Memorial Weekend Thread: 4-Day Actuals - Aladdin $116.81M | John Wick 3 $30.97M | Avengers Endgame $22.06M | Pokemon DP $17.25M

[cannastop]

2 minutes ago, Birdo Mandingo said:

Critics exist to communicate to the masses whether or not they will like a movie.

Not in my view. Their job is to analyze. Like Literary critics do.

[Eric Atreides]

13 minutes ago, filmlover said:

It's more of a win for the Disney brand than for diversity but a still cool achievement nonetheless. Blanking if that's ever happened before. I had to laugh that they got Billy Magnussen to play the lone white person in the whole movie (of course I also had to laugh whenever he showed up just because - hopefully the character he's playing in the next Bond movie is also a total goofball).

I guess technically Bohemian Rhapsody and The Jungle Book count, even if it's only the lead. If it's majority cast, the last one is probably Aladdin. Of course, even then, all of the voice actors were white people.

[Barnack]

11 minutes ago, Birdo Mandingo said:

Critics exist to communicate to the masses whether or not they will like a movie.

 

8 minutes ago, cannastop said:

Not in my view. Their job is to analyze. Like Literary critics do.

 

This is true, liking or not a movie is a more a review by a reviewer, a critic goes more profound that did someone liked or not a movie (not something that will necessarily even be brought up at all or have any relevance in a movie critic)

 

How the movie fit inside the artist body of work, how does it compare with current zeitgeist of similar movie, current cultural/social/political way the movie was made in.

 

Film criticism is the study, interpretation, and evaluation of a film and its place in cinema history. Film criticism usually offers interpretation of its meaning, analysis of its structure and style, judgement of its worth by comparison with other films, and an estimation of its likely effect on viewers. Film theory (e.g. feminist, postmodernist, etc.) often informs the critical analysis of a film. Criticism may examine a particular film, or may look at a group of films in the same genre, or a director's or actor's body of work.

 

Film criticism differs from movie reviews in several ways: it entails both analysis and judgement; it may be published many years after a film is released; it is usually longer and more complex than a movie review. A movie review documents the critical reception of a film at its time of theatrical or dvd release. It is more "consumer-oriented," placing more emphasis on recommendation than analysis.

 

Reviews of feature films or mainstream films may be found in online databases, newspapers, and general interest magazines (e.g. New York Times, Village Voice, Cineaste).

In-depth criticism and analyses of some feature films or mainstream films, foreign films, independent films, documentaries, etc. may be found in more scholarly or academic publications (e.g. Film Quarterly, Cinema Journal, Film International).

https://researchguides.uvm.edu/c.php?g=290200&p=3481769

[Legion Again]

27 minutes ago, CoolEric258 said:

 

He’s just angling for it to do well so he can get cast in the King of Thieves remake 😛 

 

 

 

[cdsacken]

Kumail is the best.

[cdsacken]

47 minutes ago, cannastop said:

 

 

I'm with Venom. Hoping for 12+.

 

Worried Endgame is gonna be below 1.8...

Edited May 28, 2019 by cdsacken

[DAJK]

2 hours ago, Thanos Legion said:

There’s no right and wrong, but audience is much closer to the average opinion because there are considerable more of them. There’s not some written on stone tablets objectively correct assessment of the movie, but if you want to know “if I picked somebody at random are they likely to like the movie” — as a statistical matter — audience is clearly much more valuable than critic.

Audiences "matter" more than critics in the sense that audiences are the ones that contribute the most money to a film's box office lol. If you were a studio, obviously you would want (if you could pick only one) audiences to love your movie rather than critics. 

But that isn't what film criticism is about lol.

 

1 hour ago, AndyChrono said:

I dunno about critic bias and all that, but IMO there was definitely a fundamental failure on the part of the critics where they completely missed how audiences might like Aladdin.

 

Yes, critics are supposed to give their honest opinion. However, a critic that ONLY gives their opinion is the lowest tier of critic possible. After all, if you just wanted an opinion on a movie then you can pick any random person who's seen the film and their opinion would be just as valid. The only difference between the two would just be that the critic is backed by a publication, Youtube, etc. But ultimately this kind of critic is next to useless - it doesn't really give you any idea of whether you will like the movie. It's just like if a stranger told you X, Y and Z sucked about a particular movie. Okay, so we know it sucked for you, but will it suck for me?

