BvS BvS Rottentomatoes score - how important will it be, and what do you hope for? - Part 9

[Orba]

I think Marvel just did...

More proof that RT doesn't mean anything?

See, that just proves that the critics have an agenda against WB and DC.

 

[marcvader]

Disney owns RT.

 

[Orba]

Disney owns RT.

Nah WB is part of owner of RT so Disney are bribing all the critics (of course blackmailing all the rest to make sure that they keep quiet about the bribery attempt).

But don't worry, we see the truth

 

[Seahawksfan]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

 

[daddydivine]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

I'm positive that if BVS was a critical success people would gladly recite the RT score all over the various threads... ala TDK. If SS becomes a critical darling a lot of the same detractors will began happily qouting the RT score without a care in the world.

 

[Joeyjojo72]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

Well it's not true that ALL people care about RT as much as you do, Seahawksfan. You shouldn't generalize.

 

[TheFlamingCoco]

I'm positive that if BVS was a critical success people would gladly recite the RT score all over the various threads... ala TDK. If SS becomes a critical darling a lot of the same detractors will began happily qouting the RT score without a care in the world.

This.

 

[Octoberist]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

You say that, but if a movie you support gets a good RT score, theby why becomes a jump of joy.

 

[JOE]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

It's still an average of how many movie critics thought the movie was "fresh". There's 300+ critics reviewing this film, actual film critics. I don't see how it's NOT credible?

I'm positive that if BVS was a critical success people would gladly recite the RT score all over the various threads... ala TDK. If SS becomes a critical darling a lot of the same detractors will began happily qouting the RT score without a care in the world.

Exactly! When Nolan was making Batman movies it was credible, post MOS I guess it isn't anymore?

The general word of mouth for the movie was bad, the RT score and its box office are reflecting that, period. Call the critics biased against the movie because it's Snyder all you want, the alarming box office drop is the only thing that matters.

 

[shinlyle]

I'm positive that if BVS was a critical success people would gladly recite the RT score all over the various threads... ala TDK. If SS becomes a critical darling a lot of the same detractors will began happily qouting the RT score without a care in the world.

Yep. The RT Score doesn't matter unless it supports someone's argument, and then it becomes irrefutable proof that the movie the best.
I called that long before the reviews started pouring in over BvS.
I gave it a 6/10. I still stand by that. However, the more I think about and try to explain it to people, the more I start floating down to a 5/10. That's not a good sign.
Still, my kids enjoyed it, so that makes me like it a little more.

 

[UltraSuperGuy]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

76% is a pretty mediocre RT score, quite frankly. I can't think of a movie that scored below 80% on RT over the last 15 years that I've liked very much. Of course, just because a movie is >80% doesn't mean I'm going to like it either.

 

[The Joker]

I'm positive that if BVS was a critical success people would gladly recite the RT score all over the various threads... ala TDK. If SS becomes a critical darling a lot of the same detractors will began happily qouting the RT score without a care in the world.

Exactly.

 

[Legendver2]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

People care about the score because it can potentially kill or build legs, especially for the CBM genre, where it's like a turf war between different companies. RT score isn't really about forming your own opinion on a film, it's more like bragging rights. And bragging rights don't mean jack since it's all based on subjective opinion.

 

[FunkMiller]

Oh, for crying out loud. The flick got a bad overall review score because it's not a good film.

Okay, the 28% is harsh, but let's not pretend this was a misunderstood classic, badly treated by all those horrible Marvel loving critics. In a few months when the hubbub dies down, that'll be the general consensus of opinion, guaranteed.

It gives me no pleasure as a DC fan to say any of this, but it's way past time people stopped mindlessly defending BvS, and took a more level-headed approach. It's just not good. Mediocre at best, poor at worst. The fact that Civil War looks to be several leagues above it doesn't help matters, but that's the hand we've been dealt.

If Civil War were on 28% percent, and BvS was tracking to be in the high 90s, then you can bet your ass DC fans would be lording it over the Marvelites.

Time to stop blaming critics, Marvel, Disney, other fans and anyone else for this. The blame lies squarely with WB, and the man they've let control the direction of the DCEU thus far - Zack Snyder. End of story.

 

[The Guard]

Question: Wouldn't citing Rotten Tomatoes as a measure of quality be considered a version of appeal to authority?

Isn't that a logical fallacy?

 

[FunkMiller]

Question: Wouldn't citing Rotten Tomatoes as a measure of quality be considered a version of appeal to authority?

Isn't that a logical fallacy?

No. Not really. The appeal to authority fallacy is based around the notion that a single authoritative opinion on a subject matter should not be taken as the truth - and quite rightly so. It is not a consensus based concept. RT is a consensus. While you could argue that the RT percentage is a logical fallacy, you cannot argue the same for multiple negative reviews from independent sources.

 

[Visualiza]

I'm positive that if BVS was a critical success people would gladly recite the RT score all over the various threads... ala TDK. If SS becomes a critical darling a lot of the same detractors will began happily qouting the RT score without a care in the world.

The funny thing is, this is already happening. There's about a handful of reviews and essays floating around that are being lauded on these boards. These are the ones that rest on the idea that BvS is a misunderstood masterpiece that the plebeians of the movie-going world are too dense to comprehend. If the critics, journalists, streamers, and bloggers don't matter, then that mentality needs to be adopted wholesale. You don't get to say "F the critics who tell people what to think" while otherwise giving the ones who make you feel better about yourself a pass.

