Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: rottentomatoes.com

Stories and comments across the archive that link to rottentomatoes.com.

Comments · 667

  1. Re:Seriously? by brainstyle · · Score: 1 · on Why Game Movies Stink
    Silent Hill was probably one of the best videogame movies I've seen.

    It's currently sitting at 25% on the Tomatometer. The 'Cream of the Crop' give it no good reviews. But your statement may be right - it may still be better than most of the videogame movies that have been made.

    These movies are garbage. The basic story in pretty much any videogame wouldn't be up to the standards of a highschool creative writing class. There's never anything interesting there to work with - at least, nothing that hasn't been done better in a hundred low-budget sci-fi, fantasy or horror flicks.

    The fact that there's a generation growing up thinking that these are decent (or even 'decent enough') movies is a sad state of affairs, and it doesn't bode well at all for what we'll see coming down the pipes a decade or two hence.

  2. Re:They don't need a good plot... by Oldsmobile · · Score: 1 · on Why Game Movies Stink

    ALMOST every movie Angelina Jolie has made has been mostly crap. I used to think she had a jinx to her, until she made Mr and Ms Smith (which was crap too, but less than her other movies, that were complete and utter crap, including Sky Captain and the Penis of Tomorrow, dispite a rating to the contrare in rotten tomatoes).

    Here, check out her resume and decide for your self wether or not it is indeed Jolie that is causing all these movies to suck:

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/p/angelina_jolie/

  3. I collected various critics reviews by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Interesting · on Ebert Reviews 'Silent Hill'
    (Leeched them from rottentomatoes)

    OK I read some of the critics reviews, And it seems to be safe. The movie DOESN'T SUCK (at least not so bad), some of the critics actually liked it :)

    by Jeff Otto. 2.5 / 5

    by Kit Bowen. 0 / 4

    by Edward Douglas. 7 / 10.

    by Moriarty. Doesn't give a rating, but he loved it.

    by Mike Sage, Peterborough This Week. 4.5 / 5.

    by Kevin Carr (2.5/5)

    by Sean Means, Salt Lake Tribune (1.5/5)

    by Brian Orndorf, EFILMCRITIC.COM (rotten, D)

    by Peter Hartlaub, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE. (Didn't like it at all)

    by Peter Howell, TORONTO STAR ("The dumbest")

    After reading the various reviews (I didn't watch it - yet), It seems Silent Hill has some flaws:

    a) The action part is slow and repetitive (Well, that's what you get in the game, duh). Perhaps having shorter and less running away sequences would have worked.
    b) Some of the acting and dialogue is bad (altho not always, the critics who gave it a positive review forgive this point)
    c) The plot is too confusing, and these parts are VERY LONG. Most of the critics would have enjoyed having less confusing plot parts. It seems Gans tried to explain the whole concept of Silent Hill, and ended up spoiling it.

    But Some of the negative reviewers gave it a 2.5/5 (that means in my lingo: "Not that bad", or "good enough for a fan".

    However, there's one point that ALMOST ALL reviewers give to Silent Hill: It's visually astounding. In other words, if you enjoyed Star Wars: Episode 1 despites the horrible story, you'll LOVE Silent Hill.

    I particularly liked Moriarty's review, because he's NOT a gamer, and did NOT play the game. However, he might be biased because he's a fan of the horror gender. But hey, maybe that's representative of the intended audience!

    "SILENT HILL worked for me because of the confidence and command of director Christophe Gans. I'm not familiar with the source material at all, so I'm not going to discuss it as an adaptation, except in the broadest terms. I can't tell you how faithful it is to the already-established mythology of the various SILENT HILL games, but I can tell you that there are certain touches in the way the film's put together that seem like a sly nod to the basic experience of gaming. ...

    Roger Ebert seemed to find the film's explanations baffling even as he was impressed by it technically. I'm not sure why this would confuse anyone... basically it boils down to a vengeful spirit looking for payback against the town that did it harm... but I also think the answers are far less important than the way the questions are presented. For example... I have no idea what the fuck Pyramid Head is, or how he's connected to the Demon, or what purpose he serves aside from freaking my shit out, and frankly, I don't care. He's one of the most striking images I've seen in a horror film in recent memory, and both of his big scenes are exhilarating. If you're tired of teenagers in danger and you're tired of remakes of

  4. I collected various critics reviews by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 2, Interesting · on Ebert Reviews 'Silent Hill'
    (Leeched them from rottentomatoes)

    OK I read some of the critics reviews, And it seems to be safe. The movie DOESN'T SUCK (at least not so bad), some of the critics actually liked it :)

    by Jeff Otto. 2.5 / 5

    by Kit Bowen. 0 / 4

    by Edward Douglas. 7 / 10.

