MovieChat Forums > The Giver (2014) Discussion > Critics just hate everything YA so they ...

Critics just hate everything YA so they are predisposed to dislike.

posted 10 years ago by do-arellano-mayra
55 replies | jump to latest

Specially dystopia. Hunger games got good reviews because it was the first Young adult dystopia since Lord of the flies and battle royale but critics are lazy and since THG they have based their reviews of other movies in the YA genre in silly comparisons.

If they must compare then they should compare to brave new world or Fahrenheit 451 instead of throwing everything YA in the same bag. The plots of Divergent, THG and the giver couldn't be more different but for the critics they are all the same. But if they applied the same standard (Art shouldn't repeat itself) to romances, and especially comic book based movies, no marvel adaptation nor DC for that matter would get a fresh rating.

Why the double standard?

Peter Travis, the rolling stone critic, in his review of the giver was clear. He wants the YA dystopia trend to stop. So he probably will do anything in his power to stop that trend by discouraging people to watch a movie.

The current onslaught of movies excreted from dystopian teen fiction would make any YA yak. So far, The Hunger Games franchise is working. But catch Divergent, The Host, Ender's Game, and The Mortal Instruments: City of Bones and see if you don't hear yourself scream: Make. It. Stop.

I wouldn't trust a guy who says Mortal instruments is a dystopian movie.But a lot of other people do.

I've realized a lot of people have started to distrust the rotten tomatoes ratings. That's just good.

The giver has flaws in editing and script but overall the acting and the story was compelling and good. If critics have applied the same standards to review the giver to the ones they use to judge comic movies the movie would've been a certified fresh.

Don't believe them nor me. Go and see yourselves.

[–] KazLuigi 10 years ago

I have not seen The Giver but I agree that I think some critics are biased against films based on YA Novels and that's just based on reviews that I have read. That being said films like The Mortal Instruments and The Host deserve to be poorly reviwed because IMHO they are bad films. Unfortunately I think most of the films are bad and thus they feed the trolls who want to hate these films. Along with The Hunger Games 1 and 2, Fault in Our Stars and Warm Bodies got solid reviews though so it's not impossible for YA films to get them.

I like Twilight but I don't think the films deserved good reviews because objectively they are not good films. I did think Beautiful Creatures got a raw deal though, it was a solid fun little film that I think would have gotten a 65-75% RT rating had some critics took off their Twilight blinders.

[–] do-arellano-mayra 10 years ago

As I said, Hunger games was the first YA dystopian they saw, since then they became lazy and compared all movies to Hunger games

The fault in our stars the same, it was the first movie they saw with a dying character after a long time so they were able to see the movie for what it is and review it on its own merits, but now that If I stay came out they are comparing it to the fault in our stars. Go to the rotten tomatoes site and you'll see it's true. The plot is nothing like but they are lazy and are just comparing. I haven't read If I stay but it's clear from the trailers that there's no cancer nor quirky comments so again.... why the comparisons? just because they are YA with heroines about to die? why then don't compare every comic adaptation?

I haven't even bothered to see the host, the book is not my cup of tea and the cast looked horrible, but the reviews of the mortal instruments included a critic attacking Lily collin's eyebrows (I think it was the new yorker critic) and the author past as fanfiction writer. Not at all a profesional review. TMI was a mediocre movie but it deserved at least the same rating or superior than the 50% twilight got. But again, everything was compared to twilight instead of constantine or buffy the vampire slayer.

Critics are just not fair to YA and if they used the same standards to review YA than they do with Comic adaptations the ratings will be 20% higher.

[–] Mystic270 10 years ago

I agree with you. The YA genre seems to get the complaints about cliches, poor acting...even dumb things like "stupid names" or extraordinary circumstances. But the comic book genre (and every other genre) has the same cliches that are either ignored, or seen as "cute" or positives.

I have to be honest, The Giver had some issues and wasn't the best movie ever, but for so many critics to rate it "rotten" and THEN to make the comments that they did shows that they were biased. And you are right, they are not "professional." That's great if fans don't care about critics, but unless it is an established franchise, many of the general audience members do.

