Do movie reviews affect your movie-going decisions?

I use movie reviews the same way I use book reviews -- I look at reviews to see if a movie/book that isn't highly promoted has a topic/director/actor who might appeal to me. No point in reading reviews of the movies at the megaplex. People talk about them. But in a city like Boston, there are always arty type films that you wouldn't know were in town unless you scanned the reviews.

 

This is what I found myself doing when I would make entertainment pages, read two or three reviews to get a consensus, then just pick the best-written one. After a while, it was like sports columnists: You knew which ones cared about the work, and which ones only wanted to rip everything.

 

Basically, I think it was intentional camp, and that people took it seriously instead, when they shouldn't have.

I don't think it was perfect, but I think as camp, it mostly worked.

 

I look at reviews more (especially Ebert) on dramas rather than comedies, although he's one of the few critics who fairly judges both. I'm usually drawn to comedies more by the actor than anything else.

I also have a soft spot for any of the Marvel genre superhero flicks. I'll catch those despite bad reviews (Green Lantern, Captain America), and usually find myself agreeing with the critics.

 

I don't think it was intended as camp at all. Even if it were camp, it may contain the worst acting of any film I've ever seen. "Saw" would probably be a close second, but considering "The Happening" starred an Academy Award nominee (who Wahlberg slept with to get that nomination I'll never know), I think it was worse.

 

There are some movies that I'm going to see no matter what.

There are others where a good or bad review (from a specific reviewer) can sway me from going or not going. Rolling Stone's Peter Travers is the one whose reviews sway me the most, because I agree with him at least 90 percent of the time (at least on the movies that I can be swayed on).

I never would have seen Mission Impossible 4 without it getting great reviews. It was so off my radar it's not even funny. But EW loved it and I think Travers loved it and I went to see it.

Drive was another that I would not have seen if the reviews hadn't been so good.

Hangover 2? Green Lantern? I was going no matter what.

 

I think The Happening has a chance to be the Troll 2 of my generation.

 

I guess I'm in the 1 in 4 who liked The Change Up. I thought it was great.

It scares me that anyone thought Freddy Got Fingered was a decent movie.

 

One of our local critics years back gave The Flintstones (the animated series, not the John Goodman movie) like a C-plus among cartoons.

I found that outrageous. How can you not give The Flintstones anything but an A. They are the modern stone-age family.

He was an elitist though who didn't see the humor in movies like Caddyshack.

 

Count me as one who thought 'The Happening' had some appeal.
I like some of the shots and some of the scenes.
In the final assessment, it was unsuccessful, but I give it a pass because it tried to be a little outside the mainstream.
Damning with faint praise, but it was better than 90 percent of what is released.

I also felt that way about Shyamalan's 'The Village' and 'Devil.'