It's NEVER Too Early For Movie Hype

[fantastic_four]

Boy Gene, you also forget that advance word on the Hulk wasn't very good. Reviews were not positive...

 

I hear people say this frequently, and I never know whether they're getting it from. Movies.com compiles reviews from as many different major sources as they're able to get them from, and the reviews for Hulk were well above average--10 positive, 4 negative, 2 mixed. The reviews weren't overwhelmingly positive like the Spidey films, but they weren't negative, either.

 

Check it out here: http://movies.go.com/movies/H/hulkthe_2001/index.html

[FFB]

Boy Gene, you also forget that advance word on the Hulk wasn't very good. Reviews were not positive...

 

I hear people say this frequently, and I never know whether they're getting it from. Movies.com compiles reviews from as many different major sources as they're able to get them from, and the reviews for Hulk were well above average--10 positive, 4 negative, 2 mixed. The reviews weren't overwhelmingly positive like the Spidey films, but they weren't negative, either.

 

Check it out here: http://movies.go.com/movies/H/hulkthe_2001/index.html

 

Rottentomatoes.com has much more in-depth coverage of reviews and it got a Fresh rating of 59% (slightly "rotten") after compiling over 200 reviews.

 

Hulk ratings from rottentomatoes.com

[fantastic_four]

Wow, never seen rottentomatoes.com, thanks! Any idea how they choose who they include reviews for? I've always wondered how movies.com chooses who they do and don't include reviews for.

[joe_collector]

Sure, but the Rotten Tomatoes takes just about everyone and their dog into consideration, while the other list is like their "cream of the crop", and includes top-name reviewers and media outlets.

 

From what I can remember, The Hulk was NOT panned by major media, while a ton of smaller, far less influential sites slammed it mercilessly. So if you're looking for a culprit, it was not the reviews.

[fantastic_four]

Wow, never seen rottentomatoes.com, thanks! Any idea how they choose who they include reviews for? I've always wondered how movies.com chooses who they do and don't include reviews for.

 

Well, nevermind, I found it. They only accept reviews from critics with an accreditation from somewhere ( http://www.rottentomatoes.com/pages/critics#film_critic ). Movies.com seems to only include the critics who work for nationally syndicated newspapers and television shows.

 

I dunno which one to trust, but I'll be glancing at them both for a while I suppose...

[FFB]

Sure, but the Rotten Tomatoes takes just about everyone and their dog into consideration, while the other list is like their "cream of the crop", and includes top-name reviewers and media outlets.

 

From what I can remember, The Hulk was NOT panned by major media, while a ton of smaller, far less influential sites slammed it mercilessly. So if you're looking for a culprit, it was not the reviews.

 

Rottentomatoes.com actually has TWO different rating scales. One from "everyone" and one from "the cream of the crop." The Hulk actually got a lower rating from the cream of the crop, with 54%.

[FFB]

Wow, never seen rottentomatoes.com, thanks! Any idea how they choose who they include reviews for? I've always wondered how movies.com chooses who they do and don't include reviews for.

 

Not really sure, James. I don't think they set the bar very high, but they have a separate rating system (which you see on the right hand side of the page) for the "cream of the crop" reviewers like A.O. Scott from the NYT and Ropers & Ebert, etc.

[uclapeterg]

I hope the movie is in full effect already.

 

The film starts production in mid August I think.

[uclapeterg]

And JC says UFF is destined to be bargain bin fodder...

 

But has he told us how much the movie's gonna suck azz yet?

 

Of course. We would not expect anything less.

[PedigreeMan]

Fantastic Four #489-502 (60-70) Waid Wieringo Alba

 

People, people, people ... amidst all of your fanboy ravings you've neglected to mention the most glaringly obvious here: Zipper's a keyword spammer ("Waid, Wieringo, Alba?!?!").

 

I expect you all to report him immediately.

[Darthdiesel]

Fantastic Four #489-502 (60-70) Waid Wieringo Alba

 

People, people, people ... amidst all of your fanboy ravings you've neglected to mention the most glaringly obvious here: Zipper's a keyword spammer ("Waid, Wieringo, Alba?!?!").

 

I expect you all to report him immediately.

 

Maybe he's including Alba with the comic if you hit the BIN?

[PedigreeMan]

Fantastic Four #489-502 (60-70) Waid Wieringo Alba

 

People, people, people ... amidst all of your fanboy ravings you've neglected to mention the most glaringly obvious here: Zipper's a keyword spammer ("Waid, Wieringo, Alba?!?!").

 

I expect you all to report him immediately.

 

Maybe he's including Alba with the comic if you hit the BIN?

 

In that case, the buyer overpaid.