Advertisements

Readers Rank the 2016 Summer Movies

Summer movies

Earlier today, Daffy and I shared our thoughts on the 2016 summer movie season.  But who cares what we think?  What really matters is how readers here at Le Blog ranked the summer’s cinema offerings.  Given the number of movies released from May-August and the limitations of our usual ranking system, this one was done a little differently.  We had readers indicate which movies they gave a thumbs up, which ones got a thumbs down and which ones they didn’t see.  From there, I am netting the picks and pans and weighting those scores by the number of views to get the total rankings.

Let’s see how the readers ranked this year’s summer movies.

Less than 10% of readers provided feedback for Me Before YouThe Purge: Election Year, Lights Out, WarCraft, Now You See Me 2, The BFG, Mike and Dave Need Wedding Dates, Ice Age: Collision Course and Bad Moms.  So we’re going to exclude these little-seen movies from the overall rankings.

Only three movies were seen by the majority of readers.  Probably no surprise that all three were superhero movies.  Captain America: Civil War, X-Men: Apocalypse and Suicide Squad were all seen by more than 50% of readers.  The movie that readers ranked the most often was Suicide Squad with 61% of readers indicating that they saw it.

The Nice Guys, Finding DoryGhostbusters and Star Trek: Beyond were all seen by slightly less than half of our respondents.  Sausage Party and Independence Day Resurgence were seen by roughly one-third of readers.  Alice Through the Looking Glass, The Legend of Tarzan and The Secret Life of Pets were rated by one-fourth.  Everything else was seen by less than twenty-five percent of our readers.

Independence-Day-Resurgence

16. Independence Day Resurgence

RT Score: 32%

Domestic Gross: $102,768,413

Summary: The sequel to the 1996 blockbuster was savaged by critics.  But then, they didn’t like the original much either.  Resurgence was a major flop in the US, but performed much better overseas.  Still, I wouldn’t hold your breath waiting for ID3.  Readers probably won’t be too concerned about that.  Among those who watched the movie, the votes were unanimously “thumbs down”.

Generally speaking, people don’t buy tickets to movies they don’t think they will enjoy.  So a certain amount of positive bias is to be expected.  Over 70% of the votes cast in this survey were “thumbs up” votes.  Since ID:R was seen by a relatively large percentage of readers (30%) and all of them cast negative votes, that was reflected in the movie’s weighted score.  Only one other movie on our list received no positive votes.

 

Suicide Squad

15. Suicide Squad

RT Score: 26%

Domestic Gross: $262,428,736

Summary: So far, the DC Universe movies have been divisive affairs and Suicide Squad was no exception to that rule.  Most readers agreed with critics that the movie was rotten.  But a sizable minority (41%) liked Suicide Squad enough to give it a thumbs up.

This is where things get a bit complicated.  Suicide Squad actually had a higher percentage of positive votes than some of the other less-seen movies on the list.  But since scores were weighted by number of responses, an overall negative score for a movie which was seen by more readers could rank lower than a movie most people skipped.  The same things if true on the opposite end of the scale.

The idea here is to prevent a movie most readers didn’t view from scoring 100% approval (or disapproval) from taking the top (or bottom) position on the ranking.  This spread things out a little more and takes into consideration that not everybody saw all of these movies.

Before any fans of Suicide Squad cry foul, it’s probably worth noting that in terms of raw votes, this movie received more “thumbs down” than any other.

Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles Out of the Shadows
14. Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles: Out of the Shadows

RT Score: 38%

Domestic Gross: $81,923,336

Summary: The Ninja Turtles sequel was only seen by 17% of readers all of whom gave the movie a thumbs-down.  The only thing separating Out of the Shadows from Resurgence is that fewer readers saw it.

Next

Advertisements

Posted on August 26, 2016, in Movies, readers rank and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink. 47 Comments.

  1. I must have missed the post requesting our opinions on the summer movies. Dadgummit!

    Also, the gross you have showing for GHOSTBUSTERS is actually the gross for the real GHOSTBUSTERS movie from 1984, not this rehash.

    Like

    • Thanks for the catch. I have adjusted the grosses. Out of curiosity, did you see the new Ghostbusters?

      Like

      • Nope. I don’t typically see remakes/rehashes of movies that I love.

        Like

        • It doesn’t sound like you’re very open to a new take on the material, so you probably wouldn’t enjoy it. While I definitely prefer the original, the new Ghostbusters has its merits. It intentionally subverts elements of the first movie so as not to be a “rehash”. As Daffy pointed out in our conversation, remakes are not inherently bad. But you have to be open to them which doesn’t appear to be the case here.

