When Are Critics Wrong?

There’s always been a divide between critics and audiences, but why? The Nostalgia Critic takes a look at how this could be.

Donate to this week’s charity here! Get the Awesoming on DVD Here!

About Doug Walker

Creator of 5 Second Movies, Nostalgia Critic, Bum Reviews and more.


  1. First because I can!

    • Great editorial once again, Doug.

      As a kid, I would follow Siskel and Ebert to a T, never questioning their all mighty thumbs until I became a teenager. There were ones I agreed with (North) and others I disagreed with (The Rock and Bicenntial Man). But in the end, an opinion is only that. An opinion. If we all blindly followed opinions, The Room wouldn’t be as popular as it is now.

      As much as I liked Blade, I look forward to the review next week. I’m sure Malcolm is gonna shine. 🙂

      • What’s the point of discussion without the intent to arrive at an answer?
        Do you really expect people to just state their opinions to each other without attempting at all to change someone’s mind?
        That’s just insane.
        You can’t just respect a person’s opinion and leave it at that, specifically because you might disagree.

        It’s like, if a married couple disagreed about their pet, one wants it, the other wants it gone. They can’t just stubbornly root themselves to their own feelings. Both of them need to come at each other trying to prove their opinion is the correct one. But it’s not a one way street, they also need to be willing to change their own opinion based on the argument.

        This whole, let’s just respect each other and agree to disagree is bullshit. If anything, it’s just the nice guys defense against reason.

        • Yeah, well, that’s just your opinion. XP

          • What he said. ^^

          • You clearly missing the point here. You clearly just shut down the conversation with that stupid comment.

            You’re just ignoring the other person while pretending to be nice.

            Refusing to even come up with a real response isn’t only lazy, it also makes you an asshole.

          • No, they gave your mental defects the exact amount of attention they deserve. That’s what happens when people comprehend priorities and don’t base their marriage around pets.

            I’d point out you calling other people assholes is retarded, but if you can’t even grasp human logic, I guess people skills are a lost cause. At least you can go through life knowing you earned every imaginary insult you get.

          • You just called me retarded. That’s not an imaginary insult, that’s just you being rude. Not to mention nonsensical. Go ahead and explain to me why calling someone an asshole, makes me retarded. I know you can’t, but I can explain why a placid to comment to actual argument would make you an ass.

            I never said anything even relating to people basing their marriage around a pet. Seriously, the comment’s right there, prove me wrong.

            A used the pet example to represent that nothing gets accomplished if people refuse to talk about something, if they simply affirm that their opinions are two disjointed entities with possibility of overlap.

          • I called your actions retarded. You’re the one announcing to everybody you’re retarded. Good job, idiot.

            Of course I can’t explain your blind hypocrisy to you. The responses below have shown you’re too unimaginably stupid to grasp anything. You don’t even know what an opinion is or how human expression and relations work. Your brain is such trash on a fundamental level, your best plan was to use its dysfunction as an impossible challenge. You’re the first imbecile to ever think “I’m too stupid to ever get the point” was a clever defense.

            “I can explain why a placid to comment to actual argument would make you an ass.”
            Yet you can’t even do a placid comment right. The cruel irony is you’re too dumb to realize your idiocy but egotistical enough to believe it’s everybody else who doesn’t get it. Even when you’re the village idiot who made the last Ghostbusters trailer look smart by comparison.

            Nobody can make you see how dumb you are so they stopped trying. You insist nothing gets done without arguing, but you’re proof even less gets accomplished telling you anything. I’m not even trying to make you understand my viewpoint because your special ed hivemind will never have the capacity to grasp it.

          • You literally just called me stupid several times, without giving sort of explanation.

            Can’t you provide anything besides an insult?

            All I asked was for you to explain to me why calling someone an asshole would make me retarded. I don’t think makes any sense. And since you can’t explain, obviously it doesn’t make sense to you either.

            You’re just arguing a point you don’t even understand. That’s pretty stupid.

          • Oh, sorry, I forgot I was talking to someone who wasn’t brain damaged and would be tipped off by the “blind hypocrisy” remark. Ahem.

            When you act like a complete shit to people, it’s funny when you complain that something benign others do makes them assholes. Maybe you don’t realize it, but you are incapable of not sounding like a condescending fuckwit. You talk down to people trying to explain basic human decency only to rave about benign behavior supposedly being insulting.