    by Moriarty. Doesn't give a rating, but he loved it.

    by Mike Sage, Peterborough This Week. 4.5 / 5.

    by Kevin Carr (2.5/5)

    by Sean Means, Salt Lake Tribune (1.5/5)

    by Brian Orndorf, EFILMCRITIC.COM (rotten, D)

    by Peter Hartlaub, SAN FRANCISCO CHRONICLE. (Didn't like it at all)

    by Peter Howell, TORONTO STAR ("The dumbest")

    After reading the various reviews (I didn't watch it - yet), It seems Silent Hill has some flaws:

    a) The action part is slow and repetitive (Well, that's what you get in the game, duh). Perhaps having shorter and less running away sequences would have worked.
    b) Some of the acting and dialogue is bad (altho not always, the critics who gave it a positive review forgive this point)
    c) The plot is too confusing, and these parts are VERY LONG. Most of the critics would have enjoyed having less confusing plot parts. It seems Gans tried to explain the whole concept of Silent Hill, and ended up spoiling it.

    But Some of the negative reviewers gave it a 2.5/5 (that means in my lingo: "Not that bad", or "good enough for a fan".

    However, there's one point that ALMOST ALL reviewers give to Silent Hill: It's visually astounding. In other words, if you enjoyed Star Wars: Episode 1 despites the horrible story, you'll LOVE Silent Hill.

    I particularly liked Moriarty's review, because he's NOT a gamer, and did NOT play the game. However, he might be biased because he's a fan of the horror gender. But hey, maybe that's representative of the intended audience!

    "SILENT HILL worked for me because of the confidence and command of director Christophe Gans. I'm not familiar with the source material at all, so I'm not going to discuss it as an adaptation, except in the broadest terms. I can't tell you how faithful it is to the already-established mythology of the various SILENT HILL games, but I can tell you that there are certain touches in the way the film's put together that seem like a sly nod to the basic experience of gaming. ...

    Roger Ebert seemed to find the film's explanations baffling even as he was impressed by it technically. I'm not sure why this would confuse anyone... basically it boils down to a vengeful spirit looking for payback against the town that did it harm... but I also think the answers are far less important than the way the questions are presented. For example... I have no idea what the fuck Pyramid Head is, or how he's connected to the Demon, or what purpose he serves aside from freaking my shit out, and frankly, I don't care. He's one of the most striking images I've seen in a horror film in recent memory, and both of his big scenes are exhilarating. If you're tired of teenagers in danger and you're tired of remakes of

  5. User reviews by Spy+der+Mann · · Score: 1 · on Ebert Reviews 'Silent Hill'

    Here are the rotten tomatoes user reviews.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/silent_hill/review s_users.php

    Just wait until the server goes back up, apparently it's been heavily accessed.

  6. Rottentomatoes initial scoring of 70% by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Ebert Reviews 'Silent Hill'

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/silent_hill/review s_users.php

    Pretty much if you are a fan of the series you'll enjoy the movie. Anyone totally fresh to the Silent Hill series will be somewhat lost..... so in a way this is a success for game movies in general, and a failure in the same way.

    Hands down the best game movie ever made.

  7. Remember Garfield? by tepples · · Score: 1 · on The Simpson's Movie Confirmed

    It would actually be interesting to see the whole thing as a movie, with all characters and their personalities, acted in the real world, and not as a cartoon.

    Be careful what you wish for. Garfield and Friends got turned into a live action movie. Only 13% of reviewers liked the Garfield movie.

  8. I like the theater, but I want better movies by AlpineR · · Score: 2, Interesting · on Movies Losing Popularity at Box Office
    I actually like going out and watching a new movie with a bunch of strangers. I spend enough time at home on the computer, and my TV is decent but nothing like a good theater. Dinner and a movie is still a good date plan -- my girlfriend and I would go almost every weekend if there were something good playing. A comedy or action movie is more enjoyable when you feel the reaction of others around you.

    The biggest problem I see is just bad movies. I've found that Rotten Tomatoes is a good guide to the quality of new releases. Take a look most weeks and you'll see one decent movie and four bad ones in the top five releases. Considering that half of the good ones won't appeal to me based on subject matter, that means there's only one appealing movie every 2-3 weeks.

    I'd like to see less of the formulaic filler clogging the theaters. Try to show more smaller or independent films. For example, I'd love to see all the short films that received Oscar nominations this year. How about showing them together in place of a regular feature?

