I make it a rule of mine never to believe movie rating's and people's opinions without seeing it for myself.

After all, Star Wars got a terrible rating in 1977. Now look at it.

"So bad it takes points away from Batman Begins."

It's a freaking Fantastic 4 movie, of course it's gonna suck.

Yeah, the movies I've been wanting to see this year (Top 5)

Star Wars: Episode III > Batman Begins > War of the Worlds > Willy Wonka (Is it called that?) > Fantastic Four

Maybe even Doom should replace it. Who knows!

I don't like the all or nothing system at RT. It's stupid.

This movie is getting WAY too much hype.

This movie seems to be one that's cool to dislike. I'll give it a shot. Like I wouldn't, it's a Marvel movie! Anyway, I like this quote:



Being that the only movie she compared it to that I didn't particularly like is Elektra that must mean I have 2 in 3 chance of liking it! Plus, I don't really like the Rotten Tomatoes site anyway.

At least with crappy superhero movies (ie. Hulk, Daredevil, Elektra, Fantastic Four, The Punisher, etc.) we can get some superb ones to overshadow them (ie. X-MEN, X2, Spider-Man, Spider-Man 2, Batman Begins.)

The critics tell Rotten Tomatoes if they thought the movie was rotten or fresh as well as how many starts or whatever out of 10 they gave the movie when they submit the review. Rotten tomatoes takes all the rotten and all the fresh reviews and averages them together. If a movie gets 60% or more 'fresh' reviews it's considered a good movie. If you don't like that system, RT even gets all the star and number ratings and averages them together. So the movie has 21% on RT making it a rotten film. But it also has under that an average rating of 4.5/10.

I didn't watch Daredevil and don't plan to, but the fans seem to love it.

I watch The Hulk but as that was never my favorite (Batman wins), I didn't enjoy it *that* much.

Elektra was just plain out cool. So why are they comparing it bad to movies the people love?

You guys are the first people I've heard that actually enjoyed Daredevil and Elektra. I've seen both and I can honestly say they were two of the worst films I think I've seen.

I "liked" daredevil, and I went in expecting it to suck terribly.
I didn't know about the comic books of it, just vaguely heard the name. When I watched it I thought it was as good as X-men 2. Batman Begins is #1 for me at the moment in terms of comic book movies.

Elektra had potential but ruined it after the opening scene. Elektra is much more "Punisher-like" in the comics. I can't think of anything significantly wrong with Daredevil. That, too, appears to be one that's cool to dislike. Elektra is the only modern Marvel movie (which started with Blade) to disappoint me although I didn't particularly like some story aspects to the Hulk.

Blaming it on the concept of "cool to dislike" doesn't change the fact that Daredevil and Elektra were really crappy movies (though I hear the DD Director's Cut was better.)

Those are matter of opinions. And, yes, I posted here before that I thought the Director's Cut was better.

Catwoman.

LOLLLL.

I had forgotten Catwoman existed. Thank you for bringing that back into my consciousness.

The Director's Cut of DD is definitely better, some things make a lot more sense and it gives it a better tone.

I enjoyed Daredevil. Elektra seemed too "look, we've got cool villains with cool powers that die in 30 seconds" to me. Fantastic Four looks interesting because Jessica Alba is hot and the Human Torch looks like enjoyable comic relief.

"Where are your ears?"

I'm not going to see the movie based on one line from the trailer, which I have deemed to be the worst written line and acted line in cinematic history

"susan, let's not fight"
"NOO LETS!!!!"

That made me laugh so hard in the theater. It even isn't that bad really, but for some reason it just sounds terrible.

Rotten Tomatoes == t3h suck. They gave Boondock Saints a 10%, but I agree that this movie most likely is bleh.

I thought the exact same thing.

EDIT: That's because The Boondock Saints does suck.

No.

I have an idea. I say we nominate someone to give dope slaps to directors who's movies get rotten status on Rotten Tomatoes. It might make people more motivated to not make crappy movies.

I third that. Exact same reason.

I agree. Boondock Saints was awesome, never mind the fact that it was a Tarantino wanna-be. It's still good in its own right.

The fantastic 4 movie is probably not that great compared to Batman Begins (which I still haven't seen) or Spider man, but anything is better than Electra or catwoman.

I kinda thought Jessica Alba's looks were going to be carrying the movie from the moment I first saw reports of it, but I still would never trust RT, it seems to be biased against the movie from the start.

Plus critics suck. Rarely do they review movies I've enjoyed fairly.

[edit] Boondock Saints was damn entertaining.

... and it taught me that the Irish were sent here by the Lord Jesus Christ to purify the Earth.

I'd argue that the worst line in cinematic history is:

"Do you know what happens to a toad when it gets struck by lightning? The same thing that happens to everything else." - Storm X-MEN

The fact that Storm says the line just makes my hate of her in the movies more (she's the only thing I dislike about the films.) Now on the director's commentary they make up a much better line... "It croaks."

While that Storm line blows, I have to say that "No Lets" gets my vote for second place. The worst dialogue/acting I have ever seen in a movie goes to Anakin's monologue on sand from ATOC

"I hate sand. It's so...sandy. But you're not sandy. And that is why I love you."

I don't care how HAWT you guys think Jessica Alba is. She can't act for crap.

I thought she did good in Dark Angel. Haven't paid enough attention to any of her films to really make a determination. I'll judge her, um, acting, yeah, acting when I watch the film probably tomorrow.

She was the only thing I didn't like about Sin City.

Well she didn't really need to act much in Sin City :p

I liked Spiderman, X-Men. X-Men 2 and Spiderman 2 even more. I also liked Daredevil. But The Hulk sucked.

And Batman begins.... well... that was the most boring movie ever. Some failed attempt at making Batman more realistic. I like it better when pulp is simply pulp, when Uma Thurman is wearing a crazy suit..less pretentious. Man, the first 70 minutes or so I was thinking seeing '7 Years in Tibet 2'... and finally some batman action... not even exciting. I personally was very, very bored. Longwinded dialogue, etc.etc.

I'm worried about FF though... lol

I thought the trailers looked terrible.

I really have to agree although I don't think you really mean the most boring movie ever. I actually saw the film again yesterday with my daughter. I was reminded how bored I was the first time by how bored I was yesterday. Even the parts I thought it did well the first time seemed less impressive this time. Overall my opinion hasn't changed. It's still probably the second best Batman movie second only to the '89 Batman. It was an origin film so I can forgive much of the slowness, I liked his origin and give it points for that. Batmobile, while better than some of the previous models still isn't as cool as the 89 version, imo. Of course the director for the first Batman, Burton, was a mixed bag. Great at the Batman stuff but a little weird on the Wayne stuff. I think Batman Begins could have been better if it borrowed a little from the 89 film. That's what would have put it over the top for me. But, hey, no film is perfect and the fans are the biggest critics.

I love that. Short, and to the point.