          Like

        • Nope, not for GHOSTBUSTERS. Any chance of me seeing any possible Ghostbusters movie died with Harold Ramis. I would have seen a GHOSTBUSTERS 3 with the original cast. It probably would have sucked, but I still would have seen it. There are so many recent remakes I have skipped altogether over the past few years as well. I’m not totally against all remakes, but the vast majority of them hold no appeal for me. I have seen both THE JUNGLE BOOK and PETE’S DRAGON and really liked both, but I’m a sucker for Disney anyway (except for those terrible Alice movies and effin’ MALEFICENT). There is one more remake I plan on seeing this year and that is THE MAGNIFICENT SEVEN. Two things tell me I shouldn’t see it: It’s a remake of a movie I love and it’s a remake starring Denzel. Denzel has burned me with remakes three times before, so I’m wary, but it looks like it might be fun, and I want more westerns.

          Like

        • I’m planning to check Magnificent Seven out with my father-in-law. He enjoys Westerns.

          I sure didn’t need a Ghostbusters remake. But I’ll take the one we got over any possible Ghostbusters 3 even if Harold Ramis had been alive to costar. Ghostbusters 2 was made under better circumstances so there’s no reason to think a much-delayed third movie would have been any better. The remake is unquestionably better than the one sequel that actually did get made. I don’t love it, but I don’t mind it either. There are far worse cinematic crimes being committed on a regular basis.

          It puts me in a weird position of feeling like I have to defend a movie that I don’t feel all that strongly about. The negativity over the remake was so far out of proportion. And that’s before you even get to the loony fringe that made death threats and bullied an actress on Twitter. I think I have a pretty good idea where that vitriol was coming from. I do notice that when a lousy remake like Total Recall comes out, the internet doesn’t explode. But for this one, it did.

          You can argue that Ghostbusters is more beloved than Total Recall and I will grant you that up to a point. But really, Ghostbusters isn’t that much better than Total Recall. The reason it is more beloved is that a generation of kids grew up watching the cartoon and playing with the toys. On it’s own merits, the Ghostbusters franchise isn’t anything special.

          So, yeah, that leaves us with sexism. I’m not going to say that everyone who has a problem with the new Ghostbusters is sexist because that would be ridiculous. But a lot of the negative reaction we saw was sexism pure and simple. And I’m willing to bet some people who thought they were objecting to the movie for non-sexist reasons are probably giving themselves too much credit.

          At the end of the day, it’s a movie. As Daffy said, if someone doesn’t want to see it, no one is going to force them to. It’s existence doesn’t hurt anyone. I do like that there is a movie out there that appeals to young girls and I can tell you from personal experience that it is bringing a new generation to the original movie. That should be worth something to all Ghostbusters fans.

          Like

  2. CIVIL WAR was my favorite movie of the summer. Hands down.

    Like

    • Early in the week, Civil War was in the lead despite having received a down-vote. Several movies had 100% approval, but hadn’t been seen by enough people to overtake it. But gradually, Finding Dory surged ahead.

      While I like both movies well enough, I think the fact that they are the top two reflects that the summer was pretty weak overall. You referred to Ghostbusters 2016 as a rehash, but I’d argue that Civil War and Finding Dory are more guilty of that charge than Feig’s remake.

      Like

      • I can see FINDING DORY as being somewhat of a rehash of FINDING NEMO due to its similar story, but CIVIL WAR wasn’t like the two previous entries in the series, so rehash doesn’t seem an appropriate term with which to classify it to me.

        Like

        • At this point, every Marvel movie is a rehash. Not that I’m complaining, but Civil war didn’t exactly break new ground. It just served up the same ol’ same ol’ on a slightly bigger scale than has been done in the past. Even the kids thought Finding Dory relied on the first movie way too much.

          Like

  3. so many under performers this summer. Ghostbusters ninja turtles and star trek. I wanna say jason bounre but i think that was a hit. If these sequels comic adaption and remakes are not hit then Hollywood might be screwed. I am surprised after underperofmance of ghostbuster hollywood is still green lighting all female oceans 11 cast.

    Like

  4. I just thought since ghostbuster female remake did not do so well. Hollywood might stray away from all female remakes fearing the box office would be the same.

    Like

    • That’s absurd.

      When a movie starring a male actor flops, do people wonder why they keep making movies starring men?

      Like

      • Actually, he kind of has a point. Didn’t Marvel and DC blame the lack of Black Widow and Wonder Woman movies on the fact that other female superhero movies bombed? What they didn’t consider though, was that there was no real desire for movies about Supergirl, Catwoman (at least not that iteration), or Elektra. There has always been a desire for a Wonder Woman movie, and since THE AVENGERS and WINTER SOLDIER there has been interest from fans in a Black Widow movie.