    I don't think that theaters are obsolete. Sure the popcorn is expensive, but I can choose to buy it or eat before. Cell phones are rarely a problem here in DC, at least now that most theaters have a "silence your cell phone" message before the feature starts. The experience could be improved with better food options including good coffee or beer. And during the Lord of the Rings trilogy I definitely appreciated my local theater that has Tempur-Pedic seat cushions.

    For my two cents, here are my favorite movies of the past year:

    • King Kong
    • Walk the Line
    • March of the Penguins
    • Harry Potter and the Goblet of Fire
    • Wallace & Gromit: The Curse of the Were-rabbit
    • Corpse Bride
    • Ballet Russes
    • Wild Parrots of Telegraph Hill

    AlpineR

  9. Hollywood thinks we're stupid by DAE51D · · Score: 1 · on Movies Losing Popularity at Box Office

    I've completely had it with Hollywood. I haven't seen a truly geat, unique, innovative movie in ages. And every time I see they are remaking a great movie, I want to puke. It pisses me off to no end and I go out of my way to boycott. In fact, I don't know what is worse: a re-hashed tired plot, a "trendy" remake of a classic, or some insipid waste of film made for the lowest common denominator of intelligence (to use a term loosly).

    The fact that those greedy fucks put commercials in front of a movie that I paid $10+ to see makes me even more angry.

    How many times must I rent a DVD (I don't go to theatres because of the rant above) and be dissatisfied by a cheeze-ball "hollywood" ending.

    Okay. I need to stop writing now. I'm getting frustrated and feeling a need to kill again...

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/ and http://www.imdb.org/ are your friends.

  10. Re:And in tomorrows news.. by Mr+Z · · Score: 2, Funny · on Lab Produces 3.6 Billion Degree Gas

    You stupid, stupid people! We then have no alternative but to destroy you before you destroy us. With your ancient juvenile minds, you have developed explosives too fast for your minds to conceive what you are doing. You are on the verge of destroying the entire universe.

  11. Re:It's been done. by SynapseLapse · · Score: 1 · on Give A Workout To More Than Just Your Thumbs

    Nintendo had a partnership with Lifetime Fitness where they produced exactly what you described.
    As seen here
    When Nintendo originally previewed they had hoped to sell it to gamers for about $200 for the unit, but whenever was said and done it ended up being a lot more (Like $600 I think for the bike and game?) So they made a single unit built for fitness centers and sold a few of them to baileys and the like.

    Its too bad, because in typical Nintendo fashion they promised the moon. It was supposed to have 2 player battles on the home version, and up to 8 player races in the arcade/fitness center. Even including features like varying resistance for going up and down hills.
    AFAIK, there was only ever a single player version released. Screen shot here.

    they had on at the local gym when I was a kid, but the stupid thing was always being hogged when I got there, until eventually the thing just wore out, so I've never actually tried it.

  12. This article reminds me a lot of by KarmaOverDogma · · Score: 1 · on Invasion of the Body Snatchers

    the movie "Dirty Pretty Things" http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/dirty_pretty_thing s

    Sad, but not surprising, to see this kind of thing already happening.

  13. Hmm... by The-Bus · · Score: 1 · on Developing Online Communities?
    Although there are various communities on the web, there is no centralized source of information for the customers. If you could develop an online community to encourage collaboration and information sharing, what features would you want included? How would you go about including features that are widely available in other places (weblogging, message boards, wiki) and generating buy-in from customers.


    Yikes. It sounds to me like you want to create something without any specific goal other than "creating a community" and "generating buy-in" which seem to be a bit vague for a business plan, at least.

    I'd say including features widely available in other places (such as Slashdot or Digg) isn't going to let you take over existing sites. In fact, often new features end up not really being used at all. (For example, Slashdot journals have a very low participation rate).

    But what would help is content. Content, after all is what's made this site popular, and what makes all good sites great. It's not interfaces, not design, but content, whether that's from a community, or editors, or both. But it still needs to be about something. Mentioning that a site is about "today's technology" is so mind-bogglingly vague that you won't be able to attract an audience.

    I'll give you an idea though, free of charge. As far as I know it hasn't been widely implemented anywhere - or to put it more clearly, I haven't heard of it (which doesn't mean much). Why not create a review-aggregating hardware site? Something that combines content from other sites (AnandTech, TomsHarware, SharkyExtreme, CNet, etc) to give a best-of-the-best overview for any number of components. I just checked these three sites and unbder each category, I was looking for a recommendation. I click on video cards, I expect to see something like "This is the top video card right now: XYZ 5000S Xtreme5" but no, that didn't show up.

    Why not create a hardware site that's like Rotten Tomatoes or Game Rankings. Gives you an overview of the overall options one has and recommends the best.

