jayntampa

I read Jeffrey Kauffman's DVD review of Sleeping Beauty at http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/read.php?ID=35046 and...

Wait, 3 stars ... for an absolute classic? It only seems tired 50 years later because every other animation company has pulled riffs on it.

You rated Indiana Jones and the Kingdom of the Crystal Skull at 4 stars - and there is nothing more derivative than that film. You honestly believe in the annals of film making that Indy 4 is better than Disney's Sleeping Beauty?

JMK

You're obviously one of the people I mention in the review who holds this film in extremely high regard. I think it's somewhat flawed, as outlined in the review (and which has nothing to do with its age and subsequent films), so, yes, I think it's a 3-star film for content. As with any review, it's simply my opinion, and as some wise man once stated, your mileage may vary.

Adam Tyner

Just as a general comment, I wouldn't take those star ratings as being absolute, and I wouldn't say that they necessarily even reflect quality so much. Entertainment value plays into it too.

I might rate a schlocky horror movie 4 stars, but that doesn't necessarily mean it's better than a drama I rated 3.5 stars. It just means one's a 4-star slice of schlock-horror, and the other is a good-but-not-great drama.

mzupeman2

This always seems to be an issue for some reason. What am I talking about? Opinions.

Different people have them, and the people reviewing movies are human. The important information regarding the release is in that review.

Cheato

I actually never even look at the "stars." I just read the content of the review and that goes into the pool for my decision to buy or not buy. My "stars" would never match another person's--especially for a wide range of movies--so I can't see a point to them.

I've seen plenty of "absolute classics" that I couldn't care less about and never want to waste my time seeing again. If reviewers let the reputation of the movie affect them that much, then what's the point of the review?