I'm all confused.

The Hunted, which is out in theaters today is tracking at only 24% on Rotten Tomatoes. Yet Roger Ebert gave it 3.5 stars. I guess I'll just have to go and see it for myself...

My guess is that many of the reviewers getting used for the Rotten Tomato rating made the mistake of reviewing the type of movie that was made (a chase movie) instead of reviewing how well the movie delivered on what it tried to be. This is an important distinction for me when I read reviews. In the end I don't really care if the reviewer had a good time, I care if I'm going to have a good time. So what I want from a film review is: This is what the movie is about, this is what the movie tried to be, and finally, how well the movie executed on those two things. Roger Ebert does this better then any other reviewer I've read, which is the simple reason he's my favorite reviewer.

Still want more?
Read the Archives!