    Then you can top it off with wikis and comments and blogs and RSS and what have you. But you need an idea to propel you.
  14. Re:Don't Judge by Rico_Suave · · Score: 2, Informative · on Uwe Boll Smash!

    A Rotten Tomatoes average of 7% is all I need to know, really.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/p/uwe_boll/

    I'm not going to blindly agree with every movie critic, but when they *all* trash *every* movie you make, it's time to consider a new career.

  15. Oh, really? by Grendel+Drago · · Score: 1 · on 10 Best S/F Films That Never Existed

    most critics actually LOVED the Hitchiker movie

    You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.

  16. Ha ha ha ha ha by sunbeam60 · · Score: 3, Insightful · on Half-Life 2 Gets Episode 1
    That was a funny joke.

    Half Life 2 was incredibly well received, both in terms of reviews (metacritic, rottentomatoes and sales numbers.

    It sold massively, created a new method of distribution, which other vendors have embraced and cuts out the middle men so hated on Slashdot.

    It was first to feature real-time radiosity lighting, scaled from DirectX 6 to 9 and pushed the character animation and expression envelope considerably.

    Do you ever look in the mirror and ask: "Maybe I am wrong this time?"

  17. Based on the title of this article... by tepples · · Score: 2, Informative · on Smartbomb

    I expected a review of Smart Bomb for PSP because the game was generally thought to suck. It got a 45% rating on Metacritic and 0% positive reviews on Rotten Tomatoes.

  18. Re: Prevent the franchise from being diluted? by Corsair2 · · Score: 0 · on Toy Story 3 Scrapped
    No, that's not what was said at all. Lassiter has been quoted many times in many other sources publicly taking a stance against creating more Toy Story films--on the grounds that there's little doubt that any sequel couldn't possibly live up to the utter brilliance of the first two films.

    It's been said in this topic that Disney is just a money machine, and that is essentially correct. How many Direct-to-DVD steaming piles has Disney released based on totally brilliant franchises--like, say, Lilo and Stitch, or Beauty and the Beast, all in efforts to squeeze every last drop of revenue out of them?

    If Walt Disney were alive today, he wouldn't go for any of that crap; he would never put studio profits ahead of quality (this is one of the many reasons why Roy Disney and Mike Eisner have been bitter adversaries for so long). Walt was diametrically opposed to releasing a Saturday morning Disney cartoon show, simply because he knew that the production values would be abysmal for a weekly show. And with all the half-baked weeklies that now crowd Toon Disney's lineup--many of them based on their popular movie franchises--he was ultimately proven very correct. They're crap.

    John Lassiter is an artist with an artist's vision; furthermore, he's right. It's been a good run. Leave it alone. Both Toy Story films got 100% on the TomatoMeter-- only two of eight G-rated, animated films to do so (and buttressed, I might add, by no less than three other Disney smash-hit classics)--how can you top that?

  19. GNAA by bluer · · Score: -1, Offtopic · on Robot Receptionist with an Attitude
    GNAA claims responsibility for eating disorder of Mary Kate Olsen
    GNAA claims responsibility for eating disorder of Mary Kate Olsen
    By Gary Niger

    Lindon, Utah - GNAA (Gay Nigger Association of America) this afternoon announced that their previous kidnapping of the Olsen twins is behind the eating disorder afflicting Mary Kate Olsen today.

    In a surprise announcement this afternoon, GNAA representative godspeed revealed that GNAA has known about Mary Kate's disorder for some time now, and that it was the ordeal she went through earlier that triggered it. "That skinny white girl," godspeed began. "Ever since we kidnapped her and her cracker sister, she couldn't stop eating nigger dick. After we originally injected the holy gay nigger seed into her, she just went crazy. Begged us for more all the time, wouldn't shut about about "Just needing a little more [cock.]" Shit, nigga, we GAY. Sure, we tapped that white ass to increase our numbers, but just cuz she wants it? HELL no!"

    As reliable sources have reported, Mary Kate went on a binge after being released from GNAA custody. She had a group of niggers on call at all times, so she could eat a little black cock while in between takes one the set of her hit movie New York Minute. She was seen being rebuffed by R. Kelly, who in a statement to GNAA member l0de said "That bitch is WAY too old." Twin sister Ashley Olsen is reported as saying "I knew she had a problem, wanting to suck some nigger cock all the time, but whenever I tried to talk to her about it, she called me a "cracker whore" and stormed off. I mean, seriously, SHE'S the one sucking all that nigger cock, who is SHE to be calling ME a whore?"

    Mary Kate is in a rehab facility in an undisclosed location, where well-qualified staff such as Ellen DeGeneres will help treat this young girl. Whether she will be able to beat this addiction to nigger cock, or relapse while seeing all those black bucks at NYU remains to be seen.

