I’m wondering how much faith/attention you pay to movie critics in your decision whether to see a particular movie?
Two recent examples spurred me to think about and realise that while I may talk about the critical reception of a movie with my wife, it is just a talking point and doesn’t really affect my decision as to whether we go to the cinema to see a movie or not.
The examples are The Last Jedi and Bright (Netflix release). The Last Jedi was a critical darling, but for me I thought it was just OK at best. While Bright was savaged by the critics, but I quite enjoyed it. A competently made movie with (to me anyway) an interesting setting.
For me, I suppose I’ll continue to ignore the critics and go and see the movies that capture my interest.
The general rule is that critical opinion has no effect on blockbuster movies (i.e. ones that cost a lot to make and opened at a lot of theaters) and has a limited effect on less expensive films which don’t get wide releases. The Last Jedi is too much of a blockbuster to be affected by the critics. Bright didn’t cost as much, so critical opinion might have some effect. However, note that there are already plans for a sequel to Bright.
I have one example: I was dead-set on seeing the Superman vs. Batman movie, but then I read the reviews. I stayed away from the theater and will probably never watch it on TV either.
Reviews don’t influence whether I see a film or not but I find it can influence the *way *I watch it. These days I usually don’t read more than one, lest I find myself looking for the particular things the reviewer points out. I find it more enjoyable to read the review *after *I’ve seen the movie.
Yes, same here, I learn things or get different perspectives after viewing. I also follow some movie critics on Twitter who are good at pointing out slightly more obscure, festival-type movies that I might have missed.
The OP seems to be referring to reviews as only being negative. But far more often they are influential in championing small films which don’t get the publicity and magazine covers of the big tentpole movies.
I’ve given this same speech before, but here goes…
Critics have almost no effect on most mainstream blockbusters. If kids want to see another “Fast and Furious” car chase movie, they will, and nothing Peter Travers says will make a difference.
What critics CAN sometimes do is draw attention to a small, indie or foreign movie that otherwise couldn’t attract an audience. Roger Ebert and Gene Siskel would have agreed- they couldn’t derail a blockbuster and they couldn’t turn an arthouse film into a blockbuster. But sometimes they could turn an arthouse movie like “The Crying Game” into a modest to good sized hit.
Not any particular critic, but I do pay attention to the critics’ rating on the Rotten Tomatoes site and usually find that I don’t enjoy the movies with a poor overall rating there (say under fifty percent) but often enjoy the ones with a really good rating (80% or better).
I know this comment is just pissing in the wind - but I find it useful to differentiate between using the term “critic” vs. “reviewer”. I know the terms are traditionally used interchangeably, but there is a subtle difference.
When you use the term “critic” there is an implicit sense that the person’s job is to “criticize” the movie, to point out weaknesses and flaws.
Whereas if we think more about a movie “reviewer”, the sense is that they are providing a neutral report on the positives and negatives, what worked and what didn’t, and as others have said, often promoting an overlooked work.
So, I encourage everyone to use the term “reviewer” and assess their value from that viewpoint.
I believe that may be different from how the film writing community views it. For them (as I understand it), reviewing is giving pluses and minuses, with a summary of whether a movie is a good choice or not. Film criticism (like literary criticism) is about finding meanings within and across films, or across directors, or across film-making as a whole, etc.
The critics, out of ignorance, attacked John Carter rather savagely before it was in general release and many have claimed this was one reason for the films “failure”.
But yes, in general, they dont have as much effect as they think upon Box office. Except that they do have an effect upon awards- which do effect Box Office later.
I would agree with that, I was going to see Star Wars either way.
But I went to see Three Billboards having never heard of it before that day, and the good critic reviews piqued my interest. And the director.
Oh, and I saw the latest Fast and Furious. I’m not a big fan of the franchise and it was a really dumb movie, but man was it entertaining.
I don’t see a lot on movies, but I’ll go to something I want to see regardless of the critics. Everybody’s got a problem with something. I was puzzled by the near unanimous panning of last year’s Ben Affleck’s Live By Night flick. I love gangster pictures and I like a lot of stuff nobody else likes. 1941 and* One From The Heart* come to mind. So I totally ignore critics except as a reference point. But I’ll tell you, Live By Night is the worst movie I have ever seen in my life. And I still liked it. It had the cars, the sets, the hats, the suits, the molls and as beautiful cinematography as you could hope for in this kind of movie. Gawd it sucked. What a nasty script with dialogue from a nineteenth century melodrama. But I still liked it. Sometimes I’m just there there for the mis en scene. The craft and the beauty of the film.
I wonder if reviews have more impact now that we have aggregator sites like Rotten Tomatoes. In the olden days, reading a review or two in the paper wouldn’t have much effect because I often disagree with the assessment of a reviewer, even one I like and trust. But when you put a couple dozen “top critics” together and they’re mostly on the same page, it says something.
A movie’s Rotten Tomatoes score can definitely impact whether I see a movie or not.
Examples:
I was psyched to see After Earth. A post-apocalyptic movie with Will Smith? Awesome! 11% on Rotten Tomatoes? Better take a look at some of those reviews. I did not go to see that movie.
“The Color of Water” is a most unappealing title, IMHO. Sounds exactly like a movie I’d hate. Just noticed it had a 93%. I read the description, and not only does it sound really interesting, but it’s also by Guillermo Del Toro! Now I want to see it. I might have overlooked it entirely if not for that high score.
Speaking of Guillermo Del Toro - bad reviews will not keep me from seeing certain movies, but there are very few that would be immune to really bad reviews. Nothing will keep me away from the Pacific Rim sequel, like nothing could have kept me away from the original. I’d be willing to pass on almost anything else, though, if the reviews were really terrible.
