Why Raya And The Last Dragon should not be here, and the Problem with the "Just Because a Film has a good Reputation doesn't mean it's good" Rule and the Reception Wikis themselves (Rant of sorts?)

About the Author

Other recent contributors

Make this page better by editing it.
BeastarsFan4132314Stephenfisher2001

Other recent voters

If you like the blog, vote for it.
avataravataravataravataravataravatar
7



Now I know you guys might downvote and block me. But this is a true statement and it's kinda important.. I hope you guys understand.

Heya guys, Now I recently came to Awful Movies Wiki. Now I do enjoy this wiki for Talking about Good Qualities and Bad Qualities of Films that are considered "Bad" or "Good." But over the Years, the Wiki wasn't as "Perfect" per say. And there are some Flaws with it as well. I will Explain it about a Certain Page and a Controversial Rule that kinda feels hyprocritcial and kinda unnecessary per say.

So about Raya and The Last Dragon. I had since watched the Film and I actually loved it. Me and my Family and Friends loved this Film and it Learned us more About Southeast Asian Folklore. I was happy that the Film got a lot of Positive Reviews from Critics and Disney fans and Even Fans of Southeast Asian Folklore. But recently I saw alot of Controversial/Harsh videos created by SaberSpark and Others about calling it a "Average" Film and "Disappointment to Disney." Now as for the Second Part "Disappointment to Disney." I kinda didn't really understood it at all. As the Film grossed alot of Money from the Box OffIce, as well as it's Positive Reviews. One day I made a account on Awful Movies Wiki and stumbled across the Film on the Wiki while searching for 2021 Films. I was shocked, "How could a film that had many positive reviews from critics and even audiences be here?" At first, I thought it was a Page maybe made by someone with a Personal Opinion, or at least just have been added as a April fools Joke they forgot to delete. and as I clicked, it turns out I was wrong.

I read through the page and was Saddened/Disgusted/a Little Upset that the Film is on the page, As I looked down, They said it's on the page because it has alot of so-called "Bad" Qualities. and the Caption didn't make sense either.. saying "Not A Bad Film, But A Disappointment for Disney." and I was Completely Confused/A little Mad about why the Film is on here. and as I saw from other "Good" Films that were on the Wikis because of "Too Many Flaws" like The Lion King II: Simba's Pride, which was the best Disney sequel ever made according to fans.

At first, I thought the pages were somewhat made by People with Unpopular/Personal Opinions. Then I saw a rule that shocked be by my eye from One of the users "FreezingTNT" who said "Just because a film has Good Reputation doesn't mean it's good." Which I didn't understood. And sounded Nonsensical. I thought the Wikis were for adding only "Bad" Films on the Wiki. But seeing Raya and the Last Dragon and The Lion King II on the wikis over "More Bad Qualities Than Good Qualities." I was just completely disgusted. As much as I like Reception Wikis, I do know for a fact according to People who don't like them often Criticize the Wikis because they can be Biased, Hyprocritcal, and a Little Harsh sometimes in their opinions, and is even said that they can't take Criticism. As much I saw other rants of Reception Wikis on the internet by People like ThePackagedReviewer. I kinda started to think of Reception Wikis as a whole to be a little bit Hyprocriticial. Then I heard reports of People getting Blocked over criticizing Pages or calling out Reception Wikis over their Hyprocritcal Ways. One Person even Criticized the "No-Niche Audience Show rule." and other Pages because of their Biased Reasons with no Sources to back up their claims was blocked by The Admins just because they were "Taking it to seriously.." Okay, how is Criticizing Pages or Rules Taking too seriously? This doesn't just prove that the Reception Wikis can't take criticism, But can't even understand about their flaws to begin with. As said from PackagedReviewer's Rant on the Reception Wikis, The Wikis have A lot of flaws with its name.

Putting a film, Even if it has good reviews from critics and audiences on the AMW instead of GMW Just because they have more Bad Qualities just makes no sense, It makes the Wikis feel Hyprocritical for what they are supposed to be. "Awful" Movies wiki is supposed to be for Awful Movies with Negative Reviews from Critics. But then we see Hellboy 2004 and it's Sequel on the Wiki. Same goes for "Crappy" Games Wiki. in which it's supposed to be for "Bad" Games, Yet they added the Entire FNAF Series (Except for Sister Location) on the Wiki just because it "has more flaws" Which is just Bullcrap. and it makes the Reception Wikis Feel like The Wikipedia Version Of Cinema Sins, and the Nostalgia Critic to be exact. Which is the main problem of this "Just because a film has good reputation doesn't mean it's good" Rule. I mean yeah, I could agree that Films like Shrek: Forever After, SCOOB!, Tom and Jerry (2021) are good films because Fans do like it and they are considered "Underrated." I like them too to be exact, But as for films like Raya and the Last Dragon. I kinda really don't understand at all.

