What's wrong with Rotten Tomatoes?

They're a critic site. Critics will hate any movie that does not try and succeed at reinventing the wheel, and that's how their review scale goes. Even if your movie has no business attempting to reinvent the wheel, Rotten Tomatoes will still complain that it failed. They grade on how "3deep5me" movies can be, not how entertaining the movie is or how well it did what it was actually trying to do.

Taken 3 was not trying to reinvent the wheel. It was trying to be a Taken sequel, and did so quite nicely in my opinion. There's no deep meaning to Taken 3, it's a popcorn flick. Expecting anything more out of a Liam Neeson movie is dumb and Rotten Tomatoes has no business reviewing movies.

"What's wrong with Rotten Tomatoes?"

The fact that it exists...

"Today is the tomorrow I was so worried about yesterday"--Anthony Hopkins

It's that HIGH on RT, I am a little surpised. From the previews this movie looks just awful and all the reviews I have read (I don't consider IMDB opinions "reviews") have said it's a pretty bad movie. I loved the first one, thought the second one was stupid, honestly the idea of a third sounds even more ridiculous than the second.

It's down to 10% now.

It could've been ok, but the director had ADHD. The action scenes are unwatchable due to excessive cutting. There are action scenes in the movie with over 20 cuts in less than 10 seconds. I think the director wanted to make the action scenes more action-y.

I also lol'd at the car-falling-down-cliff-and-exploding cliché near the end of the movie.

There's nothing wrong with RT. Their scores are usually right on the money, but I agree that below 20% is way too low for this movie. Realistic scores are rare, because people review movies subjectively, because that's the only way to do it, and usually they either like them (10/10) or hate them (1/10).

IMO Taken 3 is a 1 to 5 out of 10. Can't decide if I should rate it on the high side for being so bad that it's good or rate it bad because it really is bad.

If that's the basic RT rating, remember, it's based on a group of critics giving a yes or no (whether or not it is passable, generally at least a 6/10). So the basic rating typically exaggerates a film's quality. If most critics thought a film was worth somewhere in the 4.5-5.5 range, the score would actually probably be around 20-25%. On the other hand, if a movie solidly was thought to be worth an 8-8.5 with little variance, its score would likely be in the high 90s or even 100.

[deleted]

Ummm, because only 19% of reviews they collected gave a positive review of the film.

There's nothing wrong with it, it works fine.




Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds

Because it was terrible and should of been straight to DVD. There's so many goofs in this movie. I'll name a few incase we watched a different movie.

The police chase, cop car had no glass

It was hit like 3 times and no dents

Shot at by cops when another cop was in it

Bad voice over made Liam sound amplified, same with when Stuart was telling his story

Patriot act does not apply to a murder investigation my local police

Cop antagonize the daughter and bugged her, even Whitaker threatened to arrest her for interfering with an investigation. WTF SHE JUST LOST HER MOM AND HER DAD IS A SUSPECT are these cops heartless dbags with now moral sense?

Whitaker is some super cop but is poorly played. It seemed so scripted that his character had no life presence. It's like you knew he was going figure stuff out but there was no suspense to it.

Actors can't even hold a gun properly, as an avid shooter, it kills me to see it.

The garage explosion blew 5 floors high?!
Roll over without a scratch WTF?!
Sewer tunnel WTF!?

Cherry on top, Stuart some bad ass now? He's always a whip now he's some evil tough guy, give me a BREAK!

I can go on and on about how bad this movie is, it's like Hangover, first was good then the rest got you questioning what the hell did you just watch!?