    About GNAA:
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the first organization which gathers GAY NIGGERS from all over America and abroad for one common goal - being GAY NIGGERS.

    Are you GAY ?
    Are you a NIGGER ?
    Are you a GAY NIGGER ?

    If you answered "Yes" to all of the above questions, then GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) might be exactly what you've been looking for!
    Join GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) today, and enjoy all the benefits of being a full-time GNAA member.
    GNAA (GAY NIGGER ASSOCIATION OF AMERICA) is the fastest-growing GAY NIGGER community with THOUSANDS of members all over United States of America and the World! You, too, can be a part of GNAA if you join today!

    Why not? It's quick and easy - only 3 simple steps!

  20. Screenshot by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Funny · on Global Thermonuclear War

    Here's a screenshot.

  21. Bad ratings? by DrIdiot · · Score: 1 · on Whedon Calls Death Knell For Firefly
    I wouldn't call these ratings bad: Rotten Tomatoes

    It's average rating is about the same of King Kong's. 80% on Rotten Tomatoes is impressive. Nonetheless, I saw the movie not seeing the series, and I liked it a lot.

  22. Re:King Kong by eMartin · · Score: 1 · on Software Predicts Movie Success

    That's too bad. It's actually supposed to be pretty good.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/king_kong/

    http://www.metacritic.com/film/titles/kingkong

  23. Re:Pathetic by Surt · · Score: 1 · on Behind the Scenes of Narnia's Special Effects

    Pretty much all of the studios are doing the same thing (flooding imdb and other popular review sites with positive reviews before the theatrical release). I don't think there is any way to build a trustworthy user review movie web site. Your best bet for a mildly accurate review of a movie is probably the tomatometer. At least there you're getting a semi trustable filter on a large number of reviews.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/

    Note that their rating for narnia is only 76%
    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/chronicles_of_narn ia_lion_witch_wardrobe/

    I try to avoid seeing anything under 80%

    Even there you'll run into trouble. Batman Begins got a flood of paid-for positives and managed to come in at 83% in spite of that movie's extreme level of suckage. One helpful tip to avoid this problem: compare the negative reviews to the positive. In this particular movie, you have an extreme disparity in the reviews. The positives are glowing while the negatives thought it was a horrible movie. When that happens you can probably bet on the positives being bought and paid for.

    The best thing I've found when trying to gauge the quality of a movie: read some negative reviews. See if you feel like you can live with what they didn't like. Reading positive reviews is comparatively useless.

  24. Re:Pathetic by Surt · · Score: 1 · on Behind the Scenes of Narnia's Special Effects

    Pretty much all of the studios are doing the same thing (flooding imdb and other popular review sites with positive reviews before the theatrical release). I don't think there is any way to build a trustworthy user review movie web site. Your best bet for a mildly accurate review of a movie is probably the tomatometer. At least there you're getting a semi trustable filter on a large number of reviews.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/

    Note that their rating for narnia is only 76%
    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/chronicles_of_narn ia_lion_witch_wardrobe/

    I try to avoid seeing anything under 80%

    Even there you'll run into trouble. Batman Begins got a flood of paid-for positives and managed to come in at 83% in spite of that movie's extreme level of suckage. One helpful tip to avoid this problem: compare the negative reviews to the positive. In this particular movie, you have an extreme disparity in the reviews. The positives are glowing while the negatives thought it was a horrible movie. When that happens you can probably bet on the positives being bought and paid for.

    The best thing I've found when trying to gauge the quality of a movie: read some negative reviews. See if you feel like you can live with what they didn't like. Reading positive reviews is comparatively useless.

  25. Re:Pathetic by LDoggg_ · · Score: 1 · on Behind the Scenes of Narnia's Special Effects

    rotten tomatoes has it at 76% positive reviews.

    Not sure which effects were poorly done.

    WETA was involved in this film. The same guys that did Lord of the Rings

    If something like a centaur or minotuar looks fake, it might be because they don't really exist.

  26. Re:Strength of Character Acting by daVinci1980 · · Score: 1 · on Aeon Flux, Talk Amongst Yourselves

    Actually, ROI is expressed as a percentage above and beyond recoupment. So 100% ROI would be doubling your money (significantly better than sticking that money in a savings account).

    Reference:
    http://management.about.com/cs/adminaccounting/g/r eturnoninv.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_on_investment
    http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_roi.ht ml

    On topic, I've no interest in seeing a movie that got 10% at Rotten Tomatoes. That's embarassingly bad and puts the movie in with some truly fine company. (Catwoman, anyone?)