As for why Raya And The Last Dragon should not be on Awful Movies Wiki is not because it received Positive Reviews. But because It's basically one of the Best Disney Films of 2021, and the "Disappointment of Disney" Thing makes no sense, Since according to Wikipedia, it grossed Alot of Money at the Box Office, Making it the Sixth Highest-Grossing Film of 2021... And right now I am gonna talk about the Flaws of the Page, and why it should be moved to Greatest Movies Wiki instead of Being Here.


The First One we're gonna talk about is the Caption. Which makes no sense at all. "Not a bad movie, but a disappointment for Disney"

Okay, as I Said, How is it a Disappointment for Disney despite it making A Decent amount of Money at the Box Office. Does Disney itself hate The Film? Or is it not what they Excepted? Either Way, Disney made a decent amount of Money from the Film. So.. yeah, This makes no sense.

The Second One is the So-called Bad Qualties. Which I will explain, and Give out my Response to them.


1. Sisu's design wasn't faithful to many Southeast Asian dragons when she was first revealed sometime in 2020.

Response: Yeah I can understand this and agree with it, But they chose that Design not because for her to look "Cute." But There were possible reasons for it. They possibly (I could be wrong, but could be true.) changed It because it might look a little 'Scary" Because Dragons Are often Portrayed as Villains in Fairytales and such. and The only reason they didn't use the Concept Art Design could be the same. Since Kids might get scared of Sisu's Sharp Teeth, Disney doesn't really want to put "Scary" Looking Creatures in their Films. Yeah I might seem Hypocritical since they do have Scary Creatures in their Films sometimes, Such as the Nightmare Before Christmas. But unlike Marvel Or Star Wars, they don't want Younger Kids to be frightened by a Scary-Looking Dragon. And while I know Southeast Asian People might not like that idea. Disney is Disney, They changed it because it's a "Kid-Friendly" Movie. Can't you Understand that?

2. We don't really get to know much about the Druun (the main antagonists of the film). The movie basically establishes that the Druun are evil entities that turn any living creatures into stone upon contact and that water is their biggest weakness. Not even an origin story on how they were created or who created them?

Response: Actually their Origins were Briefly Mentioned in the Film. in one Scene, Raya says they "born from human discord" Which might not make Sense, and I could agree that they didn't give out a BIG Explantation to where they came from. But according to Facts and Theories by Fans. The existence of the Druun is therefore tied to the darkness born of humanity's conflicts. Which means they could have came from Humanity's Existance. Plus some films DON'T have to talk about the Origins of a Hero or Villain, Like did we ever Seen Scar's Origins in the first Lion King Movie before the Lion Guard? Hell no... Films do that sometimes, and they don't explain it until a possible Sequel or Prequel. Maybe you need to learn more about the art of Film and it's history a little bit more to Understand.

3. Somehow, Sisu's dead siblings get resurrected at the end. While Sisu getting brought back after getting an arrow jammed on her heart and falling off a cliff is the typical Disney death trope, her siblings coming back happened without any explanation.

Response: This reason feels a little bit less explained, and feels a little bit personal then just a real bad quality. Sisu and her Silbings came Back Because of The Dragon Gem. This proves that the Person who made the Quality didn't watch the scene close enough to understand, or never watched the Movie.

4. the modern humor used in this film, such as the "group project" joke, is kind of anachronic considering the era the film is supposed to take place in.

Response: Most Films, even taking Place in a Old Time Era Sometimes uses these Modern Humor. Like for example, In Aladdin and it's 2019 Remake, The Genie makes a lot of Modern Humor References, Even if the Film takes place in Ancient Times like other Fairytales, And Hercules even had some of this Humor. and Emperor's New Groove Too. So what is wrong with adding those Humor in a Film that takes place in a Fantasy World that is different from our Modern World? Is it bad to do? Heck no! haven't you ever watched other Films with these Type of Humor Before?

5. We don't get to learn much about the supporting characters and Sisu's siblings.

Response: As I said in Reason 2. Filmmakers DON'T have to put Every Character's Origin Stories in a Film. How many times do I have to say this? and Plus, It's okay if they want to keep their Past Mysteries and up to Debate from Fans and Theorists.

