Author Topic: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim  (Read 6890 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #15 on: May 14, 2015, 03:13:54 PM »

Offline jordb2k5

  • Aron Baynes
  • Posts: 106
  • Tommy Points: 16
You guys do realize critics get paid for their reviews right ? Not saying it's a bad movie without seeing it, but just saying.

I watched the first 3 mad max movies btw.

You do your job for free, I assume?

There are critics that I can't trust their reviews because I know they've been bought.  Harry Knowles is the worst for example he will not bad mouth a movie by any of his "friends" that are directors.  He gives them good reviews and he gets free stuff/gets to visit sets.

However that's not everyone and critics are wrong about films often.  Don't think they will be on this one however  I think it lives up to the hype

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #16 on: May 14, 2015, 03:19:25 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1238
I stopped paying attention to movie reviews when Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert died. I still read Peter Travers because of a rogue Rolling Stone subscription.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #17 on: May 14, 2015, 04:10:06 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
You guys do realize critics get paid for their reviews right ? Not saying it's a bad movie without seeing it, but just saying.

I watched the first 3 mad max movies btw.

You do your job for free, I assume?

There are critics that I can't trust their reviews because I know they've been bought.  Harry Knowles is the worst for example he will not bad mouth a movie by any of his "friends" that are directors.  He gives them good reviews and he gets free stuff/gets to visit sets.

However that's not everyone and critics are wrong about films often.  Don't think they will be on this one however  I think it lives up to the hype
There's no chance that it's receiving critical acclaim, because 100+ critics were paid off.  If that was the case, literally every billion dollar movie would receive widespread critical acclaim.  And yet you see movies like "Man of Steel" get a 55 on Metacritic... Avengers scoring in the 60s... Fast and Furious movies scoring in the 60s.   

Mad Max is receiving almost unprecedented critical acclaim.   I have literally never seen a big budget action flick receive unanimous praise like this. 

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #18 on: May 14, 2015, 04:18:47 PM »

Offline Lucky17

  • DKC Commish
  • JoJo White
  • ****************
  • Posts: 16021
  • Tommy Points: 2352
DKC League is now on reddit!: http://www.reddit.com/r/dkcleague

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #19 on: May 14, 2015, 04:31:20 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1238
You guys do realize critics get paid for their reviews right ? Not saying it's a bad movie without seeing it, but just saying.

I watched the first 3 mad max movies btw.

You do your job for free, I assume?

There are critics that I can't trust their reviews because I know they've been bought.  Harry Knowles is the worst for example he will not bad mouth a movie by any of his "friends" that are directors.  He gives them good reviews and he gets free stuff/gets to visit sets.

However that's not everyone and critics are wrong about films often.  Don't think they will be on this one however  I think it lives up to the hype
There's no chance that it's receiving critical acclaim, because 100+ critics were paid off.  If that was the case, literally every billion dollar movie would receive widespread critical acclaim.  And yet you see movies like "Man of Steel" get a 55 on Metacritic... Avengers scoring in the 60s... Fast and Furious movies scoring in the 60s.   

Mad Max is receiving almost unprecedented critical acclaim.   I have literally never seen a big budget action flick receive unanimous praise like this.

http://pretentious-o-meter.co.uk
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #20 on: May 14, 2015, 04:38:41 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
You guys do realize critics get paid for their reviews right ? Not saying it's a bad movie without seeing it, but just saying.

I watched the first 3 mad max movies btw.

You do your job for free, I assume?

There are critics that I can't trust their reviews because I know they've been bought.  Harry Knowles is the worst for example he will not bad mouth a movie by any of his "friends" that are directors.  He gives them good reviews and he gets free stuff/gets to visit sets.

However that's not everyone and critics are wrong about films often.  Don't think they will be on this one however  I think it lives up to the hype
There's no chance that it's receiving critical acclaim, because 100+ critics were paid off.  If that was the case, literally every billion dollar movie would receive widespread critical acclaim.  And yet you see movies like "Man of Steel" get a 55 on Metacritic... Avengers scoring in the 60s... Fast and Furious movies scoring in the 60s.   

