It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
Even with a mediocre presentation, it would've done a hell of a lot better without the horrendously off-putting mega-eyes on Alita. That alone was always going to make people laugh at the trailer and skip it; even as somebody who gets why they did it, it's an awful and distracting design decision, particularly when everybody else has normal eyes.
+4
Options
KetarCome on upstairswe're having a partyRegistered Userregular
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
I've been shitting on it because it looked stupid and generic but everyone is saying it's good and essentially Hansel and Gretel certified and now I feel like I should see it.
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
I've been shitting on it because it looked stupid and generic but everyone is saying it's good and essentially Hansel and Gretel certified and now I feel like I should see it.
/looks at RT
It does not look like most people are saying it's good. It's barely scrapping 60%.
Check the audience score
Green Book has an even higher audience score of 94%.
Babe, which is a goddamned classic, has an audience score of 67%.
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
Even with a mediocre presentation, it would've done a hell of a lot better without the horrendously off-putting mega-eyes on Alita. That alone was always going to make people laugh at the trailer and skip it; even as somebody who gets why they did it, it's an awful and distracting design decision, particularly when everybody else has normal eyes.
While they were put in because Cameron wanted that "manga look" for Alita - there's actually a plot reason for why she has them and no one else does.
Also, once you have started watching the movie and adjust to how she looks, it's fine.
It's honestly a technical achievement how closely they look like real eyes up close and her CG skin is crazy - having a completely CG character (who is supposed to look human) interacting with actual actors and not looking insanely weird (it really does work) is a triumph.
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
I've been shitting on it because it looked stupid and generic but everyone is saying it's good and essentially Hansel and Gretel certified and now I feel like I should see it.
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
I've been shitting on it because it looked stupid and generic but everyone is saying it's good and essentially Hansel and Gretel certified and now I feel like I should see it.
/looks at RT
It does not look like most people are saying it's good. It's barely scrapping 60%.
Check the audience score
Green Book has an even higher audience score of 94%.
Babe, which is a goddamned classic, has an audience score of 67%.
Audience scores suck.
While I do not want to be "that guy" - Texiken said most people, not most critics.
And...60% is most critics anyway.
Also, a lot of the rotten reviews have good things to say, but came up just shy of giving it a fresh rating.
Looking at just a numbered metric devoid of nuance (which was your argument with babe and, I guess, Green Book - both a critical & popular darling) is not a great way to go about deciding quantity.
Alita is okay for a live action adaptation of a manga, if you leave all the specific tags behind, its garbo, incredibly forgettable.
Yes, with a quick verbal "boom." You take a man's peko, you deny him his dab, all that is left is to rise up and tear down the walls of Jericho with a ".....not!" -TexiKen
TexiKenDammit!That fish really got me!Registered Userregular
At this point and time I trust the audience score more than the critic score. It shouldn't be that way, it should be somewhere in the middle ideally or sync up (Goodfellas has 96 & 97, natch, best movie ever) but with all the Nerd Crews these days I feel I can't get an honest answer from critics, especially with blockbusters and action movies. I just keep being reminded of Dunkey's video about game critics which is pretty apt here too.
+4
Options
Ninja Snarl PMy helmet is my burden.Ninja Snarl: Gone, but not forgotten.Registered Userregular
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
Even with a mediocre presentation, it would've done a hell of a lot better without the horrendously off-putting mega-eyes on Alita. That alone was always going to make people laugh at the trailer and skip it; even as somebody who gets why they did it, it's an awful and distracting design decision, particularly when everybody else has normal eyes.
While they were put in because Cameron wanted that "manga look" for Alita - there's actually a plot reason for why she has them and no one else does.
Also, once you have started watching the movie and adjust to how she looks, it's fine.
It's honestly a technical achievement how closely they look like real eyes up close and her CG skin is crazy - having a completely CG character (who is supposed to look human) interacting with actual actors and not looking insanely weird (it really does work) is a triumph.
But that doesn't do any good when the instant kneejerk reaction from the vast majority of moviegoers is going to be "that character looks horrible", and then ignore the movie forever.
I honestly don't give a shit that Cameron's justification is a vaguely artistic one to make her look more manga-like, because the entire rest of the visual setting is gritty realism. If that manga-ized style had applied to everyone, then maybe it could've worked out for the whole film. Instead, it's a character that sticks out hideously creepily on their own, and doubly so against the background of everybody else looking normal.
Tossing a weak justification into the film won't fix the problem that the main character's design doesn't actually add to the movie, and instead is going to be terribly off-putting for most people.
Ninja Snarl P on
+2
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
edited February 2019
I mean yeah her look is weird
But I'm still going to go see it.
It looks like a fun romp and 3D vehicle. Whatever the manga is and whether it's a disservice to it is not something I really give a shit about.
