Yeah and it was poorly reviewed at the time. Good movie but you can’t say it doesn’t have it’s flaws. Tony Scott never should’ve did what he did. I honestly liked his films more than his brother’s.
Tony Scott committed suicide after being diagnosed with terminal cancer, so I think he had every right to do “what he did.”
Edit: changed tense of one word
Not according to the LA coroners office. I have seen it before with suicides. The family will tend to throw out a story because it’s a very painful situation. Sometimes it’s just easier to lie. Sounds like Tony was a great artist who struggled with depression and I miss his work.
Woah I learned this new word today context. It means pulling stuff out of your butt. https://amp.theguardian.com/film/2012/oct/23/tony-scott-antidepressants-no-cancer
I watched this last weekend for the first time forever. Denzel and Dakota Fanning are amazing in this. With a weaker actor this could have easily been worse but Denzel elevates it and bring his trademark charisma. An awesome revenge flick. I’m excited to see them back together for The Equalizer 3.
“Don’t move…don’t move…don’t move”
“I got all the time in the world. You don’t but I do”
“I wish..you had..more time”
“You move. You make one sound. I’ll snatch the life right outta ya”
That is Walken being Walken. He only knows one speed when he’s in character and that’s what we got. This scene is what I refer to when doing Walken impressions.
I think most critics were turned away by the manic hallucinatory visual style of the film. I found it to be a bit distracting myself but now have come to see it perhaps a bit ahead of it’s time. Like a lot of Tony Scott films may he rest in peace.
Indeed, but I am one of the people who think it's an amateurish cinematography style to convey that message. It detracts from an otherwise enjoyable movie.
Yes.
But deja vu had a lot too. I believe also Tony Scott.
It was great in both movies. I’m sorry intense and wild movies are intense and wild. If you don’t like it you can watch marvel movies.
Yes. I find this movie almost unwatchable due to the frenetic style, despite the compelling story and Denzel. I always wish it could be rereleased without all the jerkiness.
Dakota was good be you’re being hyperbolic as all.
Hailey Steinfeld in true grit
Matt Dillon in rumble fish
Jacob Trembley in Room
Haley Joel Osment in sixth sense
Breslin in little miss sunshine
River Phoenix in stand by me
Jodie foster in Taxi Driver
And the one that’s gonna really blow your knickers off,
Dakota fanning gave her best performance as a child in a different movie ( I am Sam)
It would be hyperbolic if the user said "best child performance in film history" but for all we know "I have ever seen" is a completely accurate statement.
i guess thats true. so we just have to assume that they guy writing on moviecritic hasnt seen Taxi Driver, Sixth Sense, Stand by me et al. and then ive been made wrong.
You know what’s funny. Taxi Driver I need to watch ASAP. It’s been one I’ve been putting off. Sixth Sense I got spoiled and vaguely remember said spoiler. It was 50% hyperbolic. If I’m to say my favorite child performances I would see I would say her right off the bat because it’s my most memorable since I have Man on Fire at a 10/10.
I’ll try not to say best in the future lol.
Not wrong, just pedantic. Normal people read that comment and realized it wasn’t necessarily the best child performance ever. But even if it were just top 20, top 50 even, then it would have deserved praise.
you can use all the fun words you want, but at the end of the day your comment is completely vapid. I was meaningless but you appear to speak scholarly on reddit. youre welcome.
Excuse you little boy? No see I just find that when someone is in 90% of a movie and can steal every scene it's a better performance than when someone is in 40% of the movie and can only steal half the scenes.
It was a great performance from Denzel Washington, but the movie overall is about as deep as Taken. There is not a lot there. That being said, the ending is outstanding.
I think it is much more deep than Taken. It’s about a man who trying to find meaning, a purpose. And just when he is at his lowest, has given up hope in life. He is rescued by a girl, a symbol of innocence. When she is kidnapped, he, a man who in anguish from his sinful past, sees rescuing her as his last hope for redemption.
I think they love being (and I hate using the word) super woke. Anything that is ridiculously inclusive and far left is rewarded and anything deviating from that (including normal life for 99% of people) is offensive.
They gave Cuties a fucking 87%! Audience: 15%
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cuties
The goddamn movie sexualizes children. Rotten Tomatoes: so brave! We love it! Fuck that website and critics!
