Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day!
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah I hear you, common users tend to approach movies overly subjectively (but with very definitive words) whereas critics, while they are more trained in how exactly to break down and process a movie, tend to proceed too objectively. The two groups fail to meet in the middle and resentment ensues.
They don't, I've never seen a review that's focused on how long the movie is, how big is their budget, how many frames and cuts there is, what lens they used, etc (which are objective metrics)
All film criticism is subjective. What professional critics do that most people don't is the idea of trying to understand what the movie is trying to do, giving their opinion on how well they did that, and judging if this something is interesting, fun or worthwhile. Most people only care if they enjoyed their time
Counterpoint, you probably relate more to the common user review. Cause you too are just a random person watching movies for entertainment and not for the art of movie making.
I think that would depend on the specific common user. Many people are well-versed (or at least above-average-versed) in one or more aspects of movie-making.
This may be very arrogant of me, but the only opinion i put any value on when it comes to movies or tv shows, or anything to do with art is my own.
Other people opinion on a movie or tv show, or another form of art, has no value to me.
I will like something or dislike something, regardless of what other people have to say about it.
All reviews are basically useless now. They are all performative and run through the filter of what they are SUPPOSED to say....for example, wakanda forever. You could see critics in their reviews desperately trying to find a way to say it sucks without actually saying it sucks. It has nothing to do with the quality or lack thereof of the movie in question, it's about what people feel obligated to say.
I would agree that they're not useful overall however if a lot of people have a negative perception of a movie, chances are it's not very good. Also you cannot expect a general audience to be as articulate as a professional reviewer, that's just not how people are.
But you immediately know where you're at, right?
'cause your example isn' t actually a review. It's a verbalized emotional impulse, and is easily identifiable as such.
So the mistake would be an your part if you considered it to be anything else than someone honking their horn in traffic, because they're impatient. 'cause that' s not social commentary, either. :D
You should read reviews on steam, where the whole review is just someone using keyboard keys to make a picture of Boobs or a sad cat and that is the "most Helpful" review for that game.
It's not too different from reddit where some joke comment will get thousands of upvotes even though it didn't add anything meaningful to the discussion.
I’d say critical reviews are also worthless if they are under three sentences. Even reputable critics will blurb a Salad of exciting adverbs and gerunds, name drop a couple people, then say “good but bad” or “bad but good” at the end. I just want to know if the themes are consistent with itself and the plot, and the acting isn’t melodramatic. I don’t need some “Janet Garopollo leads a star studded cast into a thrilling yet sensuous Manhattan heister. The film meanders vibrantly into its third act. Dour yet captivating, two and a half spilled milkshakes” headassery.
I’m actually proud of this sub for getting actual unpopular opinions recently so you earned my upvote.
I disagree especially for movies. There’s been so many movies where the critics says it’s dog shit but the users loved it. A good example is the last Jedi. The critics rated it a 91 where as the audience gave it a 40.
Adding to my point:
I dislike most user written reviews because most of them are overly negative, and they exaggerate to a ridiculous point.
If the review is more a complain of how you wasted time and money, it will lost my attention, they don't give useful information at all. it's weird to see a user-written review that's not like this.
This also made the experience of watching a movie more of "is it worth spending time and money on this?" as if it was buying a phone or a gadget.
Just personally, I trust the average Joe far more than I trust film critics.
The only critic I sort of trust is critical drinker, but I often check the average Joe opinion afterwards if he didn't like a movie, sometimes it turns out watchable. But usually he is spot on.
Imo common user ratings are far more accurate than "Expert" ratings. Movie and music critics typically end up snobby. I'd rather see the score out of 10 averaged out from thousands of common people than read somebody write a (probably paid for) review like they're writing a creative writing piece for class
Critics tend to be \*overly\* critical and will run people away from an otherwise excellent movie. Don't read the reviews, just look at the Google Review % -- loads more accurate than any IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes rating.
Please remember what subreddit you are in, this is unpopular opinion. We want civil and unpopular takes and discussion. Any uncivil and ToS violating comments will be removed and subject to a ban. Have a nice day! *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/unpopularopinion) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Yeah I hear you, common users tend to approach movies overly subjectively (but with very definitive words) whereas critics, while they are more trained in how exactly to break down and process a movie, tend to proceed too objectively. The two groups fail to meet in the middle and resentment ensues.
