Joker "The Joker" in development with Todd Phillips and Martin Scorsese attached? - Part 2

[Boom]

One more screening this weekend, then things go quiet for a couple of weeks before NYFF.

 

[TheSmoothKnight]

Another fresh review added. That’s five in a row.

 

[Orb]

There still a lot of mainstream critics left so you never know

 

[TheScarecrow]

It has technically met the requirements to be “Certified Fresh” - more than 80 reviews and more than 75% on Tomatometer.

 

[Kane52630]

@Boom

 

[Boom]

@Boom

"Joaquin Phoenix sits on bus" is the new "Sean Bean dies."

 

[Orb]

Joaquin Phoenix's next most daring, challenging role should be playing a well-adjusted, normal man with a happy life that just goes about his day.

 

[Schlosser85]

Joaquin Phoenix's next most daring, challenging role should be playing a well-adjusted, normal man with a happy life that just goes about his day.

He tried to play this normal all-American baseball-playing jock type in Signs and it didn't feel natural.

 

[dhandler01]

Wait....what's going on? Why is everyone upset? I just checked the RT score, and its at 78%. That's not a bad score, at all.

Am I missing something? What happened here?

No you seem pretty well caught up

 

[jmc]

so, I was under the impression that the reviewers are ultimately the ones who decide whether to give rotten or fresh scores, but apparently some review on twitter said the RT decided for him. He gave a Marvel movie a 3/5 and was given a fresh, yet the same score for Joker was given rotten.

 

[Orb]

so, I was under the impression that the reviewers are ultimately the ones who decide with to give rotten or fresh scores, but apparently some review on twitter said the RT decided for him. He gave a Marvel movie a 3/5 and was given a fresh, yet the same score for Joker was given rotten.

Sometimes I believe critics don't specify rotten or fresh so RT reads the review and determines from the tone of their review. Or something like that.

 

[thangaran]

so, I was under the impression that the reviewers are ultimately the ones who decide with to give rotten or fresh scores, but apparently some review on twitter said the RT decided for him. He gave a Marvel movie a 3/5 and was given a fresh, yet the same score for Joker was given rotten.

Seems like its more RT bias against DC films again.

 

[hellblazer103]

Wait....what's going on? Why is everyone upset? I just checked the RT score, and its at 78%. That's not a bad score, at all.

Am I missing something? What happened here?

Cause it keeps getting lower. It was at like 88 percent in the beginning. They're actively trying to tarnish the movie's name now

 

[jmc]

Sometimes I believe critics don't specify rotten or fresh so RT reads the review and determines from the tone of their review. Or something like that.

That what's I've assumed as well, but the question then becomes then how many of the critics are actually submitting their fresh or rotten scores. Like, if only a few of them are submitting those scores, then the entire RT system is completely arbitrary and scores are being determined by at best guess work.

 

[Orb]

Well the Top critics average score is still screwed up and haven't been fixed yet so

 

[jmc]

I assumed for the longest time that in order to be a critic on RT you had to submit a fresh or rotten score. I appear to have been 100% wrong in how that site operates.

 

[Hollis Mason]

Well the Top critics average score is still screwed up and haven't been fixed yet so

I don't know why they don't fix it.

 

[TMP98]

so, I was under the impression that the reviewers are ultimately the ones who decide whether to give rotten or fresh scores, but apparently some review on twitter said the RT decided for him. He gave a Marvel movie a 3/5 and was given a fresh, yet the same score for Joker was given rotten.

Yeah that's what I said a while ago, a 3/5 should be a fresh but sometimes RT marks it as a rotten

 

[JimThompson]

Maybe this will get more people to realize RT is a pretty worthless site.

 

[jmc]

I've long suggested the site needs a middle ground rating. Fresh, Rotten and Stale. Stale sitting between the 45-65% range, that would solve situations where reviewers give middling scores, it will also give a fairer reflection of what the quality of the film is like. It wouldn't solve the problem if critics aren't giving the Fresh or Rotten score themselves, but it will mean any middle of the road scores that aren't submitted can simple go into the 'Stale' section by default. That means a 3/5 rating would sit comfortably in the middle rating and not be skewed one way or another.

 

[TMP98]

I've long suggested the site needs a middle ground rating. Fresh, Rotten and Stale. Stale sitting between the 45-65% range, that would solve situations where reviewers give middling scores, it will also give a fairer reflection of what the quality of the film is like. It wouldn't solve the problem if critics aren't giving the Fresh or Rotten score themselves, but it will mean any middle of the road scores that aren't submitted can simple go into the 'Stale' section by default. That means a 3/5 rating would sit comfortably in the middle rating and not be skewed one way or another.

That's Metacritic's category system

 

[FeedOnATreeFrog]

Maybe this will get more people to realize RT is a pretty worthless site.

The positive/negative ratio really is pretty meaningless.

Can you imagine if any other rating system was like that. Like at the Olympics? lol. It's madness.

 

[jmc]

That's Metacritic's category system

And it's a superior one.

 

[TheGuy]

And it's a superior one.

Preach.

RT average rating and Metacritic score >>>>> RT score

 

[Hollis Mason]

Both of them are trash imo. FilmAffinity is my fav one.