Six Good Movies with Shockingly Low Rotten Tomatoes Scores

[HereticBD]

Boondock Saints isn't as good as it's hype. I never understood the love for it. it's a cult movie, sure, but it's not a cinematic masterpiece and the director proved that he can't strike gold twice. It was a cheesy, violent movie about vigilantes. Don't get me started on Willem Defoe's intro. The dumbest, most over done introduction for a not-even-great character. It was like he was bringing out his inner Nicolas Cage, and not from Leaving Las Vegas. Everything about that character screams that they tried too hard. Also, they couldn't even cast anyone who resembled a mobster, or write decent joke for their comic relief.

 

[Badger67]

Siskel and Ebert gave it 2 thumbs up

good enough for me

Could have been much better if they stuck more to the storyline. More of the die hards would have came out to watch.

 

[Badger67]

Spaceballs and Home Alone should definitely be rated higher.

Starship Troopers should be much, much lower.

To this day i cant sit through 10 minutes of starship troopers.

 

[PaleMoonlight]

Frankly, I've never understood why theaters take ratings that seriously. It's not like it's a law.

But like you say, they do.

I think it's to have the image that parents can drop off their kids at movies and everything will be fine. So more business for them in the long run.

 

[Guestx]

I think it's to have the image that parents can drop off their kids at movies and everything will be fine. So more business for them in the long run.

That makes sense actually.

 

[HereticBD]

The game itself was NC17

And never enforced.

Few over the age of 16 were playing Mortal Kombat back in the day. It would've been box office poison to give it an R-rating.

"Hey dad, can you take me to see Mortal Kombat?"

"What the heck is a Mortal Kombat?"

"It's a video game"

"I'm not buying you any more games!"

"No, it's a movie."

"What? Go ask your mother."

 

[Dragonlordxxxxx]

Out of the six, I think Boondock Saints deserves its low scores.

Home Alone is the only movie in there whose low RT score is perplexing to me. The others in the list I can see why some didn't like it.

 

[Guestx]

Out of the six, I think Boondock Saints deserves its low scores.

Home Alone is the only movie in there whose low RT score is perplexing to me. The others in the list I can see why some didn't like it.

Why wouldn't someone like Clue? It's a nearly-flawless film, entertaining from start to finish.

 

[Katsumi Yamada]

Rambo IV (2008) : 37%

 

[bowened]

I think it's worth giving another shot. Then go watch the documentary Overnight, about the implosion of its director Troy Duffy:

I plan on it. There’s always a chance my taste may have changed over the last 20 years.

 

[bowened]

Rambo IV (2008) : 37%

That just pisses me off. Criminally underrated film.

 

[HereticBD]

Rambo IV (2008) : 37%

Yeah, that's criminal. One of the best long overdue sequels I can think of. Now that was fuckin' Rambo.

 

[TSK]

Hook at 29%?! What the fuck is that? That was my favorite movie as a kid.

 

[bowened]

Yeah, that's criminal. One of the best long overdue sequels I can think of. Now that was fuckin' Rambo.

Bro, only time ever in my life that I stood during a movie in theater and cheered. When Rambo ripped that dude’s throat out. Straight up fist pumping in the theater. What else do you want out of an action movie, right?

Unbelievable that old man Sly has been able out such quality, next generation sequels for his two top franchises. Makes me want to get on hgh NOW.

 

[Bob Gray]

Im shocked you you resisted using The Village as an example.

Spaceballs is understandable. It's stupid, but it's the right kind of stupid for certain times. Clue is a travesty. All the others dont really get much of an effect out of me.

 

[Bob Gray]

This movie is so much better than its critical review metascore it's absurd (not a great IMDb rating, either). DO NOT read anything about it. Just watch it. Everyone I've shown it to has given it a big thumbs up:
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/devil/
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1314655/

I remember enjoying it. I also remember it being one of those movies that is entertaining while you watch it, but comes apart if you think about it too much. So I dont think I ever revisited it.

 

[Guestx]

Im shocked you you resisted using The Village as an example.

Oh, The Village's score IS INDEED shockingly low. But I made an effort to only pick movies that most people agree are pretty good.

 

[cottagecheesefan]

I really like all those movies.

 

[Co-Co Zola]

Who gives a shit about critics?

They were all wannabe Siskel & Eberts and want bribes from studios in exchange for good reviews for mediocre movies.

And don't get me started on the horrible movies that critics loved so much it seemed like they were writing the reviews while getting their dicks sucked by prostitutes sent by the studio.

Fuck critics.

Many critics are pretentious prudes. They rate 'smart' films highly, but completely shit on 'fun' films. Unless it's something like, say, a Marvel film backed by Disney, then they fawn over it. Sell outs.

Another thing is the goofs who shit on a movie, then decades later when it becomes a part of popular culture and a 'certified classic' they re-review it and praise it.

Ebert himself did this with The Shining, he originally gave it 2 stars, then 26 years later he gave it a 4/4 and added it to his 'great films' list.

It's completely disingenuous. I really don't like that 'sell out' factor, if ya' don't like a film, good for you. Now don't get me wrong, people can and do change their opinions on movies. But for me, cases like this scream of going with the current and attempting to rewrite your history to make yourself look more credible. The truth is the film was the same then as it is now, except the celebration of it. If you get swayed by stuff like that, your opinion is worthless and you lack a back bone.

Ebert gave the following ratings:
The Thing (1982) 2.5/4
The Shining (1980) 2/4
The Texas Chain Saw Massacre (1974) 2/4

Needless to say, he just didn't get Horror. This is a common theme amongst critics, they are harsh when rating Horror. I agree with the other user here, High Tension (2003) is a good Horror film.

The Thing & The Shining are two of the best examples of films that were either panned or met with luke warm receptions to later become some of the most celebrated in their genre.



All in all I have long learned to completely disregard the opinions of most people when it comes to films. As a Horror fan I have seen people SHIT all over Halloween 3 (simply because it doesn't have Michael Myers in it), the absolute shit houses spam 1/10 ratings on sites like imdb. That annoys me, they hate the film for something as childish as that.

Another thing is Jason X is consider a joke, yet Jason Lives (Friday the 13th part 6) is considered a fan favorite and one of the best f13 films. I re-watched both very recently, and refuse to acknowledge Jason Lives as being better in any way, other that the fact Jason X is set in space and he gets an 'upgrade'. Those two points, I concede. They're not very f13th-ish, but that's another reason why it's better, it's not the same fucking formula as the others. People all just go with the current.


Lifeforce (1985) gets a bad rap amongst some people, it's a 6.1 on imdb. I've seen some people call it absolute trash. To my surprise it has a 67% rating on Rotten Tomatoes and Ebert gave it a 3/4. Really, it's one of the greatest 'B-movies' ever, period.

 

[Mike]

Yes. And the games target audience was adolescents and teens. Anything with blood got an MA rating, but these were still games marketed towards children.

Movies have a completely different and much more stringent review board compared to comics or games, which are typically much more violent than other entertainment targeted at kids.


The industries work differently, that's the entire point.