Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets | July 21, 2017 | FLOP OF THE YEAR

[eXtacy]

So sounds like a good sci fi adventure film with some poor casting.

[RobinHood26]

4 hours ago, tribefan695 said:

 

I've yet to see any TV ad actually mention the RT consensus, but even if they did if it were getting crappy reviews they wouldn't bother with mentioning RT but if it were getting great reviews they probably could just use whatever RT posts. And of course there'd be plenty of other material to work with if they didn't like the phrasing.

 

The Spider-Man homecoming TV spots show Spidy climbiing up RT Scores. Its fully pushing the rating.

[grey ghost]

5 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

MetaCritic has a yellow middle ground which is probably a better way to handle it. 

 

I always have to add 10 to 20 points to metacritics rating to get a better read on how much I'll like it.

 

So I just use RT instead. The percentage, not the average.

[Baerrt]

5 hours ago, redfirebird2008 said:

 

But they aren't equal. You wouldn't say the average Joe blogger who just started randomly writing reviews this year is the same as Roger Ebert, would you? That said, it's entirely possible for the less experienced and less well known critics to do a better job than the top critics. Batman Begins is a good example. 84% overall but 63% with Top Critics. General audience rating is 94%. 

 

2001: A Space Odyssey is perhaps the best example of Top Critics blowing it. Variety, New York Times, and others trashed the movie in 1968. Now it's regarded as possibly the best sci-fi movie ever made. 

The concern it seems is what with reviews now factoring into the success of blockbuster/potential blockbuster movies the negative reviews of Valerian could kill any chances it had at the box office. Also Luc Besson has never really been a critic's favorite (for some he's nothing more than a slightly more talented and idiosyncratic French equivalent of Michael Bay).

 

Blade Runner might be a better example to use than 2001 as on it's initial release it was the 2nd top grossing film of 1968 (with subsequent releases it's now surpassed that year's top film FUNNY GIRL) and gained Kubrick an Oscar nomination for Best Director so despite critics of the day trashing it for being 'cold' or too 'out there' it's impact was immediately felt.  

[FantasticBeasts]

Metacritic>>>RT

RT has simplified the whole review process in a way that is sad to me.

[dashrendar44]

I love those inane whining about RT critics being useless crap like "bad critics" shouldn't be allowed to feature.

 

So movie art is "subjective" but a critic is bad for giving a negative opinion (on Valerian) or a positive opinion (on Freddy Got Fingered) that doesn't align with yours on said movie art? How can there be a bad critic if the object of their opinion is supposed to be subjective by nature?

[JennaJ]

After reading a few reviews, seems like my concern about the casting of the two leads was justified.

 

I can definitely see myself wanting to watch this on a large screen if it had more compelling leads. As it stands, the spectacle itself just isn't enough.

[CJohn]

7 hours ago, filmlover said:

Hail Paramount?

 

@CJohn

Sadly, the Tomato Law wasn't in full effect back in 2016.

[WeneedtotalkaboutKevin]

8 hours ago, That One Guy said:

 

Valerian.  Its influence.  Its power.

Hey,That One Guy, why do you want Valerian to succeed so much? You are a big fan of Cara Delevingne ? Does anyone know?

[filmlover]

1 minute ago, WeneedtotalkaboutKevin said:

Hey,That One Guy, why do you want Valerian to succeed so much? You are a big fan of Cara Delevingne ? Does anyone know?

He is still a child so he is excited by anything with big and bright colors.

Edited July 12, 2017 by filmlover

[shayhiri]

16 minutes ago, filmlover said:

He is still a child so he is excited by anything with big and bright colors.

 

That is the Shay.

[Dementeleus]

3 hours ago, JennaJ said:

After reading a few reviews, seems like my concern about the casting of the two leads was justified.

 

The two leads are fun and entertaining to watch, though.

[Valonqar]

3 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

The two leads are fun and entertaining to watch, though.

 

yas! Spread the word! This must hit! 

[filmlover]

3 minutes ago, Telemachos said:

 

The two leads are fun and entertaining to watch, though.

The leads are why I'm on the fence about seeing this.  Don't care for either of them.

[WrathOfHan]

7 hours ago, aabattery said:

 

Actually, you didn't.

Let the record state I just gave you your 15,000th like for this post  

[JohnnyGossamer]

5 hours ago, grey ghost said:

 

I always have to add 10 to 20 points to metacritics rating to get a better read on how much I'll like it.

 

So I just use RT instead. The percentage, not the average.

So, anything with a 90 or higher there, you really, really, really, really like, no? Like 110+ out of 100 like...

[JohnnyGossamer]

5 hours ago, Jay Hollywood said:

 

The Spider-Man homecoming TV spots show Spidy climbiing up RT Scores. Its fully pushing the rating.

Yup. Get Out did the same in a big way. And, Wonder Woman did it as well. It's definitely become part of marketing, especially it a movie's 90+% at RT. Or, even just Certified Fresh.

[Gumby]

Saw a TV ad for Apes and it heralded the RT reviews.  That is becoming a huge marketing tool.

 

As far as Valerian, I would see it if not for Cara Delevingne.  I can take or leave the guy in it, but she is just too unlikable a presence.

[MyMovieCanBeatUpYourMovie]

32 minutes ago, JohnnyGossamer said:

Yup. Get Out did the same in a big way. And, Wonder Woman did it as well. It's definitely become part of marketing, especially it a movie's 90+% at RT. Or, even just Certified Fresh.

 

Which is why i think it's pretty silly to think Rotten Tomatoes is going to be changing the way it collates and scores reviews anytime soon.  Look at the influence they have now.  Why would they change?  

[JohnnyGossamer]

5 hours ago, FantasticBeasts said:

Metacritic>>>RT

RT has simplified the whole review process in a way that is sad to me.

My lone gripe wtih Metacritic, is that they're sometimes inconsistent with adding all the usual reviewers. This doesn't happen for major tentpoles but does often happen with smaller releases. But, yes, it's much better.