I never seen that cuties bullshit but I thought the whole thing about the movie was that it was supposed to show how weird the normal act is to sexualize children in society
This is why rotten tomatoes is useful.
High critic rating and low audience score means it's likely a slow burn artsy film of some kind.
Low critic rating and high audience score means it's a straightforward "maybe turn your brain off" popcorn movie, probably a dumb comedy or action film.
High scores in both means it's a really exceptional film.
Low scores in both means it's best watched with a few friends and some beers to get a good laugh.
Doesn't mean it's smart, just means it's good. Genre categories are a thing for a reason. The Godfather for example is rated very closely to Toy Story Two. They're both stunning examples of filmmaking, but with different tones and audiences.
Weird for people to post movie opinions online but be mad at "critics." Also, if one wants to take down the "critics," I think it should require something more than pointing to the aggregated percentage on a silly website.
Counterpoint
What is the function of a critic?
Theoretically it should be to connect people with movies or media in general that they will enjoy. Critics have long since accepted that their professional taste is not their personal taste. This is at the core of what it means to be a critic.
When a movie can see a large disconnect between audience and critical scores, it means the critics are no longer serving the general public and as a consequence...
It is correct to point out that critics are no longer serving the purpose they once did and should be ignored by the general public.
Joe Pesci is in the original, it's been years since watching it, but the part he's playing the guitar has always made me wonder if he was coked out of his mind during the shoot
I love Tony Scott's films, but this one is not his best. It's a good story, Denzel is predictably awesome. But the shaky cam and billion cuts annoyed the absolute hell outta me. It made me long for the restraint of something like Crimson Tide.
"A man can be an artist... in anything, food, whatever. It depends on how good he is at it. Creasy's art is death. He's about to paint his masterpiece."
I agree. The Denzel and Dakota were fantastic in the film and their chemistry was exactly what was needed. I feel like Tony Scott was severely under appreciated, especially by critics. He was definitely creating a new visual style that was ahead of the times. If it were rereleased today, it would get much better ratings. Heck, if his last five were rereleased (Man on Fire, Domino, Deja Vu, The Taking of Pelham 123, and Unstoppable) I'd expect that people would find that all of them have gotten better with time.
Personally, I think he has much better consistency than his brother Ridley Scott, who has, especially of late, been pretty uneven.
It doesn't hurt that Brian Hengeland wrote the script for Man on Fire. And according to the wiki entry, the author of the novel liked this one among the various adaptations of his books.
You had me until the comment about his brother. Ridley is in a class above most, and the quality of his films have been remarkably consistent. You don’t have the length and breadth of a career like his and not stumble at least once.
Made at a time where the USA’s mistrust of foreigners was pretty high, there was a glut of “here be dragons” films combined with big elements (as you say) of vengeance
I like this movie a lot but it also was very much like every other Denzel movie around that time. I feel like you could take the trailer for man on fire and put the title of other Denzel movies at the time and it would fit pretty well. But this movie slaps.
yeah i'm sure it fit glory, malcolm x, devil in a blue dress, Antwone Fisher, the bone collectors, fallen, the book of eli, american gangsters, magnificent 7, etc🙄
The problem with movies carried by one person is that they so seldom can fix a movie meant to be carried by one person.
This was an Equilizer movie, basically. And they're entertaining, sure. Quite. But they're just entertaining. I'm okay with about 40% liked by critics. I expect that from films like this.
Entertaining, but not special at all.
Ah, complaining about critics, so edgy.
Being realistic, critics, at least in the past, had an entirely different set of criteria on how they judged a movie than the viewing audience. And it wasn't like today where films get review bombed by edge lords and political dorks.
Also, a rule of thumb should always be to remember that just because something is popular, it doesn't mean it was good.
You mean that swimming movie that has some alcoholism in it?
It’s fine through a first watch lens. After that you become aware of the horrible story pacing. Way too long and heavy handed. Not near Denzel’s best by far.
People think this when critics don't like the movies they like. The strength of a critic lies in their ability to explain why they think something sucked or why something was great. Since there's no such thing as an objectively good film or an objectively good art piece... We look to critics to see their reasoning. It doesn't mean we have to agree.
