Rotten Tomatoes Is Destroying the Film Industry

[Kreem Pi]

Amusing that RT is only destroying the industry for those who constantly make films that end up rotten on RT.

 

[Marvin]

Rotten Tomatoes didn't even exist until 1998. Listing movies that came out before it aren't really the best examples.

The site is best used when you're on the fence whether or not you'll see a movie. I'd have probably passed on Wonder Woman if it had a 40%. I wouldn't have seen movies like Get Out without the overwhelming critical acclaim.

my example wasn't intended to highlight the fate of pre RT films. It was intended to highlight just what that their system yields even in the face of a gem like the sandlot.

It's really quite simple. The amount of people that watch any one of these big films in some nominal span of time could be upwards of 10 million(and billions over decades). For the most part RT tends to avg about 200 of these people opinions, like minded to some degree given 'quality' and what to look for in film. That's like .002%. Good for what it is but if given power it's an odd thing. At any point in time this forum has like 5k opinionated people. That percentage would be about 5. You take 5 people from here, right now(including the two of us) and have them aggregate some films, from baby driver to logan to the last starwars to something like Baraka to Lawrence of arabia or to the work of my man bong joon ho. Whatever the hell we come up with, 'correct or wrong' if that's even a real thing. Simply wouldn't be the truth, thus it should be called what it is. The opinions of some .002% however informed. I personally use the audience score to get an inclining on things i'm on the fence about. I can somehow live with 1%. It's a whole number after all. Even if it would translate to 50ppl here
Speaking personally regardless of all the films i love or hate that these people also love or hate, I could only see myself getting behind them if they did something about that percentage. The numbers are just too small and fickle for my liking. We were shown too many thought experience when it came to humans and art in college.

You do bring up another point. Someone told me once these RT gives awareness to small indie circuit stuff. Only to really highlight just how much picking and choosing power this group actually has. Yay for all the films from last years film festival they give awareness too, shame about all the great films they didn't.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

It's not Rotten Tomatoes' fault if people don't understand the intricacies. That's ignorance on the part of dumb people on the internet who start petitions about Rotten Tomatoes getting bribed by Disney or idiot filmmakers who blame Rotten Tomatoes on their films' poor reception.

It isn't like it is overly complicated or not clear.

 

[StormC]

These critics aren't average joes though. Not really. To be an RT critic it takes more than just filling out a form.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/critics/

These people see dozens if not hundreds of films a year. They come into the films as movie critics first. Not fans on an internet forum.

RT has power now because studios have churned out crap for so long and now movie tickets are too expensive to go see something on a "maybe." Millennials are much more critical as consumers, they're often reading online reviews of things before buying them. Studios need to accept this because it's only going to grow from here.

 

[Marvin]

These critics aren't average joes though. Not really. To be an RT critic it takes more than just filling out a form.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/critics/

These people see dozens if not hundreds of films a year. They come into the films as movie critics first. Not fans on an internet forum.

The perception that they are any different than us here when it comes to art speaking to the individual is irksome to be honest.
Like some critic is better at telling the rest of us if a joke is funny, worth our time even. Cause they come at it differently.

There was a time I thought otherwise, then i read Faraci's Pacific Rim review. I appreciate a jeremy jahns cause at least what he does is honest. But the reality is when deadpool type get's a higher 'score' than an english patient type...I chalk it all up to art speaking to people in different ways. They like what they like and we should do. Trumping up what they like over your own ish is not for me.

What's more seeing a hundred things a day or what not compounds the issue. Like imagine doing this with porn.
Especially when looking at the people they are serving(the audience) who come at this stuff differently.

I mean have you seen the collider guys talk film(i bring them up cause they on RT contributors). They are normal joes like u and me. There is a misconception that they are somehow different. The people on what the flick even. It's pretty fascinating.

 

[Osiris-Rex]

These critics aren't average joes though. Not really. To be an RT critic it takes more than just filling out a form.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/critics/

These people see dozens if not hundreds of films a year. They come into the films as movie critics first. Not fans on an internet forum.

Certainly more reliable than the audience scores that fans use to justify a poorly rated movie. Considering the average audience reviewer probably just goes to see
maybe two or three movies a year and just goes to see a movie they are predisposed to like. Or have an agenda and down vote a movie irregardless of quality.

 

[StormC]

I don't like Devin Faraci either but I'm not going to witch hunt other RT critics over them.

The fact that critics disagree with each other is part of the point of ongoing media analysis. Those 6% that didn't like TDK came from somewhere, and probably represent a lot of people who also didn't like it.

 

[Marvin]

I don't like Devin Faraci either but I'm not going to witch hunt other RT critics over them.