On the other hand, we have Guardians of the Galaxy. I personally liked the movie a lot, because of the characters, but it has cliches as well: "stupid names," the same plot devices, and I have to be honest...I had trouble explaining the plot using the names of the characters besides "keep this evil person from getting the supernatural thing that will harm the world." If the critics were as biased as they were against other genres, that would not be as highly rated.

I'm not sure what they can/will do about it. But you aren't the only one that noticed this bias.

[–] Curlynic91 10 years ago

I completely agree with everything you've said. The critics seem to have a bias against the YA genre because typically they all have similar themes and such. You read the reviews and most of them will compare it to another YA adaptation that came first like you mentioned with The Fault In Our Stars/If I Stay, Mortal Instruments/Twilight and Hunger Games/Other Dystopians. Just because Hunger Games came first they certify movies like Divergent and The Giver rotten.

IMO, The Giver was a great film. While there were a couple of flaws I actually think it was still better than the first Hunger Games and Divergent (and I love those movies as well). I haven't read the book so i'm not sure how they compare and what central themes they might have left out but as a movie I thought it was very well done and deserves MUCH more than a 33% score. It should definitely be certified Fresh and I can't for the life of me figure out why it wasn't except that these critics are just tired of the same YA formulas. If this movie had come out before Hunger Games I guarantee that it would be certified fresh.
To me, this whole vendetta against YA movies is completely unfair when you have all these superhero/comic book movies that have the same running themes and the same plotlines sometimes yet the critics are no where near as harsh on them as they are on these YA films. I've grown to really distrust Rotten Tomatoes lately so therefore i'm going to judge for myself, but unfortunately for these adaptations others listen to the critics and it effects box office numbers.

[–] gloria_e_evans 10 years ago

It's easy to say that when your movie is Rotten. By the way, RT is not the one giving this movie a low rating. It's all the different critics that effect the rating. RT don't have critics. You people complain when your little movies don't do well with critics and cry about it and say you don't care about critics but in actuality you want
the critics to like your movie and want to
see that plump red fresh tomato. That is validation for you.

[–] Curlynic91 10 years ago

I know its the critics that make the rotten tomatoes score. I stated that in my previous post. Of course we want some of these movies to be fresh...but not because we need validation but because we want them to do well in the box office and when its rated rotten it will effect the box office numbers. I have no problem with a YA movie getting a rotten rating/bad reviews as long as I feel they deserve it. Vampire Academy and The Host were awful movies and I definitely agree with the critics on those. I also did not like The Mortal Instruments movie. don't think it deserves a 12% but whatever it was was not a good movie and when all the critics acknowledge its a bad movie it'll lower the score even less. I also saw If I Stay last night and was disappointed with it so I agree with the critics on that.

however, I genuinely thought The Giver was an excellent movie and deserves better reviews. I believe the timing of the movie was bad and it effected the critics perception of it and I also believe book readers were nitpicking on the changes they made (like aging Jonas up and adding a romance) that I personally believed actually benefited the story. I don't need validation though. I thought the movie was good and that's all that matters I just think its too bad that more people will probably not see this movie because of the reviews and their own bias.

[–] StevesMcQueenOG 10 years ago

the first YA dystopia since Lord of the flies

What?

[–] musicblind 10 years ago

That was my thought exactly. I agree with the sentiments of the OP, but there are at least two things wrong with that 'Lord of the Flies' sentence.

"Some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again." - C.S.Lewis

[–] ryansassy1 10 years ago

Agreed, this bias against anything labeled as "YA" exists.

If the ages of the characters were portrayed as adults and not teens, the Giver would have received more serious consideration.

_________________________________
"I'm sorry, but.." is a self-contained lie.

[–] showderkari 10 years ago

I would say the same about CBM's, but lately Marvel has been performing pretty well in the market. It's time for YA movies to step it up a notch.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] do-arellano-mayra 10 years ago

It's time the critics stop their YA bias and write professional reviews instead of lazy comparisons.