Oh, for crying out loud. The flick got a bad overall review score because it's not a good film.

Okay, the 28% is harsh, but let's not pretend this was a misunderstood classic, badly treated by all those horrible Marvel loving critics. In a few months when the hubbub dies down, that'll be the general consensus of opinion, guaranteed.

It gives me no pleasure as a DC fan to say any of this, but it's way past time people stopped mindlessly defending BvS, and took a more level-headed approach. It's just not good. Mediocre at best, poor at worst. The fact that Civil War looks to be several leagues above it doesn't help matters, but that's the hand we've been dealt.

If Civil War were on 28% percent, and BvS was tracking to be in the high 90s, then you can bet your ass DC fans would be lording it over the Marvelites.

Time to stop blaming critics, Marvel, Disney, other fans and anyone else for this. The blame lies squarely with WB, and the man they've let control the direction of the DCEU thus far - Zack Snyder. End of story.

 

[The Guard]

I don't think anyone's suggesting that there's no value in a single opinion. Plenty of critics made good points and had insights about the film.

But blanket statements about things don't hold a lot of weight in a conversation about the movie's strengths and weaknesses.

Discussing the movie's strengths and weaknesses does.

 

[metaphysician]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

One data point, is one data point. Congratulations, you've that sometimes the critics like a movie significantly better than the audience ( or at least the audience who posts on RT ).

Are you going to actually go anywhere with this point, or are you basically going to stick with "because this one data point looks dubious, I will imply that RT is absolutely useless except when I agree with it"?

 

[Marvel Knight]

Okay, the 28% is harsh, but let's not pretend this was a misunderstood classic, badly treated by all those horrible Marvel loving critics. In a few months when the hubbub dies down, that'll be the general consensus of opinion, guaranteed.

It gives me no pleasure as a DC fan to say any of this, but it's way past time people stopped mindlessly defending BvS, and took a more level-headed approach. It's just not good. Mediocre at best, poor at worst. The fact that Civil War looks to be several leagues above it doesn't help matters, but that's the hand we've been dealt.

If Civil War were on 28% percent, and BvS was tracking to be in the high 90s, then you can bet your ass DC fans would be lording it over the Marvelites.

Time to stop blaming critics, Marvel, Disney, other fans and anyone else for this. The blame lies squarely with WB, and the man they've let control the direction of the DCEU thus far - Zack Snyder. End of story.

Great Post.


And time to lighten the mood in here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gYKeQczkFfM

 

[kedrell]

I find it interesting that people still value Rotten Tomatoes... These are the same critics that gave Noah a 76% while the audience score was a 41%. Why do people care so much about this score?

http://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/noah_2014/

Because the only thing useful on RT actually IS the critics score. The audience score is absolutely meaningless. It's not a good sample...EVER. Nothing scientific about it at all. Might as well be the crap score over on IMDB. RT should just dump the audience rating and in lieu of them not doing that(which won't be happening anytime soon if ever) then I'd advise all to just ignore that component. It's the critic score which actually tells you something reliable...that this is how critics as a whole generally regard a movie, any movie...provided enough critics have weighed in at all which is a number you can easily check as they put it on the front page of every movie they have a listing for.

 

[kedrell]

76% is a pretty mediocre RT score, quite frankly. I can't think of a movie that scored below 80% on RT over the last 15 years that I've liked very much. Of course, just because a movie is >80% doesn't mean I'm going to like it either.

Uh, no it's not. The vast, vast majority of movies ranked on RT don't even merit a fresh rating(60% or higher) much less clear that hurdle by well over have a dozen percentage points. Anything at a 76% is a pretty good score for a movie. There are many classic films that "only" got a score this high. There are many that have been nominated for best picture which had a comparable RT score. Maybe you're expectations are just a bit too high.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

I don't think anyone's suggesting that there's no value in a single opinion. Plenty of critics made good points and had insights about the film.

But blanket statements about things don't hold a lot of weight in a conversation about the movie's strengths and weaknesses.

Discussing the movie's strengths and weaknesses does.

You know what holds weight? When you see how much the critics and general audiences agree. When Civil War blast past BvS at the box office, while the RT score is worlds better, it is a consensus. Not one you have to agree with, but it still is a consensus.

 

[DarthSkywalker]

Uh, no it's not. The vast, vast majority of movies ranked on RT don't even merit a fresh rating(60% or higher) much less clear that hurdle by well over have a dozen percentage points. Anything at a 76% is a pretty good score for a movie. There are many classic films that "only" got a score this high. There are many that have been nominated for best picture which had a comparable RT score. Maybe you're expectations are just a bit too high.

RT scores under 80 are different then those 80 and above. A lot more consensus with 80 and up.

 

[The Guard]

You know what holds weight? When you see how much the critics and general audiences agree. When Civil War blast past BvS at the box office, while the RT score is worlds better, it is a consensus. Not one you have to agree with, but it still is a consensus.

An off topic consensus at that, at least in terms of what I've been discussing.

And no, vague statements like that have little to do with discussing the actual content of this particular film, or the movie's strengths and weaknesses, which is what I was referring to.

That speaks to the reception of the film, which really isn't in dispute, at least from me.

And to be honest, I don't really care whether Civil War is received better. It has no actual bearing on this film or its contents.