So right now it's at a 71%.
Is today the day I get to say "I told you so"?
I honestly cannot wait for the day that you're proven wrong with something.
Or, we'll get 60 rotten in a row and it'll be at 26%.
Another reason not to take the movie Critic section too seriously. Even if the critics hate it, there is a great chance the audience will LOVE it.
If a 100 critics give it an F, and 20,000 random people give it a high B. who would you listen too?t:
![]()
^ This Is FAKE by the way (though comes from a real movie). Just a lesson in listening to the "audience score" for a change.
[BLACKOUT]javascript:document.body.contentEditable%20%3D%20%27true%27%3B%20document.designMode%3D%27on%27%3B%20void%200[/BLACKOUT]
If you put that into your website you can edit it without paint
I sincerly apologise for facilitating the ability to visualise rotten tomato predictions
Does ASM2 deserve a lower rating than ASM?
Can someone who has seen both movies answer?
That day happened. Was the day I saw Man of Steel. Went it saying "this will be one of the best CBMs of all time". Walked out like "what the **** did I just watch?"
But it's hard being perfect since than. It's a tough job but someone has to do it.
If you could edit Rotten Tomatoes like Wikipedia you could make movies look better than what they are you could delete every Negative review for Batman and Robin and keep the very few positive ones and you would have 100% for that film and people who haven't seen it would think its a masterpiece
That day happened. Was the day I saw Man of Steel. Went it saying "this will be one of the best CBMs of all time". Walked out like "what the **** did I just watch?"
But it's hard being perfect since than. It's a tough job but someone has to do it.
can you give us an example of that? Kind of weird
That is not a Metacritic thing, that is a critic thing.Well, for example, on Metacritic there is 80/100 for TASM on the review by The Hollywood Reporter, and for TASM2 is 70 although it says that the film is better than the first one. **** logic, Metacritic.
This just tells us that this movie ranking sites are just irrelevant.
That is not a Metacritic thing, that is a critic thing.
Oh man you are my new favorite poster...but it's not because we agree lolBut Spider-Man isn't Batman, and he doesn't need over-developed or pseudo-developed villains like the ones that Nolan produces, Spider-Man is essentially a love story, and that is what this film is about and why I believe some critics have so many problems with Marc Webb's take.
If you read any of the greatest Spider-Man stories, they are full of drama and tragic love stories, with very strong and fleshed female characters, from Aunt May to Gwen Stacy and Mary Jane. Spider-Man isn't about the villains, that was never what made him interesting to begin with, Spider-Man is about Peter Parker.
And somehow I really doubt that Christopher Nolan could ever do a better job than Marc Webb is doing with Spider-Man, mainly because Nolan has proved time and time again how clueless he is making believable romantic relationships or female characters.
But I bet that a lot of critics think and want the same that you do from Spider-Man stories as well. Thank God it seems that Sony and Webb know what's best for Spider-Man better than their detractors or Nolan could ever do.