In the thread I began about The Uninvited, Diogenes commented that he’d already guessed the big plot twist from the reviews. Though I figured out the twist fairly early on, it wasn’t from the reviews, as I rarely read them before I see a movie; I prefer not to have my opinion influenced by others.
The reviews are the first. They’re the only guides to the movies by a source who doesn’t have an interest in the film’s success.
Directors are probably my second choice, but every director does a turkey now and then, and it’s useless for first time or directors who aren’t established. Screenwriters rarely control a film, so I don’t usually worry about them. And actors do whatever they get offered – too undependable.
Of course, ads are useless other than alerting you to check out the reviews. It also helps to know the biases of a reviewer so you can factor them in.
Director - there are certain directors I look for. (Coens, Herzog, etc) There are also directors that will turn me off a movie such as Roland Emmerich and Rob Cohen.
Writers - if it’s a writer I like I’ll see it, if the history is scary I worry and then look at who he got to direct it.
Actors - Same thing as directors, it works both ways. Emma Thompson - good, Kate Hudson - bad.
A.O. Scott (New York Times) - I once did a top 10 movies of the year and it happened to be dead on his list (and I did mine FIRST). I agree with him. The best part is he doesn’t give some arbitrary star rating.
Critical Consensus - if I have no knowledge of the movie, I’ll head down to Metacritic and Rotten Tomatoes to see what number shows up. I don’t really read the number, I just get a sense of what people are saying.
Friends - I have a few movie insider friends that go to ALL the festivals or work in areas of the industry and they see most movies in advance. For instance, they told me that Push: Based on a Novel by Sapphire is a pretty good movie (this is a different movie than the other Push that’s gonna come out in theatres now. The Push: Sapphire people are going to change the name of their movie so people don’t confuse the two. Judging by the trailer of the other Push movie…it’s probably a good idea.) Which brings me to:
I read reviews of current movies whenever I’ve got a copy of a local paper which contains them. I almost never see movies while they are still in theaters–it just passes the time and helps me to feel semi-caught up on current events.
How do I pick out movies to watch? Part random choice based on titles which appeal to me, part deliberate choice of mostly not-so-new movies which I have heard about before. Featured actors play a significant role, but most of the time, I pick out movies to watch based only on the blurb on the box. Sometimes I find a baddy, but mostly I can judge pretty well whether I’m likely to like the movie or not.
I don’t mean that I go to the screenwriter, actor, or director for advice on whether to see a movie they partipated in making. I mean that I like Charlie Kaufman’s writing, to which I was introduced to by Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind, so when I heard of the more recent Synecdoche and learned of his association with it, I was encouraged to see it. I went to see ETofSM because I like Kate Winslet’s work; and so on. By contrast, I have seen enough of Michael Bey’s work to feel comfortable saying that any movie he’s happy having made is one that will cause me to go into a venomous, dolphin-murdering rage if I waste 10 bucks on it.
I watch the two movie review programs that remain on basic cable Now Showing with Lyons & Bailes and the corpse of At the Movies with Son of Lyons and Grandson of Mancowitz. I read reviews at Rotten Tomatoes and other places. But the main reason is probably the director followed by the actors.
The very first thing to draw me to a movie is the poster. Before it died, Premiere magazine had some actually useful short features mixed in with their articles on movies and actors and their inexplicable focus on Hollywood executives. The best one was on how to read a movie poster. For writing credits, an ampersand means a partnership while an “and” means a rewrite. As a general rule, the more rewrites, the worse the film. They also pointed out how when a film has to stars of equal stature, one will be listed in the upper right, while the other will be in the lower left - so one can claim to be billed higher, while the other can claim to be billed first.
The second, though sometimes the first, thing is the trailer or teaser. We see so many films in the theater that we get heartily sick of a trailer. For instance, I honestly do want to see Tony Gilroy’s film Duplicity. But I’ve already seen the trailer a dozen times and I know I’ll see it a few dozen more times before it opens.
Unless there’s a director or actor I like involved, I go by whether the trailer piques my interest. This has led to a few duds (Reign of Fire!) but generally serves me well. I never read reviews unless I am totally on the fence. Friends and source material play a role, but not a big one.
Maybe, but even a great writer/director, etc. can make a bad film. Without an independent opinion, you can’t tell if the movie turns out to be a waste of money until you’ve spent it.
There is no writer, director, or actor that is a sure thing every time. Some have better track records, but you can’t depend on that. Charlie Kaufman is better than most, certainly, but there’s no guarantee his next film will be any good.
And, conversely, a bad director can sometimes come up with a first-class film. I’m reminded of Joe Johnston, whose films were mediocre, but who one day did the excellent October Sky before returning to hackwork.
But making decisions solely based upon the writer and actor is buying a pig in a poke. With reviews, you get a chance to find out what someone else thinks of the pig before you plunk your money down for it.
And, of course, trailers are by far the worst way to judge a movie. If there are four funny jokes in a comedy, you’ll see them all in the trailer and think it’s a funny movie. They are advertisements, and designed to make things look better than they actually are – even for a good film. Not to mention they’ll often spoil the plot.
I go by reviews, primarily those in Entertainment Weekly, which makes it a point to never include spoilers.