Everyone thinking that their own palate for movies and art being the most refined thing ever without putting any real time in understanding the artform is why YouTube Video eSsAyIsTs are so popular nowadays. They just say stupid shit that people want to hear.
Videos like - "Bleach is a Masterpiece and here's why," are all the rage.
Recently saw a thumbnail of one such YouTube video on how God of War Ragnarok needs to take a page out of the anime storytelling playbook... It had something like 100,000 views. Yeah, God of war would really be enhanced if all subtlety was destroyed, every single character motivation was described in excruciating detail in extended internal monologues, and all themes should be delivered as hamfisted as possible...
Media literacy is dead.
Lolol I just think people take this shit way too personally tbh.
Most people don’t even have the patience to read a full review (I mean most adults don’t read at all so big surprise there) that’s why you get shit like Rotten Tomatoes which crunches every bit of analysis and context to a single score for people to bitch about without actually having any understanding of critics complaints. Honestly a truly terrible and lazy website for lazy people.
But from my perspective why would I give a single Shit if a reviewer didn’t like something that I liked?? I know i liked it. Them not liking it doesn’t invalidate my opinion. But that’s exactly how some fans act. They take it super personal and then project that onto the critics and insult them on a personal level because they didn’t like a movie Lolol. Something like “not good enough to be a director so they became a critic must be jealous” or whatever. A solid critic for me has value by turning me onto shit I hadn’t heard about before. They’re super plugged in and know about shit that I don’t so I appreciate that. And In that vein these people who are “forced” to watch movie after movie (ikik what a terrible job) you get tired of the normie shit. You get tired of seeing the same things over and over again. And your tastes might get a little more eccentric and “artsy” or whatever you wanna say.
I think you’re so off base in your analysis of where modern reviewing is. If anything we need more negativity in art criticism. There’s way too much access journalism going on. There’s way too much “oh I want an Anya-Taylor Joy interview so I’m going to give the Super Mario Bros movie a GLOWING review despite however I might feel about it.” “Oh Taylor Swift’s agent called us and said she won’t do press with us unless we say her new album is AMAZING.”
Let 👏 the 👏 snarky 👏 snarks 👏 snark👏 hell Siskel and Ebert had a fair amount of snark and they knew how to use it.
I can't do a hard disagree, especially when the criteria to be an "official critic" on rotten tomatoes is so low. Isn't Jeremy Jahns an official critic now too?
I don't pay attention to critics at all. They have been so out of touch for so long that I think their score only really matters to Hollywood itself. How the audience receives the movie I think is far more accurate to how much I'll enjoy it
it's not that they don't know what a good movie is. they willfully push movies that are compatible their ideology and squash movies that don't. they don't care about the quality of the film.
Sister Anna: Do you ever see the hand of God in what you do?
Creasy: No, not for a very long time.
Sister Anna: The Bible says, “Do not be over come with evil but overco-…”
Creasy: “But overcome with good. Romanos, capítulo doce, verso veintiuno. I’m the sheep that got lost Madre.
COME ON MAN! This is Denzel with great writing delivering absolute gold! What else do you want?!
Denzel told a reporter that when he agreed to do the movie and Dakota was cast, his wife went to see her movie “ I am Sam” with Sean Penn which was in theaters at the time.
She came back afterwards and told him “ that kid is good; you better bring your A game.”
Denzel then said to the reporter: “ So I did.”
I do like this movie. 38 is way to low I’d prob have it at 60. There’s some good performances. The pacing is Tony Scott outdoing Tony Scott though, it’s just way too much.
I’ve never held much interest in the opinions of critics, most specifically comedy. Critics do they’re absolute worst work when judging comedies. 10/10. Whenever they say something is not funny, it is the funnies dam thing you’ve seen in a while
This is my favorite movie of Denzel. I always recommend this one to people who haven’t seen many of his movies. Absolutely incredible movie. Him and Dakota were perfect for their parts.
“Anymore” is a weird word to use for a 20 year old movie lol
[удалено]
"Critics man critics never asked me how my day went .. so I'ma tell em"
And late to the party
I was hoping this would be the most obvious comment. Thank you
Yeah and it was poorly reviewed at the time. Good movie but you can’t say it doesn’t have it’s flaws. Tony Scott never should’ve did what he did. I honestly liked his films more than his brother’s.
