Nope, sorry, you do not have to be paid to be a movie critic.  Absolutely and completely wrong.  You can start up a blog tomorrow and be a movie critic.  Did you mean professional movie critic?  Yeah, you might not want to question anyone's intelligence if you don't understand the differences there ...

Regardless, what you're saying is, "people who disagree with me are trash."  You're saying, "anyone who watched it will agree with me"--despite the fact that several people (who probably aren't professional movie critics) have already disagreed with you.  Not only are you using massive generalizations, you're using mass generalizations that have been completely proven wrong.

Your opinion is no better than the opinion of anyone else, professional or not.  

I actually love movie reviews. If a movie gets a high review I know it's some piece of crap artsy non-sense that it won't like...but if it gets a low score it's probably action packed or hilarious and I will like it. Then mediocre scores can be hit or miss.

Am I starting a blog? No. I'm merely posting on a video game website about my opinion about a certain movie I watched. If you disagree, go ahead. Do you see me making counter posts about people who disagree? No. Everyone is entitled to his/her own opinion.

The professional's opinion, however, has to be strictly monitored because having access to media outlets means that he/she can influence massive numbers of people and make them possibly waste time and money on useless trash that they think is good. Professional movie critics that are paid have the responsibility of keeping their content honest and in tune with the public so that they can be trusted.

There, if you want me to include "professional" in the "movie critic" phrase, you got it. Sheesh. It's as if you want to get into a technical battle for no reason.

EDIT: Oh and btw, I'm not even criticizing the movie. I'm criticizing the "professional" movie critics that gave it far too high a score. In fact, I admitted in the opening line that it's a good movie. It just doesn't deserve that high of a score.

Well if the movie was 100% like real life, then the chances of the satellite debris being in the same orbit are astronomically thin. Space is fricken huge.

If in the one in a million chance the debris and the shuttle do cross paths, then it would either be a lot lot lot worse or a lot nicer. If the destroyed satellite was orbiting at the same altitude as the shuttle, then it would have the same relative speed as the shuttle. Each one is going 17,000 mph, but to each other they are static. The explosion from what ever destroyed it would be the only thing making the debri fly. That means it would hit the shuttle going more like 50 mph, depending on the explosion. Or if for some reason the satellite was orbiting in the opposite direction(which would make like zero sense), the debri would be going 34,000 mph relatively and even the smallest dust particle would do serious damage. Wouldn't be able to see it either since that's almost 10 miles a second.

My biggest problem with the movie though was that the debri came around every 90 minutes. It would either be 45 minutes if the debri was going 34,000 and everyone would be dead the first time anyway, or it would take days to come back around.

Also I'm only a kerbal rocket scientist.

My feelings exactly

What I disagreed with was the childish way you insulted an entire segement of people because you disagreed with some of them.  Generalizations like that, to me, are a hell of a lot worse than a difference of opinion over a movie.  But let's not fight.

It bugs you that professional movie critics like different things than you, while it bugs me that someone would call someone else "trash" over something as trivial as that.  Let's just agree to disagree.

Technically, it could have intersecting orbits. Which would be every 90 minutes. However this would sort of imply that they were basically hitting eachother before. But, the chances would be really small, and the earth isn't a perfect sphere so it would likely only intersect once because their orbit times are slightly different. If you want to really push it, this could be the reason it takes out hubble, then ISS, then chinese station. But the chance of this extremely small. And in order to figure out if this was possible, you'd have to find the distances separating ISS, hubble, and see if it would work and I'm not going to do that.

But yeah, it would either be every 45 minutes if one say she was going in prograde motion and the debris is going in retrograde if they're in same orbit. Or it would take days to hit them again. But no matter what it's really really small chance.

I'm calling them trash because they're irresponsibly leading people toward things that aren't as good as they claim it to be. I feel that as journalists, they should hold themselves to higher standards than just "artsy expressions" and be more connected to the general public that will see the movie anyway. I mean, if they're reviewing the film solely by themselves, they aren't fit to be reviewers. The majority of the film viewing universe doesn't really care about what they like to emphasize on so much while their function is supposed to be to guide viewers to good films. It's an moronic waste of space and time.

Yeah that's true. The chances are even slimmer since that's time dependent but in this movie anything can happen. Don't even get me started on that space station hoping lol. Last I checked the ISS, hubble, and a random chinese station weren't up there hanging out together.

Fake edit lol: I decided to track both stations and guess what? At this very moment they are both right above Hawaii, only 100km away from each other. Guess the movie is true!

And how are they supposed to review anyway? What is being "connected to the general public"? Something like "Wow, Transformers is GOAT, Shia LaBeouf the new Marlon Brando confirmed!"? Obviously they will rate what they like higher.