I liked Toy Story and of course it was the one that started it all but I also felt that it was the one Pixar film where technological limitations got in the way of the story and characters, especially the villanous boy and the dog.
Toy Story 2 has Randy Newman’s great song When She Loved Me, which has “earned a reputation as one of the saddest sequences in both Pixar and Disney films, as well as one of the saddest film songs ever written.”
I love the film but come on it was very controversial with some Christians as exemplified in this famous TV debate at the time.
You think it was controversial for the posters in this board? For me it was not. It just made me laugh again thinking of some scenes.
That debate was very influential on British attitudes to religion in the UK. There was the Nicest Man in The World (Palin), wiping the floor with a couple of woeful Christian apologetics.
That’s not the reason why Life of Brian isn’t perfect; the reason it fails is Gilliam’s daft Alien Spacecraft sequence, which broke the tone of the film completely. And the woeful suicide squad segment, which has been removed from later prints.
Oh I don’t know. I greatly enjoyed “Harry Potter and the Big Bags Full of Money.”
The Coen brothers weren’t particularly impressed by The Big Lebowski.
I alluded to it above; a small proportion of viewers simply cannot get into the kind of broad surreal comedy that the Pythons regularly engaged in. View its (and Holy Grail’s) user reviews on IMDB, and you’ll come across a ton of 1* reviews who claim there isn’t a single remotely funny moment in either.
Yeah, I don’t care, they thought the Hudsucker Proxy didn’t suck.
Here’s an example of my own. Raging Bull. I don’t like boxing or movies about boxing, and Jake LaMotta was a loathsome individual if there ever was one. Yet this is considered by many critics as one of the best movies ever made. When I finally saw it, I was repelled by it.
However, Robert DeNiro’s performance is excellent. He really makes you hate that man. Yet I recognize that it is a very well-crafted film and works well on its own level. I just don’t like it myself.
A 90% on RT means that 90% of the critics give it a “recommended”. That means that 10% of the critics wouldn’t recommend it.
Or because Marilyn Monroe’s character was written so stupid as to be mentally disabled. I was embarrassed by her character as a child, and again 3 years ago when I rewatched it. Several of the people I saw it with felt the same way. And I love other black & white movies.
Exactly. Rotten Tomatoes’ reviewer score is a binary number: they evaluate each reviewer’s take on a movie, and decide if it’s either a “positive” review (e.g., typically at least 2.5 out of 4 stars, at least a 3 out of 5 stars, at least a B- on a A-B-C-D-F scale), or a “negative” review (e.g., lower than the above). It doesn’t differentiate between a 4-star/A rating, and a 2.5/B- rating. In a sense, it’s not entirely unlike the OP’s question: movies that are at least “good.”
As a result, a 90% “Fresh” rating could mean that a lot of reviewers gave it a 4-star/A+ rating, and thought it was the best movie or the year, or that most of the positive reviews were “OK, but not great.” It’s a very blunt instrument.
Yeah, it could mean 90% gave it a B-
Christmas Story
Roxanne
Plains Trains and Automobiles
Oh GOD no. My family last year put this on, and Lord it is definitely the worst movie I have ever seen. Hopelessly written, acted (as such), and directed. Yet it supposedly echoes people’s actual holidays of their childhood. Not mine.
That’s true, as far as it goes, and it would be silly for me to claim otherwise as I made a comment earlier about RT rating some movies at 100% that I don’t consider particularly exceptional. It is, indeed, a blunt instrument, though a useful guide to how critics generally perceive a particular movie.
But we can turn to IMDb for another opinion. That’s a much more finely-tuned instrument in which members express their rating on a scale of 1-10. The published rating is not a simple mean but a weighted average in which some voters are given higher weighting based on a proprietary algorithm, and though the algorithm isn’t public it’s known that factors like being frequent voters tends to give them a higher reputational weighting. It’s all in the interest of getting the most reliable possible rating.
The end result of all this is that movies generally regarded as “very good” tend to have a score in the 7.x range. As I also said earlier, it’s very unusual for any movie to be rated higher than about 7.9, which would be interpreted as “truly exceptional”.
The rating for 2001? 8.3, based on 773,000 votes.
You also forgot to quote the other part of my post:
Yeah, I don’t think you get nominated for “best writing” for being “monumentally unimaginative”.
Out of curiosity, I looked at the IMDb ratings for some of the films mentioned in this discussion.
tl:dr version: as @wolfpup’s observation would suggest, many of the films we’ve discussed have IMDb ratings in the high 7s and low 8s, and none of the ones I looked up were below a 7.0. Quite a few substantially above the 7.9 threshold, in the mid 8s to low 9s.
- The Princess Bride: 8.0
- The Shawshank Redemption: 9.3
- Apollo 13: 7.7
- Forrest Gump: 8.8
- Toy Story: 8.3
- Up: 8.3
- Casablanca: 8.5
- Star Wars: 8.6
- The Empire Strikes Back: 8.7
- The Sound of Music: 8.1
- The Wizard of Oz: 8.1
- Citizen Kane: 8.2
- WALL-E: 8.4
- Mary Poppins: 7.8
- Back to the Future: 8.5
- Spirited Away: 8.6
- The Godfather: 9.2
- The Godfather Part II: 9.0
- Galaxy Quest: 7.4
- The Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring: 8.9 ((Return of the King is 9.0))
- Jaws: 8.1
- Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid: 8.9
- E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial: 7.9
- Ghostbusters: 7.8
- Young Frankenstein: 8.0
- Blazing Saddles: 7.7
- Leave No Trace: 7.1 (somewhat smaller sample size, at 70K, than the others)
- Monty Python and the Holy Grail: 8.2
- Ninotchka: 7.8
- The Philadelphia Story: 7.8
- The Blues Brothers: 7.9
- Groundhog Day: 8.0
- Blue Velvet: 7.7
- The Lion King: 8.5
- My Cousin Vinny: 7.6
- Fargo: 8.1
That’s a nice list of mostly great movies, and would be a good guide for someone who hasn’t seen some of them. For me, I agree with most of the movie ratings on that list and have either seen them or, in the case of a few, am not interested in seeing them.
My specific nixes from that list are The Lord of the Rings (not interested in elaborate fantasies) and Spirited Away (I just don’t get the attraction – I tried watching it, and quit partway through). WALL-E I haven’t seen because I didn’t think it would interest me, but maybe I should give it a shot.
I’m not generally a big fan of animated movies but both The Lion King and Toy Story have my heartfelt endorsement, and most of the rest of the high ratings there I absolutely agree with.
When both WALL-E and UP came out, their marketing was particularly clever as they only showed clips from the first 20 minutes, and they each take a turn in a different direction. Nobody really knew what to expect, but everyone came out uplifted.