            And that is humorously ridiculous. You’re cartoonishly narcissistic and out of touch with how repulsive you are. Do you believe telling people “You aren’t getting it,” “You honestly don’t know the meaning of the word argument… stupid people don’t know what the word means,” “You don’t know words,” and so on isn’t insulting? Especially when you accuse the others of being childish for treating you in kind.

            You’re a gaping asshole in love with the smell of his own shit-spattered farts. That is why you get insults both real and imaginary, only to act surprised. You will never realize you are shambling human garbage cemented as unworthy of civil discussion long ago. I don’t even expect you to accept this because you would have to be human first. None of what I typed so far was ever intended as an argument.

          • You dumb asshole. Do you even realize the only time I ever brought up the subject of vocabulary is because idiots like you keep trying to correct MY use of words, even though I’m the only one here actually using words correctly?

            Look at yourself for once. Frankly, I’m being relatively polite considering how absurdly vulgar you’re being.

            You actually came into the conversation, strictly to throw school-yard insults at me, and you actually think you’re in any place to someone else trash. Little boy, you don’t even know the meaning of the word.

          • I’ll just tell you what you want to hear oh so badly.

            Your dick is the biggest there’s ever been. Congratulations.

          • Oh, please, relatively speaking you were being an absolute cunt long before vocabulary came up. Like always, you’re just too dumb to realize it. That’s why when I say you’re shitforbrains fucktarded, those words have never been more appropriately applied. And if it took me this long to say it, that means I was being polite, too. You owe me your appreciation for that.

            I’m kidding, of course, I’d have to be as blindly self-absorbed as you to actually believe that last part. And unlike you with your head stuck up your own ass, I actually can look at myself. You’re right that I’m immature as hell and just here to practice insults. The difference is I need someone like you to avoid feeling bad.

        • Hope I never end up being seated next to this guy at a party…

          • You’re thinking of a movie genius.
            Parties don’t have assigned seating.

          • Some parties do have assigned seating and all you did was explain why nobody invites you. Since you exist to fail , trying to sound smart is one of the dumbest things you could do. Luckily for unintentional comedy, you’re also too dumb to stop.

          • Like what, a cotillion? I’m pretty sure bringing up complete outliers isn’t actually a logical form of reason.

            There are also movie theaters without chairs. Not many, but they exist. Are you sure don’t want to call me out on that? You still can.

          • Of course not. All I have to do is point out assigned movie seats aren’t the norm either to make you look like a complete idiot. You set that one up yourself and walked right into it. Like a social leper stumbling over chairs a simple dinner party he had no idea were assigned.

          • Have you ever even been to a movie?
            They have limited seating. Not to mention it’s considered very rude to stand up during the movie. So in some sense, you’re stuck.

            These factors don’t apply to a party, and so the only reason you couldn’t move would be because you are assigned a seat.

            Could you seriously not work that out? It was really simple.

          • And movie theaters are where people go to argue. Keep digging yourself deeper over that joke, it makes your failure funnier.

          • Oh my god. Yes you idiot. Why do think people go to the movies with friends? They like to chat with each other during the movie. Are you such an outcast that you’ve never experienced this before?

            The problem is that sometimes you get stuck sitting next to people that aren’t your friends, and they’re very loud and insist on sharing their thoughts with you.
            And you know what you can do about it? Pretty much nothing, unless you feel like picking a fight with a stranger and getting thrown out.

          • And now that counts as a discussion to change each others’ opinions mid-movie in a theater. You’ve gone full retard trying to justify your dumb remark and I love it.

        • Yeah… no. In your couple with a pet example, there is a clear conflict with clear relevant long term consequences for its resolution. And even then there is no universal right answer. There might be a better answer regarding the life of that specific couple depending on many factors including how much one loves pets and how much the other hates them. The same conflict between other 2 people might resolve better in a different way.

          The daily lives of them both will be affected by the decision. How deep and important will be the benefits for anyone if a friend convinces another about the “correct sort of entertainment to be enjoyed and how it must be enjoyed”?

          And just like the answer to “should we have a pet?” changes from couple to couple, the answer to “Whick kind of cinematic work do I enjoy more” changes from person to person. The parameters are different! Both for genetic and upbringing reasons people will be affected differently by each kind of comedy trope, or drama style, and so on.

          Trying to convince someone to “enjoy” a movie the way you do is sometimes the same as trying to convince someone the solution to an equation is 5… without noticing the other person’s equation is different from the one you solved.

