Inspired by the linked XKCD. Using 60% instead of 50% because that’s an easy filter to apply on rottentomatoes.
I’ll go first: I think “Sherlock Holmes: A game of Shadows” was awesome, from the plot to the characters ,and especially how they used screen-play to highlight how Sherlocks head works in these absurd ways.
I just looked up Event Horizon and it only got a 33%. I love that movie. It genuinely really creeped me out. Few horror films do.
Just goes to show you some people (critics) have no taste. That movie was awesome!
As always, it has to be kept in mind how the RT scores work. It doesn’t aggregate scores, it just aggregates if the review is positive or negative.
A movie with hundred critics saying “Yeah, the movie is fine I guess” will score higher than a movie with 90 of those critics saying “This is the best movie I’ve ever seen!” and 10 of them not really feeling it.
The concept of mass critic aggregation also just has fundamental problems compared to following and learning the tastes of a specific critic, in order to evaluate their review.
Right? It also got a 61% audience score, which I found surprising. I always hear good things about it from people.
It is a horror movie so that could put a lot of folks off, especially with some of the imagery. That’s one of my favorites but just a theory on why others may not like it.
I love the dismissal of critics as a while because a movie you like scored low. It’s a good creepy movie but it’s no that good of a movie overall. It’s very cheesy, the dialogue is poor, the story is minimal. It’s got great creeps though.
Check out Pandorum if you haven’t already. I think about that movie a lot.
That is absurd! Event Horizon is the only legit Doom movie. That was the idea all along and they even used the sound clip from the spawn cube in the movie.
Also, although I am not a 40k fan, I know some people see this as a prequel to Warhammer 40k as the moment in which humans first get to use the Warp.
It was ruined by execs, but it is a masterpiece, especially in the production design.
What? I still hold that movie as the scariest thing I’ve ever seen. It grips me just thinking about some scenes. It’s an amazing movie. Can’t believe the score
I remember feeling like that about “the Sphere” which came out the year after and has 13% on rotten tomatoes. I really liked it.
I watched that thinking it was just sci-fi while high as a kite in my teens.
I’m still not over it.
A+
Indeed, that movie is actually scary! Like proper scary, not how most movies are.
And there was a lot of cut content that was even crazier than what made it into the released film:
The League of Extraordinary Gentlemen. Sure it’s campy and way over the top. But I kinda like it for that. Plus the characters are awesome, the designs were pretty cool, and Sean Connery was great. Currently at 17% on rt.
Grandma’s Boy is a perfect stoner comedy. Featuring Nick Swardson in a hilarious breakout performance. RT can kiss 15% of my ass.
I’m thinking about getting metal legs. It’s a risky operation but it will be worth it.
I vote Freddie got Fingered as the only better stoner comedy.
Or comedy overall.
It’s one of the best movies.
Nothing can hurt me in my CHEESE HELMET!
I love that I see you everywhere and am graced by this approval uwu
Fuck RT, imdb it’s over 7. That’s really high for a comedy to be honest. One of my favorites and has rewatchability.
That movie is hilarious sober!
But why?
This one of my all-time favourite movies
Titan A.E. only got a 50% and it is incredible and still holds up!
Constantine - 46%
Predator - 34%
Ghost in the Shell - 43%
Hellboy - 17%
Robocop (2016) - 49%
Well, it seems like I have poor taste in movies after all.
Constantine is an awesome movie.
Yeah. I don’t understand why it doesn’t get a lot more attention as one of the early solidly made comic book movies.
I liked Hellboy
I loved Ron Perlman’s Hellboy, but the Hellboy 2019 movie was the best. Felt more like a comicbook pulp story and less of a 2000-ish action comedy. But the public and critics has spoken; if it ain’t a standard superhero action comedy flick, it is a “soulless” reboot.
David Harbour had the potential to be a better Hellboy than Perlman, but the rest of the movie was … really not very good – in pacing, characters, or effects.
If you want a mash-up horror movie that’s more fun than the critics said, go for the 2004 Van Helsing.
I loved Van Helsing. It was seriously brain dead entertainment but action was great and the effects were good. I loved The Brothers Grimm, that came out the year after, better though. Horror movie, comedy, action. I passed that movie over back then because of the critics, so took a few more years until I actually got to see it.
Predator came out in 1986 I think. But I totally agree about Constantine and Robocop 2016, I liked those a lot.
Yeah. Robocop 2016 is so good. I get that it’s different, and it’s reboot no one asked for.
But it’s also a solid movie.
Wow, those are some hot takes, those movies are great
I’m on your team for that.
I kind of agree with the hate for the live action ghost in the shell. SJH was overused for a while.
Hellboy is amazing how the hell is it that low?!
They mean the 2019 David Harbour Hellboy.
The 2004 Ron Perlman one is at 82%.
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hellboy
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/hellboy_2019That makes more sense. Thanks.
Ghost in the Shell (2017) was quite good.
Loved the characters, but the movie plot felt like a clipshow of a bigger plot that didn’t fit into 2 hours. I haven’t watched the anime but it probably was.
Watch the anime, everything that was great in the 2016 version is a bow to the “original”. And I actually think Johansson was a great cast for the film. The way she moves is so totally Major Kusanagi.
Chappie (32%)
I love that movie and have seen it several times. Directed by Noel Blompkamp (District 9) and starring Die Antwoord.
It’s extremely original and entertaining sci fi.
I tend to like sci-fi in this category such as Stargate, Dune (1984), and the Riddick films.
TRON Legacy is my favorite of the bunch, however. Incredible soundtrack, gorgeous costume design, and plenty of character.
Prince of Persia: The Sands of Time is way better than anyone gives it credit for. It’s a really fun movie.
I also really like Vanilla Sky even though critics hate it. It’s a weird but good movie.
How Equilibrium has a 40% RT rating is beyond me. It’s amazing.
Yeah, I liked Prince of Persia as well! It’s nothing groundbreaking, but it’s a fun movie.
I’m pretty shocked to see Vanilla Sky rated that poorly. I recall it being a critical darling at the time.
Wait, people don’t like Vanilla Sky‽ That movie is great!
So good! After seeing it, I grabbed and watched Abre Los Ojos the next week just to get more.
Equilibrium is a good movie. I remember the controversy of the new Ghostbusters which has weird numbers too (people hated it, RT loved it).
I feel like prince of Persia missed on timing more than anything. It came out too close to dragon emperor imo. And the same year as clash of the titans. It’s a decent flick, but not good enough to outrun the comparisons on what all 3 did poorly. (Mostly dialog)
Idiocracy is one of my favorite movies. When it came out, it was far below 50%, but after some of the things on the movie started becoming true, it became popular.
Welcome to Costco. I love you.
Such a great movie.
Tank Girl. No one liked that movie when it came out. I left the theater with the biggest grin on my face. Absolutely awesome. Still one of my favorites.
It was completely different than the comics but it was still very fun. Especially in 1995.
Possibly Stings best villian. I love that film.
You’re not supposed to watch it sober.
You’re not supposed to watch all of it; you’re supposed to be noisily and lewdly snogging your date through most of it.
I’ll have to remember that; I only saw it just after its release and don’t remember being anything other than indifferent. I’ve never read the comic though; the author/artist of the comic is part of the duo of the Gorillas, correct?
Rotten Tomatoes has both a critic score and an audience score.
If your pick has a low critic score but high audience score, that means it was formulaic or unoriginal but probably lots of fun.
Movies with a high critic score and low audience score are usually more artsy, film-festival stuff.
deleted by creator
Ha ha!
At first glance none of the critics we’re fans of the original TV show so they thought the adaptation waa harmless fun. Reviewers who we’re fans of the original show hates it.
we’re = we are
You mean were
Meh, it depends. I don’t use either as a solid indicator of anything because Morbius fits your first description and that movie was hot ass. Same with 2016 Suicide Squad and the Mortal Kombat reboot. All of those movies had low or mixed critic scores with moderately high to high audience scores and they all suck.
Morbius isn’t a great one to point at as an example where this rule of thumb fails because the reviews were brigaded. It was a huge meme and would have been flooded with meme user reviews.
Mortal Kombat was a fun movie, and exactly fits the description. The whole plot is basically a series of setups for characters to fight, and characters are a bit one-dimensional, which is exactly what we all want from Mortal Kombat movies.
Mortal Kombat was fucking amazing dude.
Nah. It STARTED out amazing in the first act with subzero and scorpion in the Japanese village, but once that scene is over, the entire second act drags and is by far the biggest act in the movie. Then when things finally start picking up again in the third act, its almost over. Plus theres stupid stuff like Subzero speaking english in 1400 japan when he was speaking chinese for the majority of the film and then a little japanese plus much more. I guess it wasn’t absolutely horrible, but definitely not amazing.
The second act is when Kano talks the most which makes it the best act.
Which then it’s bogged down by cole young, who shouldn’t have been the human surrogate for the audience. Honestly, it should’ve been Kano, which would’ve improved this movie by a lot.
I support any opinion that results in me seeing more Kano
Hook with it’s 29% tomatometer rating. Dustin Hoffman—sexual misconduct allegations aside—fucking nailed it as Hook, and I think the general concept of an adult Peter Pan returning was pretty cool. Also, who doesn’t love Robin Williams? It was a movie I loved in my childhood so I am absolutely biased, but 29% seems absurd. I still find the “Don’t try to stop me, Smee” scene hilarious to this day.
I feel like the for xkcd question using audience score makes it a harder problem.
I’m surprised that Hook has a 29% tomato rating but it does have a 76% Audience score. So it’s more liking something that critics hate instead of something everyone hates.
It’s a classic that maintains that status across multiple generations, so 29% is a bit of a joke. I guess if you view it from the POV of a haughty film critic, but c’mon.
I, Robot, especially after reading the books. It functions as a combo of the books, but set roughly where the first book took place in, using a variant of the protagonist from the sequels. The robots taking over as they did, though, wasn’t really accurate, even just regarding the laws of robotics, but it worked for the movie’s conflict. In the books, they get a larger hold on humanity, but to help them go past Earth to become an intragalactic society. For a one-off, though, I can see the directions the movie took to give it that close-ended feeling. Also, the implications of robots and humans, and Spooner as a chracter were pretty faithful to the source material, IMO.
On the topic of Isaac Asimov stories on the big screen, I nominate Bicentennial man. 36% critic and 59% audience score respectively.
I thought it did a good with the themes it brought forth and Asimovs testing of the types of conflicts that would occur with Robots gaining sentience and humanity seeing them as just machines.
Despite the one event near the end that would create a conflict with the laws of Robotics and the effect it should have on a positronic brain.
Also James Horner’s awesome soundtrack.
I would have never guessed Bicentennial Man would have scores that low. It’s a great scifi and a really well made movie.
At worst, it sacrifices a strong ending for telling a complete scifi story, which many scifi movies do. (And I believe was the right call.)
I would say the only thing the movie has in common with the book is that it mentions the book’s main character and the laws of robotics. The book is all about weird behavior of robots that actually obey the laws but the movie just treats them as some corporate doublespeak.
Yeah, I don’t think Spooner is identical to Elijah Baley, but I see they connect on the technophobe aspects, if nothing else. It’s been a while since I’ve read the books, in other aspects they’re probably vastly different.
The main character in I, Robot is Dr. Susan Calvin. It also features Donovan and Powell. Elijah is from the robot trilogy, which happens centuries after I, Robot.
“The Caves of Steel” is very much part of the “I Robot” storyline, and not an important distinction here. I also expected Dr Susan Calvin, but when talking about what we actually got, it’s closest to an adaptation of the R. Daneel trilogy.
And anyway, on Asimov’s average scale, those years are right next to eachother. /s
Following the XKCD rules and keeping it in the 2000s and later makes it a lot harder. I could make an entire list of '90s movies that qualify.
But my answer is: Pitch Black.
Bonus answer, which doesn’t quite qualify because it has an exact 60% rating: Love (2011, the space one)
Boondock Saints (Nov 99 is close enough). It’s such a fun movie, but only has a 27%
