(no subject)

[alexeye]

okay, 'cause i'm all poor and stuff, i don't have a paid account that would give us nifty options, but i need to take a little poll, for research purposes (i'm pulling movie reviews for my "pretty gone ugly" project).


do movie reviews/criticism influence your decision to see a particular film?

if you read reviews, which writers/papers/media do you find the most influential?


thanx, folks.

Comments

[blue-lotus.livejournal.com]

Movie reviews do influence my decision. I read local reviews and Globe and Mail. However, if something is "critically acclaimed", I am probably more likely to go see it. I am also more likely to see something if it wins prizes at Sundance or Cannes

I would say that "word of mouth" is a big factor for me. When my friends say something is good, or if someone like you or [Bad username or site: @ livejournal.com] says something is good, I am more likely to see it.

[brdgt.livejournal.com]

*blushes*

I trust Ebert. Reviewers are just giving their opinions and I just tend to agree with him more - plus he sees the value in cheesy horror/sci fi movies.

[kumquatmay]

I trust Ebert too. We very rarely disagree, and I love that he's got a lovely taste for the trashy stuff that too many hoity-toity reviewers disdain.

[joeychen.livejournal.com]

I have certain ideas on what kind of movies I will see. I prefer certain genres. If a downer of a movie got a fantastic review, I'm still unlikely to see it. If a movie in a genre I like (light and fluffy, chick flicks, pure entertainment) got a bad review, then that does influence to not see it, maybe wait till video or cable.
I get EW and read their reviews. I take them with a grain of salt tho, Schwartzbaum's review blow generally, and Gliebermans are only a bit better.

[jessypie.livejournal.com]

I hardly ever see movies in the theater. There are certain directors whose films I make a point to go see (like the Coen brothers, Wes Anderson, David Lynch) and beyond that, I mostly base my movie choices on word of mouth. I have some friends who see a LOT of movies, and the surprisingly cool old retired people who volunteer at my work see a lot of movies and have really intelligent opinions about them, so if I'm hearing a lot of glowing reviews about a film, I might get around to seeing it in theaters.

So I would say that reviews and criticism play a HUGE part in my decisions to see or not see movies, but mostly the things I read are informal commentary on the internet. I don't generally read particular writers or papers for movie reviews.

[tabristheangel.livejournal.com]

my two cents.
basically, the order i filter my film-going experience in is by a) director/creator, b) actors (but not necesarily stars or star billings), c) word-of-mouth, and only then do i glance at reviews. first, i don't really know many critics whose opinions matter enough to me to follow blindly (sorry - no links for you!). most i'd just rather skim only after seeing a film to contextualize my own experience. i like to view a work somewhat open eyes and not be to biased beforehand, so even if i did love a particular critic i'd probably just read him or her more contientiously afterward. secondly, as an actor, i have a bias towards great performers doing their thing, even in a painfully bad film. you have to skim the reviews pretty closely to find out whether a h.i.t.g was kickass in the background of some messy blockbuster. and speaking of h.i.t.g., i have to admit that YOU, miss film buff, have changed this whole paradigm for me. i discovered fametracker, i.m.d.b., and netflix through you - three things that are making me watch more and different films. so i guess YOU are my critic of choice!

[alexeye.livejournal.com]

thanks, you guys - it seems as things are turning more and more towards word-of-mouth than newspaper critics & industry wonks. i think the internet has a LOT to do with that shift, and this may actually filter into my paper as well.