- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Disney's Snow White "Best live action remake in years" | 74% Popcornmeter
Posted on 3/25/25 at 6:47 pm to Corinthians420
Posted on 3/25/25 at 6:47 pm to Corinthians420
I’m a Star Wars fan and Revenge of the Sith is one of my top 3 favorite movies of all time
But I’m not gonna give that motherfricker a 5 star review. I can point out multiple editing problems. Just because I love it doesn’t mean it’s 5 stars. It’s not.
If you’re gonna point out negative review bombing, I’m going to point out obvious bullshite shill reviews
Objectivity is the issue with that review
But I’m not gonna give that motherfricker a 5 star review. I can point out multiple editing problems. Just because I love it doesn’t mean it’s 5 stars. It’s not.
If you’re gonna point out negative review bombing, I’m going to point out obvious bullshite shill reviews
Objectivity is the issue with that review
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 6:48 pm
1
Posted on 3/25/25 at 6:48 pm to JetsetNuggs
quote:
If you’re gonna point out negative review bombing, I’m going to point out obvious bullshite shill reviews
Ok but you do recognize there is a difference between watching a movie and writing a review and not watching it and writing one right?
I think Joe Dirt is a 5 star movie, i dont expect everyone to agree with me. People have different tastes and it is definitely possible someone really enjoyed Snow White
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 6:51 pm
Posted on 3/25/25 at 6:52 pm to Corinthians420
Automatically writing a 5 star review because you want it to be rated higher lacks just as much objectivity as not seeing it
Like others have said, the numbers don’t lie.
Like others have said, the numbers don’t lie.
Posted on 3/25/25 at 6:56 pm to JetsetNuggs
So you are of the opinion even the biggest snow white fans cant possibly enjoy a remake of one of their favorite movies enough to rate it 5 stars. In reality just about every movie does find an audience of people that enjoy it. There are people that rated The Room by Tommy Wiseau 5 stars.
People enjoy different things, which explains all the reality tv thats keeps getting made.
People enjoy different things, which explains all the reality tv thats keeps getting made.
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:05 pm to Corinthians420
You’re making multiple arguments and trying to frame them as one.
People are saying the movie fricking sucks and is bombing because of it, as a shown by the box office. You use rotten tomatoes scores to say it’s a good movie, which are heavily influenced both ways and have been known to be paid for. Posters again bring up that it’ll go down as a massive monetary flop, which it will based on current numbers, then you revert to “what people aren’t allowed to like movies?”
People are saying the movie fricking sucks and is bombing because of it, as a shown by the box office. You use rotten tomatoes scores to say it’s a good movie, which are heavily influenced both ways and have been known to be paid for. Posters again bring up that it’ll go down as a massive monetary flop, which it will based on current numbers, then you revert to “what people aren’t allowed to like movies?”
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:08 pm to JetsetNuggs
I don't associate how much money a movie makes with it being good or not. I think a movie is good or not based on if each person enjoys their experience of watching it. The critics scored Kraven the hunter a 15% and Hook a 29%.
am I supposed to tell the people that enjoyed it they are wrong about them being good because Kraven was a bomb and Hook has low scores?
Good is subjective.
A movie can be good but not financially successful, like Dungeons and Dragons: HAT. They are 2 different metrics.
am I supposed to tell the people that enjoyed it they are wrong about them being good because Kraven was a bomb and Hook has low scores?
Good is subjective.
A movie can be good but not financially successful, like Dungeons and Dragons: HAT. They are 2 different metrics.
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 7:14 pm
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:13 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
I don't associate how much money a movie makes with it being good or not. I think a movie is good or not based on if each person enjoys their experience of watching it. The critics scored Kraven the hunter a 15% and Hook a 29%. am I supposed to tell the people that enjoyed it they are wrong about them being good because Kraven was a bomb and Hook has low scores?
You are objectively retarded. You keep pathetically spinning away.
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:15 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
I don't associate how much money a movie makes with it being good or not.
That’s fine, but the rest of the world generally does.
quote:
am I supposed to tell the people that enjoyed it they are wrong about them being good because Kraven was a bomb and Hook has low scores?
“What, people aren’t allowed to like movies?”
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 7:18 pm
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:18 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
The critics scored Kraven the hunter a 15%
But they were correct. Lol
quote:
Hook a 29%.
That was 1991 haha. Comparing that landscape to this one is do ludicrous you are either disingenuous or stupid.
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:21 pm to JetsetNuggs
quote:
I don't associate how much money a movie makes with it being good or not.
That’s fine, but the rest of the world generally does.
Fast & Furious: Hobbs and Shaw made more money than The Shawshank Redemption. Maybe you think that makes it a better movie, but the rest of the world generally doesn't.
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 7:28 pm
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:40 pm to Corinthians420
That’s why I said generally, Slick. Every rule has outliers. You’re also picking a comparison with a 30 year discrepancy and a limited audience genre vs a wide appeal popcorn flick. This Snow White is not one of these outliers.