 

A better critic will try and put themselves into the shoes of the movie-goer and their expectations. They can give their opinion, but also acknowledge that their public platform gives a chance to let ticket buyers make an informed decision on what they will be paying for. For instance, they can write something along the likes of "The songs were cheesy and sappy beyond belief (opinion part) but your kids will love them and you might even find yourself humming along (inform audience part)!"

 

The top-tier Roger Ebert level critics are the ones that can pick out the diamonds in the rough (pun intended). They can look at a movie that isn't great in any particular area but see that the combined whole is greater than the sum of its parts. Imagine for a moment, you had a movie where the critic thought the script was poor, acting was poor, direction was poor, VFX was poor, etc. The vast majority of them would simply slap a quick negative review on that and move on. But the best ones will take a step back and look at the combined whole and see that: "There is hardly a thing I can say in its favor, except that I was cheered by nearly every minute of it. I cannot argue for the script, the direction, the acting or even the mummy, but I can say that I was not bored and sometimes I was unreasonably pleased."

 

So all-in-all, it seems like the critics this time around were looking to hard for individual aspects to pick at: genie effects, should this even have been made, etc. instead of looking at whether audiences would like the combined whole - which it seems they do. Anyway, JMO.

But how is a critic supposed to know whether "your kids will love them and you might hum along"? How can they tell what any particular reader is going to like or dislike? The point of a critic is to give their honest opinion and then JUSTIFY that opinion. Preaching to the choir, rather than giving an honest opinion, is what I would consider the lowest tier of critic. 

 

34 minutes ago, Birdo Mandingo said:

you are a terrible critic if the audience routinely disagrees with you.

 

This is why I like RT in generally. I personally don't give a sh!t about what any individual critic has to say but I do look at the aggregate. It rarely changes my intent on watching a movie, but rather perspective. For instance I was going to see Endgame no matter what. However if the reviews initially were 60s to 70s I would have tempered my expectations. Because of this if the movie was just okay I would have been enjoyed it more because I would have the expectation going in that it was not perfect and hand flaws and I could enjoy it for what it is. In this case it was at 96% when I watched it, so I allowed my hype to stay high going in. And was rewarded.

 

The only critic I ever care for his personal opinion was Roger Ebert. 

 

As far as Aladdin, I have not seen it, but kinda want to. I watched the baby so my wife could take our 6 and 8 year old to go see it. My wife really loved it (and she is super hard on the Disney live action remakes, her favorite movie alltime is BatB and she did not care for the live action remake) so I assume it is quite enjoyable. 

why? The thing people have to stop thinking is that "critics" are one single mass with a homogenous opinion, and that "audiences" are also a single mass with a homogenous opinion. We seem to forget that despite the fact that there are "consensuses" where more people than not enjoy a particular movie or don't like a particular movie. But you're going to find someone out there who loves Age of Extinction and hates Moonlight. So is an individual critic terrible because they disagree with those particular audience members? Of course not!

 

If you don't want to read an individual critic, that's great! That's what I love about RT, is that it gives a general consensus of how many critics/audiences like or dislike a movie. I don't have unlimited hours in my day, I can't read all 420+ reviews for A Star is Born for example, but I can look at the consensus, and maybe check out one or two reviews from critics I like. 

 

Find a critic that you agree with more often than not. Let them be your baseline. A critic is a person like you or me, with personalized likes and dislikes. So take them for what they are. 

[dxmatrixdt]

have you ever seen Ong-Bak?

[MovieMan89]

25 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

He’s just angling for it to do well so he can get cast in the King of Thieves remake 😛 

 

 

 

A King of Thieves live action remake legit has some amazing potential. Some really cool ideas and set pieces in that movie despite being bogged down by direct to video level writing hell. 

[That One Girl]

13 minutes ago, DAJK said:

But you're going to find someone out there who loves Age of Extinction and hates Moonlight

 

please just @ me next time you wanna call me out

[snarkmachine]

the booksmart vs aladdin discourse on film twitter is so exhausting. you mean an indie comedy with no stars made less than a live action disney remake of one of their most beloved movies starring will smith? shocked. 

