This is pretty pathetic. When the Rotten Tomatoes meter gets under 30% then it’s pretty conclusive that you’re dealing with the kind of film that you’d scrape off the bottom of your sneaker. If it’s 30-50% then that means that you’ve still at least got a chance that it’ll be good. In those cases when a majority of critics reject the film but still a significant minority embraces it then that means that perhaps it’s just a film for a smaller audience with more specific tastes.
Memo to Hollywood: taking the Smurfs and sticking them in “the real world” completely destroys the concept. A Smurfs movie could have actually worked (and been quite good) if it was actually LIKE THE ORIGINAL SHOW and set in a fantasy world of monsters, bumbling sorcerers, and cats named after demons:
Does everyone agree with that general analysis? That if Hollywood is going to make movies of our beloved childhood shows they need to actually try and make a movie that’s like the show instead of just stealing its characters?