  27. Re:Strength of Character Acting by daVinci1980 · · Score: 1 · on Aeon Flux, Talk Amongst Yourselves

    Actually, ROI is expressed as a percentage above and beyond recoupment. So 100% ROI would be doubling your money (significantly better than sticking that money in a savings account).

    Reference:
    http://management.about.com/cs/adminaccounting/g/r eturnoninv.htm
    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Return_on_investment
    http://www.valuebasedmanagement.net/methods_roi.ht ml

    On topic, I've no interest in seeing a movie that got 10% at Rotten Tomatoes. That's embarassingly bad and puts the movie in with some truly fine company. (Catwoman, anyone?)

  28. Umm, I think I'll trust Rotten Tomatoes more by Jugalator · · Score: 2, Informative · on Aeon Flux, Talk Amongst Yourselves

    This "movie" at RottenTomatoes. Yay, a 10% rating.

    It's pretty obvious to me the "reviewer" above was making an advertisement for his site on Slashdot (compare the author URL with the "review" URL, it sure is becoming common these days), and gets a boner from Charlize Theron.

  29. Whoa, timeout. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Aeon Flux, Talk Amongst Yourselves

    "The movie AeonFlux has been getting a mixture of reviews since it's debut and most tend to be on the negative side

    The mixture of the reviews of AeonFlux are uniformly bad! The reviews can't have the status of being "mixed" and "most tend to be on the negative side." Rotten Tomatoes is sitting at a 10% Positive review status(7 positive out of 67 total).

    On the plus side, In the Mix (4%) and Yours Mine and Ours (6%) are the two movies rated below AeonFlux in the top 50 movies out today.
    Sorry to be critical, but at least the OP can acknowledge that the movie is getting TERRIBLE reviews, and try to make his points afterward.

  30. Re:DVD Formula... by ApuD2 · · Score: 1 · on A Method To Uwe Boll's Madness

    Alone in the Dark's box office and rental numbers From the site: Box Office: $5,132,655 Rentals: $630,000 Apparently, even the Wal*Mart crowd knows a turd when they see it.

  31. How the movies rank at rottentomatoes.com by kronocide · · Score: 1 · on Space.com's Top 10 Space Movies of All Time

    Just as a comparison, this is how these movies rank at Rottentomatoes.com, which relies on professional movie revies:

    1. Alien - 100% (44 reviews)
    2. Star Trek II: The Wrath of Khan - 100% (25 reviews)
    3. Star Wars V-The Empire Strikes Back - 98% (49 reviews)
    4. Apollo 13 - 97% (37 reviews)
    5. 2001-A Space Odyssey - 94% (36 reviews)
    6. Star Trek: First Contact - 94% (32 reviews)
    7. Star Wars IV-A New Hope - 93% (44 reviews)
    8. Star Wars VI: Return of the Jedi - 81% (43 reviews)
    9. Star Trek VI: The Undiscovered Country - 79% (33 reviews)
    10. Contact - 76% (29 reviews)

    Although the idea that The Wrath of Khan is better than 2001 is amusing to say the least, I still like this list better because it confirms Alien as the masterpiece it is and relegates Contact to the bottom of the list where it belongs (if it belong on the list at all).

  32. Thoughts are free... by digitaldc · · Score: 1 · on Patent Pools and Pledges - Panacea or Placebo?

    ...thoughts typed out in code are not?
    You can copy each other's software and modify it as you please as long as you share the wealth / credit - but this is something that is inherently contradictory to hard-core capitalism. In a system where you have lawyers representing lawyers over who owns what and when, it is really hard to get around patents and the greed that inevetibly comes with them. (see http://www.thecorporation.com/ or http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/corporation/) Patent pools may only lead to more litigation about how they were used or abused.

    From the Creative Commons licensing restrictions under 4C:
    If you distribute, publicly display, publicly perform, or publicly digitally perform the Work or any Derivative Works or Collective Works, You must keep intact all copyright notices for the Work and give the Original Author credit reasonable to the medium or means You are utilizing by conveying the name (or pseudonym if applicable) of the Original Author if supplied; the title of the Work if supplied; in the case of a Derivative Work, a credit identifying the use of the Work in the Derivative Work (e.g., "French translation of the Work by Original Author," or "Screenplay based on original Work by Original Author"). Such credit may be implemented in any reasonable manner; provided, however, that in the case of a Derivative Work or Collective Work, at a minimum such credit will appear where any other comparable authorship credit appears and in a manner at least as prominent as such other comparable authorship credit.