          • You aren’t getting it. Why even have an opinion or even share your opinion with another person if they’re just going to ignore it entirely.

            Let me give you a “better” example. Let’s just say two friends are chatting. One says he likes the movie “Space Jam”. The other responds, “Well, that’s just your opinion.” Just instantly an asshole response. It’s just passive aggressive. He’s not even gonna say why. He’s not going to listen to why it’s good, or even explain why it’s bad. They can’t come to an understanding at all because one side of the argument refuses to make it an argument. There is no understanding without communication, and just saying “that’s your opinion”
            is not communication. They may not come to agree from arguing necessarily, but they certainly won’t by not talking about it.

            This very instance is a perfect example of what I mean. What if I simply responded to your comment with “that’s just your opinion”. I would’ve figuratively slammed the door in your face as you tried to give a legitimate argument, all the while pretending to be the bigger man.

            Can’t you see? The whole “that’s just your opinion” thing is an insult, not a truce. It’s just me telling you you’re wrong, while telling you to stop talking.

        • kreative-kontrol

          The point of a discussion is not just winning it. It’s also to bring a mutual understanding. Through civilized discussion with someone you disagree with, you might not change your opinion, but you’ll be able to understand someone else a lot better, broaden your perspective on the world and as a result respect their opinion. No one has changed their minds, but you’re also not screaming at each other like idiot’s, calling each other nazi’s or whatever, simply because you can only see them as an opponent, an enemy. And we can really use less idiotic screaming.

          • I’m not saying the purpose IS to win, the purpose is to TRY to win.

            Think of an argument like a game. It doesn’t really matter if you win, but it’s pointless if you didn’t try to win.

            If we just give in to the stupid, “It’s just your opinion” thing, it’s like someone just shut the game down. No winner, no loser.

            Just imagine playing a game of chess with someone for like 10 minutes and suddenly he just walks away and says forget it, everyone wins. It doesn’t matter if he was winning or losing, what a shitty thing to do.

        • Olddog, You are aware there’s a difference between discussions and arguments, right? Because you consistently make your points as if they were interchangeable terms. There’s plenty of reasons to have discussions with no “answer”. Because there are a variety of components to human interaction that aren’t about objective fact but shared subjective experience. If, for example, I think one girl is prettier than another, we’re not attempting to establish why I think YOU should find her more attractive, I’m simply explaining what I find attractive. We’re not having an argument, we’re just discussing what we prefer.

          Even when it comes to arguments, your belief structure faces some major difficulties. There are fundamental points about people and their beliefs, backgrounds, etc, that are going to be essentially unchangeable. Also, copious research has shown that attacking people’s beliefs doesn’t make them change their mind, it actually makes them MORE dedicated. People can’t be convinced they’re wrong unless they wish to be. This is the basis of ‘agree to disagree’: there comes a point when an argument is no longer useful, because you’ve come to a fundamental or subjective limit. Because people’s personal emotions ARE valid points of foundation in personal discussions. I personally don’t particularly like the color yellow, but it’s my brother’s favorite color. There is no use for either of us to attempt to argue about it, because the foundations of our respective beliefs are too subjective.

          There will come a point in various arguments where you can’t progress. And this isn’t a “shitty thing to do”, because it’s not about YOUR “victory”, it’s about having civil conversation and enjoying one’s time. The response to “That’s just your opinion” is “Yes, it is” and inviting them to attempt to change it. That’s the component you’re missing: If you’re attempting to WIN a conversation without laying out that base expectation to the other partner, it’s not like they walked away mid chess game, it’s like you shoving your friend to the ground as you both walk to the bar, and justifying your actions with “I got there first, didn’t I?”

          Further, your own analogy is flawed, because it assumes a universal mentality about games and their values that is demonstrably untrue: not everyone is in a game for a victory. Maybe they just want to waste some time, or spend time with another player. Maybe they have some esoteric definition of victory, based on a desire for some personal achievement.

          Finally, I hope you understand that YOU’RE the one shutting down the conversation, because your comments have been needlessly aggressive from the first post. No one wants to talk to someone who seems to have received none of the basic instruction in etiquette, because it puts unnecessary difficulty into the conversation.

          • No, you’re wrong.

            You honestly don’t know the meaning of the word argument.

            Please look it up.

            The definition people commonly associate with the word came from people sugar-coating young couples cursing each other out. “They’re not fighting. They’re just having an argument.” And now stupid people don’t know what the word means, kinda like “gratuitous”.

