Rotten Tomatoes tomatometer

patrickm2009

New member
7 %

only 7% from TODs rating. I'll take that. I am so ready. My last day of school is wednesday. then indy on thursday! muhahaha:whip:
 

Indy's Fist

New member
On a side note, I noticed that the Indy films were the highest rated movie franchise. The only other one that comes close is Lord of the Rings.
 

Tom Cook

New member
The interesting thing about these films is that they deeply appeal to the great mass of movie-goers, who are not interested in critiquing films. They deeply appeal to a part of us which one might even call... embarrassing. How many of you haven't been embarrassed expressing your excitement over these films w/ co-workers, etc. the past few weeks? You know, you feel like you're being a little immature? A little kid?

And so hundreds of sophisticated critics are put in the odd position of reviewing a film of enormous popularity, which makes everyone feel like a little kid, the enormousness of which they don't quite understand. And the legitimacy of the movie with the emotions of adults as well, they just don't understand. It's all a little awkward I think. And so they try to squint their eyes and put their best take on it, but at the end of the day they just see action, action, jokes. I mean come on, to compare it to National Treasure, you have to have your head in your butt.

They aren't able to allow the mythological recipe of Indiana Jones resonate in their psyche. They miss all the most basic elements which are the substructure of the film: the yearning for the supernatural, the sense of mystery/transcendence in exploration and travel, the basic idea of a hero's quest w/ trials, the pure joy of trying to understand the domino-effects and suspense of mechanical traps, and a sacramental object in which the transcendent inhabits the mundane world.

There really aren't any film-makers who employ basic elements of mythology in their story-telling... can you think of any? Indiana Jones is inspired by mythology. It is inspired by a shy, unspoilt place within each of us. :sleep:

Critics use films as a way to propel their own aesthetic superiority over others, their own subtle, nuanced artistic taste for ideological concepts. And so when they watch this movie they see action, dialogue, action, dialogue, fantasy.

Harrison says he made this film for :) "those who PAY TO GET IN" (emphasis mine) and those are the opinions that matter. If only critics could take responsibility for their own ability to like or dislike something, instead of responding carefully to fads with a politically correct sense of proportion. These films are fundamentally B-films. Cult-classics which are, strangely, not 'cult' in the sense of engendering a sub-culture. They do not appeal to the pride or the intellect, they appeal to basic human emotions and to mythological stories which resonate in the human psyche.
 

Indy's Fist

New member
Bottom line is that Indy films are fun. All these "sophisticated" critics need to ask themselves is, "Did I have fun?" If they didn't have fun then they need to take that stick out of their a$$es and live a little.
 

No Ticket

New member
I don't need critics or a "tomatometer" to tell me what a good movie is. I've got a pair of eyes and a set of ears. I can figure it out on my own.

But as a huge Indy fan, I hope other people end up liking it even if I don't.
 

Borbarad

New member
No Ticket said:
I don't need critics or a "tomatometer" to tell me what a good movie is. I've got a pair of eyes and a set of ears. I can figure it out on my own.

I bet the SpeedRacer fans are saying the same thing.
 

MolaRam2

New member
I don't see how Iron Man with it's 93% fresh rating could be equal to or better than any Indy flick. I liked Iron Man alot, but compared to Indy movies, Iron Man was just a spec in the dust.
 

Vance

New member
MolaRam2 said:
Temple of Doom had plenty of peril in the action scenes. The bridge scene and the spike room scene are great examples, they are just as good or better with putting Indy in peril as anything in Raiders.

Doom's weaknesses are pretty much spelled out elsehwere here,

But so long as we don't get an insanely stupid, unfunny, and blatantly racist dinner scene...

A female 'sidekick' that screams more than anyone else has dialog...

key scenes that are sadly shunted for bad comedy...

And a ten minute out-of-character 'dark' sequence...

I'll rate it better than Temple of Doom.
 

MolaRam2

New member
Vance said:
Doom's weaknesses are pretty much spelled out elsehwere here,

But so long as we don't get an insanely stupid, unfunny, and blatantly racist dinner scene...

A female 'sidekick' that screams more than anyone else has dialog...

key scenes that are sadly shunted for bad comedy...

And a ten minute out-of-character 'dark' sequence...

I'll rate it better than Temple of Doom.

I love, love, love the dinner scene (it was never meant to be racist and shouldn't be taken as such) and the out-of-character 'dark' sequence.
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:
So are you a proponent of Rotten Tomatoes?

I've wandered through it, but never found anything worthwhile.

I don't think we can take too much notice of percentages. There are so many factors why people would go onto a film site and either record a postive, negative or indifferent review, or not to post one at all. Not only that, but personal views can change at a later date, without feeling the necessity to post an updated opinion.

We can't even be sure that the "professional" critics, who are paid to form an opinon, are speaking from the heart, or from another agenda.

The only review that counts is your own personal one, though it's great to hear other people's thoughts, as we can here. It's the ideas that count, not the percentages. It's hard enough sometimes to express what it is that draws me to a movie, let alone give it a specific grade!
 
Montana Smith said:
Not only that, but personal views can change at a later date... It's hard enough sometimes to express what it is that draws me to a movie, let alone give it a specific grade!
I rate movies on Netflix mostly because I'm curious about the kind of movies they'd recommend/percentages of people's agreement. It would be interesting to get greater access to the raw numbers...

I've noticed my ratings either dropped/not recorded, so I also wonder about those I've changed. I agree, there's always that movie that you wished there was a more precise choice like: I didn't dislike it but I wouldn't watch it again...ect.

I haven't found Rotten Tomatoes to offer much...
 

Montana Smith

Active member
Rocket Surgeon said:
I rate movies on Netflix mostly because I'm curious about the kind of movies they'd recommend/percentages of people's agreement. It would be interesting to get greater access to the raw numbers...

I've noticed my ratings either dropped/not recorded, so I also wonder about those I've changed. I agree, there's always that movie that you wished there was a more precise choice like: I didn't dislike it but I wouldn't watch it again...ect.

I haven't found Rotten Tomatoes to offer much...

The thing about being here, on this particular message board, is that over time I get to know the personalities of some of the members, so when you're reading their opinion of a movie, you have a back story to judge it by. Rather than reading the anonymous opinions of those whose agendas you aren't sure of. If you're a regular on a movie-reviewing site you'll also be able to judge the value of the opinions.
 

Moedred

Administrator
Staff member
Rocket Surgeon said:
So are you a proponent of Rotten Tomatoes?
It's probably the best metric for recent films. Critics are lemmings sometimes, but an aggregator can save you from being steered wrong by a lone trusted voice. Plebian-generated ratings on Netflix and Imdb unfortunately skew to the middle.

KOTCS graphics are used to promote this list, so there follow amusing comments about its unexpectedly high score.
 
Top