        Like

        • That was the thinking of the studio guys. They were wrong to think that way then and they would be wrong to think that way now.

          The biggest reason the Ghostbusters remake wasn’t successful is that Sony spent way too much money on it. If the budget had been reasonable, the movie could have been a base hit.

          Like

  5. But this was a remake of a male movie turning into an all female cast. I would assume they would not to go the same route remaking a male cast into all male cast. Its kind of like after the Alexander movie with colin farell flopped the Alexander movie with leo that was in production was cancelled.

    Like

    • Studio guys do think that way a lot of the time. It’s like Disney changing the name of Rapunzel to Tangled after The Princess and the Frog disappointed because they thought little boys wouldn’t go to a movie that sounded to girly. Or cancelling the next Tron sequel because Tomorrowland bombed. But each movie should succeed or fail on its own merits. Make good movies and market them well and you won’t have to worry about fickle fads.

      Like

  6. It had backlash before it hit theater due to have an all female cast . Fans complaining it was not true to original film. So I think having female cast hurt it anyways. Plus remake are hit and miss. For every hit remake like true grit or mad max there are flops like total recall and arthur.

    Like

    • The uproar over the female cast was stupid and should be ignored. Frankly, the uproar by Ghostbusters fans that claimed their childhood was being ruined wasn’t much better. None of this should have any impact on future decisions.

      Yes, some remakes fail and others succeed. Just like every other kind of movie out there.

      Like

      • If my childhood was ruined by anything, it was the oppressive nature of the public school administration I was involved in, especially early. But that didn’t ruin it either, nor did the new Ghostbusters film. Ruined childhoods…people can be so dramatic, or need a little perspective. There was no need for some people to go off on Leslie Jones like that either (I had no idea she was 48 though, I thought she was 27 or something).
        I just didn’t treat its arrival like it was an event or anything. It could’ve been animated, have an all-baby cast, teenage Ghostbusters, Scandinavian Ghostbusters…I wouldn’t been agog either way.

        Like

        • It’s just Ghostbusters. It isn’t a cultural landmark, it’s not a triumph of cinematic artistry. It’s just a silly, fluffy little crowd pleasing comedy. There’s nothing sacred there to defile. That being said, I think folks are pretty hard pressed to explain how making the cast female somehow “defiles” the film whilst claiming that it has nothing to do with being sexist. The natural implication there would of course be that there’s something inherently profane or inferior about femaleness, if making it female is an automatic downgrade. I feel sad for people who don’t know their own mind in that way.
          It seems that some people feel as though something has been taken away from men by doing a gender swap version, but there’s really nothing about the theme or message of Ghostbusters- if there even IS a message to Ghostbusters- which is inherently about maleness. The film never “belonged” to men to begin with, and it’s only “taken from” them if they chose to exclude themselves from all things female, as though they believed we weren’t of the same species and didn’t share a common human experience. The film in itself would not be the slightest bit culturally significant without the up-in-arms reaction to it. In advertantly, they have shined a spotlight on the fact that pop culture continually asks women to identify with male heroes and protagonists, whilst never calling upon men to see themselves in women, feeding in to the perception that they cannot and should not. Since these fellows forced the question, it’s time for them to ask themselves why and realize they don’t have any reasonable answer.

          Like

        • The worst possible outcome would have been letting Dan Aykroyd make a third Ghostbusters that did to the original what Blues Brothers 2000 did to the first Blues Brothers. I wouldn’t have liked that, but it wouldn’t have ruined my childhood either. I can pretty easily forget BB2000 and Ghostbusters 2 for that matter.

          Like

        • Yeah, it’s better that the Ghostbusters name had the recent film it did instead of another sequel to the original; there’s a really good reason that didn’t happen, because it’s unlikely that it would’ve worked. “Blues Brothers 2000”, to me, is a case of going back to a certain formula to see if there’s any more success to mine from it. I guess some people liked it, but I feel it can be easily missed.

          Like

    • All movies, remakes or not, are hit or miss.

      Like

  7. It just goes to show how much sexism there still is, that a film with a female cast is perceived as a “women’s movie” made for a specifically female audience, whereas a film with a male cast is just a plain old movie, whose target audience is everyone.