At this point and time I trust the audience score more than the critic score. It shouldn't be that way, it should be somewhere in the middle ideally or sync up (Goodfellas has 96 & 97, natch, best movie ever) but with all the Nerd Crews these days I feel I can't get an honest answer from critics, especially with blockbusters and action movies. I just keep being reminded of Dunkey's video about game critics which is pretty apt here too.
It's pretty hilarious to complain about critics and instead go with the super easily gamed audience score.
+2
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
Did people have bets in here on whether Alita was going to flop or succeed?
Y'all acting like you've got money on the line with whether or not this movie does well.
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
I've been shitting on it because it looked stupid and generic but everyone is saying it's good and essentially Hansel and Gretel certified and now I feel like I should see it.
It was a lot of fun and the CG was amazing. Great performances mixed with an anime as fuck asthetic.
While not high-art, it's probably the best live-action anime movie ever made, and I'm a big fan of how goofy Speed Racer is.
It's a shame it's going to bomb super hard.
I've been shitting on it because it looked stupid and generic but everyone is saying it's good and essentially Hansel and Gretel certified and now I feel like I should see it.
/looks at RT
It does not look like most people are saying it's good. It's barely scrapping 60%.
Check the audience score
Green Book has an even higher audience score of 94%.
Babe, which is a goddamned classic, has an audience score of 67%.
Audience scores suck.
While I do not want to be "that guy" - Texiken said most people, not most critics.
And...60% is most critics anyway.
Also, a lot of the rotten reviews have good things to say, but came up just shy of giving it a fresh rating.
Looking at just a numbered metric devoid of nuance (which was your argument with babe and, I guess, Green Book - both a critical & popular darling) is not a great way to go about deciding quantity.
60% is a terrible score. There's a reason the site lists anything 59% of below as rotten.
You want to look at the scores with nuance, combine several different aggregators. Metacritic is giving it like 53% or something. So it's not even polarizing, it's just universal considered kinda bad.
0
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
I don't know that I would call the majority of these villains who have robotic bodies with faces slapped on, gigantic rocket hammers, and entire settings done in CG "gritty realism"
Also, I understand you have made up your mind about the eyes, but if you haven't seen the film, can you actually say said eyes only have a weak justification?
Also, I don't disagree with you about the negative reaction the general public has had about the eyes. Between her eyes and the fact that it seems like people just don't want to see cyberpunk-esque movies as they continue to fail at the box office more often than not, Alita will be a huge bomb.
Did people have bets in here on whether Alita was going to flop or succeed?
Y'all acting like you've got money on the line with whether or not this movie does well.
People really hate the eyes.
+7
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
+8
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
0
Options
AstaerethIn the belly of the beastRegistered Userregular
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
That argument is not a useful or interesting argument
Did you like it is interesting
Did everybody like it is only interesting for the investors
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
But if that were the case, there's no arguing whether most people liked it! More than half of critics (most) AND the vast majority of audiences (most) liked it!
At the very least, it intrigues me. I probably won't see it in the theater (to be fair, I haven't caught many movies in the theater in the past year because of social stuff), but I might catch it on Netflix. Scuttlebutt from friends who saw it last night was that it was way better than they thought it was going to be. They were expecting "Ghost In The Shell" live action, but they thought it was better than that.
At the very least, it intrigues me. I probably won't see it in the theater (to be fair, I haven't caught many movies in the theater in the past year because of social stuff), but I might catch it on Netflix. Scuttlebutt from friends who saw it last night was that it was way better than they thought it was going to be. They were expecting "Ghost In The Shell" live action, but they thought it was better than that.
Ghost in the Shell was garbage. I fell asleep in the theater half way through.
At the very least, it intrigues me. I probably won't see it in the theater (to be fair, I haven't caught many movies in the theater in the past year because of social stuff), but I might catch it on Netflix. Scuttlebutt from friends who saw it last night was that it was way better than they thought it was going to be. They were expecting "Ghost In The Shell" live action, but they thought it was better than that.
It's Robert Rodriguez and James Cameron getting together to adapt a manga that they've both loved and tried to get developed for it feels like decades now. I run hot and cold on both, but I'm definitely interested in seeing what seems like an idiosyncratic passion project for the pair.
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
That argument is not a useful or interesting argument
Did you like it is interesting
Did everybody like it is only interesting for the investors
Nah, it's interesting for plenty of reasons. You see lots of interesting analysis on the varying trends on the business and taste side and how they influence the movie industry. Or we can look at the differing reactions to a film from critics to movie-goers to niche/enthusiast reviewers and so on.
And of course, it's also useful in the context of question that comes before "Did I like this?" which is "Will I like this?".
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
But if that were the case, there's no arguing whether most people liked it! More than half of critics (most) AND the vast majority of audiences (most) liked it!
