The "we're sorry, Brett" thread...

[YJ1]

All you idiots who doubted Ratner and have been bashing him from the start should admit your mistake, quit compounding it (and farther embarrassing yourself) by continuing to try to knock a superior film, and just simply apologize to the man. Step up, face reality and do what's right. Go to your nearest Hallmark shop and purchase and apology card and mail it to Fox studios on Tuesday morning.

 

[Mr. Credible]

oh no not really ..you argue like that ..not shadow...reread everything ...but I know you will not admit it's a shame everything is there.

Have fun , i don't have anymore .

and......... yup. Shadow i think... yes! he just came! good job, Maze!

you hid under mommie's skirt the entire argument, and did nothing for yourself. jolly good.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

All you idiots who doubted Ratner and have been bashing him from the start should admit your mistake, quit compounding it (and farther embarrassing yourself) by continuing to try to knock a superior film, and just simply apologize to the man. Step up, face reality and do what's right. Go to your nearest Hallmark shop and purchase and apology card and mail it to Fox studios on Tuesday morning.

As I say the minute it raises above 80% (X-Men 1 rating) on rotten tomatoes, I'll apologize...until then I told you so, he made a bad film and the rating it got I predicted.

 

[XCharlieX]

Truthfully.. i dont think a part 3 wouldve made around 80 for sure even if it was outstanding. A well made part 3 usually gets slightly lower than the previous ones i think.. because the shift of crew turns some off more than before.

 

[Mr. Credible]

Sorry , english is not my first language and i prefer to do my best to be understood.

Don't worry i will stop there

fair enough, but, for the record, you english is quite good.

but when you edit your posts after someone has quoted you, it looks bad... like you're trying to fool them or something.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Truthfully.. i dont think a part 3 wouldve made around 80 for sure even if it was outstanding. A well made part 3 usually gets slightly lower than the previous ones i think.. because the shift of crew turns some off more than before.

Revenge of the Sith (after the first 2 were 60%, it scored 82%) was the highest rated of its franchise, all the LOTR scored in the upper 90%, Harry Potter gets better reviews every installment and of course the original Star Wars as well did good across the board.

 

[YJ1]

As I say the minute it raises above 80% (X-Men 1 rating) on rotten tomatoes, I'll apologize...until then I told you so, he made a bad film and the rating it got I predicted.

Yes because we all know that the mark of a quality movie is what Jeanne Aufmuth from the Palo Alto Weekly or Mike Agger of Slate or Emily Blunt of Blunt Review or Cherryl Dawson of Moviechicks.com thinks of a film. (Those are actual loser critics that make up the TomatoMeter. Why anyone pays any attention to that I'll never know.)

 

[geka]

Yeah pretty much. I guarentee you the guy writing for the New York Times on movie reviews (the one of many) has a degree in theatre arts and or knows an a$$load about it.

Critics are all full of it I hope nobody actually goes to or stays away from a movie because "critics" say its good or bad. Get out of your moms basement and get some friends and go watch movies you will have alot more fun.

Pulp fiction, sin city, lucky number slevin, Ace ventura, austin powers got ****ty reviews from most critics. I hope everyone has seen these great movies if not go rent or netflix them asap.

While a movie like Thin red line gets good reviews and to this day is the only movie in which I ever been to on opening weekend that had over half the theater walk out and get refunds.

 

[XCharlieX]

Revenge of the Sith (after the first 2 were 60%, it scored 82%) was the highest rated of its franchise, all the LOTR scored in the upper 90%, Harry Potter gets better reviews every installment and of course the original Star Wars as well did good across the board.

usually a consistent director for 2 times vs a newcomer even if good is slightly less rated. Thats my point. Constantly shifting directors is risky too and im amazed at how consistent harry potter has been as i look at the tomatometers... perhaps due to the books guidelines.

 

[Flexo]

I have to admit; I thought X:3 was going to be utter trash.

I was wrong.

Horribly, horribly wrong.

 

[Toad88]

I never doubted Brett Ratner I thought he was going to do a good job.I was very sad to see Singer go but I must say Brett Ratner did a good job with this one.