Witch hunt? Firstly i like Faraci. If he didnt' have the power of influence and RT I'd have as little issue with him as i do any of the people i do or don't agree with on this forum. But that's just it, he came up on a forum(just like us here), they made him a writer for their official outlet and presto, a film fan turned 'something more'.

And i said it wasn't till i read his P Rim 'review' that i finally clicked out of seeing him one way and seeing him another. He's just a dude like us. They all are. Kofi Outlaw aka dc outlaw? I mean really. I say that having followed alot of them and check out their podcasts and such. I mean even the slash film boys, review writers for that site but I'll be damned if david chen or peter sciretta or any of them are anything more than...again i digress.
I just see modern critics/bloogers a certain way and RT is quite the platform they have been given to steer things a certain way. For better or worse.

 

[MessiahDecoy123]

These critics aren't average joes though. Not really. To be an RT critic it takes more than just filling out a form.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/critics/

These people see dozens if not hundreds of films a year. They come into the films as movie critics first. Not fans on an internet forum.

RT has power now because studios have churned out crap for so long and now movie tickets are too expensive to go see something on a "maybe." Millennials are much more critical as consumers, they're often reading online reviews of things before buying them. Studios need to accept this because it's only going to grow from here.

Agreed 100%.

Studios want audiences to make uninformed decisions because it lowers their standards and requirements.

Audiences aren't trying to waste time and energy.

I guess Hollywood can't shovel s**t to movie goers and expect to make hundreds of millions.

#SorryNotSorry

 

[Grootster]

Rotten Tomatoes, and critic reviews in general, are simply tools to help people know whether a movie is worth their time or not. It's silly to put complete blind faith in the Rotten Tomatoes to tell you whether or not to see a movie, but at the same time I don't get why some people are so against it. I don't think it's going to destroy the film industry any more than other people's opinions on movies since the beginning of cinema.

 

[Flint Marko]

Rotten Tomatoes is a grouped from of selected opinions.
Letting those people affect you in anyway is as big a joke as letting people here turn you off a film. I mean The sandlot is rotten on that thing. The sandlot.

It's when this group of people and their opinions affect greater things, such as the careers of producers and talent, sequels. The next star wars for the next generation that the discussion becomes relevant. Half of our great fillm makers today are who they are cause they grew up watching the celebrated films of their time. Especially the genre ones. It's relevant.

after i saw 1990tmnt get rotten i swore revenge.
Shame RT didn't bury that movie though, then we maybe wouldn't have gotten it's sequels.

...Are you serious?

 

[DarthSkywalker]

...Are you serious?

I really hope he is. Makes it so much better.

 

[Marvin]

I really hope he is. Makes it so much better.

makes what better?

...Are you serious?

...use your brain.

 

[dark_b]

Can i use this thread to point out something interesting? usually when a movie is out on SHH a thread will be created where the title is not ''critic reviews'' but ''rotten tomato score''. And from there on that thread will be used to talk about the % of the tomato score..... but almost almost never to discuss reviews and quote good reviews and point out interesting opinions on the movie.

look at the last superhero movie
http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=531199

You would think that since to fans the score is important they would take film critics serious enough to read reviews and discuss them. If they do they point out critics who they dont agree with their thumbs up/down .

 

[TheVileOne]

Fans just want that 90% or higher RT meter because it's an easy way to seek validation for their film that it's "good"

 

[StormC]

Tomato watches are fun. Good or bad. It's like a sport. But some people take it too seriously and single out every negative review and find some reason that the reviewer is an idiot that has no business watching the movie.

 

[Flint Marko]

makes what better?


...use your brain.

I've said for a while now that the loudest detractors of RT, for all their talk about art and critics and subjectivity, don't like it simply because it doesn't validate the specific films that they like. Thanks for the confirmation.

 

[Marvin]

I've said for a while now that the loudest detractors of RT, for all their talk about art and critics and subjectivity, don't like it simply because it doesn't validate the specific films that they like. Thanks for the confirmation.

And I said use your brain. I see now I should have just explained instead.

My clearly facetious response to his/her similar if not parroted assertion was meant to clearly contrast 'all my talk' of art and subjectivity and consequence, after making yet another point on the matter...I stop and say nah 'I simply swore revenge because my childhood movie is rotten'. Surely I didn't need add a sarcasm smiley given the timing, how outlandish the statement was in comparison to the rest of the content, and most importantly how it played into the strawman being illustrated about people that aren't gung ho about RT(as it exists today). But here we are.

I've said "for awhile now" that a few of you people just pick what you want out of any argument or comment you don't agree with and try and use it to force your long form agenda. This would be an example of that, for the record. If only it was under less facetious circumstances.

Forcing confirmation: the loudest trumpeters of RT are those that love what it's been saying about their favorite franchises, for all their talk.... looking at your own avy, I suppose that's that. The next post you make about liking a film they have praised someone should swoop in and say, 'thanks for the confirmation, the resolution stands..'
Fair warning, it's pretty tiresome.

 

[Flint Marko]

As it's been noted multiple times by me and others, clarity has never been your strong suit. Your posts are often full of run-on sentences and rabbit trails that never quite coalesce.

You've also spent most of your time here the past several years lambasting rotten tomatoes and film critics while praising movies that they don't look so favorably on.

So yes, those things combined had me fairly convinced that you were serious. I still think you just might be, given that your tireless crusade against RT and film critics isn't likely to end any time soon.

 

[Marvin]

As it's been noted multiple times by me and others, clarity has never been your strong suit. Your posts are often full of run-on sentences and rabbit trails that never quite coalesce.

You've also spent most of your time here the past several years lambasting rotten tomatoes and film critics while praising movies that they don't look so favorably on.

So yes, those things combined had me fairly convinced that you were serious. I still think you just might be, given that your tireless crusade against RT and film critics isn't likely to end any time soon.

On that matter, usually about now you divert from the point and turn to some form of ad hom like approach. I'd say it was your fall back but in debate your way seems to be character focused, even what you've added to this thread about RT detraction.

It's been brought up by you and those that are 'with' you in times just like these. This clear misunderstanding on your part has nothing to do with run on sentences and coalescence. It's you doing what you do, ignoring the points for character illustration. Simply pay more attention next time. Though if you don't you could just fall back on 'lack of clarity'.

I've spent several years here having my own opinion, both about movies they like and movies they don't. I know that seems odd but it happens sometimes. My lambasting of RT has been very consistent, even when they support a film I enjoy, though mainly when someone brings up 'what RT scored' as some sort of substantial point, good or bad. If you actually payed attention to that part maybe you wouldn't be so quick to see what you want see. And get serious, my 'crusade' is full of tiredness, oh right the paint bush. Anyhow I'm sure you still think i was serious, even after the explanation. It's just your way.

 

[metaphysician]

Yup

And that's why the discussion around RT can be so frustrating. People don't seem to get that a 99% doesn't mean it's a 9.9/10 movie necessarily. It just means 99% of people gave it somewhat of a passing grade

It scarcely makes a difference. Barring some really odd outliers ( mainly art films with only a scant number of reviews )? If 99% of reviewers give a movie "at least a passing" grade? It means its a *really awesome movie*, because only the highest of quality work can get that many critics to agree.

 

[jmc]

These critics aren't average joes though. Not really. To be an RT critic it takes more than just filling out a form.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_desk/critics/

These people see dozens if not hundreds of films a year. They come into the films as movie critics first. Not fans on an internet forum.

RT has power now because studios have churned out crap for so long and now movie tickets are too expensive to go see something on a "maybe." Millennials are much more critical as consumers, they're often reading online reviews of things before buying them. Studios need to accept this because it's only going to grow from here.

And frankly, it's for the better. Consumers should get as much information as they can prior to a films release about its quality and RT does a good enough job in providing such information. You are correct, the reason studios hate RT is because they can no longer control the message. As far as I'm concerned it's the studios problem if they make a **** film not RT. You want a good response? Make a good film.

 

[scifiwolf]

I was just checking the site since the Atomic Blonde reviews are dropping. Holy cow, there's a lot of good stuff (almost all certified fresh, mostly in the 90s) in the top 10 at the box office. I think July this year is really showcasing the point a lot have been making, that good movies get their just desserts.

 

[Flint Marko]

The first time I remember seeing anyone treat RT as anything more than what it is (a review aggregator) was the widespread complaining started a few years back with "teh bias against DC". Still to this day the main people I see regularly taking RT for more than what it is (again, a simple review aggregator) are the ones demonizing it for not validating what they like.

 

[BatLobster]

To be honest, I do sometimes miss the days of going into a film with less preconceptions. Just reading the local paper review was enough. Or just picking up a movie off the shelf at Blockbuster based on its title and poster, reading the back of the box, and renting it if the plot sounded interesting to me. Part of it was just being younger of course, but I think there was something to be said for that aspect of just going into a movie with less baggage. Versus being well aware of that 74% tomatometer going in and your mind automatically looking for the flaws/reasons it's not higher. Or being aware of a really high score and feeling let down when it fails to live up to your expectations. It is what it is though, it's 2017 and the world isn't the same place it was in 1997. And yes, movie ticket prices are too high for audiences to simply throw caution to the wind and take more chances on movies. RT being a force in the industry is a reality that the studios and we the audience simply have to live with for the time being.