Film Critics

i spent most of the day, reading Reviews of Rain's Ninja Assassin. i am trying to understand why critics see this film differently from the public.

the majority of them were harsh on Rain's film, everything from the script, the director, the fight scenes, etc. but for all of their harshness, the marjority of the public said the complete opposite of the critics. except the first report, for instance:
1.)
credit: Top Ten Reviews
Voters 2.1090 for 29%
Critics: 2.0855 for 29%
the breakdown was: excellent (2); very good (29); good (29); fair (15); poor (1)
2.) credit: The Numbers
Rotten Tomatoes
score: 31% = Rotten (even though this site's votes were comparmised by nagetive spamming)
voters gave the film 6.44
3) credit: Box Office mojo
voters "B" for the film
critics didn't like the film
the breakdown was: A (48.6%); B (27.6%); C (10.9%); D(5.09%); E (9.9%); F (.10%)
4) credit: IMDB
gave the film 7 stars
voters 6.8/10

so with these numbers, i have to wonder why the critics didn't like the film and the public did? What do you think?

I don't think a film critic can watch a movie like we would...they are analyzing the film and picking it apart piece by piece, they are looking for flaws and whatnot and things that stand out. Most of the negative critic reviews have to do with the plot/storyline, which I have heard from regular viewers was not THE BEST, but they still enjoyed the film, and maybe this is what the critics are basing their judgment on. Personally I think it's just supposed to be, as Rain says, "a KICK ASS movie", and nothing more. I can't wait to see it myself! I know I will enjoy it ....for Rain and also for the action