That's the thing. When a movie like Transformers gets 57% or whatever it is, then it can be highly debatable. But when ROTF gets 20%, then it's just plain willful ignorance to pretend there's nothing legitimate to that. Or that it's some kind of conspiracy against Michael Bay.
They get paid for writing a review. Like, writing text, thinking up sentences, doing typing work, getting paid for work? Just because you're voicing off your opinion on the internet for free doesn't mean nobody should ever get paid for writing, y'know. Can the same be said about people who do toy or comic reviews?
the 5 people who voted option 2 are going to eat their words and shit them out next week ...one of them being chojin.
I'd prefer not to get into how I feel about movie critics. I could rant all day about them...And I'd prefer not to do that and keep my peace. I think that post you quoted is all I want to say.
Critics were completely wrong against Transformers2. And there was clearly a plan with all of them bashing the movie repeating the same sentences, it was obvious that competitors paid them in a hope to bring down the movie. If you can't see the obvious and you prefer living in a fantasy world that doesn't exist it's your choice but things do work that way in the real world. People spoke and chose to watch Transformers2 despite all the hatred and bashing. That is a fact. So you and others think that all those that loved Transformers2 and made it a financial success more than the first one and that chose again on their free will to make DVD/BluRay disc sales of Transformers2 another financial success.. well, they were all dumb, stupid and with a bad taste because they didn't listen to what critics said and they should have avoided the movie at all costs? And it's really sad seeing now Paramount and Michael Bay so concerned about selling the movie having positive critics reviews, it really seems that their marketing tactics is "if you liked Transformers2 you were dumb we fooled you, we did an awful work, critics were right and we were wrong" and now they are telling people "you see? critics now love us, so you have to love our product as well, it's surely the best of the franchise because now critics tell you so and you must love it, how couldn't you? it's perfect..." Well, that looks dumb and fishy marketing strategy, really disrespectful of all those customers that loved the first two movies regardless of any critics reviews and bashing on forums. And it just shows that they are not confident of the movie at all, they need and want to cash in as much as possible in the shortest possible time because they are worried people would start questioning all the issues they will see on the movie and word of mouth among actual people,customers is going to do more harm than good this time. Otherwise Paramount would have had no logical reason to act like this and be so concerned about critics instead of actual customers/viewers that made them richer in the first place because they chose and loved the first two movies regardless of any negative reviews and bashing.
Btw I just watched RedLetterMedia's review of Cop Dog. In it he shows a suckability chart with various awful films like Indiana Jones 4 and Twilight. ROTF is rated 96% sucky. So the 20% is actually generous since it doesn't include that. I'm still begging RLM to do a full review.
Oh boy. You mean you actually enjoy listening to Red Letter Media? I'd rather be raped by Gary Busy than listen to that idiot drone on in awful monotone. He is one of the many reasons why the internet kind of sucks.
Okay I'm having just a little trouble with the logic. So 20th Century Fox had the money to pay off the critics for a bad review of Revenge of the Fallen so Ice Age 3 could do well against it, but Paramount didn't have the sort of money to pay off the critics for a good review? How exactly could Paramount not afford a pay off if all it took for good reviews was slipping someone one a little cash? The logic sure can't be that Wolverine at 37% or Terminator at 33% made a pay off to sabotage any reviews given how poorly they were reviewed. Then we have that wee problem of how exactly is critics saying hey Dark of the Moon is a great movie so you should go watch it? It seems like positive reviews would help bring in the people who might not be totally sold on the film instead of just the people who say they will watch it no matter what. "they need and want to cash in as much as possible in the shortest possible time because they are worried people would start questioning all the issues they will see on the movie and word of mouth among actual people". Maybe you have films confused because Revenge of the Fallen box office dropped off 60% in it's second week. The first Transformers only dropped off 45% so it seems like Revenge of the Fallen was the film out to make it's money fast before people talked to their friends. If anything the scaled back advertising just screams that they are confident that when people see this film they are going to all over the social networking sites to tell their friends why they must see Dark of the Moon.
I hope when the Nostalgia Critic does his review of this one, he'll start off with the standard, "OH MY GOD, THIS IS THE GREATEST MOVIE I'VE EVER SEEN IN MY LIFE" and then turn around in mid-sentence and confess that he actually dislikes these movies.
Why? he already said he likes these movies because they are just mindless action films. and if he was to make a review he wouldnt do it as Chester A.Bum
Depends on what sort of critic it is really. Also zomg, the movie discussion forum has 666 threads D:
