Which side is incorrect about the movie, the critics or the audience?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
Which side is incorrect about the movie, the critics or the audience?
high audience score and low critic score is always a recipe for pure kino
Fbpb
more like recipe for normalgay trash like Uncharted, for mainstream films relying on any scores is stupid, the critics are either paid off or the normalhomosexuals gobble up the most generic trash possible
for non mainstream films the kino formula is critic praise and audience getting filtered
but never rely on RT, they stuff their critic database with everybody they can, they got fricking Nostalgia Critic in there
>for non mainstream films the kino formula is critic praise and audience getting filtered
Then you get pretentious boring schlock
filtered
most of this was probably because the Knight was played by the pajeet
the film was okay but like a 6/10
are you moronic
this vexes me
Yes
this isn't how their rating works
they present the ratio of people who consider a movie at least passable, not the quality score
i know how RT works, I mean the score is low on the audience because many complained about the casting of the main character
RT is an overall stupid site with a stupid concept, the % score means not much as the film could be a 100% with all the scores being 6/10 to 7/10 and 0% with all the scores being 5/10
You were saying
How is this emaciated body impressive?
Yes
Thanks for proving his point.
Post example that don't comply to this rule.
Whitey gtfo
Sexy tamil chads we won
>lets give him white features to make him more palatable
>gets pummelled by a 5’6 woman in hand to hand combat, gives up and just leaves the film
he was also simping for a girl he didn't even see and merely heard being talked about
This is a Sexy tamil chad appreciation thread now
Based honorable bros. They can never take our honor away from us.
Indeed.
fpwp
everyone knows its low audience + low critic score = kino
Audience score is always driven by bots. Trust the critics.
Critics score is always driven by direct or indirect payola by the studios. Trust the audience.
you guys are gays. just trust your gut. you are your own best indicator that any given piece of media will be suitable to your taste.
The ultimate goy.
>Critics: NOOOOOOOO!!! ITS NOT EVERYTHING TO ALL PEOPLE!! IT DOESNT JIVE WITH MY BACKGROUND IN FILM ACADEMIA! THERES NOT ENOUGH REPRESENTATION AND IT DOESNT PASS THE BECHDEL TEST!!!
Audience: The Goose is loose! Hahah
Both, always
the truth is somewhere inbetween
a solid 7
goosebros..
the layman, i don't value the opinion of some homosexual that is paid to sniff their own farts.
>Russo brothers
It’s shit. You, Me, and Dupree Man
I always imagine critics are leftists and audience are reddit using leftists. Does anyone based review movies?
Pretty much feel the same way, I just go on Cinemaphile or talk to movie friends.
the villain is a black man and the protagonist is a white man, to them it's white supremacy the film. If you took the same script made the villain white and the protagonist black this would be 95% certified fresh.
Armond White
High audience/low critic means it's probably a "fun" movie. The trick here is it fun kino like Die Hard or moron schlock like Fast and Furious.
High critic/low audience means it's probably an artistic film. The trick here is it a good story well made or is it pretentious navel gazing homosexualry.
The one wrench in the gears here is if it is politically motivated. That can change scores drastically and steer away from the general high/low rules.
>High critic/low audience means it's probably an artistic film.
Wrong, it's a film filled to the brim with Black folk and/or trannies
High audience and low critic typically means the alt-left got mad about something and are trying to get it canceled.
>chad super competent white male protagonist
>chad super competent white male sub villain
>secondary protagonist is an attractive white woman who beats up the token pajeet
>attractive Asian woman in the film (number one roastie aggravator)
>main villain is black
I wonder who could possibly be revved…
Asian woman in the film (number one roastie aggravator)
Kek.
>secondary protagonist is an attractive latina woman who beats up the token pajeet
ftfy, but also
>plot revolves around saving and protecting the white girl teen
Ana de Arnas is a Spaniard. She's European, not some native mutt.
She literally has green eyes
>main villain is a black chud incel
>pajeet is adamant about never hurting women under any circumstances
What did the Russo’s mean by this?
>attractive Asian woman in the film (number one roastie aggravator)
This meme has no basis in reality. Also, If I'm even seen talking to a black man in a friendly manner, it's you losers who start experiencing an panic attack.
>Actually, I’m so UNbothered and NOT fuming at the sight of an attractive Asian woman that I specifically need to go out of my way to tell you that I’m not. Okay???
Post breasts or gtfo white roastie
Ha. I'm not even trying to flex right now, but it's just a brute fact that white women are the most desirable group of women on this planet. Black, Brown, Asian...it doesn't matter, if they're dating outside their race, they're most likely imagining a white woman as their dream girl. The only ppl that gush over asian women are unattractive white men that spent their HS years jerking off to cartoons rather than having a healthy social life.
the sight of Jessica Henwick has literally made you unhinged
Is she half asian/white? She looks closer to eastern european than asian
So you admit you're a White woman?
you will never be a woman
in the name of your ancestors kys
even without being buried in woke shit it was still trash, a billion quips and a cliche story. easy to tell it had capeshit directors.
I agree with critics. It's just a mediocre movie not more not less. But I was glad to see Gosling with de Armas again
Low critic score just means there is not enough Black folk and homosexuals in it.
Do I even bother downloading this new Goose Personality (Goosonality)
Yes, it’s an upgrade of the blade runner personality. It’s essentially the BR2049 personality with added charisma and people liking you DLC
The main message of the film didn’t make any sense. It’s just “the public sector is good, private sector are the bad guys because they have no rules or regulations.” It couldn’t be any further from the truth irl, I just think the Russobros are moronic and lazy
>public sector is good
lolwut, Chris Evans was literally hired by the glowoids because goose was about to expose how corrupt they were
Yea but that was only Denny Carmichael, who was taking orders from the Old Man (allegory for Israel?). The main focus of the movie is how ebil the private sector is while ignoring the fact that there’s a shadow leader controlling the CIA, which I think they mentioned only once
The Private Sector is evil.
More so than the public sector of national security? they’re the lesser of two evils if anything
I watched it and it was entertaining enough, a decent Bourne-type movie. I'm not a fan of Gosling at all but the character he is playing is an emotionless CIA hitman which does a good job of hiding that he can't emote. Chris Evans as the villain steals the movie, he is basically playing moral-less Captain America while retaining the optimistic attitude and easy charisma, his scenes are worth the price of admission alone. Ana de Armas isn't the typical Bond eye candy, she has enough training to keep up with both Gosling and Evans.
The private sector mercenary hired by that same public-sector CIA to clean up their own mess? I'm not seeing how you that was the takeaway from this when the movie is beating you over the head that the *CIA* is dirty and will bend and break the rules whenever needed. There is even a bit of a twist ending where the one CIA operative you think might be worth a damn is just as crooked as the rest
this. Chris Evans and Goose are having an honourable warrior’s fight to the death and the glowie just walks up and executes him and then blackmails goose. The point was that Evans was just a dog they used for their own aims and got rid of him when they no longer needed him
Yeah I chose my words poorly sorry anon, I was typing this on the go. I don’t think the public sector was being portrayed as good necessarily, it was more that they were using a contractor to do the rule breaking (shooting police of allied country and bombing Margaret Cahill’s home for example) as if they wouldn’t just do it themselves. Maybe I’m missing that they intentionally used a contractor as a fall guy from the start, but if that wasn’t the case I just had a problem with that
>Which side is incorrect
Truthfully, you never know.
If an audience hates a movie, it might be because they're a bunch of smoothbrains who thought it was too slow or confusing.
Or, the audience could all hate it for very reasonable reasons, and the (positive) critics are just being a bunch of pretentious asshats.
Critics are often driven by identity politics or social stigma and they often speak for a very, very limited group of people from one specific sub-set of people (inner city, high wealth and or status or leaning toward left leaning social politics with little experience in anything outside of their social bubbles).
Audiences however are largely less intelligent and find generic "capeshit" good. That being said, their enjoyment often comes from a place of sincere honesty with no real ulterior motive to the type of shows they watch and won't hesitate to call out utter bullshit or political pandering. They also have people from all over the world and all walks of life, meaning you're going to get a more grounded answer to whether something is good or not.
As such, despite audiences generally being less intelligent, I'll still trust their opinions more than any "professional" midwit Critic obsessed with appearing intelligent or appealing to a select group.
It's not a PERFECT way to discern 'kino' and there will always be outliers, but it's better than nothing.
I don't fricking get this.
Stop, just stop using these sites, and RT espeically. Opinions vary, the critics are often paid off or political, while the audience is stupid and also political but in reverse. If you really need someone else to tell you about the film find some critic you agree most often with and follow him, you can also watch films of directors you think are good.
Was anyone else highly disappointed by the action scenes in most of the movie? They were intentionally blurry, choppy, and hard to follow due to the heavy reliance on CGI. The parachute scene was just a barley recognizable blur. I was able to get the gist what was occurring but it was still absurd to follow. The air plane scene and the opening action scene felt the same.
a bit yeah. it was trying real hard to be cantonese kung fu shit but clearly they didn't have the right choreographer.
It was action schlock but I enjoyed it. It’s no drive or only god forgives, but it was fun and I’d watch a sequel. It was a little over the top and stupid in places and it’s clichéd and tropey as frick. But all I wanted was gosling being a badass, nice watches, and violence. It delivered all that and an Arthur Schopenhauer quote. Also considering it was Netflix it could have been a lot lot worse. Take it for what it is: just a fun dumb movie with all of us literally in it
depends on if the critics are being leftist homosexuals or not
>90%
I wonder why people like it
>Critic reviews of the past:
>A person well educated in film does their best to give a balanced opinion on the merits of the movie so audiences can decide for themselves if it's something they'd be interested in.
>Critic reviews of today:
>An uneducated political partisan determines whether or not the movie includes rightthink or wrongthink and then demands the audience see movies that include the right messaging and forbids them from seeing movies that include the wrong messaging. No consideration is given to quality or enjoyment for the audience.
50% of critics and 10% of audience are wrong
>This is a Sexy tamil chad appreciation thread now
Starlight curried
Whitey cucked
Sexy Tamil chads can't stop winning
the critics. this is some goofy fun. I wouldn't call it kino though, this is flick tier.
The correct score is the average between the critic and audience score so it should be 70. Good action flick but nothing special
>Which side is incorrect
It's not that all critics are homosexuals. It's that they weight the scores in favour of the critics who are homosexuals.
Plus, about 90% of them are homosexuals.
>Poojeet beats 6 and his waifu in 2v1.
>Poojeet doesn't needlessly kill police or innocent people to escape.
>Poojeet beats waifu in 1v1 after getting blown up by her.
Kinda surprised they didn't get the poojeet from the Chris Hemsworth movie to play the role, would have been more believable.
>Poojeet beats waifu in 1v1
She nearly strangles him to death and once he manages to break free he runs away kek
We Tamils view women as weaker sex
You whitey view themselves as women
We are not the same they/them
Weren't they both strangling each other at the same time? She managed to get a second rope around his neck until he freed himself too. Sadly though he did indeed do the needful for she.
he was loosing but by chance found a knife nearby
>somehow loses a purely physical strength based literal tug of war with a woman and has to abort
Kek what a redpilled movie
Bow tf down to Don kokki kumar
He doesn't know Giga tamil chad danush
>Kinda surprised they didn't get the poojeet from the Chris Hemsworth movie to play the role
>Was produced by the Russos too.
They love their kung fu indians as much as they love knife flipping from one hand to the other mid combat.
looks shit tbf
Russo Brothers are fricking hacks and everything they touch is pleb-tier industry-killing garbage
This, they tried making a John wick action movie and failed epicly
I don't see how they failed to make a shit movie
The film has literally zero gun fu you fricking zoomer
Films where people shoot at each other have existed before John Wick
King of gun fu danush
WHITE PEOPLE BAD
Pros:
Goose going all-out action star with cheesy but enjoyable banter
Evans steals every scene as he hams it up as the villain
Kino scene where Ana de Armas becomes a one-man army and storms a compound with a rocket launcher
Kino 1v1 MGS4 style fight between Evans and Goose
Cons:
Poor direction
Overuse of drone shots that make things look CGI
Cliched as frick
The entire movie is moot if the bad guys ended up with the mcguffin anyway
t. spoilers don't matter because you're not watching this for the plot
Ana going MGS speedrun mode strapped to the teeth with RPGs and grenade launchers was the most kino part of the film
The noob tube multikills and crossmaps were certified kino
Pros
>Danush
Cons
>Not enough danush
>No ana de armas danush sex scene
Critcs are paid moron homosexuals. The audience score is all that matters.
I'd add that there were some very interesting cinematography shots, at least early in the movie, that I wasn't expecting from what is otherwise just a servicable popcorn movie.
>Which side is incorrect about the movie, the critics or the audience?
its a mixed bag in a case like this the critics are probably right the movie is meh but because its Ryan Gosling its being meme'd to hell by all the discordgays who highjacked the meme. But there are genuine cases where good films get lambasted by "critics" like the Thing. Easiest way to tell is if a movie has a pop culture or meme culture relevance then don't trust either scores but if its a more obscure movie the ratings are probably a good indication of where it actually sits in quality even if one side has a significantly lower/higher score.
Why are you guys dickriding this shitty Russo bros film?
>why is a board that has been literally obsessed with multiple actors in the film for years now dickriding the film
It’s the newest instalment of the daily Goose and ADA posting.
neither
movies are so pozzed now that being non-pozzed makes a movie automatically good in the eyes of normies
this isn't a good thing before you morons start rejoicing
it means the israelites won because now the standards are set at an all time low
the overton window has shifted to demonic standards
picrel is the future of "based & redpilled" standards
for morons who can't conceptualize
in the future the most pozzed movies of today will be considered kino by normies
had to spell it out for the brain damaged zoomers
Who was the old man?
The CIA boss who is going to be the big bad of the inevitable sequel The Gray Man II: 50 Shades of Gray
There's no "incorrect" side. Audience RT scores are usually higher than critic scores because critics
1) care about all aspects of a film
2) aren't guaranteed to be the target audience
perfect example is Transformers. The audience is a bunch of young men/boys who love watching giant robot action, don't care about story so much. They're more likely to have the opinion that the story doesn't matter, but the action was awesome. Either that or they weren't scrutinizing it enough to critique it. And that's fine, it's just important to realize why these scores are different.
Stop looking at RT scores to validate your own opinion. 1 out of 2 critics didn't like the movie, that has nothing to do with whether you should like it.
>critics
>caring about a film
>at all
wow you're a fricking moron
critics don't watch movies, they just take bribes to give shit a rubber stamp
No critic has given an actual review of a movie in decades
The movie really isn't very good.
who cares about rating sites anyway?
you cant rate a work of art or enterteinment with a arbitrary score system like these
they should actually create a sistematic for score for technical and objective things and then use it for critical scoring so we know what the critics objectivelly analyzed
then have a user scoring that is divided in fun-not fun.
the problem with RT is that you can only rate it as rotten or fresh but if you just check the numbers a 50+ audience score means it's enjoyable. 50+ critic score means it's shot well enough. There are exceptions where obvious shills are in play but you just have to trust your gut on that one. read a couple of fresh scores if it says anything about disenfranchised people get away from it as far as possible.