> Because honestly, I don't think most people even pay ATTENTION to what the critics say. Most people don't even CARE what critics say, I'd wager. More people rely on their friends (like I do) than on what critics say. So most people probably aren't even AWARE of what critics think about your typical movie. But they DO have the idea in their heads, right or wrong, that critics are general elitist arty snobs who want people to not see movies like Spider-Man. So it doesn't matter how many times the critics are "right" about a movie, that opinion will never change.

I tend to rely on critics in exactly the same way I rely on the recommendations of my friends. In other words, if I've regularly agreed with a particular critic's thoughts about movies, then I'll probably go see a new movie if that critic liked it, because it seems as though we have the same tastes. I used to do this quite a lot when there was a reviewer for the local newspaper who almost always mirrored my thoughts about a movie I'd seen.

Likewise, a recommendation from Stephen, or from Sam in particular genres, is as good as an ironclad guarantee that I'll like the movie. I don't even feel the need to find out what the movie is *about* before deciding to see it. I suppose sooner or later I'll see a movie on their recommendation and hate it, but so far this method has a success rate very close to 100%, so that works for me.

Nowadays I very rarely read movie reviews in the newspaper -- or, at least, I very rarely read them BEFORE seeing the movie -- because most of them could be more accurately described as "plot summaries". The reviewer who currently infects the local newspaper usually leaves me thinking, "All right, I don't NEED to see it now, thanks for saving me $11."