Didn't need to watch it to know I'd hate it. Incidentally... "The film was critically panned on release, scoring a 12% on Rotten Tomatoes."
Haha didnt know that like, i thought it was canny probs cause it was the kid of game of thrones was one of the leads.
My issue with critics is that I have generally enjoyed films that they deem rubbish. Says something about them or me and I would rather trust my judgment.
I don't tend to trust them when they say something is good as I know what goes on in the industry, there's a lot of towing the line and a fear of being excluded from future screenings and stuff. They've got little reason to say something is bad other than for it being bad though. It's rare I see a film I like which has been panned. They tend to get slated because they're utterly slated. If you don't trust the critics there you could also take the word of third lead Will Poulter who said the film was shaming in its ****tiness..
They are. I can't really watch a lot of the old one. Pierce brsonana was my jb. Though I do like the current ones apart from quantum. That was pure gash.
The film that sticks out in memory was "Hook" with Dustin Hoffman (Terry Thomas lookalike Captain Hook) and Robin Williams as adult Peter Pan. Grand kids wanted to see it and I thought I was in for a bore based on what critics had said about it even though it had b een directed by Spielberg. Turned out to be highly entertaining and enjoyable for us all. A disappointing one for me following all its hype was Private Ryan, critics loved it but after the first half hour it became just a run of the mill war film with the inevitable ending. It could be an age thing as I felt it was there to give a history lesson on war sacrifice and fly the flag as archive material for the D-Day landings. Spielberg again so maybe the critics had made their points previously.
Saving private ryan is a decent movie. But as it has the best opening of any movie. Imo. I could understand how the rest of it could be a bit of a let down for some.
