Although criticism is not always kind to fictions, people do not always agree with their positions. We tell you about two productions that although the “specialists” did not like them so much, they won the hearts of the fans.
It is clear that the world of criticism often helps a person decide to watch a series or movie, or directly avoid it, as well as there are many others in which they prefer to take their risks and are not interested in the least what they say the press. Many times, this has to do with your decisions being influenced by a star of Hollywood that they like to see in whatever, or for a matter of comfort, as in Netflix, which today is the most installed platform worldwide.
With social media and the internet, the rift between people’s opinions and those of critics became even more apparent. Just go Twitter The Instagram to find opinions that are sometimes light years away from what famous “specialists” say about a production. Therefore, we tell you about three series that, although they do not have the endorsement of critics, are loved by audiences worldwide.
Emily in Paris
The case of the series starring Lily Collins it’s more than strange. It is a production that was destroyed by critics and audiences simultaneously. However, a peculiar situation occurs: everyone says they hate it but everyone sits down to see it as soon as it opens. For something Netflix He understood that beyond the questions that the first installment had, they could make a second; for ironic consumption or whatever, people are going to see it the same.
Mayor of Kingstown
Released in November by Paramount+ and with the leading role of Jeremy Renner, in vogue recently for his series of Marvel, It was obvious that the series was going to be seen beyond what the specialists said. Prison dramas have an almost guaranteed audience and fans took it upon themselves to make it clear in Rotten Tomatoes that they liked what they saw. While the critics left a 32% approval, for the audience the first installment deserved 89%. More than 60 points of difference!
This week there was a lot of talk about Full House for the sad departure of Bob Saget, one of the actors who was part of the sitcom that began in the 80s. And if it is about the beginning, when today no one would hesitate to remember this series fondly, just read some reviews published in 1987 to see how it was destroyed by criticism. Robert Laurence from The San Diego Union-Tribune said “it was not to laugh”, while John O’Connor from The New York Times pointed out that it was “one predictable situation after another” Y Howard Rosenberg from Los Angeles Times He assured that he did not have “laughter or life”.[display-posts orderby="rand"]