After I see the film, I go read Ebert, who spoilers like a son-of-a-bitch and regularly gets basic plot points wrong, but whose comments are usually interesting.
There’s a local reviewer who has tastes fairly similar to mine (he has a higher tolerance for mediocre horror, I have a higher tolerance for mediocre comic/SF). He’s also pretty witty and well-versed in movie lore. Sample from this week:
I skim his review for a movie I might want to see, looking at the first and last paragraph and at the rating. I look at directors and (to a much lesser degree) actors. I look at trailers. I listen for word from friends.
Movies I want to see:
Either via the “buzz” or the trailers, the subject matter or genre, almost never the Director or stars, there will be some event movie or comedy or whatever that I definitely am interested in seeing. 95% of the time I will end up seeing it.
Movies I do not want to see:
Subject matter or genre is usually enough for me to be not interested. And I definitely know that if I ever end up seeing a movie that I had previously listed as “NEVER WATCH” I will regret it. Every time, movies I don’t want to watch end up being movies I don’t like and should never have watched. I have a 100% success rate there.
Movies I have no particular opinion of:
These are the movies I will check reviews, or gauge the buzz, or discuss with friends, to see if maybe it will be worth a look. I’d say 50% of movies I watch fall under this category.
I rarely let a review influence my decision to see a movie. Any number of times I’ve sen a movie absolutely panned, and I’ve gone and seen it anyway, and enjoyed it.
I get annoyed by reviewers that seem to want to judge movies by an expectation that they all be cinema masterpieces. Sometimes I just want a decent shoot em up movie without subtexts and allegories and what not
The sort of reviewer who bothers me is the one who reviews movies of a genre he clearly dislikes. You see it all the time in SF/fantasy/comic book films. If your suspension of disbelief won’t extend to accepting fictional universes with different laws of physics, and consequently you think that Batman/Iron Man/LotR is ridiculous and childish from the get-go, you shouldn’t write the review. Likewise if you hate musicals as a matter of principle, you shouldn’t be reviewing Mama Mia. Hell, I shouldn’t review movies about teenagers dancing.
I’m actually pretty picky when it comes to movies. I don’t like most romantic comedies or comedies. Maybe half the big-budget action flicks catch my interest. So I don’t really care that trailers spoil everything or have all the funny jokes, since they help me spot the formulaic garbage and eliminate them right off the bat.
Trailers are what I prefer because they’re more or less delivered to me. I am not so into movies that I’ll research projects in the works or constantly scout the independent movie scene or anything like that. I also have friends with tastes similar to mine who keep me updated on what’s new and worth seeing, and that’s good enough for me.
When it comes to movies I see in the theater usually the overriding consideration is:
what time is it playing?
Going out to the movies is a pretty rare occasion for me and usually not to see a particular movie.
There is a pretty small window defined by when my husband can get home from work, when a sitter can come, when the sitter needs to leave, and how late I can reasonably expect to keep my eyes open.
There is a movie theater 5 minutes from us that gets almost everything, so I check what’s playing when we can go and pick from the 2 or 3 movies that fit. I may click to get some thumbnail overviews if I’ve never heard of a movie, but I avoid regular reviews like the plague. I hate spoilers and I hate going in w/ preconceived notions. My favorite way to see a movie is to know NOTHING about it but the title.
What sways me in sorting through those 2 or 3? Stars, trailer, high concept, and genre.
I choose my movies by (a) what’s playing when I want to see a movie, and (b) what’s close. I have a couple of discount cards and get emails about special showings–which I don’t usuallly attend, but it’s nice to know about them.
Example: I had a few hours off during the week. My local theatre, which is of the sort known as “art-house,” had several intriguing titles. Upon closer inspection two of them were nothing I wanted to see but the third, Man on Wire, looked intriguing. It was great. Another time I ended up at this theatre and saw Rabbit Proof Fence because the movie my husband and I originally intended to go to was sold out. (Rabbit proof Fence was pretty full, too. Big movie day.) So those were two movies I had never heard of before seeing their names on the marquee, and I really liked both of them.
If I go with a friend, that’s an influence, too. My girlfriend and I always go to movies while our guys are watching the Super Bowl. We decided to go for Oscar nominees, except neither one of us wanted to see Frost/Nixon (because it just sounds lame, who came up with this concept anyway?). We decided we could fit in two. Slumdog Millionaire was our first choice, and then we went to Milk because it was playing at the same theater and at a compatible time.
I am not picky when it comes to seeing a movie, but obviously I’d rather see a good one. On the other hand I have sought out movies known to be bad, and I have sought out movies that had bad reviews just to see what was so damn bad about them (Magnolia).
I read the movie preview section of the Arizona Republic every week. While I usually know most of the movies, I want to see, I like to be made aware of some of the lesser known movies in the back of my mind. If something looks good, but it is only showing at one theatre, I’ll add to to the saved section of my netflix queue.
I also seem to be the only one who pays attention to the running time. I don’t want to sit through a 3 hour movie if I"m going to dinner after.
I love Magnolia, and don’t recall it getting particularly terrible reviews when it was new. It has an 8.0 (out of 10) on IMDB and 84% at Rotten Tomatoes.