 

[XCharlieX]

Id like to add that i think brett Ratner is a pro at action and i do like the looks of it, but the reason for negative reviews are because the enjoyment of the things such as this are linked to the amount of storytime given to balance it and many people seem to think it wasnt enough to in full conscience accept it.

 

[tonytr1687]

Critics are all full of it I hope nobody actually goes to or stays away from a movie because "critics" say its good or bad. Get out of your moms basement and get some friends and go watch movies you will have alot more fun.

Pulp fiction, sin city, lucky number slevin, Ace ventura, austin powers got ****ty reviews from most critics. I hope everyone has seen these great movies if not go rent or netflix them asap.

While a movie like Thin red line gets good reviews and to this day is the only movie in which I ever been to on opening weekend that had over half the theater walk out and get refunds.

Both Pulp Fiction and Sin City got good reviews, so right there you just ruin your argument. The Austin Powers flicks got decent reviews too. And since when is ****ing Lucky Number Slevin a classic? The movie flopped and deservedly so as it tried to ape Tarantino. Ace Ventura? A good comedy but c'mon...when it comes to critics comedies are a whole different ball game from action and drama movies. Mainly because comedy is much more subjective and dependable on "taste." The Thin Red Line? What so because a bunch of unintelligent sheep who wanted a nonstop action film walked out of your theater...its automatically a bad movie?

I didnt think X3 was terrible but I really pity the intelligence of those here who actually thought it was better than X2. The movie was mediocre and could have been so much better. Terribly rushed at points but also showcasing some incredible effects at others. I cant believe the lies that Kinberg and Penn told us over at the xverse. That Danger Room scene we saw a clip of on Leno? Exactly the same in the movie, even the bad effects on Colossus. The third movie curse continues for the most part. Its sad when the best part of your experience was a trailer before the movie (Superman). Oh well, at least we'll get a whole Spider-man trilogy directed by the same guy.

 

[skruloos]

Yes because we all know that the mark of a quality movie is what Jeanne Aufmuth from the Palo Alto Weekly or Mike Agger of Slate or Emily Blunt of Blunt Review or Cherryl Dawson of Moviechicks.com thinks of a film. (Those are actual loser critics that make up the TomatoMeter. Why anyone pays any attention to that I'll never know.)

Because the website compiles a consensus. Sure, one reviewer's opinion is a bit meaningless. But suddenly having opinions across different groups of people starts to show more information. Of course, you don't have to agree with the opinion. However, it does show something.

If 80 people out of 100 said a movie wasn't very good, that's pause for concern. That's 80 people that were not impressed. Now, you could be part of the 20 out of that 100 that actually liked the movie and that's fine. You're entitled to your opinion. However, the fact that it didn't click with that 80 is a problem. The more people you poll, the more reliable results you can gain. The bigger group you have, the more diverse opinions.

 

[ororoandme]

X3 suffered from one thing, the pacing...it was too fast. You didn't get to realize the gravity of the major events of the movie because u were too busy trying to keep up with what was happening.

 

[XCharlieX]

X3 suffered from one thing, the pacing...it was too fast. You didn't get to realize the gravity of the major events of the movie because u were too busy trying to keep up with what was happening.

Which makes people apathetic to the story often and withdraw... yes this gets on critics bad sides often.

 

[geka]

Both Pulp Fiction and Sin City got good reviews, so right there you just ruin your argument. The Austin Powers flicks got decent reviews too. And since when is ****ing Lucky Number Slevin a classic? The movie flopped and deservedly so as it tried to ape Tarantino. Ace Ventura? A good comedy but c'mon...when it comes to critics comedies are a whole different ball game from action and drama movies. Mainly because comedy is much more subjective and dependable on "taste." The Thin Red Line? What so because a bunch of unintelligent sheep who wanted a nonstop action film walked out of your theater...its automatically a bad movie?

Did you actually see a thin red line? lack of action had nothing to do with why people walked out of that bad movie. The never ending movie and the billion cut to a snake in a tree or a bird or some **** did.

