BK007 Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) Breaking Dawn is oscar material in comparison to some of the other "blockbusters" that have come out this year. Films above $100m/Metacritic scores Deathly Hallows [87] Bridesmaids [75] Rango [75] Super 8 [72] Rise of the Planet of the Apes [68] Fast Five [67] Kung Fu Panda 2 [67] Captain America [66] Puss in Boots [65] X-Men First Class [65] Rio [63] Help [62] Paranormal Activity 3 [59] Cars 2 [57] Horrible Bosses [57] Thor [57] Cowboys & Aliens [50] Bad Teacher [47] On Stranger Tides [45] Breaking Dawn [45] Hangover 2 [44] Transformers [42] Hop [41] Green Lantern [39] Just Go With It [33] Smurfs [30] Tied 19th out of 26 movies. No. Edited November 27, 2011 by BK007 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kayumanggi Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Don't you think the flood of family films has been one of the culprits? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bacon Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 The only movies I'd venture to say are worse than BD on that list are Smurfs and Hop, going only off of the previous Twilight movies, the plot sypnosis, and reviews for it. And those were hardly blockbusters, I'd compare it to any over 200M movie, and it is all but certainly the worst movie of the year to surpass 200M. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fake Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Nice Friday jump for BD1. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SchumacherFTW Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 For me on that list I preferred it to all the films below X-Men, barring Thor and The Smurfs (Sue me, but I had a hell of a lot of fun watching it), as well as Bridesmaids. It was on a par with Eclipse for me.Thats a decent recovery for BD, Muppets are looking good as well. Happy Feet's going to be finished next week if it carries on at this rate isn't it? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
baumer Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Films above $100m/Metacritic scores Deathly Hallows [87] Bridesmaids [75] Rango [75] Super 8 [72] Rise of the Planet of the Apes [68] Fast Five [67] Kung Fu Panda 2 [67] Captain America [66] Puss in Boots [65] X-Men First Class [65] Rio [63] Help [62] Paranormal Activity 3 [59] Cars 2 [57] Horrible Bosses [57] Thor [57] Cowboys & Aliens [50] Bad Teacher [47] On Stranger Tides [45] Breaking Dawn [45] Hangover 2 [44] Transformers [42] Hop [41] Green Lantern [39] Just Go With It [33] Smurfs [30] Tied 19th out of 26 movies. No. Right, I forgot, you let other people dictate what you like. Damn, I forgot it's better to be a sheep than it is to like what you like. Films like Green Lantern, Thor, Bad Teacher Captain America, KFP2 and Cars2 were all horrible films. And this is just a small sample. BD2 was more competently made and a hell of a lot more entertaining than those piles of crap. It's just too bad that critics have an agenda and have to like something because they're paper is owned by a conglomerate that produced some of these films. ButI'm an independent thinker so my opinion is my own. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 When are we getting Sat and/or weekend numbers? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goosenman Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Weekend numbers should start turning up any time now. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
theultimatebiu Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Here we go again....every critic has a secret ageda against Twilight. They meet at midnight under the Lincoln memorial to dicuss how to give it bad reviews to piss of housewives and little girls.Also, lets stop this BD1 has good WOM...ALL TWILIGHT MOVIES HAVE GOOD WOM FROM THE FANBASE. It's only after its gone on DVD do all the fans start criticising them.P.S I have seen both BD1 and Transformers 3 and can proudly say both are total shit but at least something happens in TF3. BD1 is a 30 minute halloween episode of 90210 stretched to 2 hours Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rainbowtrout Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Here we go again....every critic has a secret ageda against Twilight. They meet at midnight under the Lincoln memorial to dicuss how to give it bad reviews to piss of housewives and little girls.Also, lets stop this BD1 has good WOM...ALL TWILIGHT MOVIES HAVE GOOD WOM FROM THE FANBASE. It's only after its gone on DVD do all the fans start criticising them.P.S I have seen both BD1 and Transformers 3 and can proudly say both are total shit but at least something happens in TF3. BD1 is a 30 minute halloween episode of 90210 stretched to 2 hoursFor anyone who doesn't think critics can have an agenda when reviewing a movie, I urge you to check out Variety's review of The Iron Lady. The female critic is beside herself because she hates Margaret Thatcher and she wanted the movie to skewer her. It is a blatant, agenda-driven review, without question. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BobThePizzaBoy Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Also, lets stop this BD1 has good WOM...ALL TWILIGHT MOVIES HAVE GOOD WOM FROM THE FANBASE. It's only after its gone on DVD do all the fans start criticising them. Indeed, I remember when I was a senior in high school when New Moon came out, the reviewer in the school newspaper gave it a perfect 5/5 just because it was a Twilight movie. When the DVD came out, you didn't hear a single word aboutNew Moon. Nothing. Breaking Dawn is only two parts because Harry Potter did it, it's to squeeze more money out of one more film. The day Breaking Dawn Part 2 leaves theaters I will be celebrating with delight and hoping we don't get a The Short Second Life of Bree Tanner movie to follow up the saga. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cookie Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) Anyone can have an agenda, even audience members. Edited November 27, 2011 by C00k13 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 (edited) It`s one thing when individuals have agenda but talking about global anti-Twilight conspiracy is too much. It`s like anti-Nolan conspiracy by AMPAS. Both demographics - AMPAS and critics - have their taste that may not be compatible with each other`s or with that of other demographics. Such as teen girls and frustrated housewifes and baumer . problem is, critic`s and/or AMPAS verdict is taken at face value as the ceriticate of quality or lack thereof whereas it is just one demographics opinion. There`s no conspiracy. twi simply isn`t their thing. Edited November 27, 2011 by fishnets Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becca85 Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Why can't people just accept that there is a movie that appeals primarily to women, without denigrating us and trying desperately to make us see the error of our ways. I don't know if I would have ever watched Twilight if Robert Pattinson hadn't starred but I do know that I would never have belittled those who did. I think some members here,and critics, are only teasing and rolling their eyes at us but some are being downright nasty and i wonder if that's how they treat women in general. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
fishstick Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Why can't people just accept that there is a movie that appeals primarily to women, without denigrating us and trying desperately to make us see the error of our ways. I don't know if I would have ever watched Twilight if Robert Pattinson hadn't starred but I do know that I would never have belittled those who did. I think some members here,and critics, are only teasing and rolling their eyes at us but some are being downright nasty and i wonder if that's how they treat women in general.You just belittled yourself by admitting that Pattison is the sole reason why you watch this, not content or anything of substance. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
becca85 Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 You just belittled yourself by admitting that Pattison is the sole reason why you watch this, not content or anything of substance.Why is that belittling myself ? Am I not allowed to have a favourite actor? All I am saying is that RP led me to Twilight, from there I read the books and enjoyed them. It's exactly the same as saying I'll watch most films starring DiCaprio or Hanks because I know I'll enjoy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kevin Bacon Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Right, I forgot, you let other people dictate what you like. Damn, I forgot it's better to be a sheep than it is to like what you like.Films like Green Lantern, Thor, Bad Teacher Captain America, KFP2 and Cars2 were all horrible films. And this is just a small sample. BD2 was more competently made and a hell of a lot more entertaining than those piles of crap. It's just too bad that critics have an agenda and have to like something because they're paper is owned by a conglomerate that produced some of these films. ButI'm an independent thinker so my opinion is my own.This is just bullshit. You are entitled to your opinion to like whatever movies you like, but when you call competently made movies trash, and somebody cites Meta-scores for said movies as a way of saying "Hey, this got solid reviews, you should probably be open to the idea that they aren't horrible films", it doesn't make them a "sheep". There is a difference between liking something and thinking it is good film-making. Movies get good reviews for reasons, it's because *gasp* maybe they're actually good movies? But no, baumer thinks people should go against the critics because it's all a big conspiracy and anybody who agrees with them on a regular basis do because they don't think for themselves, it isn't because they don't have the same fucked taste and/or grip on reality that you do. Get it through your thick skull that critics are just people like you and me (well, me) who analyze the quality of movies and share that analysis with those interested in potentially seeing them, or comparing their own analyses with those of the critics. That the millions of people who also love the movies critics love and hate the ones critics hate aren't sheep who just like things because other people like them, but because the movies critics rip tend to suck and the movies they love tend to be decent. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AniNate Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 For anyone who doesn't think critics can have an agenda when reviewing a movie, I urge you to check out Variety's review of The Iron Lady. The female critic is beside herself because she hates Margaret Thatcher and she wanted the movie to skewer her. It is a blatant, agenda-driven review, without question.While I don't disagree that critics can have biases (they are human, after all), that reads like a fair review to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Noctis Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 Critics have a vendetta against Twilight? That's why Eclipse has a 67% with Top Critics? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ddddeeee Posted November 27, 2011 Share Posted November 27, 2011 I generally defend Twilight but the only thing critics have a vendetta against are bad movies. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