Of course there are more people reading comic books than YA books so CBM's will always make more money. But if they were reviewed by the standards the critics use to judge YA the ratings would be 30% lower.

[–] jordanschnaidt 10 years ago

If the ages of the characters were portrayed as adults and not teens, the Giver would have received more serious consideration.

Well, you could do that, but then the story would be broken. You can't have this story without the characters at the cusp of adolescence/adulthood.

There are plenty of other stories in which the age of the character doesn't matter. This one does.

[–] !!!deleted!!! (7282253) 10 years ago

This is an interesting discussion. I'm about to see the movie (having not read the books), so I have no opinion yet.

I will agree that I'm slightly predisposed to disliking most YA adaptations. But here's my perspective: movie making is a business. Producers see that the likes of Twilight and Hunger Games have made huge sums of money with smaller budgeted films. So, many productions from then on have been lazy. And I blame it on the fact that they pump them out so fast. Did you know that they had started production on the Mortal Instruments 2 before they even released the first one? A lot of people I know were fired when they never got the greenlight for the sequel (people, like you and me, who were rushed to finish the first). The producers rush the writer, who doesn't really satisfy an engaging story, the producers rush the production design, which lowers the production value, the producers rush the director, who then becomes unable to oversee every detail.

I'm convinced that many people, not just critics, lambast these productions that don't have a soul. They're not art, and they're definitely not trying to justify the story; they're mindless movies that have joined the bandwagon to be the next "big thing." Is anybody looking forward to the sequel to the Spiderwick Chronicles? Or Divergent? or I am Number Four? or Vampire Academy? These are just plain, poorly-constructed movies.

[–] do-arellano-mayra 10 years ago

a lot of people even outside the target audience loved divergent. Not me, but I thought divergent had more production value than the hunger games, it's just the premise is more difficult to sell and the skates aren't as high. The worst that could have happened to tris was end up factionless.But overall the movie wasn't as bad and yet it got a horrible rating.

And? what did you think of the giver?

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] musicblind 10 years ago

Except a lot of these actors are 25 and up... like the lead in this movie.

"Some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again." - C.S.Lewis

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] do-arellano-mayra 10 years ago

If you mean the twilight actors you are right. Worst acting ever. But the rest of YA adaptation haven't been so bad in terms of acting. Hunger games, the giver, beautiful creatures, the maze runner, the fault in our stars have better acting than half the Marvel and DC adaptations. Yet they always receive complains from critics on acting, eyebrows (true story, NY post review on mortal instruments, the movie was bad no need to attack personally the lead actress) weird names and other stupid comments.

I'm not saying bad YA movies didn't deserved bad ratings. I'm saying if the same standards used to judge comic books to review YA movies the ratings would be 30% higher for YA adaptations. And viceversa. Most Comic book adaptions are generic, formulaic and way overrated. I like comic based movies I'm just tired of the double standard.

[–] 10 years ago

[deleted]

[–] timlin-4 10 years ago

YA is made by retards for retards, maybe the critics are mean, but these movies should be shown in special theaters

[–] krypt_o 10 years ago

Yeah, when it comes to Rotten Tomato critic reviews, most of the reviewers are all hardcore left-wing Hollywood types, so anything that flies in the face of their world view will get bad ratings. As of right now, this movie has 66% favorable audience review and 33% critic, while a not-so-great-could-have-been-better movie like Lucy has 66% critic and 48% audience. I tend to avoid that site or just not pay any attention to what the critics "think". Atlas Shrugged Part 1, for example, has 11% critic but 70% audience. It's like that for every movie that goes against progressive ideology.

I read this book, well was forced to read, in 7th grade. I thought it was good back then and felt the movie did a decent job of holding true to the book.

[–] musicblind 10 years ago

I don't see how this movie goes against "progressive ideology"... if anything it goes against conservative ideology.

"Some day you will be old enough to start reading fairy tales again." - C.S.Lewis"