Mad Max is receiving almost unprecedented critical acclaim.   I have literally never seen a big budget action flick receive unanimous praise like this.

http://pretentious-o-meter.co.uk

Yeah that's the thing, though...

A lot of action/comic book films received mixed-to-poor reviews by critics. I'll use Metacritic scores for reference. Whether it's the "Taken" franchise (26-50 on Metacritic), Avengers (60s), Fast and Furious franchise (60s) or literally every movie Zack Snyder has made ("300" - 51, "Man of Steel" - 55, "Watchmen" - 56"). Even an oft-mentioned film liked "Dredd" scored a 59.

A common excuse from fans is that critics simply do not like action films. As if all critics are merely pretentious elitist snobs who only enjoy boring slow-paced schmaltzy actor-driven dramas with beautiful prose and thoughtful introspective dialogue. The belief has been that a large percentage of high-brow critics will auto-bash anything resembling entertainment.

Now here comes "Mad Max: Fury Road".  It's receiving more consensus critical praise than almost every single Oscar nominee last year.

And yet everything I read about it suggest it's a balls-to-the-wall action flick with minimal dialogue. Does this put to rest the theory that "critics hate action films"?

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #21 on: May 14, 2015, 04:43:04 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1238
Critics loved Drive. Ebert (and others) gave Die Hard a great review (if you read it, instead of just looking at the star quotient). People that say that sort of stuff probably don't know what they're talking about and are trying to justify the fact that they like bad movies without having any idea "what makes it bad."

"I like it" does not make something good. That's a big hurdle for a lot of people.  Not to mention, using numbers to measure the worth of art is fundamentally stupid.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #22 on: May 14, 2015, 04:44:57 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
I stopped paying attention to movie reviews when Pauline Kael and Roger Ebert died. I still read Peter Travers because of a rogue Rolling Stone subscription.
FYI, Travers gave it 3.5 out of 4 stars. 

He says, "Mad Max: Fury Road kicked my ass hard. It'll kick yours. So get prepped for a new action classic. You won't know what hit you."

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #23 on: May 14, 2015, 04:47:42 PM »

Offline D.o.s.

  • NCE
  • Cedric Maxwell
  • **************
  • Posts: 14061
  • Tommy Points: 1238
I have read nothing that suggests that Mad Max isn't an awesome movie.

The problem is that a lot of movies that enjoy mass success aren't. Being a "good movie" and being financially successful aren't mutually exclusive, but making a blockbuster requires a ton of money, and directors haven't had the power to make massive movies free of producers/investor meddling since 1980, give or take.
At least a goldfish with a Lincoln Log on its back goin' across your floor to your sock drawer has a miraculous connotation to it.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #24 on: May 14, 2015, 04:55:08 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
Critics loved Drive. Ebert (and others) gave Die Hard a great review (if you read it, instead of just looking at the star quotient). People that say that sort of stuff probably don't know what they're talking about and are trying to justify the fact that they like bad movies without having any idea "what makes it bad."

"I like it" does not make something good. That's a big hurdle for a lot of people.

I completely agree. 

I look at critical consensus as a great quick-glance to determine whether a movie is worth my time.  I'm familiar enough with the scoring system that I know what to expect... and frankly, I generally agree with the scores.   

On Metacritic, 90+ means it's a critically beloved film... something approaching masterpiece and very likely an Oscar Contender.

80-90 - Outstanding film.  One of the year's best.
70-80 - Great film.  Most people will enjoy it.
60-70 - Good film.  Unless you hate the genre, it should be fine.
50-60 - Mediocre, but if you like the genre you should enjoy it
40-50 - Avoid these movies unless it's a genre you love
30-40 - Probably garbage, but if it's your favorite genre you might be ok with it.
20-30 - "The Love Guru" starring Mike Meyers



Still, I have the capacity to enjoy most movies on that scale.  The most recent "Hobbit" film scored a 58.  It wasn't a very good movie, but I was fine with it, because I like the world.