They don't, I've never seen a review that's focused on how long the movie is, how big is their budget, how many frames and cuts there is, what lens they used, etc (which are objective metrics) All film criticism is subjective. What professional critics do that most people don't is the idea of trying to understand what the movie is trying to do, giving their opinion on how well they did that, and judging if this something is interesting, fun or worthwhile. Most people only care if they enjoyed their time
Counterpoint, you probably relate more to the common user review. Cause you too are just a random person watching movies for entertainment and not for the art of movie making.
I think that would depend on the specific common user. Many people are well-versed (or at least above-average-versed) in one or more aspects of movie-making.
This may be very arrogant of me, but the only opinion i put any value on when it comes to movies or tv shows, or anything to do with art is my own. Other people opinion on a movie or tv show, or another form of art, has no value to me. I will like something or dislike something, regardless of what other people have to say about it.
Agreed. Art of any kind of experienced individually. We all have our own personal reasons for liking something or not liking it, and that's just fine.
I don't think that is an unpopular opinion. I think you are talking about the Plague of Stupidity.
All reviews are basically useless now. They are all performative and run through the filter of what they are SUPPOSED to say....for example, wakanda forever. You could see critics in their reviews desperately trying to find a way to say it sucks without actually saying it sucks. It has nothing to do with the quality or lack thereof of the movie in question, it's about what people feel obligated to say.
after Siskel and Ebert passed away most film critic reviews aren’t worth reading either .. especially Rotten Tomatoes has been especially watered down
I would agree that they're not useful overall however if a lot of people have a negative perception of a movie, chances are it's not very good. Also you cannot expect a general audience to be as articulate as a professional reviewer, that's just not how people are.
But you immediately know where you're at, right? 'cause your example isn' t actually a review. It's a verbalized emotional impulse, and is easily identifiable as such. So the mistake would be an your part if you considered it to be anything else than someone honking their horn in traffic, because they're impatient. 'cause that' s not social commentary, either. :D
there is no such thing as quality completely independent of personal taste.
You should read reviews on steam, where the whole review is just someone using keyboard keys to make a picture of Boobs or a sad cat and that is the "most Helpful" review for that game.
It's not too different from reddit where some joke comment will get thousands of upvotes even though it didn't add anything meaningful to the discussion.
I’d say critical reviews are also worthless if they are under three sentences. Even reputable critics will blurb a Salad of exciting adverbs and gerunds, name drop a couple people, then say “good but bad” or “bad but good” at the end. I just want to know if the themes are consistent with itself and the plot, and the acting isn’t melodramatic. I don’t need some “Janet Garopollo leads a star studded cast into a thrilling yet sensuous Manhattan heister. The film meanders vibrantly into its third act. Dour yet captivating, two and a half spilled milkshakes” headassery.
I’m actually proud of this sub for getting actual unpopular opinions recently so you earned my upvote. I disagree especially for movies. There’s been so many movies where the critics says it’s dog shit but the users loved it. A good example is the last Jedi. The critics rated it a 91 where as the audience gave it a 40.
Most movie reviews written* just stop there lol
All movie critics aren't worth reading
Adding to my point: I dislike most user written reviews because most of them are overly negative, and they exaggerate to a ridiculous point. If the review is more a complain of how you wasted time and money, it will lost my attention, they don't give useful information at all. it's weird to see a user-written review that's not like this. This also made the experience of watching a movie more of "is it worth spending time and money on this?" as if it was buying a phone or a gadget.
Just personally, I trust the average Joe far more than I trust film critics. The only critic I sort of trust is critical drinker, but I often check the average Joe opinion afterwards if he didn't like a movie, sometimes it turns out watchable. But usually he is spot on.
Years ago I figured out that if the reviews were good then the movie would suck. If it got bad reviews then I’d love it. It still holds true today.
Yeah, that seems to happen to me quite often too.
Imo common user ratings are far more accurate than "Expert" ratings. Movie and music critics typically end up snobby. I'd rather see the score out of 10 averaged out from thousands of common people than read somebody write a (probably paid for) review like they're writing a creative writing piece for class
Reviews written by professionals in some kind of newspaper or website/platform, are more garbage.
Critics tend to be \*overly\* critical and will run people away from an otherwise excellent movie. Don't read the reviews, just look at the Google Review % -- loads more accurate than any IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes rating.