            Argument is a term actually used by scientists and philosophers to define their explanations. Even today.

            You don’t know words.

            Obviously you read my comments, and somehow didn’t catch the part where I said victory doesn’t matter. It’s about trying to win. It doesn’t even matter if it ended in a tie, at least you have actually had an argument. I was pretty clear.

            Think about this truthfully. When, when has somewhere ever continued to talk about something after stating “That’s just your opinion.” They never do. It’s a conversation ended. It’s just a person stating their intention to nullify any significance to your words.

            I’ve stated clearly that it’s not only important to talk, but to listen. Saying “That’s just your opinion” isn’t listening to someone, it’s just invalidating them. It’s pretty much the exact opposite. They’re not saying “I get where you’re coming from.” It’s saying “I don’t get it and I won’t try to.”

            Go back to the first comment made in this thread. They said an opinion is just an opinion. Although that’s literally true, what did they mean? They speak like they’re a stronger person because opinions don’t affect them, and that they don’t matter. An opinion is something of incredible significance. Sure, you might think opinions about movies don’t matter, although I’d argue they kinda do, they’re just a lesser version of something really significant. People’s OPINIONS about what constitutes life could be a casual conversation, but it also could determine abortion laws.
            I’ll remind you that they were referring to an actual critic. A critic’s ACTUAL purpose is to convince someone of something. Why even listen to a critic if you are resigned to ignore them?

            Have you ever heard of Lindsey Graham? Basically he’s a politician that spoke strongly that Apple SHOULD unlock the terrorist phone. He argued with people that said this was a bad idea. And you know what, he changed his mind. He said what he thought and listened to other people. He didn’t just assume, like a righteous ass, that the argument would lead nowhere, he gave it a chance. This won’t always happen, but you know when it definitely never will? When someone contents themselves with believing people simply have different opinion, like opinions are a big static anomaly.

            Look at this big conversation I’m having with you. If either of us ever said, “That’s just your opinion.” This would have never happened. Look back at the same person who made the first comment. They said, “That’s just your opinion.” And you know what else? Nothing. Is that not a slightly convincing piece of evidence that that statement is an edict of finality?

          • Olddog: “No, you’re wrong.

            You honestly don’t know the meaning of the word argument.

            Please look it up.”

            tl;dr You automatically “win” in your superior mind’s eye, because that mind’s eye is completely narcissistic.

          • Oh really. I can see you ALSO didn’t look up the word “argument”.
            Please enlighten me to how my use of the word was incorrect, and how it totally ISN’T just a form of discussion that’s existed for centuries.

            In all your comments, you state that I’m wrong and call me a grade-school insult. I dunno, I maybe expected at least one REASON why I’m wrong in the multiple comments you made, but I guess that’s too hard for you.

          • “In all your comments, you state that I’m wrong and call me a grade-school insult. I dunno, I maybe expected at least one REASON why I’m wrong in the multiple comments you made, but I guess that’s too hard for you.”

            Nobody’s bothering with reason any more because numbers higher than zero confuse you. You can’t keep track of anything.

            Also I don’t think “narcissistic” is a grade school insult. It must have caught on at yours entirely because of you.

          • It’s pretty adolescent if you use it incorrectly.

            For my “mind’s eye” to be narcissistic, my “mind’s eye” would need to be obsessed with my “mind’s eye”.

            “Narcissistic” is just a buzz word dumb people like to say to sound intelligent. By the way, so is “mind’s eye”, which you also use incorrectly.

          • Are you as senile as your name suggests? That’s the first time e.d.oot said anything to you. Stop being rude to bystanders, I’m the one giving you the well-deserved shit-talking.

            For the record, the primary definition of an argument these days is “an exchange of diverging or opposite views, typically a heated or angry one” or “an oral disagreement; verbal opposition; contention; altercation.” Even google and certain dictionaries think you’re stupid. It can also mean persuasion, but that definition only comes up over friends’ tastes in movies if you’re of the asshole persuasion.

          • Since none of you give an actual opinion. You’re just blending together into a big blob of childish insults.

            How is someone who very clearly attempted to insult me, a bystander? Do I need to explain the word bystander to you?

            Are you seriously just really stupid or something? Do you understand how definitions work?
            A “fan” can be a utility or a person, not one or the other. There is no “primary definition”. It means both things.