Pulp fiction and sin city both got alot of bad reviews, they had the good and the so so reviews to but there was alot of bad ones out there to. Bruce willis killing people was nothing like a tarantino movie and other then my girlfriend who did not care for it everyone I have seen at my comic shop has liked it. Ace ventura and the first Austin powers did not do so well on the big screen and by word of mouth, did so well on VHS that they made more movies of them.

and i was refering to pulp fiction and sin city as clasics not bruce willis killing people sorry

 

[Mr. Credible]

... this is the first thread i've ever made that got up to 8 pages.

...single tear.

 

[TwilightPro101]

Both Pulp Fiction and Sin City got good reviews, so right there you just ruin your argument. The Austin Powers flicks got decent reviews too. And since when is ****ing Lucky Number Slevin a classic? The movie flopped and deservedly so as it tried to ape Tarantino. Ace Ventura? A good comedy but c'mon...when it comes to critics comedies are a whole different ball game from action and drama movies. Mainly because comedy is much more subjective and dependable on "taste." The Thin Red Line? What so because a bunch of unintelligent sheep who wanted a nonstop action film walked out of your theater...its automatically a bad movie?

I didnt think X3 was terrible but I really pity the intelligence of those here who actually thought it was better than X2. The movie was mediocre and could have been so much better. Terribly rushed at points but also showcasing some incredible effects at others. I cant believe the lies that Kinberg and Penn told us over at the xverse. That Danger Room scene we saw a clip of on Leno? Exactly the same in the movie, even the bad effects on Colossus. The third movie curse continues for the most part. Its sad when the best part of your experience was a trailer before the movie (Superman). Oh well, at least we'll get a whole Spider-man trilogy directed by the same guy.

I second that statement. Ratner tried but didn't really have the ability to put up where Singer left off. All he honestly had going for him was the action. The character development in this chapter was so underdeveloped. X2 stands to be the best chapter in this "trilogy."

 

[Morgoth]

I never had a problem with Brett, I was happy Singer left. Brett finally made an X-men movie that felt like the comic book, more open more free more fun, much much better. Thankyou Brett.

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Did you actually see a thin red line? lack of action had nothing to do with why people walked out of that bad movie. The never ending movie and the billion cut to a snake in a tree or a bird or some **** did.

Pulp fiction and sin city both got alot of bad reviews, they had the good and the so so reviews to but there was alot of bad ones out there to. Bruce willis killing people was nothing like a tarantino movie and other then my girlfriend who did not care for it everyone I have seen at my comic shop has liked it. Ace ventura and the first Austin powers did not do so well on the big screen and by word of mouth, did so well on VHS that they made more movies of them.

and i was refering to pulp fiction and sin city as clasics not bruce willis killing people sorry

You're right, the 2 bad reviews Pulp Fiction got were awful

 

[ShadowBoxing]

Yes because we all know that the mark of a quality movie is what Jeanne Aufmuth from the Palo Alto Weekly or Mike Agger of Slate or Emily Blunt of Blunt Review or Cherryl Dawson of Moviechicks.com thinks of a film. (Those are actual loser critics that make up the TomatoMeter. Why anyone pays any attention to that I'll never know.)

Ah but thats why the Cream of the Crop is nicely added on your side bar. And in fact those loser critics make it a more accurate gauge. Now I know I am hearing from all angles, not just the biased fanboy angle who desperately wants his movie to be good.

 

[Karea07]

This was my favorite X-men movie yet... and I never bashed Ratner or doubted him.

 

[conan69]

You can look up any of my old posts, I never had a problem with Ratner, but with Rothman and FOX who seemed determined to rush this film - and it shows in the final product.

The biggest mistakes here being Cylops the short running time and rushing the films production and release. A extra 1/2 hour would have allowed for more characterization and depth.

Geeky "ohhh ahhh" comic book moments dont make for a great movie.

 

[usagicassidy]

Funny. I never doubted Brett Ratner once. I had my worries, like anyone should, but I hoped he would turn out an astonishing film.

Turns out I was horribly, horribly WRONG.

Do you guys only care about action? This film is falling apart at the seams! It introduces WAY too many characters, only to have them to nothing and get lost behind Halle and Hugh. And the character development, the emotion that made X1 and X2 not only good comic book films, but also good drama films, where was that?