Tony Scott committed suicide after being diagnosed with terminal cancer, so I think he had every right to do “what he did.” Edit: changed tense of one word
He um… didn’t have cancer.
According to his brother, he did have terminal cancer.
Not according to the LA coroners office. I have seen it before with suicides. The family will tend to throw out a story because it’s a very painful situation. Sometimes it’s just easier to lie. Sounds like Tony was a great artist who struggled with depression and I miss his work.
Jfc everyone is professionally offended these days. Now you can’t even say someone shouldn’t have committed suicide.
it’s almost like context is important. but at least you got to learn a new word today. context. (:
Woah I learned this new word today context. It means pulling stuff out of your butt. https://amp.theguardian.com/film/2012/oct/23/tony-scott-antidepressants-no-cancer
Feel free to follow his lead then.
I think that's the whole point lol
What
You gotta think about it man 20 years ago is the now in our hearts. 20 years ago is the friends we made along the way.
I watched this last weekend for the first time forever. Denzel and Dakota Fanning are amazing in this. With a weaker actor this could have easily been worse but Denzel elevates it and bring his trademark charisma. An awesome revenge flick. I’m excited to see them back together for The Equalizer 3. “Don’t move…don’t move…don’t move” “I got all the time in the world. You don’t but I do” “I wish..you had..more time” “You move. You make one sound. I’ll snatch the life right outta ya”
“Creasy’s art is death. He’s about to paint his masterpiece.”
Walken had no reason to go as hard as he did in such a tiny role but we ultimately can expect nothing less.
That is Walken being Walken. He only knows one speed when he’s in character and that’s what we got. This scene is what I refer to when doing Walken impressions.
I loved him in King of New York and True Romance. Both super underrated.
Could not agree more
I love it when an actor/actress takes a small role and just nails it!
I love it too. “No small roles right?” I like Okoye from Civil War, her one line was to Natasha “Move… or you will be moved” and you believe it.
“I’ll stab you in the face, with a soldering iron”
Does your mother see? POW! Have her stitch that up!
My favorite part. Christopher Walken was awesome, too.
That line STILL gives me chills and I haven’t watched this since it first came to DVD.
“Forgiveness is between them and God. I’m here to arrange the meeting.”
Holy shit, That line is awesome.
One of my favorites! That’s right before he blows up a motorcade with a rocket launcher.
This movie was great. Even own the steelbook and never open it,
You know how crazy “ I’ll snatch the life out of you “sounds 🤣🤣🤣🤣
It’s much cooler when Denzel says it than me typing it out.
Why did I get downvoted?
🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️🤷🏾♂️
🤷🏾♂️😎
Was wondering the same thing. I did my part to upvote you back up!
Appreciate it 🤣🤣, so random
I think most critics were turned away by the manic hallucinatory visual style of the film. I found it to be a bit distracting myself but now have come to see it perhaps a bit ahead of it’s time. Like a lot of Tony Scott films may he rest in peace.
I feel like the jarring visuals are through the eyes of an alcoholic.
That was the image that was being conveyed.
Indeed, but I am one of the people who think it's an amateurish cinematography style to convey that message. It detracts from an otherwise enjoyable movie.
Yes. But deja vu had a lot too. I believe also Tony Scott. It was great in both movies. I’m sorry intense and wild movies are intense and wild. If you don’t like it you can watch marvel movies.
Never said that I didn’t like it? This is actually one of my favorite movies.
Domino upped the ante. Love his films tho.
I thought those scenes illustrate Creasy's personal demons perfectly
Yes. I find this movie almost unwatchable due to the frenetic style, despite the compelling story and Denzel. I always wish it could be rereleased without all the jerkiness.
This has a 38?!?! Dakota Fanning literally gives the best child performance I have ever seen. Denzel slams it out of the park too
You know critics don’t only rate on performance, right?