"Divergent" scored a 48.  Not a good film, but if you're a big fan of teenage "Hunger Games" style angsty action movies, you'll probably be ok with it.  My girlfriend works with teenage girls... this was right in their wheelhouse.  I liked "Maze Runner" slightly more.  Not surprisingly, it scored slightly higher (56).

Both "Dumb and Dumber To" and "Hot Tub Time Machine 2" scored below 40.  Garbage movies, but I love comedy so I enjoyed them for what they were. 

A lot of fans get super defensive when critics dislike their favorite movie.  I happened to really like "Man of Steel" (55), because I love Superman... but I fully understand why it scored that low.  I agree with the score.   

On the flip side, I HATE the Horror genre.  I'd rather get punched in the face than sit through a Horror movie that scored under 60 on Metacritic.  I reluctantly went to the theater to see "Cabin in the Woods" with my girlfriend mainly because it scored a 72.  It was a really solid movie.  I enjoyed it.  The quality of the film outweighed my major dislike of the genre.


« Last Edit: May 14, 2015, 05:04:14 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #25 on: May 14, 2015, 06:06:47 PM »

Offline celticsclay

  • Tiny Archibald
  • *******
  • Posts: 7805
  • Tommy Points: 893
Critics loved Drive. Ebert (and others) gave Die Hard a great review (if you read it, instead of just looking at the star quotient). People that say that sort of stuff probably don't know what they're talking about and are trying to justify the fact that they like bad movies without having any idea "what makes it bad."

"I like it" does not make something good. That's a big hurdle for a lot of people.

I completely agree. 

I look at critical consensus as a great quick-glance to determine whether a movie is worth my time.  I'm familiar enough with the scoring system that I know what to expect... and frankly, I generally agree with the scores.   

On Metacritic, 90+ means it's a critically beloved film... something approaching masterpiece and very likely an Oscar Contender.

80-90 - Outstanding film.  One of the year's best.
70-80 - Great film.  Most people will enjoy it.
60-70 - Good film.  Unless you hate the genre, it should be fine.
50-60 - Mediocre, but if you like the genre you should enjoy it
40-50 - Avoid these movies unless it's a genre you love
30-40 - Probably garbage, but if it's your favorite genre you might be ok with it.
20-30 - "The Love Guru" starring Mike Meyers



Still, I have the capacity to enjoy most movies on that scale.  The most recent "Hobbit" film scored a 58.  It wasn't a very good movie, but I was fine with it, because I like the world.

"Divergent" scored a 48.  Not a good film, but if you're a big fan of teenage "Hunger Games" style angsty action movies, you'll probably be ok with it.  My girlfriend works with teenage girls... this was right in their wheelhouse.  I liked "Maze Runner" slightly more.  Not surprisingly, it scored slightly higher (56).

Both "Dumb and Dumber To" and "Hot Tub Time Machine 2" scored below 40.  Garbage movies, but I love comedy so I enjoyed them for what they were. 

A lot of fans get super defensive when critics dislike their favorite movie.  I happened to really like "Man of Steel" (55), because I love Superman... but I fully understand why it scored that low.  I agree with the score.   

On the flip side, I HATE the Horror genre.  I'd rather get punched in the face than sit through a Horror movie that scored under 60 on Metacritic.  I reluctantly went to the theater to see "Cabin in the Woods" with my girlfriend mainly because it scored a 72.  It was a really solid movie.  I enjoyed it.  The quality of the film outweighed my major dislike of the genre.

Did Dumb and Dumber 2 make you at least laugh? I enjoyed the first one but haven't bothered to see the second almost entirely off reviews.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #26 on: May 14, 2015, 06:50:30 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
Critics loved Drive. Ebert (and others) gave Die Hard a great review (if you read it, instead of just looking at the star quotient). People that say that sort of stuff probably don't know what they're talking about and are trying to justify the fact that they like bad movies without having any idea "what makes it bad."

