The Dark Knight Rises The TDKR General Discussion Thread - Part 127 (NO SPOILERS)

[Deserana]

No, they don't. If they do it is only because you allow them to, which is more your problem than that of a critic

They do. How many times have you finished watching a film or during a film thought "this isn't as bad as everyone makes out" or "this really isn't THAT good". Probably alot. No they probably don't affect all the time but a lot of time.

All that matters is if you like it though but that probably will be affected by reactions of others even if minimally.

 

[lililatigresse]

Lol, on RT Honeycutt's review is listed as "rotten" even though he gave the movie a 9/10. Pretty sure it's a typo they'll fix

Yeah, it's definitely an error that review is positive.

 

[WVsax27]

Lol, on RT Honeycutt's review is listed as "rotten" even though he gave the movie a 9/10. Pretty sure it's a typo they'll fix

Good thing the comments are turned off, the crazies would be having a field day with RT over that one.

 

[joker1524]

Lol, on RT Honeycutt's review is listed as "rotten" even though he gave the movie a 9/10. Pretty sure it's a typo they'll fix

RT needs to pick up the slack

 

[Deserana]

If the comments are switched off how are they meant to know they made a mistake?

 

[WVsax27]

They do. How many times have you finished watching a film or during a film thought "this isn't as bad as everyone makes out" or "this really isn't THAT good". Probably alot. No they probably don't affect all the time but a lot of .

Literally never.

 

[Avengers-Report]

They do. How many times have you finished watching a film or during a film thought "this isn't as bad as everyone makes out" or "this really isn't THAT good". Probably alot. No they probably don't affect all the time but a lot of time.

All that matters is if you like it though but that probably will be affected by reactions of others even if minimally.

I actually almost always agree with the Tomatometer.

 

[cjjr72984]

Literally never.

Shoot, I have. I remember watching 300 and thinking "While good, it wasn't as epic as everyone said it was."

 

[Scarlettess]

Some AWESOME street art -

Spoiler

I love this!!

 

[Joker594]

Honeycutt's review'll push this movie's Top Critics rating up to an 89%. . .

 

[gillberg2k1]

Not to rag on RT, but there's been some fishy stuff going on with a couple of these reviews. It's still early. People are loving the movie. Give it until Thursday morning before jumping to conclusions, folks.

 

[ImAlwaysAngry]

Yeah, I find that part kind of confusing.

Its Faraci's opinion, and he's made the case a few times. I don't totally share it, but I think it's something about how Nolan's Bruce wants to give up being Batman too much. He also has an issue with the idea that Bruce could give up for eight years, regardless of the loss of Rachel. In his mind, Bruce would be looking for guys holding up convenience stores whether organized crime was broken up or not. It's a fair point, because it cuts to the core question of why Bruce does what he does. I always took it as a pretty dark compulsion. He HAS to be Batman or his internal darkness eats him up. So the idea that he could cast off the cowl for such a significant chunk of time, to Faraci, totally violates the character's central motivations.

 

[moviefan!]

https://***********/Reelviews/status/225286108940992512

James Berardinelli RT top critic

TDKR delivers! Review coming soon.

Positive

 

[cjjr72984]

https://***********/Reelviews/status/225286108940992512

James Berardinelli RT top critic



Positive

t:

 

[joker1524]

Its Faraci's opinion, and he's made the case a few times. I don't totally share it, but I think it's something about how Nolan's Bruce wants to give up being Batman too much. He also has an issue with the idea that Bruce could give up for eight years, regardless of the loss of Rachel. In his mind, Bruce would be looking for guys holding up convenience stores whether organized crime was broken up or not. It's a fair point, because it cuts to the core question of why Bruce does what he does. I always took it as a pretty dark compulsion. He HAS to be Batman or his internal darkness eats him up. So the idea that he could cast off the cowl for such a significant chunk of time, to Faraci, totally violates the character's central motivations.

I agree with him in some parts...im not fond of batman being gone for 8 years

 

[BuddhaWasABat]

https://***********/Reelviews/status/225286108940992512

James Berardinelli RT top critic



Positive

Cool! He's one of my favorites.

 

[WVsax27]

Shoot, I have. I remember watching 300 and thinking "While good, it wasn't as epic as everyone said it was."

I'm good about going in even headed about everything, I didn't even bash the twilight films until I had seen them. Not that hard to do, just have to think for yourself and block everything out.

 

[joker1524]

Not to rag on RT, but there's been some fishy stuff going on with a couple of these reviews. It's still early. People are loving the movie. Give it until Thursday morning before jumping to conclusions, folks.

It has been acting weird

 

[Avengers-Report]

Not to rag on RT, but there's been some fishy stuff going on with a couple of these reviews. It's still early. People are loving the movie. Give it until Thursday morning before jumping to conclusions, folks.

Fishy? How so? WB owns RT so if anything....nah

 

[Hurm...]

Gill has spoken!

 

[Scarlettess]

I read a few reviews and then I stop, unless I am really invested in that movie. I feel when you read the reviews it does kind of have a subconscious effect on the way you view a movie sometimes so I dont bother and enjoy reading them after to see what i agree with or not or even, sometimes can find some flaws you didnt see before.

 

[BatLobster]

Its Faraci's opinion, and he's made the case a few times. I don't totally share it, but I think it's something about how Nolan's Bruce wants to give up being Batman too much. He also has an issue with the idea that Bruce could give up for eight years, regardless of the loss of Rachel. In his mind, Bruce would be looking for guys holding up convenience stores whether organized crime was broken up or not. It's a fair point, because it cuts to the core question of why Bruce does what he does. I always took it as a pretty dark compulsion. He HAS to be Batman or his internal darkness eats him up. So the idea that he could cast off the cowl for such a significant chunk of time, to Faraci, totally violates the character's central motivations.

Oh, I see.

Well, the whole hiatus thing I'll say I was a bit unsure about. I don't want to open up the whole 8 years debate again, so I'll just say that I'll wait to see how it plays in the film. What I'll say is that TDK presented a unique set of circumstances that led Bruce to where he is in TDKR. And the fact that he seems to be so lost without Batman seems to speak directly to that point of him needing it. From what I gather, the whole point is that he needs Batman, but the city doesn't need him.

 

[kthevs]

I agree with him in some parts...im not fond of batman being gone for 8 years

He's judging the film purely on the fact that he didn't get exactly what he wanted, rather than judging it on its artistic merits (which is what he should do). Same with Lemure woman or whatever her name is. Her complaint is that Nolan didn't bring Ledger back from the dead and have him star in this movie too.

 

[Micromind]

Fishy? How so? WB owns RT so if anything....nah

But they don't own every blogger that thinks that he is a movie critic for some obscure website and there are many such critics.

 

[kthevs]

But they don't own every blogger that thinks that he is a movie critic for some obscure website and there are many such critics.

Exactly. This is why I prefer metacritic's top critic section. ON RT, they count the review of every random blogger who thinks of himself or herself as a critic.