The Golden Idol
New member
Skipper said:Boston Globe (3 stars)
Out of four? Or five?
Skipper said:Boston Globe (3 stars)
The Golden Idol said:Out of four? Or five?
I don't think it said. I would assume out of 4, since it's a really positive review.The Golden Idol said:Out of four? Or five?
Skipper said:I don't think it said. I would assume out of 4, since it's a really positive review.
Kingsley said:I try to take these things with a grain of salt, but I couldn't resist temptation...
67% in the Tomatoer
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/indiana_jones_4/
Not bad, not great... Good.
When Attack of the Clones first came out, I seem to remember most critics saying it was way better than Phantom Menace.The Golden Idol said:That's the same rating as Attack of the Clones, and that was horrendous.
Oh well, I'm sure it'll change soon, because there are only 12 reviews.
Noooooooooooo... but I believe it will grow over 70% too.The Golden Idol said:That's the same rating as Attack of the Clones, and that was horrendous.
Skipper said:When Attack of the Clones first came out, I seem to remember most critics saying it was way better than Phantom Menace.
jasperjones said:Chud is chiming in with hints of their reviews. Good bits. Bad bits. Fairly predictable. They've been against the film from the off and I never agree with their views on the whole although some of their articles are amusing. They're far too cynical for my tastes.
Far away from the 87% of TOD (the lowest in the trilogy)SterankoII said:But anyway the fact that the Rotten Tomatoes meter is rising is a good sign. When I checked an hour ago it was 63%.
Is that 87% the percentage of critics who gave it a favorable review? Or does that include user reviews?Kingsley said:Far away from the 87% of TOD (the lowest in the trilogy