Tittle says it all. I did not include sub-genres of which, you can find a list here to correspond with the above list.
I (along with the 2 other people who have so-far voted) went with sci-fi fantasy, because people just go CRAZY if the image on the screen doesn’t match the image in their head, or if the source material had been changed to some degree.
I’ve seen some Jane Austen adaptations and have never heard anything like "They fucked it up but good - the scene where they’re talking about marriage is supposed to happen on a rainy day, not out in a sunny garden! WTF! Once I heard that change was made I decided to never see the movie as they so don’t care about the source material. :mad: "
Cite: LOTR
When I hear “critic,” I think professionals, and so voted accordingly, but JohnT has a good point. Amateur critics can go apeshit over minor details, like “Daario Naharis has a beard! I’m boycotting this show!” and it’s only exacerbated by the Internet.
I said comedy, and I’ll stick by it. Sure there is dreck, (“Meet the…”), but it seems many critics will only fall over themselves praising if it’s the new Dr. Strangelove or older Woody Allen. They’re starting to like stuff like the Hangover now, though. Also, I feel that bad ratings for SF/fantasy* are lessening in the last couple years, as these genres become less “nerdy,” for pro critics but especially fans.
*P.S. you can easily have some overzealous critics call you out because they feel “sci-fi” is too low-brow; they’re science fiction or SF fans, thank you.
Yes. Thank you for this.
To be clear, I was speaking of the average movie goer. Or ‘armchair’ critic if you will.
I went with historical because when I go to the movie, I go with my friends and family, and they almost all have a great love of tearing down any part of any scene that isn’t historically accurate. “That wouldn’t have been a paved road!” “That style of dress didn’t come into fashion for another 15 years.” “Oh, come on, now, they didn’t even have plate glass back then!” It’s all great fun, really.