

You're welcome, I carefully crafted those posts to ruin Fury Road's reputation.

>the people trying to defend King Arthur can't say a single nice thing about it, only attack other people and other movies
That says everything right there.

It's directed by Guy Ritchie.

If you base what you watch off an aggregate score of over 100 critics you're a fucking idiot.

That doesn't make it a good movie

Actually, yes it does. The man is incapable of failure.

You're retarded, user

The montages are god-tier, amongst the best in cinema history. The dialogue is witty without feeling like forced humour and feeds you the necessary information at a very deliberate pace to keep you paying attention as you're trying to learn more.
The soundtrack was amazing and the use of music was fantastic too, perfectly enhancing the montages and feeling like a good modern/medieval fusion

The opening battle was a bit shit. And the last sword fight wasn't great. But considering the rest of the film, these flaws are negligible.
Now fuck off

...

Once he pulls the sword from the stone the movie stopped being good. Before that I was really enjoying it.

>The montages are god-tier, amongst the best in cinema history.
Why?

>The montages are god-tier, amongst the best in cinema history.

I really liked that part near the start where they were they were telling the story to the guard or whatever and it kept jumping back to them as they added corrections and clarifications and so on. It was cool how modern it felt for a King Arthur movie.

>trusting critics
>trusting audience reviews
>trusting Sup Forums opinions
>not seeing every movie and forming your own opinion

fucking plebs

Rotten Tomatoes rarely has real film critics or academics in it, since most of them are writing long-winded books or actually writing something more than a pretentious diary of the day I went to the moovees

Your, american in majority, obsession with that website is fucking embarassing. Even Filmaffinity has more quality.

YouTube critics are counted in Rotten Tomatoes' rating. It's laughable.

RT is cancer

"Over recent years, film journalism has—perhaps unconsciously—been considered a part of the film industry and expected to be a partner in Hollywood’s commercial system. Look at the increased prevalence of on-television reviewing dedicated to dispensing consumer advice, and of magazine and newspaper features linked only to current releases, or to the Oscar campaign, as if Hollywood’s business was everybody’s business. Critics are no longer respected as individual thinkers, only as adjuncts to advertising. We are not. And we should not be. Criticism needs to be reassessed with this clear understanding: We judge movies because we know movies, and our knowledge is based on learning and experience."

firstthings.com/article/2010/04/do-movie-critics-matter

>This essay is adapted from a speech given by Armond White, chairman of the New York Film Critics Circle, at the group’s annual awards banquet on January 11, 2010. With movie luminaries such as Meryl Streep, George Clooney, Jeff Bridges, Mo’Nique, Kathryn Bigelow, and others in the audience, White’s remarks were met with stony silence.

The Shining smells like arse tbqh

>Armond White
youtu.be/lG2dXobAXLI?t=149

Revisiting Lock,Stock recently after not having watched it since it came out, I found it to be fantastic and pure Kino.
I then watched RocknRolla, which comparatively is garbage, and was massively underwhelmed. Its rife with music cutting in every other part of a scene, ruining almost every scene and turning it into your standard US style pop movie. It really was disappointing for me as it paled in comparison to Lock,Stock. It was nowhere near the quality and reminded me of every copypasted crime movie from that era on.

Go back to Sup Forums you pleb

>Trump derangement syndrome

Living in your head, rent free

The perfect symmetry between the pacing, the music, the story and what was being told. It quickly gave us a lo of information but it didn't feel like it had been rushed over or that it was getting the boring bits out of the way so it could tell the 'real' story.
The montages were amazing and enjoyable to watch.
Especially the opening montage of Arthur growing up. So many other films have done montages of a character growing up, but they're always pretty generic (sunsets, one particular action repeated). But here we had this entire routine repeated multiple times with Jude being crowned in the background to break it up and music that kept the pace up. I don't know how to explain it better than that.

Yeah, same. I loved the dialogue and the way they said it there.
>"We were off to meet George who..."
>"George who? Big George, George the Butcher, be specific"
I loved all the dialogue to be honest

>LE FUN

Literally every fucking time a pleb tries to justify liking garbage. EVERY TIME.

>it's just le ebin coincidence i swear im not a pleb with pleb taste even though i'm typical pleb with typical pleb taste for the 29384209348th time

every fucking time

Yeah, like people that try to justify liking the King Arthur movie.

No y ou.

You keep trying to force this meme but it's not working.

>he provides actual justification for his opinion
>you respond with one-word posts and memes

You shitposters are just embarrassing. Straight up. How long till you graduate high school?

>The montages are god-tier, amongst the best in cinema history.

>The montages are god-tier, amongst the best in cinema history.

>The montages are god-tier, amongst the best in cinema history.

>autism

youtube.com/watch?v=sPW5sziS5z0

This scene is absolute kino.

>meme

Lol