            And even at that, the very first definition YOU provided would still work the way I used the term. “an exchange of diverging or opposite views”. People argue all the time, they don’t have to be angry at each other. A bunch lame name calling, is not an “argument” by any definition.

          • “Since none of you give an actual opinion.”
            I was going to say our opinions are that you’re human trash, but you’re right. That one’s an objective truth.

            Your argument was always a big blob of childish insults insisting anybody who disagreed were assholes, insane, stupid, against reason, and bullshit. How about you drizzle off your pedestal and stop being shocked when not all responses are respectful? e.d.oot only said one sentence and you went off in your muddled stupor.

            Good god, you’re so nonsensically self-absorbed, you forgot this means DurmUndStrang also used the term correctly while you harped on him ignoring all context. That’s not even pedantic, that’s just you being a dumb, self-centered asshole and a lying hypocrite. If you insist there’s no primary definition, you don’t get to tell people they’re wrong. All you did was explain why you’re an irredeemable shithead.

        • “What’s the point of discussion without the intent to arrive at an answer?”

          There isn’t always a single answer available. If there was, the world would have arrived at that answer already and it would mostly be accepted by the populous. Of course, this is assuming that any answer could be the correct one. It’s possible to argue for the wrong answer too, simply because of the belief in being correct. Consider how often people make faith based arguments, where there is no proof, which means objectivity isn’t always important when it comes to opinions.

          “Do you really expect people to just state their opinions to each other without attempting at all to change someone’s mind?
          That’s just insane.
          You can’t just respect a person’s opinion and leave it at that, specifically because you might disagree.”

          Some opinions aren’t worth arguing over, but we all fundamentally want to be understood. Agreeing to disagree is when one person has decided that they don’t agree, but they’ve already said everything that can be said. If the other person won’t change their mind, you can either say that you agree to disagree or stop arguing in general, but it makes no difference at that point. Hassling people into a false agreement is completely empty and repeating everything multiple times is wasted effort. Do you have a better solution?

          “It’s like, if a married couple disagreed about their pet, one wants it, the other wants it gone. They can’t just stubbornly root themselves to their own feelings. Both of them need to come at each other trying to prove their opinion is the correct one. But it’s not a one way street, they also need to be willing to change their own opinion based on the argument.”

          This is an incredibly complicated example, but in particular it’s making one very basic assumption: a decision has to be made. Many arguments on the internet don’t involve the fate of a pet. It’s just opinions about a movie, which will change nothing about that movie. On the other hand, the couple in this example can’t agree to disagree, because it’s based around fulfilling a necessary action. However, the results could vary, and even in this example, it depends on the circumstances. For instance, if one of them has allergies or they can’t afford to pay for the pet’s needs or even something as simple as being upset about the fleas the pet keeps bringing into the house. This is less about opinions and more about taking action, which is why an agreement and some kind of compromise is necessary.

          “This whole, let’s just respect each other and agree to disagree is bullshit. If anything, it’s just the nice guys defense against reason.”
          Reason assumes the debate isn’t purely subjective to begin with. I also find it amusing that you consider it a defense. It’s not. It’s a statement meant to end the conversation, as you have noted. But what do you have against respect, my friend? Do you believe the person saying this doesn’t actually respect your opinion? Does it even matter if they do, considering how this is the internet and respect is usually in such short supply? Is agreeing to disagree no different from calling you names, in your opinion? Can the other person ever win, unless they agree with you? I certainly hope so, but it sounds as if that might not be the case.

        • Zoey Posthuman

          And people like you are why suffering still exists. If their opinion (or views or beliefs) does not impact you or harm a third party, then you should just respectfully move the fuck on.

  2. Second because……..well, because I also can?

  3. Can you please do a charity shout-out to Doctors Without Borders/Médecins Sans Frontières?

  4. I remember studying Critical and Literary Analysis back in college that a critic must only review the body of the work and nothing else, but sometimes we tend to focus mostly in out emotional response to it. Heck, I’m guilty of doing it most of the time.
    I remember watching the Phantom Menace and thinking to myself: “without the SFX, what do we have in here?”, but that was mostly my main problem with the film…..well, that the abomination that I shall never mention!
    Sometimes I even have to watch a film a 2nd time to actually make sure if I like it or not! Yeah, I’m not very bright…
    Chris Tucker might be kind of enjoyable in small dosis only, but after starring in a couple of films gets annoying fast.
    YES! Blade next!

