| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I liked Alien 3 which was better movie than Alien, I liked Alien 4 as an action movie despite many issues with it. My favorite is still Aliens, though. I still envy that my mom saw it in the cinema when it was new.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So this is the one franchise where if the producers are taking executive decisions that will alienate the fan base, that's actually a good thing, right?
Spreading infestation of facehuggers will quickly render the fan base incapable of paying for more movies, so I'd say no.
Alien story is over for me, it should continue with Prometheus sequels
Jupiter Ascending got 24%? Meh, I wouldn't call that a reliable source of movie scoring.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
ALIEN: RESURRECTION did do one thing right: the rewrites and mishandled direction annoyed Whedon so much that he decided to revisit the "misfit space pirates in space" concept five years later, resulting in the creation of FIREFLY. So that was one positive outcome :)
ALIEN 3 is a pretty good movie. It's just not a very good ALIENS movie, and was a step backwards when the franchise should have been looking for another way forwards. The "Aliens loose on Earth" concept seems solid, but I've never seen a real way for that story to go that doesn't descend into lots of shoot-outs and then nuking the planet.
Also, Ridley Scott was right when he said that the alien was no longer scary. It's too familiar a force now, we know how dangerous it is and how to kill it. That limits its potential for true horror, although you can still make a good war/suspense film with it.
I was never clear on what was based on what. There was a book called To Acheron and back, but I never found out more about it. Anyone know anything?
ALIEN: RESURRECTION did do one thing right: the rewrites and mishandled direction annoyed Whedon so much that he decided to revisit the "misfit space pirates in space" concept five years later, resulting in the creation of FIREFLY. So that was one positive outcome :)
ALIEN 3 is a pretty good movie. It's just not a very good ALIENS movie, and was a step backwards when the franchise should have been looking for another way forwards. The "Aliens loose on Earth" concept seems solid, but I've never seen a real way for that story to go that doesn't descend into lots of shoot-outs and then nuking the planet.Also, Ridley Scott was right when he said that the alien was no longer scary. It's too familiar a force now, we know how dangerous it is and how to kill it. That limits its potential for true horror, although you can still make a good war/suspense film with it.
...hmm...
Rotten tomatoes has long since became useless.
I dunno...Generally I have found that movies that are absolutely panned (say 30% or less good) usually turn out to be pretty crappy movies.
50% to 60% is more....err iffy on whether I will enjoy the movie or not.
|
Rotten tomatoes has long since became useless.
How would an estimated egregation of scores be useless? It's a pretty good reflection of the consensus on any given movie.
Of course, everyone will find themselves at odds with the unwashed masses every now and then (myself, I can't figure out how those Thor movies keep getting acceptable scores there), but that hardly makes the site useless.
|
|
I think 30% is too harsh, but honestly many of the complaints the reviewers have are fair.
A lot of Chappie was great, but it did have some problems, and it sort of fell apart at the end.
I would rate it better than Elysium, but not as good as District 9
The way that site works is that it collects the opinions of many film critics from blogs and such all around the internet. Each one gives it a "fresh" or "rotten" grade (meaning "it was good" or "it wasn't good"). The percentages you see don't reflect how good the movie is - they reflect how many of the reviewers recommended it.
So 70% of the critics said the movie was bad. This is not a perfect measuring scale, but it's far from useless.
Contributor, RPG Superstar 2010 Top 8
|
I think 30% is too harsh, but honestly many of the complaints the reviewers have are fair.
A lot of Chappie was great, but it did have some problems, and it sort of fell apart at the end.
I would rate it better than Elysium, but not as good as District 9
The way that site works is that it collects the opinions of many film critics from blogs and such all around the internet. Each one gives it a "fresh" or "rotten" grade (meaning "it was good" or "it wasn't good"). The percentages you see don't reflect how good the movie is - they reflect how many of the reviewers recommended it.
So 70% of the critics said the movie was bad. This is not a perfect measuring scale, but it's far from useless.
I understand how it works, and I wasn't arguing that it was useless.
I saw the movie, and I was sharing my opinion :)
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Rotten tomatoes has long since became useless.How would an estimated egregation of scores be useless? It's a pretty good reflection of the consensus on any given movie.
Of course, everyone will find themselves at odds with the unwashed masses every now and then (myself, I can't figure out how those Thor movies keep getting acceptable scores there), but that hardly makes the site useless.
I generally find my opinions clash often enough with general consensus that I have long since stopped using any sort of aggregate judgement and rely completely on word-of-mouth from people who I know share my opinions on such things.