COULD IT BE?
>>63708694
BIG
Is 8.5 larger than 8.4? Hm...
ANTI ART FRANCHISE TRASH BLOWN THE FUCK OUT
>>63708714
BLACK MOUSE
8.4/10? There are Oscar winners who have gotten less. What a bunch of shills
>>63708739
Not if averaged over 34 less reviews, two more of them negative. Face it /tv/, Disney Blew Fox TFO.
IMDb is a better gage than RT. Most reviewers give stuff higher ratings for diversity, feminism et al. 90% are limp wristed liberal art majors who raise money for Africa in their spare time.
>there is some over-reliance on tying things to and making nods to the classic Star Wars films.
from the ign review. They can't be serious about this complaint, can they?: If they had done less or none, they would have just said it didn't reference the old movies enough.
>>63708855
You probably think you sound intelligent don't you
>>63708855
>Mad Max is rated higher by RT critics than by IMDB fanboys
Seems accurate. How does that even happen though?
8.5 > 8.4
>>63708741
Check my 12
>>63708694
Even Jar Jar in Senate is better than SW7.
/tv/, I wasn't planning on watching this flick because I expected it to bomb critically
Should I go see it now, or would I be a cuck enabler if I did so?
>>63709248
why even ask, you already know you're going to go see it like 10 times in the theaters.
>>63709292
na m8, my theater has a no singles policy