6. While there is decent world-building, it isn't fleshed out further since the characters only stay at a location for a brief moment before moving on to the next.

Response: Okay, If that is true, Then there won't be any Movie Scenes. But still, This Reason has no Sources to back up it's Claim whatsoever as with any other Reception Wiki Page. Plus they do Stay at the Locations and do Learn more about How the Dragons Disappeared and what-not. Haven't you watched the entire film?

7. Around the end of the film, the movie made it look like it was Raya's fault that Sisu died because she didn't trust Namaari. Raya had a good reason to not trust Namaari because she betrayed Raya at the beginning of the film which resulted in the dragon orb being broken into pieces and the Druun being freed, which subsequently led to many people in Kumandra being turned into stone, not helped by the fact that Namaari never apologized to her either. If you look at the light when Sisu close to Namaari's face, while Raya was a little bit of light, She shot and killed Sisu using her crossbow. It was Namaari's fault for the murder of Sisu, not Raya.

Response: Okay how is this even a Bad Quality? And plus, as the others. Has no Sources to back up it's Claims whatsoever. It makes no sense, Plus the Ending makes no sense whatsoever. Plus Namaari (Accidentally) Shot Sisu in the Movie's Climax, And When Did Raya wanted To Lose Sisu? This could be referring to the dark alternate ending as explained On Polygon. But like as I said. Raya cares about Sisu and they became Good Friends. And the Mentioning of a Alternate Ending that didn't make the Cut makes no sense. Again, have you even Watched the Film or read The Original Script with this Ending? Seriously?

8 .The movie feels a little rushed, since it has to fit in a plot of the main character, along with a dragon and others, traveling to different lands that 4 enemy tribes each reside in to collect and assemble all of the pieces of a dragon gem to defeat the Druun and save everyone that was turned into stone within a 2-hour runtime. The movie could have potential to be made into a series since the plot seems too complex to be made into a 2 hour long movie.

Response: The Film isn't Rushed, Well it is sort of Rushed. I mean the Film was in Development during the Pandemic, and Some Filmmakers have to Rush/Remotely work on it and release them on early Release Dates for Digital because of the Crisis. or they would be forced to delay their films or worse, Cancel them. Plus Some Films do have that Too-Short-Of-Storylines-For-A-Movie before, Such as other Adaptions of Fairytales/Short Stories that were made by Disney. If you read The Original Fairytale Version, They would only take a couple Minutes. But a Movie Adaption takes 1 Hour as they add more into the story. Yeah, I know.. Raya and the Last Dragon isn't based on Any Fairytale. But it Has a similarity to other Fairytale Films that Disney made throughout the Years. So, maybe you should learn about Filmmaking And Adapting more? No offense.

9. Raya goes in to the town of Fang knowing that it is full of pick pockets and thieves, then falls for a trap instead of doing the mission which is far more important.

Response: Seriously? Most Heroes find a Trap or Riddle they have to solve Before continuing their Quest, which makes this Reason feel Biased, and doesn't make any Sense. Which Proves that the Person who made the page never watched the Film at all. Or doesn't understand How a Adventure/Faiirytale Film is made at all.


Now, I know I might get blocked for this. But this is true. I Still Like Reception Wikis. But Just to tell you guys. as said by People who hate the Wikis, They do have points in The Wiki's Flaws. The Wikis had a history of Drama, Corrupted Members, Terrible Fanbases, and Other Things that happened throughout the years. I am not trying to insult The Wikis in general. But after seeing alot of Drama happening on these Wikis, and what made them Not-So-Perfect as the Mods Or Owners Claim them to be. I really want these Wikis to change for the better and improve their Mistakes and Flaws.