No matter how hard you want this movie to succeed, it won’t. Your crusade is strange given that you said you won’t watch it, so even you won’t know if it’s good.
No matter how hard you want this movie to succeed, it won’t. Your crusade is strange given that you said you won’t watch it, so even you won’t know if it’s good.
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 7:41 pm
Posted on 3/25/25 at 7:43 pm to JetsetNuggs
quote:
No matter how hard you want this movie to succeed, it won’t.
I don't care if the movie succeeds. that is your obsession. i simply think review bombing movies that people haven't seen is bad for everyone.
we will never know the truth behind how much they lose on this movie anyway so seems like a weird thing to obsess about, Hollywood financials are a lot of creative accounting
This post was edited on 3/25/25 at 7:45 pm
Posted on 3/25/25 at 11:35 pm to Corinthians420
quote:
Fast & Furious: Hobbs and Shaw made more money than The Shawshank Redemption.
Are you really comparing Shawshank with the 2025 Snow White remake?
Posted on 3/26/25 at 12:29 am to kilo
If you could read you woulda saw I was the one saying how much money a movie makes doesn't determine how good it is.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 12:32 am to Corinthians420
quote:
If you could read you woulda saw
I seen it...
quote:
Are you really comparing Shawshank with the 2025 Snow White remake?
Posted on 3/26/25 at 12:45 am to kilo
I compared shawshank to fast and tbe furious: hobbs and shaw.
I think Shawshank is better despite making less money in theaters. The other guy said everyone agrees how much money something makes determines how good it is.
I think he is wrong.
I think Shawshank is better despite making less money in theaters. The other guy said everyone agrees how much money something makes determines how good it is.
I think he is wrong.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 4:39 am to Corinthians420
quote:
I think Shawshank is better despite making less money in theaters. The other guy said everyone agrees how much money something makes determines how good it is. I think he is wrong.
How did the compare when you account for ticket price differences? Genre?
Shawshank was a relatively unexpected towel a ton movie. It was based of a Stephen King short novella for goodness sake that was not widely known.
Hobbs and Shaw was part of a franchise that had already been established and took place thirty years later when ticket prices were ridiculously higher.
Snow White was a highly marketed blockbuster meant to make Disney boatloads of money. That was the entire reason for making it. The film apparently is bad enough that people don’t want to see it and most reviews, save a few, have panned it heavily.
In the end, it is doing awful and I doubt it even loses only $100 to $200 million for Disney after its opening run.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 4:52 am to Corinthians420
LINK
Shawshank did not make a lot of money bc of a few key factors. It was going up against Forrest Gump and Pulp Fiction. It was not marketed well. It was a period piece set in a prison and confusing title. Also never mentioned it was by Stephen King so people would not associate it with horror.
As for review bombing being bad, others have agreed but also said review boosting is bad but you disagree bc "they paid for the ticket". Of course they paid for the ticket, that is their movie they want to see. They will give it a positive review regardless. They are not giving in depth reviews so their opinions should cancel out the review bombers.
Do you really think only 1000 people saw this movie and gave their "review"? The other 9000 people are just haters who want to blast an audience score down?
Do you think only the top critics reviews matter or all the critics reviews matter? Bc the top critics score it 29% where all critics have it 44%.
Shawshank did not make a lot of money bc of a few key factors. It was going up against Forrest Gump and Pulp Fiction. It was not marketed well. It was a period piece set in a prison and confusing title. Also never mentioned it was by Stephen King so people would not associate it with horror.
As for review bombing being bad, others have agreed but also said review boosting is bad but you disagree bc "they paid for the ticket". Of course they paid for the ticket, that is their movie they want to see. They will give it a positive review regardless. They are not giving in depth reviews so their opinions should cancel out the review bombers.
Do you really think only 1000 people saw this movie and gave their "review"? The other 9000 people are just haters who want to blast an audience score down?
Do you think only the top critics reviews matter or all the critics reviews matter? Bc the top critics score it 29% where all critics have it 44%.
Posted on 3/26/25 at 5:01 am to MasterKnight
quote:
Shawshank did not make a lot of money bc of a few key factors. It was going up against Forrest Gump and Pulp Fiction. It was not marketed well. It was a period piece set in a prison and confusing title. Also never mentioned it was by Stephen King so people would not associate it with horror
You are making my point for me. There are a lot of factors that go into how much a movie makes at the box office besides how good it is. It was a dumb thing for the guy to say sales are based on how good something is.
Avatar 2 is one of the top selling films ever and i think everyone could name at least a 20+ movies better than that.
Snow White 2 may not be good, but that doesnt mean his point made sense.
This post was edited on 3/26/25 at 5:11 am
Posted on 3/26/25 at 7:23 am to Corinthians420
Page 10 of 16
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News