[Darth Lehnsherr]

Well you can obviously make your point about wanting more people to see Booksmart without putting Aladdin down. It's not even about people wanting to watch Aladdin vs wanting to watch Booksmart it's about people prefer to stay at home vs watching Booksmart.

[lorddemaxus]

19 minutes ago, snarkmachine said:

the booksmart vs aladdin discourse on film twitter is so exhausting. you mean an indie comedy with no stars made less than a live action disney remake of one of their most beloved movies starring will smith? shocked. 

It's moreso that the indie comedy didn't make as much as it should have. If Blockers made 60 mil DOM, this should have easily been able to surpass that number.

[keysersoze123]

Trend for Aladdin is amazing. How long before someone opens Aladdin 2nd weekend over Zilla Club?

 

I would be out as I still see Zilla opening ot 60m which is impossible for Aladdin 2nd weekend.

Edited May 28, 2019 by keysersoze123

[Legion Again]

50 minutes ago, MovieMan89 said:

A King of Thieves live action remake legit has some amazing potential. Some really cool ideas and set pieces in that movie despite being bogged down by direct to video level writing hell. 

Return of Jafar runtime: 69 minutes

King of Thieves runtime: 81 minutes   

 

You could just incorporate ideas from both into a single live-action sequel (and also beef up Jasmine’s role seeing as she’s the best character).

Edited May 28, 2019 by Thanos Legion

[MovieMan89]

3 minutes ago, Thanos Legion said:

Return of Jafar runtime: 69 minutes

King of Thieves runtime: 81 minutes   

 

You could just incorporate ideas from both into a single live-action sequel (and also beef up Jasmine’s role seeing as she’s the best character).

Return of Jafar has almost no redeeming qualities, I’d rather they just brush right past that. Also solves the issue of having to bring back the weak link of the film (Kenzari).

Edited May 28, 2019 by MovieMan89

[BK007]

4 hours ago, Birdo Mandingo said:

you are a terrible critic if the audience routinely disagrees with you.

 

This is why I like RT in generally. I personally don't give a sh!t about what any individual critic has to say but I do look at the aggregate. It rarely changes my intent on watching a movie, but rather perspective. For instance I was going to see Endgame no matter what. However if the reviews initially were 60s to 70s I would have tempered my expectations. Because of this if the movie was just okay I would have been enjoyed it more because I would have the expectation going in that it was not perfect and hand flaws and I could enjoy it for what it is. In this case it was at 96% when I watched it, so I allowed my hype to stay high going in. And was rewarded.

 

The only critic I ever care for his personal opinion was Roger Ebert. 

 

As far as Aladdin, I have not seen it, but kinda want to. I watched the baby so my wife could take our 6 and 8 year old to go see it. My wife really loved it (and she is super hard on the Disney live action remakes, her favorite movie alltime is BatB and she did not care for the live action remake) so I assume it is quite enjoyable. 

You need to be looking at the actual average rating and not the %.

 

 

[cannastop]

3 hours ago, lorddemaxus said:

It's moreso that the indie comedy didn't make as much as it should have. If Blockers made 60 mil DOM, this should have easily been able to surpass that number.

Totally different genre. More like Lady Bird, which made $49m.

[JonathanLB]

If more movies with “brown people” means Naomi Scott on screen more often, my god please sign me up! Gorgeous and talented, not a bad combo! 

 

I really enjoyed Aladdin. I didn’t care for Beauty and the Beast really, didn’t dislike it either, just kind of meh to me. I thought Aladdin was a ton of fun, also Will Smith was fantastic!

[Bagatelle31]

57 minutes ago, JonathanLB said:

If more movies with “brown people” means Naomi Scott on screen more often, my god please sign me up! Gorgeous and talented, not a bad combo! 

 

I really enjoyed Aladdin. I didn’t care for Beauty and the Beast really, didn’t dislike it either, just kind of meh to me. I thought Aladdin was a ton of fun, also Will Smith was fantastic!

And Mena Massoud please I’m in love!