Question about movie reviews

[batman1]

What is the difference between a professional reviewer and just an opinion? When I look on sites like rotten tomatoes I see the critics review and then the audience score.

 

[Mysteryman]

A professional reviewer is someone paid to give their opinion.

 

[batman1]

A professional reviewer is someone paid to give their opinion.

By who? Are they required to have credentials?

 

[Milk Tray Guy]

What is the difference between a professional reviewer and just an opinion? When I look on sites like rotten tomatoes I see the critics review and then the audience score.

As far as I'm concerned a professional reviewer's write-up is just an opinion. There are plenty of professional reviewers that I've disagreed with. They may (indeed, should) be knowledgeable about film history and film making, but at the end of the day if they hate something and you don't (or vice versa) you're as entitled to your view as they are to theirs.

 

[batman1]

As far as I'm concerned a professional reviewer's write-up is just an opinion. There are plenty of professional reviewers that I've disagreed with. They may (indeed, should) be knowledgeable about film history and film making, but at the end of the day if they hate something and you don't (or vice versa) you're as entitled to your view as they are to theirs.

Then why is it like their opinion has more weight? Why do they act like a professional reviewers/critics count and the audience doesn't? It's always been like that.

 

[Aximili86]

Their opinions don't necessarily hold more weight, but they do tend to be involved in the field somehow. Writing degrees, or former hard-journalism reporters shifting into entertainment, that type of thing. Or people from the academic world who've studied film, or people who run film festivals and stuff.

At least people employed by the newspapers and major online companies, random bloggers aren't really the same thing.

Doesn't mean their opinions are always right or that you should dismiss a movie entirely that critics hate, but (the legit ones at least) should definitely be taken more seriously than your average fanboy.

 

[elgaz]

Then why is it like their opinion has more weight? Why do they act like a professional reviewers/critics count and the audience doesn't? It's always been like that.

I don't think it's necessarily that their opinions carry more weight as such. The opinion of any one individual moviegoer is no more meaningful than the next; as with all artistic mediums, movies are very subjective, often open to interpretation and every individual has a right to their own opinions on them.

However, professional reviewers are paid to do it and as such will often have an academic background in journalism/literature/movies/etc. This doesn't make their opinion any more important than yours, but it means they're qualified to certain degree to analyse, break down and write about the movie they've watched - the techniques used to make it, nuances in the performances, equipment used, etc. An average forum critic may not have knowledge of these things but they can still say the movie sucked, or excelled.

My personal approach is that I don't really choose to view a movie based on what critics say (I'll go if I like the trailer), but I often enjoy reading the breakdown afterwards from the critics.

 

[batman1]

Their opinions don't necessarily hold more weight, but they do tend to be involved in the field somehow. Writing degrees, or former hard-journalism reporters shifting into entertainment, that type of thing. Or people from the academic world who've studied film, or people who run film festivals and stuff.

At least people employed by the newspapers and major online companies, random bloggers aren't really the same thing.

Doesn't mean their opinions are always right or that you should dismiss a movie entirely that critics hate, but (the legit ones at least) should definitely be taken more seriously than your average fanboy.

Interesting.

 

[Mandon Knight]

For me, nought. Its an opinion, that's all, a paid one, yes, but still just an opinion. My review I trust, is I go see the film and do I like it or not. There have been too many examples and they are growing of magazines and reviewers openly spoiling films with no warning or belief that they have to provide a warning of spoilers included in their work.

 

[Abudefduf]

What is the difference between a professional reviewer and just an opinion?

A lot, if by "professional reviewer" you mean knowledgeable, educated critics like Roger Ebert.

Virtually none, if by "professional reviewer" you mean random dudes with an internet connection like Red Letter Media or Jeremy Jahns.

 

[batman1]

A lot, if by "professional reviewer" you mean knowledgeable, educated critics like Roger Ebert.

Virtually none, if by "professional reviewer" you mean random dudes with an internet connection like Red Letter Media or Jeremy Jahns.

Why not? Doesn't their opinion matter?

 

[Abudefduf]

I didn't say that, I said that there's virtually no difference between the opinion of people like them and the opinion of people like us.

 

[batman1]

This is very interesting.