8.3 on IMDB? - Top Gun: Maverick (2022) Discussion

[–] blindfolded (1660) 2 years ago

Interesting you use the term "plausible" as the score speaks for itself.

But in addition, this movie manages to appeal to a wide variety of demographics, which is extremely hard to do.

reply

[–] V7 (111) 2 years ago

Interesting indeed. Users like myself can make typos from time to time

reply

[–] blindfolded (1660) 2 years ago

I wasn't saying you misused a word.

I mean that your use of the word in conjunction with your personal opinion almost implies you believe the score is unjustly skewed. But I believe we have a large enough sample size that despite you not feeling 8.3-impressed the vast majority of people feel it's appropriate, myself included.

reply

[–] V7 (111) 2 years ago

Well perhaps I am just hard to impress. What was impressive about movie?

reply

[–] blindfolded (1660) 2 years ago

The movie has been out for almost a year and has countless opinion pieces, articles, and posts outlining it's "impressiveness," including on this very site you type on...so I honestly feel exactly zero responsibility in justifying, convincing, or proving to you otherwise.
Plus it has the profits to back itself up.

Besides, take your personal "best" film of all time for example, and I'm sure it's easy for any random nay-sayer to poke any amount of holes in it.

reply

[–] V7 (111) 2 years ago

No no. I want to read from your comments of what impressed you the most about the film? Everyone has their own personal take on a movie. What is your personal take?

reply

[–] blindfolded (1660) 2 years ago

Why are you interested in my personal take on a movie that you're not as impressed by?

I have no interest in outlining it for you if your personal opinion is set to disagree by default lol

reply

[–] V7 (111) 2 years ago

Nope. There's a potential chance that you could change my mind about what I may have missed. You can't assume everyone will disagree with you.

reply

[–] blindfolded (1660) 2 years ago

Again, I really don't have interest in getting into a deeper discussion than this already is and I have no mission to convince you otherwise lol.
You're entitled to your unimpressive-ness.

I'm just saying, the score, sample size, word of mouth, professional critic reviews, and box office speaks for itself.

reply

[–] V7 (111) 2 years ago

And you are entitled to your impressed-ness. Point taken.

reply

[–] Sparky (2712) 2 years ago

That's a difference of .4 though- not much. There is more variation between people I think, which makes the 8.3 fairly accurate to your own position on it IMO. Folks have been beaten down with inclusivity, women replacing men in roles and unwanted political drivel being shoved down their throats. I assume the scores were arrived at in comparison to similar films, which practically don't exist.

reply

[–] V7 (111) 2 years ago

I see what you mean. In short, it is like a hollywood film from the days before what you mentioned. I at least appreciate that in a film like this.

reply

[–] WhereIsRent (1091) 2 years ago

It's one of the best sequels ever made. No one expected to be as great as it was but the beauty of cinema that it can surprise you like this.

reply

[–] [deleted] 2 years ago

It's more like a 7.2-7.5 for me.

I really struggle to pin point what makes a film get an 8.2 as opposed to a 7.2. A lot of the time I find myself preferring the ones in the 7s as the ones in the 8s often feel a bit safe and generic. I guess that's ultimately what it is. Play it safe with good production values and everyone agrees it's a decent film so it gets a lot of 8s whereaways a lot of the best content becomes a bit more divisive and can't rise about the mid 7s.

reply