    Stifling innovation is not what the IT world needs or wants. Would I even be able to write this posting if someone had patented comment fields, html code and text-boxes? The internet is a perfect example of why you should not patent everything, simply because it will lead to the greater good of the community. After all, if you are worth billions of dollars and have acheived many things in your life, why do you need to keep making tons of money by patenting anything with a potential profit? It is the ruthless capitalism game you are playing, the rules that dictate how you MUST play it, and the mind-set it creates while playing the game.

  33. At last! by Garg · · Score: 2, Informative · on Stereo View of the Sun

    We'll be able to see that mirror-image planet over there!

  34. Re:What's the point if the graphics suck? by EGSonikku · · Score: 1 · on Xbox 360 Not Hi-Def Enough?

    I can't speak on playability, but unless you have quite intentionally avoided all xbox 360 news except for trolling, most of the Xbox 360 games look quite good. Whether you are into the types of games they produce is a different subjsct, but it's hard to argue that the native games don't look great.

    http://screenshots.teamxbox.com/index/xbox-360/ XBox 360 Screenshots

    http://xboxmovies.teamxbox.com/index/xbox-360/ XBox 360 Movies

    http://www.extremegamer.ca/xbox/features/X05.php
    XBox 360 Gameplay Impressions

    http://www.360hacker.net/articles/10-11-2005/first -impressions-of-xbox-360-launch-titles/ More XBox 360 Gameplay Impressions

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/vine/showthread.php? t=443644 ...and still more !

    Maybe more people should, I don't know....*play* a thing before bashing it out of hand? The general impressions are that the launch games are decent, with some being quite good.

    And before anyone pulls the fanboy card on me, I currently have with 20ft of me:

    A slimline PS2, GameCube, NeoGeo, a Linux box, a Mac Mini, xbox, Nintendo DS, PSP, and a sligtly dusty Dreamcast.

  35. Re:Smart Move by damiangerous · · Score: 1 · on Revolution Least Expensive Next-Gen Console
    You're not serious, are you? Fixed camera angles, linear gameplay, predictable action sequences .. this is what you consider the 'best game ever'?

    Well, he did say one of the best games ever, not the best. Considering that it got 100% fresh on Rotten Tomatoes with an average score of 9.5 it's pretty hard to argue with that statement.

  36. Re:a little Smed history... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Ask John Smedley About Star Wars Galaxies

    > Armorgeddon (now Tanarus)*

    Armorgeddon! God! I used to play that on the Amiga back in 1991 - it was one of the first realtime games where you could have more than one player in the same universe.

    Here's some reviews from back in the day:

    http://games.eldritchs.com/armged.html
    http://www.angusm.demon.co.uk/AGDB/DBA1/ArmG.html

    And screenshots - this was considered good graphics at the time!

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/g/pc_games/armour_ge ddon/gallery.php?page=3

    And finally, a shot of the box cover:

    http://www.mobygames.com/game/atari-st/armour-gedd on/cover-art/gameCoverId,19250/

    Psygnosis (makers of Armor-geddon) was quite the game maker, in their heyday.

  37. Re:Storage on hard drives by shmlco · · Score: 2, Insightful · on Bill Gates Speaks Out Against Next-Gen DVDs
    There's this new concept called a "review". You should check it out.

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/

  38. Re:It would just be kind of cool by sesshomaru · · Score: 1 · on Nintendo & McDonalds Providing WiFi
    Burger Time would be cool, but you must play Mick and Mack: Global Gladiators!. Thrill as Ronald McDonald himself uses his evil clown powers to send a couple of hapless kids into a hellish world where they must collect M symbols and fight hideous beasts.

    Seriously, I wonder how much of the rights to that game McDonald's owns, since it was basically designed as an advertisement for the chain. It's actually a good game, too. (Well, I thought so anyway, at the time. It used that trademark Virgin/Shiny style animation that would show up in the Genesis version of Aladdin and reached its apex in Earthworm Jim.)

  39. Rottentomatoes.com by borawjm · · Score: 2, Informative · on IMDb Turns 15

    Since IMDb is more for reference, I personally prefer rottentomatoes.com for my "scoop" on movies.

    I also like boxofficemojo.com to track a particular movie's progress at the box office.

    I think the only thing that I use IMDb for is to look what movies a particular actor starred in and vice versa.

  40. Re:Overkill by jangobongo · · Score: 1 · on Wallace and Gromit Studio Loses History

    Well according to rottentomatoes.com, only 5 critics out of 105 panned the movie.

    With such a short list it should be easy to nab the one who felt "felt that Wallace and Grommet are really that evil and must be destroyed at all costs."

  41. Re:Overkill by jangobongo · · Score: 1 · on Wallace and Gromit Studio Loses History

    Well according to rottentomatoes.com, only 5 critics out of 105 panned the movie.