    • Zoey Posthuman

      In my opinion, anything that claims to be THE way a critic should do something is wrong. For example, to use that situation, while it’s important to review the body of work independently, it’s equally important to review something with regards to the world in which it exists. Nothing exists in a vacuum. The beliefs of the creator(s), the intended audience, and much more are all important to understanding a work, its meaning, and its place in the world. For example: Gene Simmons. Mediocre musician, yes. But, while his talent is low, his understanding of how to make catchy, successful music is far, far beyond any of us. Furthermore, he’s a talented businessman. He’s also a raging, gaping asshole. On a whole, Gene Simmons deserves a punch in the face. But, if you review only his work, you divorce the work from the person and thus will lose a lot of the meaning and purpose of the work. Or, for a film example, Woody Allen. If you divorce Allen’s personal life from his film, he’s a talented creator. But when you analyze the content of his film in tandem with his personal life, everything feels a ton more ewww, and you pick up on subtext in some of the works that you’d never have noticed otherwise. Gary Glitter is another good example of that, although Jimmy Savile is perhaps the most obvious example of why you can’t just divorce the creator from the work.

  5. Tell it like it is critic. BTW, major kudos for shouting out to WWF.

  6. When he was saying “You can like whatever you like” I was just waiting for “Unless you like Garbage Pail Kids. WTF”

  7. Thank you for always promoting thoughtful dialogues between people rather than shutting it down in favor of one opinion or another.

  8. >Signs got a 74% by critics, Kingdom of the Crystal Skull got a 77% by critics
    Very true

    >Phantom Menace got good critic scores
    Oh for fuck’s sake, Phantom Menace got a 56% by critics! Stop giving into the ‘Roger Ebert critic’ excuse back in the day because a load of critics hated the movie. ONE MAN DOES NOT MAKE THE MAJORITY.

    Critics are just basically a ‘is it a good idea to see it or not’ kind of thinking. It’s obvious and easy to answer.

    • “Critics are just basically a ‘is it a good idea to see it or not’ kind of thinking. It’s obvious and easy to answer”

      But it’s not, and that’s the point. Whether or not a movie is enjoyable is incredibly subjective. Heck, even how much you have to enjoy a movie in order to be worth your time is subjective!

    • The thing to do with all reviews is to do more than just look at the score. Read what they say and figure out if those opinions would line up with what you like or dislike in your movies. People today too much care only about the numbers a movie gets and not what anyone actually says about the movie.

      • Also find people who you trust the opinions of. Like I watch Doug’s, Angry Joe’s and Jeremy Jahn’s opinions of movies. They all give nice thorough opinions of the movies, and of course if you watch enough you get an idea of how their opinions may differ from yours and you can infer your opinion on a new movie based on past experience.

    • It has a 56% now… Rotten Tomatoes didn’t exist in 1999 and Roger Ebert and other big name critics (rather than the made horde that is the internet blog culture) were the critics whose opinions carried weight.

    • Do you honestly go into those screaming cursing caps raves thinking it’s everybody else who’s a troll and you’re the sensible one? Because with statements like “It’s obvious and easy to answer” or “everybody should do the same,” you already act like the magical know-it-all described at the beginning. Minus all the self aware sarcasm.

    • TheSuicidalTeddybear

      “Don’t listen to Roger Ebert only!” says the guy who follows rotten tomatoes blindly. What the critic means is that all those movies got good reviews when they came out, just like The Big Lebowski got BAD reviews by critics when they came out. But now several years later many old and new critics has seen through new eyes how bad phantom menace is and how good The Big Lebowski is, which has effected the score on rotten tomatoes.

  9. Do a Review on Star Wars: The Clone Wars The Film and maybe you should check out The Spectucalar Spider-Man and Young Justice, they are both by Greg Wisemen, The Guy behind Gargoyles and it really shows!

  10. A very good point. I also didn’t like the new Jungle Book movie as much as everyone else did.

    Also, PLEASE let this not be a clipless review. It’s really bad that it’s gotten to the point where I can never tell based on the title anymore. I DON’T want to give a view to those types of reviews, so please put a disclaimer in there or I’ll be forced to skim through the comments of poor people who DID unfortunately give it a view and were tricked.