As for Reception Wiki fans who are "Trying" to Revive Some Wikis like Terrible Fanbases and Hatedoms Wiki, Horrible Vyonders Wiki, and others that were shut down because of Miraheze's Code Of Conduct. Just to tell you. Miraheze Did had a good point of shuttting down those Wikis. That's Because According to Most People. Those Wikis, who Criticized People and Internet Celebrities Over Mistakes they had made are considered "Hate Speech." Which I have to agree with a little, Because well. Yes, I could agree that People Like Zenko (sorry if I mentioned her. But just a example.) were toxic. But That doesn't mean she was a "Terrible" Person in real life, or a bad Person that deserves to die. Some People even took her way too seriously. and even wished that she could be banned forever from the internet, Or even Worse, Force her End her own Life. She even had a page of her on one Wiki with alot of Shock Site Pictures that Insulted and took her way too seriously. Just to tell you, Zenko is a dead horse now. and Harassing her like she is a "Villain" and wishing Bad things on her and other People who did Questionable things is just Horrible. I already seen this happen on the wikis alot. The Drama, The Amounts of People being toxic and Disrespecting Opinions, and even People who can't take Criticism at all on Wikis that I consider to be a "Decent" Place to talk about opinions and such. Only to find out about the Bad things that happened throughout the years. And One of The Staff Members of Miraheze even said once to a Person who ranted on the Wikis on Reddit that Mireheze is not the place for the Reception Wikis. as they fear they would cause more Drama, and would damage Miraheze's Reputation. More info can be said here: https://www.reddit.com/r/rant/comments/lfdvsu/i_hope_miraheze_kicks_the_reception_wikis_off/?utm_source=amp&utm_medium=&utm_content=post_body

Now I know I might act a little Hypocritical, Since I said I like the Reception Wikis. But I do Understand the Flaws of these Wikis. and I have to agree with Some of the People who Hated these Wikis. For the best, The Wikis should be Improved and Even Fix all these Mistakes. I want the Reception Wikis to be a Better Community of talking about Opinions on Certain type of Media and Art. Not to Cause Drama or Express it in a biased Manner. I really hope you guys understand. And alot of People already agreed with me about this, So, for the Best of the Miraheze Staff People, and for Miraheze itself. We need to Redeem these Wikis and make them a better place. For Fans alike, and for People who like to express their Opinions.

I hope you Understand.

This is BeastarsFan. signing off.


avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 1
Now i changed my mind
avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 1
about just because the media is received good doesn't mean a good
avatar

BeastarsFan4132314

one month ago
Score 1
The People who think Movies that have Good Reputation/Reception from Fans are Bad because of Adding So-Called Flaws to each page in my opinion is just bullshit, I know I might be complaining a little. But, Let me tell you.. Some of these So-Called Flaws have no Sources to back up their claims. and are either biased or just harsh to the film's story, and the Filmmaker's hard work on the film. I'm fine with people hating these films. But as I said, it seems Hyprocrtiical a little. Like one time on the SCOOB! Greatest Movies Page, One of the Mods said "We don't trust Critics." Yet they added Rambo: Last Blood and Firebirds to Awful Movies Wiki. even if it had positive reviews from fans. It kinda makes the People who add them on here because of so many so-claimed flaws with no sources to back up it's claims are nothing but Cinema Sins-styled Nitpicks that just ruins a film for everyone by giving out Flaws that are either Untrue, Biased, or have no Sources. What I mean ruin a film for everyone is that. Well I don't hate people "Hating" movies. I don't hate "Movie Criticism." But I think it's better if people can just stick to their own opinions instead of having to change it because of a review page. The best thing to improve the reception wikis is to remove the "Films with Good Reputation are still bad" Rule because it might cause Drama to people who like these films. or even start a hate base of the film they are "Criticizing" I know people are gonna downvote me and disagree with me. But we seen some pages on Reception wikis that are just Personal Opinions/Nitpicks/Biased Thinking and such.
avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 1
@BeastarsFan4132314 I used this on Hellboy: The Golden Iron but nowadays i changed that this pharse is a bad excuse
avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 2
Honestly the hate for Qualitipedia/ Reception Wiki isn't different because most of the rants on youtube (except ThePackagedReviewer) according to HellLord are bad and many people call a rip-off of FANDOM
avatar

BeastarsFan4132314

one month ago
Score 1
Well. some of the rants are kinda positive and do include vaild reasons about the wiki's flaws and why they should improve.
avatar

DarkMatterMan4500

one month ago
Score 1
@BeastarsFan4132314 You do make a valid point, and you seem to want the entire Reception Wikis to improve. I'm definitely not going to block you for giving us criticism that could help us stay afloat in the long run. We have been going downhill as of late, and we need to prevent its demise from happening.
avatar

DarkMatterMan4500

one month ago
Score 1
You seem to be more positive about this.
avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 3
Niche-Audience shows should bring back on Terrible TV Shows Wiki but more well written, okay i talked to the death about that
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

one month ago
Score 4

How about, no?

Because this will bring us back to pre-Masson Thief state.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

one month ago
Score 4
Not only that, but it was Unnamedgoon who created the rule a while back.
avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 2
@Stephenfisher2001 Fine, i done of niche audience shows should be bring back on TTVSH Wiki
avatar

Blader07

one month ago
Score 2
I mean, the idea of Niche Audience should be bring back couldn't work very well for the reason of pre- Masson Thief State as you said, Stephen
avatar

Trevor807

one month ago
Score 2
It's likely Goon had provided an explanation for the rule, but it's lost to history.
avatar

Trevor807

one month ago
Score 6

Come to think of it, I haven't seen a film FreezingTNT personally hates that isn't on here.

And you do have a point about Zenko. Yes, she did some questionable things. But the users who harassed her and vandalized her user page are, frankly, no better than her.

I also responded to the Reddit post. I handled it as straightforward as possible because I'd only worsen the situation if I couldn't take criticism.
avatar

DeciduousWater534

one month ago
Score 2

"and other Pages because of their Biased Reasons with no Sources to back up their claims"

To me, that's literally the biggest problem with these wikis. Users just add pages because they personally like/dislike something even if said bit of entertainment received the exact opposite critical reception.

A few weeks ago I stated how I make pages, only for it it to be met with disagreement. Click these links to see what I said:

https://awfu...=single-view

https://awfu...=single-view

I addition to those pages about Terminator: Dark Fate and 2020's Mulan as examples, there's a bunch of other pages that suffer this problem. On GMW, there's a page about the first Angry Birds movie there even though critics and audiences alike consider the film mediocre, and the videos listed thrash the film. Same thing can be said for Scoob! and 2021's Tom & Jerry, though the difference with those pages is that the creator picked out a very specific set of videos to include (and I'm talking obscure videos that have no more than 10,000 views). And on the other hand we have pages like The Loud House (Seasons 5-present) on TTVSW that doesn't include a single source nor any mention about the critical reception of said seasons, which really makes you question the pages credibility.

What you mentioned about the reputation quote being nonsensical is spot-on. How exactly can the quality of something that has a good/bad reputation actually be the opposite of its reputation? To me, that statement about reputation just screams "opinionated".
avatar

BeastarsFan4132314

one month ago
Score 0
I mean Tom and Jerry 2021 and Scoob! were possibly added on the wiki because I do agree that alot of fans. I mean true fans do love the film. Scoob! and Tom And Jerry 2021 can stay on greatest in my opinion because those films are kinda underrated. Should we rename Decent films category to Underrated Films? lol... okay idk about that idea.
avatar

FreezingTNT

one month ago
Score 1

First things first, for example, "Awful Movies" in the title implies the wiki is about movies that are bad when it comes to its quality; are you implying that a movie is automatically good just because it has a positive reputation, regardless of its actual quality?

Shrek Forever After, for example, had a mixed critical reception upon its initial release and it is only on the Greatest Movies Wiki because of its actual quality. Going by what seems to be your logic, Shrek Forever After is automatically a bad movie just because it had a mixed critical reception, regardless of whether it is good or bad when it comes to the actual quality of the movie.

I agree that some pointers on specific articles can be a little opinionated, but a lot of the time we point out legitimate storytelling flaws with in-movie evidence to back it up.

Most of the time, people tend to overlook specific storytelling flaws in specific works of art... except for a few, like me. For example, most people who enjoy Simba's Pride are... (now, I know this might sound offensive, but...) blind to the flaws I saw in the movie.

We are trying to say that we should be focusing on the actual quality of the movie, a lot of people who praise specific movies tend to overlook specific flaws or positives, its reputation alone does not determine as to whether it is good or bad in terms of its actual quality.

It is about whether or not we agree on whether the flaw or positive of that movie exists or not. Why is it a bad idea for us to acknowledge specific flaws in specific movies even exist? Why should people ignore that the flaws of Simba's Pride I pointed out even exist?
avatar

FreezingTNT

one month ago
Score 3

And another thing... regarding as to people complaining about a movie they enjoy being on the Awful Movies Wiki, for example... this is literally the problem.

I will be going into rant territory here, and this might sound offensive, so be warned...

When someone complains about their favorite movie being on the Awful Movies Wiki, it just shows how immature they are, they seem to be as overly-reactive and as overly-sensitive as Lita from Instant Family. At least I, myself, am trying to point out the existence of legitimate storytelling flaws in the first place, I am trying to snap them out of ignorance, to help them see more clearly and acknowledge that these flaws exist.

I do not want anyone to be blinded by ignorance, I want to help contribute of the future of the quality of storytelling, if anyone wants to tell a story then they should be acknowledging and not ignoring flaws in specific stories so they would avoid them in the first place and this would help storytelling become better than before and now.
avatar

Agent Joestar

one month ago
Score 0
Agreed, I was upset that Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom was here too, but I understand that it has flaws which the same can be said for Raya
avatar

DeciduousWater534

one month ago
Score 0
Is your comment supposed to be a reply to my comment? It sounds like it.
avatar

BeastarsFan4132314

one month ago
Score 1
FreezingTNT Just to tell you. I know what u said and I understand. But Adding Films even if has good reputation to Awful Movies wiki because of small flaws just really makes no sense, I mean, yeah they are flawed. But they aren't "Awful" Like the Wiki name is supposed to be for. It feels like people who add these films with these flaws with no sources to back up their claims. Instead of adding them just here. I do have an idea. I know this was mentioned as a not good idea before. But there was a wiki on Fandom created by some of the Mods called "Okay Movies Wiki." I think you should add lion king 2 and 3 there instead because alot of fans do kinda like it. Or at least make a new reception wiki called "Neutral Films Wiki.." And guys, thanks for understanding alot. I really wanted the best for the wikis. and I didn't wanted it to go downhill because of questionable drama and things that happened throughout the years. I could make a separate blog on how to improve the wikis. but I'm in the middle of typing it soon.
avatar

BeastarsFan4132314

one month ago
Score 0
Like the Bee Movie is on Okay movies wiki along with Other Films with "Mixed-to-Average" reviews because They aren't "Bad" or "Good" But are "Okay" depending on what they think. Should we make a Miraheze version of that wiki? you can say no if u want. it's just a idea I had.. Thought about it before.
avatar

Trevor807

one month ago
Score 6
There will never be an official "Okay or Neutral Movies Wiki". Why would it be necessary?
avatar

FreezingTNT

one month ago
Score 1

Hmm...

Perhaps we should elaborate on all of our negative or positive [media] wikis as to what the "negative" or "positive" word means. We are in the middle of a re-branding (though it'll take a long while, and part of it includes re-vamping the home pages for each of our wikis.

On the home page for, for example, the Awful Movies Wiki, I'll point out that the use of the word "awful" should not imply that any movie here is not immediately god-awful (if you know what I mean).
avatar

FreezingTNT

one month ago
Score 1
Basically, I plan to clarify so people wouldn't be misled.
avatar

FreezingTNT

11 days ago
Score 0
@DeciduousWater534 The comment was a response to OP.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

one month ago
Score 2
To FreezingTNT: I guess you do have a point about it why we add movies, even if they do have good reception that was actually didn't make the movie good, like Star Wars: The Last Jedi despite got great reviews from critics, but the audiences and the fanbase reaction to TLJ were heavily derived neagtive because of pretty much why it is on this wiki due to something that made the older fans rage quit due to a huge insult to the older stuff from the previous trilogies. When I first saw this blog, that gives me a little concern. :(
avatar

Trevor807

one month ago
Score 4
You could use "Reply".
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

one month ago
Score 2
He was in the middle of talking more about how the "Don't Trust Receptions" works.
avatar

Agent Joestar

one month ago
Score 1
Not to sound rude but going by your logic, movies such as Sponge on the Run and Jurassic World Fallen Kingdom shouldn't be on here since there are people that like it
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

one month ago
Score 4
But the fans aren't happy about the third Spongebob movie.
avatar

Stephenfisher2001

one month ago
Score 4
Not even the fans of Jurassic Park are happy about the Falling Kingdom.
avatar

Agent Joestar

one month ago
Score 1
Sure, especially for JWFK, though I’ve seen a lot of people that weren’t happy with Raya either which you can see in the comments sections of the videos reviewing the film on YouTube
avatar

BeastarsFan4132314

29 days ago
Score 1
Spongebob Movie 3 was actually loved By Young Spongebob Fans who never watched the Older Episodes. and A lot of People who haven't watched the show before would Love it. As I true fan I loved it and I kinda hoped it would go on GMW, but I saw the Page on AMW and I was a little sad. and the reasons were a little too harsh, not biased, just harsh... Alot of people like the film in real life but not on the internet. Lol.. sorry um, you forgive me?
avatar

Joey442

one month ago
Score 2
  • grabs popcorn* boi
avatar

Joey442

one month ago
Score 1
Now it's pretty much a vote war between these 2 blogs.
avatar

YTF43

23 days ago
Score 1
Too long, didn't read. :P

You are not allowed to post comments.