Edit: aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Not really, no. Audience scores online don't mean shit (online polling lol) and critics are not anything like a uniform distribution across the population. Which impacts both the question "Do people like this?" and "Will I like this?".
0
Options
AtomikaLive fast and get fucked or whateverRegistered Userregular
If “fans of the genre” are going to be the most served, I’m afraid I’m gonna bow out
40% on RT critic reviews seems to be my low threshold on whether I'll like something or not. Under it, pretty much guaranteed I won't. Over though, a significant number of times I've still enjoyed the movie. Movies that hover between 40-50% seem to attract a disproportionate number of negative for the sake of being negative reviews, critics getting on the bandwagon because it gets exposure or something. Or it'll be some popcorn action or B-movie that they're reviewing like it was supposed to be high art.
If “fans of the genre” are going to be the most served, I’m afraid I’m gonna bow out
My wife, who would not call herself a "sci-fi" fan and not usually an action movie fan, was dreading seeing this, but it was a Valentines Day gift to me.
40% on RT critic reviews seems to be my low threshold on whether I'll like something or not. Under it, pretty much guaranteed I won't. Over though, a significant number of times I've still enjoyed the movie. Movies that hover between 40-50% seem to attract a disproportionate number of negative for the sake of being negative reviews, critics getting on the bandwagon because it gets exposure or something. Or it'll be some popcorn action or B-movie that they're reviewing like it was supposed to be high art.
I find it is also very worth at least skimming the reviews, especially for genre films. Metacritic, at least, has a habit of marking reviews that read fairly positive low, with a lot of "This is fun film for fans of this type of thing" reviews that are scored 50 percent or less for some reason.
Phillishere on
+5
Options
jungleroomxIt's never too many graves, it's always not enough shovelsRegistered Userregular
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
But if that were the case, there's no arguing whether most people liked it! More than half of critics (most) AND the vast majority of audiences (most) liked it!
Edit: aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Not really, no. Audience scores online don't mean shit (online polling lol) and critics are not anything like a uniform distribution across the population. Which impacts both the question "Do people like this?" and "Will I like this?".
Which is, again, why you seek out a critic whose judgment you trust when it comes to film and listen to them as opposed to seeing how full the Good Movie Meter is at Critic Boogaloo Dot Com.
This quantification of movie "goodness" is right up there with using TVTropes as a sole source of critical analysis.
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
But if that were the case, there's no arguing whether most people liked it! More than half of critics (most) AND the vast majority of audiences (most) liked it!
Edit: aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Not really, no. Audience scores online don't mean shit (online polling lol) and critics are not anything like a uniform distribution across the population. Which impacts both the question "Do people like this?" and "Will I like this?".
Which is, again, why you seek out a critic whose judgment you trust when it comes to film and listen to them as opposed to seeing how full the Good Movie Meter is at Critic Boogaloo Dot Com.
This quantification of movie "goodness" is right up there with using TVTropes as a sole source of critical analysis.
But that wasn't the contention at all. The whole argument was that people (in the collective sense) actually liked the movie.
For the love of god, montressor, argue about whether the movie is good, not whether the movie’s arbitrary consensus numbers indicate that it is good or not
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
But if that were the case, there's no arguing whether most people liked it! More than half of critics (most) AND the vast majority of audiences (most) liked it!
Edit: aaaaaaaaaaaaa
Not really, no. Audience scores online don't mean shit (online polling lol) and critics are not anything like a uniform distribution across the population. Which impacts both the question "Do people like this?" and "Will I like this?".
Which is, again, why you seek out a critic whose judgment you trust when it comes to film and listen to them as opposed to seeing how full the Good Movie Meter is at Critic Boogaloo Dot Com.
This quantification of movie "goodness" is right up there with using TVTropes as a sole source of critical analysis.
But that wasn't the contention at all. The whole argument was that people (in the collective sense) actually liked the movie.
But by the quantifiable metrics, most people who saw the film liked it.
Unless you can somehow quantify the mysterious number of cinema goers that do not participate in online polling?
Which isnt indicative of whether or not you will because people who go to a movie is a self selecting group which you may not be a part of. And people that respond to those surveys are a further self selecting group.
The critic score (and individual reviews) are better indicators of whether or not youre likely to like the movie given that you dont know if youre in that aelf selecting group
Posts
Even with a mediocre presentation, it would've done a hell of a lot better without the horrendously off-putting mega-eyes on Alita. That alone was always going to make people laugh at the trailer and skip it; even as somebody who gets why they did it, it's an awful and distracting design decision, particularly when everybody else has normal eyes.
Green Book has an even higher audience score of 94%.
Babe, which is a goddamned classic, has an audience score of 67%.
Audience scores suck.
Also, once you have started watching the movie and adjust to how she looks, it's fine.