  11. this is something I have been kinda struggling with a little bit. As I have gotten older I have become much much more critical of stories and of movies. I do have a rule about critics though:

    Find a critic that shares your opinion on a usual basis and that’s usually the critic you want to trust.

    its like a news agency find one you trust and go with that one, which I think is the best way to approach a critic or news in my experience. It’s because every critic has it’s likes and dislikes.

    Like for instance deadpool was panned by some critics because the character was immature and childish, and it’s reliance on pop culture references. Anyone who knows of the character should know that is basically that makes the character interesting (that and his 4th wall breaking and inability to die).

    It is about who you trust as a journalist that is (at least in my opinion) how you measure a critic.

  12. “Screw the critics” is what I always say when critics bash on recently released movies that I actually enjoy watching; from Transformers: Revenge of the Fallen to recently with Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice. But I agree with them on films like Star Wars Episode I (which is NOT a bad film) and Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull.
    I never had the chance to see Birdman yet, but I want to. Not just because it got critical acclaim and won at the Oscars, but because of the characters and the story of a has-been trying to get back on top.
    Forrest Gump is one of Robert Zemeckis’s finest, Saving Private Ryan is my favorite WW2 movie, Ace Ventura help make Jim Carrey a big name, TMNT ’90 is a nostalgic classic, The Lego Movie is a love letter any to all Lego fans like myself, Hotel Transylvania films are great comedies for monsterfans young and old, Home Alone is a Christmas classic.

  13. So does this mean I can finally go back to liking Pixar’s Cars and Cars 2 without feeling like I should be sent to prison/an insane asylum for having a positive opinion of those movies?

  14. Oh dont you dare say anything bad about first and second Blade!

  15. Oh yeah, the same can be applied to video games as well. We look to critics to see if they like the games we hope to buy, but sometimes their reviews can be helpful but sometimes outlandish in some parts.

  16. MidnightScreeningsman2014

    And I can see all the critics got it wrong on Batman v Superman being on this form….

    • MidnightScreeningsman2014

      Good video Doug. I really didnt think Batman v Superman dawn of justice deserved all the hate it gotnfrom the critics(or simply I didn’t think it was as bad as they said it was. Still good video though hope blade isint a clipless review.

  17. Answer: never. Opinions -which are what criticism, or evaluations are- can never be wrong as in correct or incorrect. It just means critics don’t equal the major populace. Therefore, nobody ever got something wrong for feeling something was good when a lot of others didn’t or for not sharing the groupthink mentality of something being good if they didn’t think so…

  18. The Scarlet Ninja

    Opinions are what make the world go round. If everyone agreed on everything all the time, we’d live in a VERY boring world. Films despised by critics and others like X men origins: Wolverine, Hancock, Dragonball Evolution, and a Knight’s Tale I found very enjoyable and I know people will ask why. I don’t know, I just did, it’s like explaining why I like a food, it’s just the reaction I got. Even the worst reviewed film of all time is bound to have at least one fan. So don’t let other opinions sway you from experiencing something you want to experience, because you may come to find out that you think those people are wrong.

  19. I like the star wars prequels and hated episode 7,of course I like the original trilogy!

    • How could you hate the 7th movie when it takes the best parts of the original trilogy and puts them all in one movie? Also how could you love the prequel trilogy when it’s 90% politics and cartoon fight sequences and the other 10% are emo drama and badly choreographed fight sequences that make little to no sense?

  20. Animal Farm, 1984, Atlas Shrugged, all three tackled and talk about the same thing from different view points and in different ways. The things is that Atlas Shrugged is the ONLY one to acknowledge that it is happening in places other than Russia, the author herself also grew up in Russia during that era and watched what it did first hand, unlike Orwell who was hated the end result of socialism/communism that Russia and every other communist nation eventually ends up taking. What is surprising is that people today all acknowledge that these things are going on in places they are not welcome to be going on. Fromt he EPA causing a disaster just so they could get more money to push an agenda to mass fraud from institutes such as the NOAA because of political pressure to over regulation, the list goes on and on.