    Like

  8. Well, I recently read that women currently make 78 cents on the dollar in the workplace, so there’s still a long way to go when it comes to equality.
    It’s like Ferris Bueller said, “-ism’s aren’t good”, so I try to avoid the majority of them. Unfortunately, discrimination in all forms will never be stamped out, due to certain individuals thinking that their way of thinking is the right way

    Like

    • There’s a beer commercial that has been playing with Seth Rogen and Amy Schumer. When Rogen finds out that women are not only paid less, but they often have to pay more for the same goods and services, he is outraged. The comedy is that this is not a new situation, but it’s complete news to him. Hysterical.

      Like

      • I don’t tend to like remakes, most of time. If the original film achieved what it was going for then I don’t see the point, if it’s a movie I’m particularly fond of it I worry that the new version will be inferior. In a general sense, I’m annoyed at the sheer plethora of remakes because it points to a lack of original ideas being penned and is usually motivated by the desire to cash in on nostalgia (for instance, I find the upcoming remakes of Dirty Dancing and Rocky Horror exasperating). Horror remakes in particular usually rely on the poor device of substituting the original’s suspense for over the top splatter, which really detracts from most of what was good about the stories to begin with. I think remakes have the most artistic credibility when they are of movies that are old enough that they are not well remembered (like HBO’s treatment of Mildred Pierce) or of foreign films that haven’t been widely seen in that country (like Old Boy). The viewers frame of reference doesn’t interfere with their response to it. At least doing a gender switch with Ghostbusters was doing something fresh with the concept, as people are not used to seeing ensemble casts of women in these kind of hero roles. Reheating the same story with different, younger men would have had no point at all.

        Like

        • Doing a female-led Ghostbusters was about the most original thing that could be done with it. Let’s face it, if somehow we would have gotten a Ghostbusters 3, the film that certain fans are angry never happened, I can guarantee that it would have had the original cast in supporting roles as they train the new generation of brash young guys to take over the franchise. That sounds like warmed over material to me with only some nostalgia and a few chuckles to save it. I can understand why Bill Murray kept passing on it. The new Ghostbusters didn’t exactly deliver as strongly as hoped (and with Sony expecting a $70M write-off don’t expect a sequel), but if it failed in execution I still believe they were correct to try a fresh take on it. No harm done really, I’ll always have my original Ghostbusters Blu-Ray to watch.

          Like

        • I don’t believe the new Ghostbusters failed in execution. It’s not great, but it’s better than you could reasonably expect a Ghostbusters remake to be. Once you see it, let us know what you think.

          Like

        • I’m all for remakes of films that were were obscure (like 2005’s “Assault on Precinct 13”, since the original isn’t widely known) or can be updated to the times (like 2004’s “The Manchurian Candidate”).

          Like

        • I’m inclined to agree. A long time ago, I remember Siskle or Ebert (pretty sure it was Siskle) saying that Hollywood should only remake movies that didn’t work the first time. Don’t remake classics you can’t hope to live up to. Remake movies that fell short of their potential the first time out.

          As for Ghostbusters, every idea I heard prior to the gender swap excited me as much as they did Bill Murray. Not at all.

          Like

        • I would like to see a remake of They Live; I think it was a really interesting premise that could have been done much better. Does The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo count as a remake? I tend to think of it as simply a different interpretation on the same source material; I did not see the Swedish version, but I very much like the Fincher film. They’re probably both quite good.
          I think my least favorite remake would have to be the Last House On the Left. The original was not by any stretch a great film, but it worked for what it was. It’s strength was it’s rawness.

          Like

        • I would call it a remake. I liked the Swedish version better.

          Like

        • I wouldn’t object to a remake of They Live. However, the appeal of the first movie is the John Carpenterness of it all. I’m not sure there’s any point to remaking it without his involvement. I watched the movie relatively recently and it’s kind of distressing how well it holds up today. Still relevant.

          I would consider The Girl With the Dragon Tattoo a remake. The makers were definitely aware of the Swedish film and wouldn’t have been looking to adapt the book if the first adaptation hadn’t been an international hit. But a remake of an adaptation can certainly be considered just a new adaptation.

          I haven’t watched either version of Last House On the Left. Just not my thing.

          I can name some remakes I like, but off the top of my head I can’t think of any that get my blood boiling. Gus Van Sant’s Psycho stands out as a real “what was he thinking?”

          Like

        • The PSYCHO remake was an exercise in pointlessness. The remake of THE TAKING OF PELHAM ONE TWO THREE with Denzel and Travolta was class A garbage. I didn’t care for Denzel’s remake of THE MANCHURIAN CANDIDATE either.

          Like

        • I don’t think I watched the Pelham remake. If I did, it didn’t impress me obviously. I disliked the Manchurian remake, but didn’t feel too strongly about that. I liked the original so much the remake was almost bound to disappoint.