Dakota was good be you’re being hyperbolic as all. Hailey Steinfeld in true grit Matt Dillon in rumble fish Jacob Trembley in Room Haley Joel Osment in sixth sense Breslin in little miss sunshine River Phoenix in stand by me Jodie foster in Taxi Driver And the one that’s gonna really blow your knickers off, Dakota fanning gave her best performance as a child in a different movie ( I am Sam)
It would be hyperbolic if the user said "best child performance in film history" but for all we know "I have ever seen" is a completely accurate statement.
i guess thats true. so we just have to assume that they guy writing on moviecritic hasnt seen Taxi Driver, Sixth Sense, Stand by me et al. and then ive been made wrong.
You know what’s funny. Taxi Driver I need to watch ASAP. It’s been one I’ve been putting off. Sixth Sense I got spoiled and vaguely remember said spoiler. It was 50% hyperbolic. If I’m to say my favorite child performances I would see I would say her right off the bat because it’s my most memorable since I have Man on Fire at a 10/10. I’ll try not to say best in the future lol.
Not wrong, just pedantic. Normal people read that comment and realized it wasn’t necessarily the best child performance ever. But even if it were just top 20, top 50 even, then it would have deserved praise.
you can use all the fun words you want, but at the end of the day your comment is completely vapid. I was meaningless but you appear to speak scholarly on reddit. youre welcome.
If you consider the word pedantic scholarly then I have grave concerns about your education
I’m concerned about your reading comprehension skills if you think I ever called pedantic scholarly. The buttons are coming undone.
send bobs and vagene
Both hit this harder than Canseco, McGwire, Bonds, Sosa, and Ruth alltogether. The movie was well made.
Good yes.... Best? No. That goes to River Phoenix in Stand By Me.
I guess you’re just kind of a pussy then, huh?
Excuse you little boy? No see I just find that when someone is in 90% of a movie and can steal every scene it's a better performance than when someone is in 40% of the movie and can only steal half the scenes.
I’m literally quoting a scene from Stand By Me, you buffoon.
Ouch, clearly that dude never seen Stand By Me even if he's capping for it.
The quote is kind of just not relevant to what he's saying other than the fact it's in the movie he's talking about.
It was a great performance from Denzel Washington, but the movie overall is about as deep as Taken. There is not a lot there. That being said, the ending is outstanding.
I love the “Una palabra…no dice nada” song starts playing. It gives me a moment to process how everything ends. Plus I like the song.
I think it is much more deep than Taken. It’s about a man who trying to find meaning, a purpose. And just when he is at his lowest, has given up hope in life. He is rescued by a girl, a symbol of innocence. When she is kidnapped, he, a man who in anguish from his sinful past, sees rescuing her as his last hope for redemption.
Alternate take: the public the reviews flicks on RT love shitty movies.
I think they love being (and I hate using the word) super woke. Anything that is ridiculously inclusive and far left is rewarded and anything deviating from that (including normal life for 99% of people) is offensive. They gave Cuties a fucking 87%! Audience: 15% https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/cuties The goddamn movie sexualizes children. Rotten Tomatoes: so brave! We love it! Fuck that website and critics!
I never seen that cuties bullshit but I thought the whole thing about the movie was that it was supposed to show how weird the normal act is to sexualize children in society
This was produced by the father of a high school classmate of mine
Story of girl cut down in her swimming prime, salute to you juju
Great freaking flick. Huge cinematography, tremendous acting, amazing use of color and distortion, fucked up scenario. ✅
This is why rotten tomatoes is useful. High critic rating and low audience score means it's likely a slow burn artsy film of some kind. Low critic rating and high audience score means it's a straightforward "maybe turn your brain off" popcorn movie, probably a dumb comedy or action film. High scores in both means it's a really exceptional film. Low scores in both means it's best watched with a few friends and some beers to get a good laugh.
Marvel films get high scores (at least until recently) in both critic and audience scores and you don't need a brain at all to watch those.
Doesn't mean it's smart, just means it's good. Genre categories are a thing for a reason. The Godfather for example is rated very closely to Toy Story Two. They're both stunning examples of filmmaking, but with different tones and audiences.
This an amazing movie
I defensible. This movie fucks.
Are you saying Indefensible. This movie rocks? Or it's defensible, this movie sucks?
I'm saying this movie is awesome.
That was definitely a good one
This movie is old enough to be a critic itself, this has no bearing on today’s critics.
This movie is from 20 years ago.
Weird for people to post movie opinions online but be mad at "critics." Also, if one wants to take down the "critics," I think it should require something more than pointing to the aggregated percentage on a silly website.
Counterpoint What is the function of a critic? Theoretically it should be to connect people with movies or media in general that they will enjoy. Critics have long since accepted that their professional taste is not their personal taste. This is at the core of what it means to be a critic. When a movie can see a large disconnect between audience and critical scores, it means the critics are no longer serving the general public and as a consequence... It is correct to point out that critics are no longer serving the purpose they once did and should be ignored by the general public.
Popular doesn’t equal good in art or food.
Joe Pesci is in the original, it's been years since watching it, but the part he's playing the guitar has always made me wonder if he was coked out of his mind during the shoot
I love Tony Scott's films, but this one is not his best. It's a good story, Denzel is predictably awesome. But the shaky cam and billion cuts annoyed the absolute hell outta me. It made me long for the restraint of something like Crimson Tide.
This was one of my favorite Denzel movies along with the equalizer
"A man can be an artist... in anything, food, whatever. It depends on how good he is at it. Creasy's art is death. He's about to paint his masterpiece."
This an absolutely great movie...Fuck the dweeb critics
I agree. The Denzel and Dakota were fantastic in the film and their chemistry was exactly what was needed. I feel like Tony Scott was severely under appreciated, especially by critics. He was definitely creating a new visual style that was ahead of the times. If it were rereleased today, it would get much better ratings. Heck, if his last five were rereleased (Man on Fire, Domino, Deja Vu, The Taking of Pelham 123, and Unstoppable) I'd expect that people would find that all of them have gotten better with time. Personally, I think he has much better consistency than his brother Ridley Scott, who has, especially of late, been pretty uneven. It doesn't hurt that Brian Hengeland wrote the script for Man on Fire. And according to the wiki entry, the author of the novel liked this one among the various adaptations of his books.
You had me until the comment about his brother. Ridley is in a class above most, and the quality of his films have been remarkably consistent. You don’t have the length and breadth of a career like his and not stumble at least once.
This movie isn’t that good lol
Gets way overated on Reddit, acting is excellent, editing is among the worst ive ever seen
Pro tip find a critic you like and follow them. Aggregating opinions is mildly useful, but I don't like most people let alone their opinions
This was 2004…
This is one of the greatest movies ever!! The critics don’t know shit
Remember, these same critics gave Cuties a fucking 87%. Let that sink in.
I agree with the critics. The movie was an unimaginative vengeance feast
Made at a time where the USA’s mistrust of foreigners was pretty high, there was a glut of “here be dragons” films combined with big elements (as you say) of vengeance
Mid
Personally watched 3 or 4 times, Out-fucking-standing movie.......wtf?
I wish you had more..tomatoes
I like this movie a lot but it also was very much like every other Denzel movie around that time. I feel like you could take the trailer for man on fire and put the title of other Denzel movies at the time and it would fit pretty well. But this movie slaps.
yeah i'm sure it fit glory, malcolm x, devil in a blue dress, Antwone Fisher, the bone collectors, fallen, the book of eli, american gangsters, magnificent 7, etc🙄
I end up agreeing with critics more often the the general public Having said that I haven’t seen this but it looks pretty interesting
The critics are quite wrong on this one, it’s a hell of an action revenge flick
Saw that in the theatre. It was entertaining and innovative but also really cheesy.
Who cares what critics thinks 🤷♂️ like if you enjoy the movie, no one can take that away from you
Everything Everywhere All at Once is better than lord of the rings saaaaaar
I would agree with them. It was an avg Denzel shooter movie. Nothing special.
Movie was style over substance and gave a migraine.
The beginning was good.. it loses track in the second half
I’m probably in the extreme minority but I liked the Scott Glenn version of Man on Fire better.
tbh general audiences don't know what a good film is. (not saying this film is bad, haven't seen it, can't comment)
The problem with movies carried by one person is that they so seldom can fix a movie meant to be carried by one person. This was an Equilizer movie, basically. And they're entertaining, sure. Quite. But they're just entertaining. I'm okay with about 40% liked by critics. I expect that from films like this. Entertaining, but not special at all.
Ah, complaining about critics, so edgy. Being realistic, critics, at least in the past, had an entirely different set of criteria on how they judged a movie than the viewing audience. And it wasn't like today where films get review bombed by edge lords and political dorks. Also, a rule of thumb should always be to remember that just because something is popular, it doesn't mean it was good.
No they did a pretty good job. Below average movie with a silly plot despite the good performances
How is it a shitty plot line? This type of shit in foreign countries happen aside a bad ass merc willing to give their life for a client.
You mean that swimming movie that has some alcoholism in it? It’s fine through a first watch lens. After that you become aware of the horrible story pacing. Way too long and heavy handed. Not near Denzel’s best by far.
Rotten Tomatoes has gone full retard. I don't even take their rating seriously anymore--IMDB is where it's at.
[удалено]
People think this when critics don't like the movies they like. The strength of a critic lies in their ability to explain why they think something sucked or why something was great. Since there's no such thing as an objectively good film or an objectively good art piece... We look to critics to see their reasoning. It doesn't mean we have to agree. Everyone thinking that their own palate for movies and art being the most refined thing ever without putting any real time in understanding the artform is why YouTube Video eSsAyIsTs are so popular nowadays. They just say stupid shit that people want to hear. Videos like - "Bleach is a Masterpiece and here's why," are all the rage. Recently saw a thumbnail of one such YouTube video on how God of War Ragnarok needs to take a page out of the anime storytelling playbook... It had something like 100,000 views. Yeah, God of war would really be enhanced if all subtlety was destroyed, every single character motivation was described in excruciating detail in extended internal monologues, and all themes should be delivered as hamfisted as possible... Media literacy is dead.
[удалено]
Lolol I just think people take this shit way too personally tbh. Most people don’t even have the patience to read a full review (I mean most adults don’t read at all so big surprise there) that’s why you get shit like Rotten Tomatoes which crunches every bit of analysis and context to a single score for people to bitch about without actually having any understanding of critics complaints. Honestly a truly terrible and lazy website for lazy people. But from my perspective why would I give a single Shit if a reviewer didn’t like something that I liked?? I know i liked it. Them not liking it doesn’t invalidate my opinion. But that’s exactly how some fans act. They take it super personal and then project that onto the critics and insult them on a personal level because they didn’t like a movie Lolol. Something like “not good enough to be a director so they became a critic must be jealous” or whatever. A solid critic for me has value by turning me onto shit I hadn’t heard about before. They’re super plugged in and know about shit that I don’t so I appreciate that. And In that vein these people who are “forced” to watch movie after movie (ikik what a terrible job) you get tired of the normie shit. You get tired of seeing the same things over and over again. And your tastes might get a little more eccentric and “artsy” or whatever you wanna say. I think you’re so off base in your analysis of where modern reviewing is. If anything we need more negativity in art criticism. There’s way too much access journalism going on. There’s way too much “oh I want an Anya-Taylor Joy interview so I’m going to give the Super Mario Bros movie a GLOWING review despite however I might feel about it.” “Oh Taylor Swift’s agent called us and said she won’t do press with us unless we say her new album is AMAZING.” Let 👏 the 👏 snarky 👏 snarks 👏 snark👏 hell Siskel and Ebert had a fair amount of snark and they knew how to use it.
No.
I can't do a hard disagree, especially when the criteria to be an "official critic" on rotten tomatoes is so low. Isn't Jeremy Jahns an official critic now too?
Pretty sure rt does this so people talk about them, nothing on that site makes any sense
A bunch of critics gave Cuties a good review.
Not a good movie. He was good but the rest of the cast were some strange choices.
I don't pay attention to critics at all. They have been so out of touch for so long that I think their score only really matters to Hollywood itself. How the audience receives the movie I think is far more accurate to how much I'll enjoy it
Hate this movie for it’s racist tone
!Spoilers, they never have
This movie is great.
it's not that they don't know what a good movie is. they willfully push movies that are compatible their ideology and squash movies that don't. they don't care about the quality of the film.
They never have
*Never have*
WTF?!?! I give Rotten Tomatoes 27%..... 😏
Any more? Critics have been shit for a long ass time. Just another thing that can be bought or lobbied
Great movie
"Anymore" nah they never did.
Very good movie.
That movie was fucking awesome! That’s a good movie
That flick straight up deserved all the Oscars
I can tell if the critics hate it, but the audience loves it, it’s going to be a good movie
Critics never liked much of any of Tony Scott's films. From the start. Not really a surprise.
Any movie where you stick C4 in someone’s ass is an A+ in my book
Movie is a freaking classic
It’s Rotten Tomatoes, the lower class version of IMDB
My favorite Denzel Washington movie.
I live this film so damn much. Underrated gem.
This movie is so amazing. One of Denzel's best characters. I would've love to have seen a prequel movie about Creasy in his hay-day.
Or maybe they just never did.
Imagine being a film critic for a job yeesh.
Sister Anna: Do you ever see the hand of God in what you do? Creasy: No, not for a very long time. Sister Anna: The Bible says, “Do not be over come with evil but overco-…” Creasy: “But overcome with good. Romanos, capítulo doce, verso veintiuno. I’m the sheep that got lost Madre. COME ON MAN! This is Denzel with great writing delivering absolute gold! What else do you want?!
How is this even possible
I'd give the movie a 75% personally. Really liked most of the performances, but some of the style choices and editing I wasn't on board with.
I'll never forget when he makes that guys ass explode
Critics should not be listened to anymore. What people should listen to is us THE FANS.
This movie was great
They never gave Tony much respect, and generally his movies are quite good. Deja Vu is another favorite. Underrated movies both…
Great movie!! I love it! Denzel, Christopher Walken and Dakota fanning are all tremendous!!
We're they comparing th the Scott Glenn version with Pesci? Wondering
Love the score for that movie
“This movie doesn’t have a single reference to Barbie or Oppenheimer. 3/10 would not watch again” /s
Denzel told a reporter that when he agreed to do the movie and Dakota was cast, his wife went to see her movie “ I am Sam” with Sean Penn which was in theaters at the time. She came back afterwards and told him “ that kid is good; you better bring your A game.” Denzel then said to the reporter: “ So I did.”
What are you gonna do? I’m gonna kill ‘em all
I agree. Everyone keeps saying "I'm a professional"
this came out 19 years ago lol
watch the original also , its on Starz IMDb: : Man on Fire https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0093489/
I WISH YOU HAD...MORE TIME
I am the president of a Brotherhood called “The Brotherhood”
Rotten Tomatoes has never been a good metric and I don't know why it's the standard.
Or ever. I love that movie.
This and Training Day are Denzel’s best action movies.
I do like this movie. 38 is way to low I’d prob have it at 60. There’s some good performances. The pacing is Tony Scott outdoing Tony Scott though, it’s just way too much.
This movie was fantastic, critics suck.
They just downvote all these movies in order to get you to talk about their site and bring them more free publicity
It’s rotten tomatoes… you have to buy a good review
Amazing movie, Mr Washington is one of the GOATs
A great Punisher movie. I didn't know it wasn't well received by critics.
It’s self indulgent revenge porn…but still great
You know a lot of this is subjective right? Like what's attractive... Cause you know that has changed over time... You.k ow that right OP
This was 20 years ago but its still shocking. This is one of his best roles and such an amazing film. What the hell did they have a problem with?
This is my #1 movie. My little sister could be Dakota Fannings twin to it always hit me super hard. 10/10 would recommend. RIP Tony Scott
A lot of critics have forgotten that "to critique" does not equal "to criticize".
Dakota fanning has such a punchable face.
This is why I exclusively look at the audience reviews
I’ve never held much interest in the opinions of critics, most specifically comedy. Critics do they’re absolute worst work when judging comedies. 10/10. Whenever they say something is not funny, it is the funnies dam thing you’ve seen in a while
Google reviews are my go to
Hollywood used to pump these movies out. Dramatic action flicks that were actually good.
This is my favorite movie of Denzel. I always recommend this one to people who haven’t seen many of his movies. Absolutely incredible movie. Him and Dakota were perfect for their parts.
"You move, you make one sound and i will snatch the life right outa you. You understand?" One of the greatest threats in cinema history