"I like it" does not make something good. That's a big hurdle for a lot of people.

I completely agree. 

I look at critical consensus as a great quick-glance to determine whether a movie is worth my time.  I'm familiar enough with the scoring system that I know what to expect... and frankly, I generally agree with the scores.   

On Metacritic, 90+ means it's a critically beloved film... something approaching masterpiece and very likely an Oscar Contender.

80-90 - Outstanding film.  One of the year's best.
70-80 - Great film.  Most people will enjoy it.
60-70 - Good film.  Unless you hate the genre, it should be fine.
50-60 - Mediocre, but if you like the genre you should enjoy it
40-50 - Avoid these movies unless it's a genre you love
30-40 - Probably garbage, but if it's your favorite genre you might be ok with it.
20-30 - "The Love Guru" starring Mike Meyers



Still, I have the capacity to enjoy most movies on that scale.  The most recent "Hobbit" film scored a 58.  It wasn't a very good movie, but I was fine with it, because I like the world.

"Divergent" scored a 48.  Not a good film, but if you're a big fan of teenage "Hunger Games" style angsty action movies, you'll probably be ok with it.  My girlfriend works with teenage girls... this was right in their wheelhouse.  I liked "Maze Runner" slightly more.  Not surprisingly, it scored slightly higher (56).

Both "Dumb and Dumber To" and "Hot Tub Time Machine 2" scored below 40.  Garbage movies, but I love comedy so I enjoyed them for what they were. 

A lot of fans get super defensive when critics dislike their favorite movie.  I happened to really like "Man of Steel" (55), because I love Superman... but I fully understand why it scored that low.  I agree with the score.   

On the flip side, I HATE the Horror genre.  I'd rather get punched in the face than sit through a Horror movie that scored under 60 on Metacritic.  I reluctantly went to the theater to see "Cabin in the Woods" with my girlfriend mainly because it scored a 72.  It was a really solid movie.  I enjoyed it.  The quality of the film outweighed my major dislike of the genre.

Did Dumb and Dumber 2 make you at least laugh? I enjoyed the first one but haven't bothered to see the second almost entirely off reviews.
Yeah ... it was as stupid as you'd expect.  If you STILL like the first, you probably would like the second.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road
« Reply #27 on: May 15, 2015, 03:11:11 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
Wife and I are seeing this tonight!  Can't wait I think this will be the best summer movie.  Side note I'll be very disappointed if Pitch Perfect 2 beats it at the box office, which it probably will. 

I will post some thoughts spoiler free tonight if I get time.
Did you like it?  I'm seeing it tomorrow. 

FYI, it officially finished with an 89/100 on Metacritic.  I've never seen an action flick get that kind of critical acclaim. 

I hoped we'd look back on 2015 as the year a beloved movie from late 70s got a sequel/reboot worthy of it's predecessor.  I thought it would be Star Wars, though... not Mad Max.
« Last Edit: May 15, 2015, 03:18:19 PM by LarBrd33 »

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #28 on: May 24, 2015, 04:25:40 PM »

Offline LarBrd33

  • Johnny Most
  • ********************
  • Posts: 20000
  • Tommy Points: 1780
Btw, I finally got to see this movie... it's freaking incredible.  Go see it in the theater.  It's easily the best one out right now.  Absolutely worthy of the praise.

Re: Mad Max: Fury Road Receiving Widespread Critical Acclaim
« Reply #29 on: May 24, 2015, 04:48:20 PM »

Offline GC003332

  • Kyrie Irving
  • Posts: 754
  • Tommy Points: 80
Did they manage to squeeze in Mel Gibson for a cameo role.
An Alfred Hitchcock split second kind of thing to pay homage to him?
« Last Edit: May 24, 2015, 04:58:01 PM by GC003332 »