          Like

        • There are many aspects of They Live that I think could have been better. For instance, casting a professional actor in the lead role instead of WWF wrestler; shortening the over-the-top 6 minute fistfight sequence; toning down some of the lead character’s machismo; and of course, the appearance of the aliens themselves. They effects for the movie were really, really bad.
          The only remake that I was actually upset about was I Spit On Your Grave, on the principle that the original film is something no one needs to see. Thusly, of course, I didn’t see the remake, but the film poster was equally as sickening as the original one and the reviews of it were savage.

          Like

        • You just named some of the things that make They Live different from any other alien invasion flick. The over-the-top 6 minute fistfight is considered by many to be the movie’s crowning achievement. Sure, you could make a more polished movie about an alien invasion. But why call it They Live?

          Like

        • It just boils down to a question of taste. I feel like a film can be unpolished without being dumb, and liked the film less on account of it was a little dumb, and I feel like it could have been done in a way that was smart, given that the message of the film is actually sort of highbrow. I feel it could have been made in a way that could be taken a little more seriously, but for you, that would take the fun out of it. It would not for me because the message was the main appeal, which made the cheesier parts more bearable. For me, the fight sequence was just plain boring and didn’t do much to serve the plot. I interpreted it just as, oh okay, we’ve got a wrestler here, let’s let him bust chairs over people’s heads and shit. The point would have been better made in two or three minutes and then move on….unless you just really enjoy a good brawl. But I don’t.

          Like

        • Don’t get me wrong. I am perfectly okay with someone not being a fan of They Live. It’s a cult movie that appeals to a niche audience. I have to admit that for me it was very much an acquired taste. The first time I saw it, I wondered what the fuss was about. It’s only been within the last few years that I have come to appreciate that the cheese is part of its charm. The fight scene pushed the limits of my patience. It still kind of does. They Live is 2nd tier John Carpenter. It doesn’t rise to the level of The Thing. I put it alongside Big Trouble in Little China as a fun movie that isn’t necessarily good.

          As far as remaking it, that’s a dicey proposition. I think if you do a remake, you have to examine what made the first movie work. With They Live or Rocky Horror or any cult movie, it would be really difficult recreate the elements that made those movies memorable in the first place. If you aim for cheese, you will probably fail. But if you go for a more serious take, you’re probably missing the entire point of what made the first movie enjoyable. See the Total Recall and Robocop remakes.

          Like

        • The one thing I would never ever in a million years change from They Live! is the fight sequence between Keith David and Roddy Piper. Yes, I will grant that there is more raw potential in the material than John Carpenter achieved in his film. Yet ironically no major studio would touch this with a ten foot pole, because you cannot make a political comment of any kind in a mainstream film as that could alienate a segment of your audience which is unacceptable.

          Let’s be honest: The best single scene in They Live! is the fight sequence between Roddy Piper and Keith David. And it’s so simply set up: Roddy wants Keith to put on the sunglasses, and Keith refuses, which leads to the long rough-and-tumble fist fight. There’s not many set-ups more simplistic than that. And yet, set-up aside this is one of the greatest cinematic fights of all time. Probably because this is one of the most realistic low-and-dirty street fights ever depicted. It goes back and forth between the two, and it goes on for a very long time. And it gets very personal. Every guy understands, you do not try to hit another man’s genitals. Even worse than that, you should never even think of smashing the other guy’s car windshield! Hey, I’m sorry, I did not mean to do that!

          Like

        • That fight scene in “They Live” is such a big deal that its re-enacted when Keith David & Roddy Piper play as themselves in the video game “Saints Row IV” (no, it doesn’t quite go on for six minute, but David complains in the game afterwards when talking to Piper how that scene is his worst nightmare, which is the joke). I don’t really know about a remake of this film though.
          I forgot to mention another good remake: “1983’s “Scarface”. I could view either that version or the 1932 version over & over with no problems.
          Like Lebeau, I consider films released in other countries, then redesigned for American audiences like “The Girl with the Dragon Tattoo” (when it was released, I was always seeing comparisons between the original version & the American version, and the same goes with the main character), “The Grudge” and 2002’s “Unfaithful” as adaptations too.

          Like

        • I think the fight scene is also a case of dragging on something so long that it gets kind of boring, then funny, then dull again and finally flipping hysterical. But for that to work, you have to be in the right mindset. You have to know that this is a B-movie starring Rowdy Roddy Piper and you have to accept that.

          You could do another movie about aliens taking over power positions in government and industry. But if you jettison the B-movie elements, you might as well call it something else.

          Like

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: