Example of not liking a movie because of personal taste? "I didn't like the concept."

Example of not liking a movie because (you feel) it's poorly written? "I felt the writers/filmmakers didn't fully *commit* to the concept." Or maybe "I felt the concept was poorly executed."

I'll go with an example I always think of from the non-horror genre: The Wolverine.

The concept of Wolverine, in a nutshell, is twofold: "Guy wants to steal Wolverine's powers" and "Wolverine (ostensibly) spends most of the movie without his powers." The creators of the film fail to execute this concept in a couple of different areas:

1. Wolverine's powers aren't really gone, just weakened to an unspecified and constantly shifting extent. (In other words, they work just well enough for him to survive all the crazy $H!+ he goes through over the course of the movie, but are weakened *just* enough for one of the other characters to occasionally say, "Wow. Don't you typically heal faster than this?")
2. Logan doesn't (partially) lose his powers because the bad guy succeeds in stealing them or whatever; rather, the bad guy has a mutant chick with a poison tongue working for him, and her venom just *happens* to weaken Logan and (sort of) take away his powers.

So Writing Tip A would be: if you're gonna take away a superhero's powers -- if that's your hook -- then take away his f---ing powers. Don't half-ass it. And Tip B would be, if you've already introduced a character who wants, and ostensibly knows how, to steal the hero's powers, and you need said hero to lose those powers... put two and two together, yo.

To steer things back to the horror realm: I love most of the Scream movies, but some people praise them not only as horror films, or self-referential/meta-infused satire, or whatever, but as murder mysteries. And as mysteries, the Scream films are in no way, shape or form competently written.

In a well-written murder mystery, the identity of the killer has to *matter.* And yes, I think it has to be at least theoretically possible to deduce it. (Not guess -- deduce). In all but *maybe* the first film, it feels like Craven and Co. pulled the killers' identities out of a hat. They're completely arbitrary. In two of the films, characters are revealed as the killers who were in maybe two scenes/had no significant impact on the plot prior. That's bad mystery writing (if indeed writing a mystery is what the creators of the film were trying to achieve, which is of course highly debatable).

(Also, another little pet peeve of mine -- Scream 2, 3 and 5 ((two of which are my favorites, as it happens!)) each contain a plot point that's revealed early on, then dropped without ceremony or explanation. In 2 we learn that the killer(s) is/are targeting people with similar names to those who died in the first movie, in the order in which they died. The problem? They abruptly stop doing that as soon as Gale Weathers points it out, and it's never brought up again. Similarly, in the third film it's established that they're taking out characters in the order they were killed in the new Stab! film's script. Again... never brought up again. Finally, Scream 5 tells us early on that the killer(s) are targeting people related to the killers from the previous films. Guess what becomes of that fascinating plot point?)