X3's competition getting slammed by critics!

[JokerNick]

^ These aren't internet critics on Rottentomatoes. Though some of them are....All the legit critics are there. Those are the one's noted as "Cream of the Crop" all of which are negative right now for DaVinci and surely some for x3 will be there too.

ummm, all the critics they mentioned are on rottentomatoes...... they are allowed to see films before other critcs because they give positive reviews, and in return for their positive review, they get qouted on packages and adds, they get money for that and notibility

thsi has nothing to do with the competition, but it shows that no one should listen to "internet only critics"

 

[bluewolv]

Wow, I'm really surprised at the reviews for DVC. Hopefully X3 won't follow suit.

And Advanced, 50% for an X-Men film would be terrible--there is no way one could put a positive spin on that, considering the film's 80%-plus predecessors. I don't expect X3 to surpass X1 or X2 critically, but I hope it is nowhere near those depths.

X-men united was an 87% so I doubt Last Stand will top that...X-men I believe was an 80%

 

[Spidey 2007]

id bet about a 60-65% ill be suprised at a 70%

 

[Advanced Dark]

60-65% wouldn't shock me but I'm expected a bit less. I'm hoping for more obviously. Mixed reviews don't mean bad film.

http://www.metacritic.com doesnt' have any reviews yet. They're a little bit more picky as too who's reviews get onto their site. Their rating system is also different with all reviewers scoring the movie on a scale of 1-100. DaVinci has an average score of 56% which is not good at all. The 56% doesn't have the same meaning as on RT which. On RT the % is just the % of positive reviews over negative.

 

[Celestial]

I think the problem is that most people had great expectations for The DaVinci Code, while the movie not being bad it certainly didn't live up to the hype.

People seemed to have high expectations of The Da Vinci Code (though the problems were obvious from reading the book) so they were disappointed. And it was long.
Expectations for X3 have been pretty low, so people may be pleasantly surprised. Most critics aren't likely to be bothered about Cyclops (he got the worst reviews for X2) and they seem to prefer a film to be too short rather than too long.

 

[Iceman]

0/7 fresh reviews = 0% for Da Vinci Code so far

Didn't see that coming

 

[Advanced Dark]

ummm, all the critics they mentioned are on rottentomatoes...... they are allowed to see films before other critcs because they give positive reviews, and in return for their positive review, they get qouted on packages and adds, they get money for that and notibility

thsi has nothing to do with the competition, but it shows that no one should listen to "internet only critics"

They might have online sites but they're not all online critics. They have publications as well. By the way show me one "positive" review for the DaVinci code. What are they getting in turn for those 7 negative reviews. LOL

 

[TNC9852002]

I'm hoping for a 74% for XMTLS...

-TNC

 

[Iceman]

I'm hoping for a 74% for XMTLS...

-TNC

I'd be reasonably happy with that given some of the problems we've heard about the film. 80% is my target and DVC shows that it is not always predictable.

 

[ororoandme]

I'll be happy with 70% for X3. It won't get slammed by critics because it is not held to the same standard as Da Vinci for example. Da Vinci has a A lsit cast thru and thru. Tom Hanks is arguably one of Hollywood's most successful (commercially and critically) actors. Plus you have Ron Howard and Brian Grazer, both of whom are Oscar winners. And Akiva Goldsman who is also an Oscar winner (adapted screenplay for Beautiful Mind)...so lets see...

 

[Celestial]

The RT reviews include Variety and The Hollywood Reporter.

I've read a few reviews from british newspapers and media that are not at RT. It got a positve review from The Sun, negative from Time Out, The Daily Mail and Channel 4. The BBC were non-commital.

 

[DarkYoda]

I'm not. I found the book boring. Too talkative. Seems like the movie reflects that. They should have done Angels & Demons first

Plus Dan Brown can't write. He needs to get a better editor.

 

[xwolverine2]

posiedon wasnt bad....

shows how much critics know.

 

[TNC9852002]

I haven't seen Poseidon yet, but one of our OC's at the theater that I work at saw it and said it was horrible.. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to see it tommorow night..

-TNC

 

[xwolverine2]

I haven't seen Poseidon yet, but one of our OC's at the theater that I work at saw it and said it was horrible.. Hopefully, I'll get a chance to see it tommorow night..

-TNC

its not my kind of movie but it was good

 

[newwaveboy87]

why are you people surprised by the negative reaction to TDVC?

 

[newwaveboy87]

posiedon wasnt bad....

shows how much critics know.

what you like is subjective. so are reviews and reviewers.

 

[Iceman]

why are you people surprised by the negative reaction to TDVC?

I was expecting it to be good. I've only started reading the book recently but it's a solid read so far.

 

[CapBeerCino]

why are you people surprised by the negative reaction to TDVC?

The trailer was promising...Then again... akiva goldsman

 

[newwaveboy87]

I was expecting it to be good. I've only started reading the book recently but it's a solid read so far.

when the novel a film is based on is purely illogical connection of dots and terribly inaccurate from an art history perspective....what else would one suspect? i'm sure it's a nice work of fiction, but from asking for details about the plot/storyline/characters from my friends who have read i have come to the conclusion that Dan Brown blowns a lot of hot air and wants people to think his fiction has some basis in truth.

while fiction can have basis in truth, one actually needs to know and understand what they're talking about before they make some of the claims he does.

it shot itself in the foot from the get-go.

 

[Iceman]

The RT reviews include Variety and The Hollywood Reporter.

I've read a few reviews from british newspapers and media that are not at RT. It got a positve review from The Sun, negative from Time Out, The Daily Mail and Channel 4. The BBC were non-commital.

When did it get reviewed in The Sun?

 

[Iceman]

when the novel a film is based on is purely illogical connection of dots and terribly inaccurate from an art history perspective....what else would one suspect? i'm sure it's a nice work of fiction, but from asking for details about the plot/storyline/characters from my friends who have read i have come to the conclusion that Dan Brown blowns a lot of hot air and wants people to think his fiction has some basis in truth.

while fiction can have basis in truth, one actually needs to know and understand what they're talking about before they make some of the claims he does.

it shot itself in the foot from the get-go.

It's true that he wants readers to be thinking parts of his story are based in truth but to be fair, Brown seems to have done his share of research. More importantly controversy (hot air as you say) even over nothing seems to be a good way to make a few quick dollars.

 

[BMM]

posiedon wasnt bad....

shows how much critics know.

Actually Poseidon didn't receive incredibly horrible reviews.

 

[newwaveboy87]

It's true that he wants readers to be thinking parts of his story are based in truth but to be fair, Brown seems to have done his share of research. More importantly controversy (hot air as you say) even over nothing seems to be a good way to make a few quick dollars.

take a couple of Art History and religious studies courses before you claim him to have done his research.

i think he did a great marketing campaign to get some money. it's genius, a complete and utter lie, but genius.

 

[WorthyStevens]

DVC is now 0 for 8 at RT... ouch.