    With such a short list it should be easy to nab the one who felt "felt that Wallace and Grommet are really that evil and must be destroyed at all costs."

  42. Survey of web reviews: 83% recommend by vigyanik · · Score: 2, Informative · on Serenity Opens Today
    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/serenity/

    Recommended by 83% critics on the web, 93% users.

  43. Review: Great for fans, so-so for everyone else by ChaosDiscord · · Score: 2, Insightful · on Serenity Opens Today

    As a fan of the series, it's a great movie. Whedon did a great job of taking what I assume was several seasons of plot lines and collapsing them into a two hour movie. The result flowed well and didn't feel too rushed. I do suspect that spreading many of the developments over the course of many episodes would have made the important revelations all the more significant. As closure for the series, I'm very satisfied.

    However, I'm pessimistic for people who haven't seen the series. Whedon does an admirable job providing a Cliff's Notes of the series. He even does so in a way that doesn't bug me as a fan; indeed several minor details that were never expounded upon in the series were cleared up. However much of power of the series was the attachment you formed to the characters. That's something that takes hours. You can't do it in a movie.

    So I suspect the movie will do well in the short term as the fans flock to it, then it will quietly fade away. This will be the end of the series; it will remain with a cult fandom, but nothing more. (That said, I'm surprised at the positive reviews it's getting from people I doubt are fans.)

  44. Rotten Tomatoes by andy4322 · · Score: 4, Informative · on Serenity Opens Today

    http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/serenity/

    Currently 83% fresh!

  45. Corpse Bride & Wallace & Gromit??? by stefanlasiewski · · Score: 3, Insightful · on Gaiman and Whedon Discuss the Rise of the Geek
    How could any geek forget these two:



    These are classic geek genres, and Wallace & Gromit is something I can watch with the kids!
  46. Re:Nintendo Revolution and its possibilities by Quince+alPillan · · Score: 1 · on Ask Sid Meier

    Finally come home to consoles?

    Already been done. And quite fun. I know I played it many days during the summer when my dad had the computer tied up.

  47. Re:wow... by game+kid · · Score: 2, Interesting · on News Corp buys IGN for $650M
    [AD|AD|AD|AD]
    [company] has released a very cool new game called [title]. [token screenshot of box cover]
    [AD|AD|AD|AD]
    [NEXT] Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11

    I absolutely hate that about IGN.com, too! ...where have you BEEN all my life?!? (prepares for beating from other admirers/(present|future) husband)

    The worst part is when IGN merged with Rotten Tomatoes beforehand. Since around that time, I've had to endure click-here-to-continue adpages and a first page with banners big enough to warrant that 1280x1024 flat panel I got...*sob*that doesn't show 1080p correctly like my old CRT*sob**runs away in tears*

    ...*walks back*all to see some movie reviews and stuff. Nah, I forgive them.

  48. Re:Differing opinion by superflippy · · Score: 1 · on Piracy Not To Blame In Decline of Moviegoers

    I truly believe that our beloved Internet is to blame.

    I agree, but not for the reason you stated. Word of mouth travels a lot faster these days. 20 years ago, a lousy movie with good marketing could still hope to have at least a good opening weekend before everyone discovered it was lousy. Nowadays, movie reviews are easily accessible online before the movie's even out, and people can blog on Friday about the terrible movie they just saw, keeping others away on Saturday.

  49. Re:DVDs should be released immediately by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Piracy Not To Blame In Decline of Moviegoers

    40 YO Virgin is pretty good actually. The trailers make it look far more horrid than it is. It's got an 85% overall rating on RottenTomatoes. And an even higher 88% from their "Cream of the Crop" reviewers (i.e. established critics). This compares with an 8% overall rating for the new Deuce Bigalow movie.

  50. Re:Commercials and Price by courtarro · · Score: 1 · on Piracy Not To Blame In Decline of Moviegoers
    You hit it spot on price. Ticket prices seem to have exceeded the threshold of what people will put down without thinking. When movies cost $4, why not just go to the theater? Who cares if it sucks or not, it's a decent way to pass the time.

    Now that movies cost $8 and up, theaters have lost the impulse buyer. When I plan to check out a movie nowadays, I give it a little time to show up on the Tomatometer, and if the percentage is good enough I'll check it out. If not, I might rent the DVD when it comes out later, but I'm not going to waste $8 seeing a movie that might suck. In other words, I plan my moviegoings so that I get the most money for my dollar, and I end up seeing far less movies.

    This explains why good movies are exceeding records for gross, and yet theaters are seeing less money overall. People no longer go to movies on an impulse; they only attend "sure bets" and have become conservative and that's the worst thing a retailer could want.