What Movies Did You Watch Last Week? (31/07-06/08) CLOSED

I dont think running scared is good but its just batshit crazy enough to be entertaining in a weird way

moviemouth

based on how i view IMDb average ratings, i would agree with that.

here is how i basically translate IMDb wide opinion based on the average scores there...

4.x/10 and lower = largely negative opinions (Showgirls is the only exception for me personally as that movie should be at least 5.0+ bare minimum.)
5.x/10 = mostly negative opinions (i have seen a quality movie here and there that scores here though, just very few is all)
6.x/10 = mixed-opinions (but could be slightly more negative than positive depending on what side of the 6's it's on)
7.x/10 = mostly positive opinions
high 7's on up = mostly praised.

hell, even based on my own personal rating scale... with 5/10 being average, 4/10 being below average, and 3's and less being pretty much bottom of the barrel(i skipped the details on the 1-3/10 scores here), i would probably not consider something below average as garbage but then again i could not really disagree with you either as below average is still pretty weak and i could easily see how you, and many others, could label below average movies as garbage.

but it's still missing that core that makes it stand out which Running Scared has if you ask me. but i guess we ain't on the same page in this particular comparison as Running Scared is within my Top 60 movies (even conservatively... Top 108) where as 15 Minutes, while not bad, is basically apart of that "just another movie" group for me (i.e. forgettable).

also, i would have to disagree about the MUCH better acting thing... while you can probably make a legitimate argument of 15 Minutes having overall better acting, i would not say it's anything significant as truly bad acting in movies you don't see all that often in general(while Paul Walker might be a bit so-so here and there (like i mentioned) his overall presence keeps him out the truly bad acting range, at least for the most part), at least amongst movies that are at least reasonably well known.

p.s. one of my 'go to' things in terms of bad acting... would be that scene in Gran Torino (2008) where the kid is pounding on the door in the basement to 'let him out'. but with that said... that movie is within my Top 9 movies in general so the overall movie is still top notch for me and overall i thought he was okay enough in his role. but it was probably largely because he landed in a great movie that helped boost him some.

like i always say... movies in general are not about being original but taking a idea that's already been done and do it well enough.

besides... even if someone does something original, it probably won't matter much if your lacking a good cast and other key areas. so while doing something new can be nice, it's not something that will make or break a movie for me on that alone.

also, i would not really say the pedophile scene is forced but i can see how it somewhat seemed out of no where given the general style etc of the rest of the movie. but i see that scene as a nice bonus in already solid movie. kinda helps make the movie a bit more unique in it's genre in a way as it's not like your standard dime-a-dozen action type of movie overall.

Yes, but critics tend to dis what a lot of people like (and vice versa).

personally... i think wide opinion (i.e. basically the masses) carries more weight than critics overall. it's pretty much what makes some movies classics and others are forgotten depending on what the masses think about a random movie. about the only time the critics matter more is for those places that make those Top 100 movies of all-time types of list which just mostly kiss up to movies being 'ahead of their time' (and the like) more than just being a really entertaining movie the masses remember etc. i realize we all got our personal preferences and all but i would rather have critics make those lists (i.e. like Top 100 of all time etc) based on their own personal opinions (like what they personally like the most) instead of just kissing up to the 'ahead of their' time and the like stuff which mostly ends up making lists that are pretty much the same-ish to others doing basically the same thing.

p.s. but with that said... i am not surprised The Cooler is more liked by critics as it just seems like a movie that would be more liked by critics than Running Scared. but don't get me wrong, i still think The Cooler is solid as it's within my Top 197 movies which makes it more enjoyable to watch than about 90%+ of everything i have seen at the least.

Yeah, we are all in the majority and minority at times as i think this applies to pretty much everyone who watches movies.

but just because i feel the VAST majority of movies are nothing special... that's going to guarantee i am in the minority a good portion of the time.

but looking at IMDb average scores there is only 19 movies i gave a 7/10 or higher that have a 6.4/10 or lower average. lower that 6.4/10 average down to a 5.9/10 or lower and that total drops to only six movies. but with that said... i realize that's only on movies i think stand out as if you factor in what many think stand out from the pack then i am sure you could come up with a sizable list that i would be in the minority on.

but speaking of that understanding the appeal of movies... i would have a similar opinion as you about some movies out there as some movies i wonder why they are liked so much. but i honestly think there are some people (as for how many i have no clue) who praise a movie because they don't want to be in the minority (or looked down on by their friends etc) more than them actually liking the movie as much as they claim. makes me wonder if Citizen Kane is one of those movies as it seems to get high praise on IMDb for those movies from the old days but i can't see that movie being as liked it as it's made out to be by too many people. just speculating a bit here.

have a good day