It's honestly a technical achievement how closely they look like real eyes up close and her CG skin is crazy - having a completely CG character (who is supposed to look human) interacting with actual actors and not looking insanely weird (it really does work) is a triumph.
And...60% is most critics anyway.
Also, a lot of the rotten reviews have good things to say, but came up just shy of giving it a fresh rating.
Looking at just a numbered metric devoid of nuance (which was your argument with babe and, I guess, Green Book - both a critical & popular darling) is not a great way to go about deciding quantity.
Woof!
But that doesn't do any good when the instant kneejerk reaction from the vast majority of moviegoers is going to be "that character looks horrible", and then ignore the movie forever.
I honestly don't give a shit that Cameron's justification is a vaguely artistic one to make her look more manga-like, because the entire rest of the visual setting is gritty realism. If that manga-ized style had applied to everyone, then maybe it could've worked out for the whole film. Instead, it's a character that sticks out hideously creepily on their own, and doubly so against the background of everybody else looking normal.
Tossing a weak justification into the film won't fix the problem that the main character's design doesn't actually add to the movie, and instead is going to be terribly off-putting for most people.
But I'm still going to go see it.
It looks like a fun romp and 3D vehicle. Whatever the manga is and whether it's a disservice to it is not something I really give a shit about.
It's pretty hilarious to complain about critics and instead go with the super easily gamed audience score.
Y'all acting like you've got money on the line with whether or not this movie does well.
60% is a terrible score. There's a reason the site lists anything 59% of below as rotten.
You want to look at the scores with nuance, combine several different aggregators. Metacritic is giving it like 53% or something. So it's not even polarizing, it's just universal considered kinda bad.
What even in the hell
Also, I understand you have made up your mind about the eyes, but if you haven't seen the film, can you actually say said eyes only have a weak justification?
Also, I don't disagree with you about the negative reaction the general public has had about the eyes. Between her eyes and the fact that it seems like people just don't want to see cyberpunk-esque movies as they continue to fail at the box office more often than not, Alita will be a huge bomb.
RT has always worked this way and for good reason.
Again, the cut-off line for being considered rotten is 59%. By the sites metrics, 60% is only not shit because of the margin of error.
Nah.
It means half the critics liked it. Which means there's a 50% chance you (the royal you) will also like it.
Stop trying to quantify art quality, it’s madness
I'm seeing that.
Oh no what a horrible movie
3DS: 1521-4165-5907
PS3: KayleSolo
Live: Kayle Solo
WiiU: KayleSolo
Which is why as of late I've diverged off of the aggregate review sites and just listen to a couple of trusted reviewers who I share tastes with.
The argument was over whether "most people liked it" so an aggregator is basically the only tool we have.
That argument is not a useful or interesting argument
Did you like it is interesting
Did everybody like it is only interesting for the investors
Edit: aaaaaaaaaaaaa
https://arstechnica.com/gaming/2019/02/alita-battle-angel-rises-above-its-ugly-ads-flies-to-a-cloud-city-of-awesome/
At the very least, it intrigues me. I probably won't see it in the theater (to be fair, I haven't caught many movies in the theater in the past year because of social stuff), but I might catch it on Netflix. Scuttlebutt from friends who saw it last night was that it was way better than they thought it was going to be. They were expecting "Ghost In The Shell" live action, but they thought it was better than that.
It's Robert Rodriguez and James Cameron getting together to adapt a manga that they've both loved and tried to get developed for it feels like decades now. I run hot and cold on both, but I'm definitely interested in seeing what seems like an idiosyncratic passion project for the pair.
Nah, it's interesting for plenty of reasons. You see lots of interesting analysis on the varying trends on the business and taste side and how they influence the movie industry. Or we can look at the differing reactions to a film from critics to movie-goers to niche/enthusiast reviewers and so on.
And of course, it's also useful in the context of question that comes before "Did I like this?" which is "Will I like this?".
Not really, no. Audience scores online don't mean shit (online polling lol) and critics are not anything like a uniform distribution across the population. Which impacts both the question "Do people like this?" and "Will I like this?".
She loved it.
I find it is also very worth at least skimming the reviews, especially for genre films. Metacritic, at least, has a habit of marking reviews that read fairly positive low, with a lot of "This is fun film for fans of this type of thing" reviews that are scored 50 percent or less for some reason.
Which is, again, why you seek out a critic whose judgment you trust when it comes to film and listen to them as opposed to seeing how full the Good Movie Meter is at Critic Boogaloo Dot Com.
This quantification of movie "goodness" is right up there with using TVTropes as a sole source of critical analysis.
But that wasn't the contention at all. The whole argument was that people (in the collective sense) actually liked the movie.
Unless you can somehow quantify the mysterious number of cinema goers that do not participate in online polling?
The critic score (and individual reviews) are better indicators of whether or not youre likely to like the movie given that you dont know if youre in that aelf selecting group