  21. Andre Meadows The Black Nerd said it best. You are allowed to go into a movie to decide for yourself if you like it or not. Here’s my take on the whole take on Batman v Superman. What made me feel that critics were bias towards it initially was that Social Media were saying nothing but good things about it after 2 Priemeres. I have seen movies I think are bad. Marvel & DC alike. I liked the movie. Was there some really bad moments in it yes. But instead of focusing on what the movie failed in I focus on what the movie succeeded in. Wonder Woman based on reactions I’ve seen have been mostly positive. Therefore now a spark of interest in her movie has been increased significantly. Ben Affleck got better reception as Batman himself and now we get a Batman solo movie directed by him! So Batman v Superman is highly unlikely to hit the Billion. This movie did what it needed to make people wanna enjoy Marvel & DC movies for DIFFERENT Reasons instead of the same reasons. DC doing the quips and the jokes doesn’t work as well than Marvel doing it. DC should consider themselves lucky to be able to make what it will end up making. Star Trek never could Ninja Turtles never could. One movie doesn’t define DC fans. DC fans define DC fans.

  22. I always thought the initial love that turned into hate for Episode 1 and the Prequels in general where people appealing to the masses. Most people saw Episode 1 and loved it but later on changed their opinions after being exposed to the great internet nerd fury over how they changed Star Wars and therefore its sucks. People were told the movie is bad, that they had to hate it and how everyone else did so people had to go with the crowd. Look at the vitriol people receive when they admit they didn’t hate the Prequels, not even say they liked them just that they didn’t hate them.

    People point to stuff like Red Letter Media’s review of the Prequels as why they were bad, holding up that nitpicky comedy review as the be all end all of why the Prequels are bad. People are barely able to form their own opinions of why they are bad, merely reciting other peoples opinions of why they are bad. Resorting to bashing the creator, sometimes actually enraged that George Lucas made them.

    I almost wonder if Episode 7 would have went the way of the Prequels without Disney purposely distancing itself from Lucas himself and appealing to OT fanboys. Even then its still got a massive divide among people, even OT fanboys are divided with some thinking it tried too hard to appeal to them.

  23. Wait, people hate Ender’s Game? Why?

    No, “it’s not like the books therefore it sucks!” is not an argument, shut up and think again!

  24. 9:38 HA! Thanks to an IHE video I see this shot as a pitch meeting for Lady Ghostbusters (as I like to call it).

    A professional critical needs to be one thing: informed. They need to know WTF they are talking about. Beyond that it doesn’t matter what their opinion actually is.

    At the same time the rest of us have to understand that that is ALL it is: opinion. It’s not trying to be law, it’s not trying to be fact. It’s one person’s thoughts on a movie.

  25. If the “top” critics of the world were correct, then that would mean that no movie in the past 75 years has been able to top Citizen Cane as the best movie ever created.

    Anyone who think’s that Citizen Cane is the best movie ever should lose all credibility. It’s an insult to all directors since that time to say that there has been nothing better since then. Unfortunately, if you DON’T say that it’s the greatest thing ever created, you’ll be looked down on.

    • Sorry, 50 years.

    • Considering it’s spelled “Citizen Kane” I wager that you have not seen the movie, and to me you have ‘lost all credibility’. Judging from your comment, that must be quite the sting.

      People look down on you because you’re bloviating on a subject you clearly haven’t explored, not because your conclusion (ie “Citizen Kane is not the best movie ever made) is necessarily incorrect. With three lines you expressed both profound unfamiliarity with “Citizen Kane” and an overbearingly dismissive attitude and judgement of it. Quite a feat.

    • Steve the Pocket

      Ironically, “Citizen Kane” was also poorly received by critics when it first came out.

      • To me, Citizen Kane is the movie equivalent of Pokemon GO because lots of people like them but I, myself will never want to watch/play them because they look so boring to me.

  26. I listen to some critics more than others. Although, your points make sense. I would be sad if critics weren’t a thing. I love reading and watching movie reviews. That’s what I do for 25% of my day!

  27. To me there are 3 kinds of movies, good ones, bad ones and debatable ones. You can enjoy all of them but there is such a thing as an objectively bad movie. I usually agree with the points alot of critics make(for the most part) but whether or not I enjoy the movie is a different subject altogether although most movies I’ve been blown away by often had a high RT score. I’m sorta baffled though how a movie like Star Wars 7 has a higher rating than alot of great movies with actual thoughtful scripts(not hating on 7 but its RT score is inflated).

  28. Leonard Maltin! <3

    @ Darth Biomech, Ender's Game is amazing! It certainly has problems. (Oh, that's where the alien leader is… a few yards from a military base, completely undiscovered, what!?) But it was moving, well acted, loyal to the book, good piece of work.

  29. Nostalgia Critic’s videos always lag for me lately, I haven’t been able to watch one all the way through for several weeks now. None of the other videos on this site have this problem. What’s going on?

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.