LuccaCardoso1 said:
When do you draw the line between fiction and documentary? D'Souza calls them "documentaries", but there's not much truth in them. He basically puts together a bunch of conspiracy theories based on absolutely no factual information and calls it a "documentary". Pretending that false information is the truth is worthy of a 1/100 in my opinion. They're not just bad movies that won't add anything to society, they're actively harmful to society. D'Souza is blatantly spreading false information disguised as truth.
That expectation is also true for documentaries or any other form of media. But D'Souza is not saying "Trump is good, society should be more conservative", he's saying "liberalism is the same as nazism" and "the Democrat party is just a bunch of nazis" in a "documentary". He didn't receive bad scores because he supports trump, he received bad scores because he's trying to polarize society even more than it already is by spreading lies.
No, it is not. First of all, I have no idea where you got this 92% number. It has 85/100 on Metacritic and 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. Second of all, it has those scores because it is a good, well-made movie. It's a technical marvel. Fans hated it because of what it did with the Star Wars universe, but critics have to rate a movie as a standalone piece of media. The critics don't have to consider the whole cinematic universe. They're rating a movie, not the impact it has on a franchise.
This is incredibly stupid. Do you really believe that? Don't you think every movie would get either a great score or a terrible one if that was the case? Let's analyze the 5 recent movies rated on Metacritic to see how you're wrong: Mission Impossible: Fallout - Lowest Score: 50 / Highest Score: 100 / Range of Scores: 50 / Metascore: 86 Critics think so differently among them that the highest score a movie gets is usually 50 points higher than the lowest scores. When you stop to really think about that, "reviewers are a group of people who all think alike" suddenly becomes an undoubtedly stupid thing to say. |
If viewed as a standalone film, "The Last Jedi" is still cinematic garbage. A weak story with awful pacing, plot threads that go nowhere, and packed to the brim with juvenile humor that would normally be found in parodies like Blue Harvest or Robot Chicken as opposed to serious sci-fi fare. If "The Last Jedi" were the first ever Star Wars film, there would be no Star Wars franchise at all. Without an established franchise fanbase already built in to boost ticket sales on name alone, I have no doubt that the movie would have bombed. As such, any planned sequels would have been cancelled immediately. It would have joined the company of intended trilogies that ended after one film such as "The Golden Compass", "Eragon", and "Ender's Game".
