The Official Suicide Squad Rotten Tomatoes Thread - Part 1

[idiot09]

I remember many people on this very forum saying they wouldnt watch SS after the negative reviews started coming out.

 

[BlZARRO]

Oh good more of your personal experience stories. The type of argument you just told Flint Marko is invalid. Aren't you just precious.

Wrong. He said people will see the movie they wanna see regardless the reviews. I simply told him that maybe in his personal bubble that happens. I never claimed that people won't watch a movie because of the reviews. I claimed some people won't. The difference between me and him(and you) is that i'm not denying the existence of a significant amount of people who don't give a damn about critics. I'm simply acknowledging the existence of people who do care. Those people exist. And if they exist, that's money the studio will never see. Is it a lot of money? I don't know. You're the one claiming it's not, without providing any significant evidence of what you're saying. You just ask for it and you give nothing in return.

You should tattoo this on your forehead.

Maybe i should start with yours. You need an update.

Exactly what I have been saying. The reviews don't scare off the audiences. That's why the decline doesn't happen until the second week after most people have seen it and have no desire to go back.

Can you provide me with any evidence that the money that's made during the second week is mostly generated by returning viewers and not new viewers? Why would you think there aren't people who only watch the movie in the second or third week?

You see, you assume a lot of nonsense. That's fine. You can assume i ***** thunders for breakfast. You can assume Batman is eating dog food right now in your kitchen. You can assume you are my son. The problem is when you start confusing personal beliefs with facts.

Now, all that article shows is that there is a correlation between reviews and BO numbers. That's all that matters. Everything else is pure baseless speculation by you.

Let me remind you of something: I never told you that everybody cares about critics. When you look at a movie like BvS, you know a lot of people will watch it REGARDLESS. The fans, the people who were super excited by the trailers. Those people will try to see the movie as soon as possible, no matter what. Most people i see waiting for the second or third week are less enthusiastic viewers. They might be curious about the movie, but they're not big fans or dying to watch it. Those are the people who will probably be highly susceptible to opinions and reviews, because they don't need to spend money on the movie unless they feel it's really worth it. They have other options.

 

[The Joker]

Wrong. He said people will see the movie they wanna see regardless the reviews. I simply told him that maybe in his personal bubble that happens. I never claimed that people won't watch a movie because of the reviews. I claimed some people won't. The difference between me and him(and you) is that i'm denying the existence of a significant amount of people who don't give a damn about critics. I'm simply acknowledging the existence of people who do care. Those people exist. And if they exist, that's money the studio will never see. Is it a lot of money? I don't know. You're the one claiming it's not, without providing any significant evidence of what you're saying. You just ask for it and you give nothing in return.

That's besides the point. You criticized him for saying in his personal bubble that may happen, when you were relaying here what happens in your personal bubble to make your point. He never claimed what happens in his personal bubble is universal. You keep saying these type of people exist. Nobody said they don't. Whether they make up any kind of significant consensus, that you have yet to prove.

Maybe i should start with yours. You need an update.

I do. My Skype needs an update, and I think Adobe does, too

Can you provide me with any evidence that the money that's made during the second week is mostly generated by returning viewers and not new viewers? Why would you think there aren't people who only watch the movie in the second or third week?

Oh I don't deny there are people who will see a movie in a second week, but for a major anticipated blockbuster, most will be getting their bums to that theater some time in that first week. They don't give a flying fig what critics think that's why they are there giving the movie a big opening week, just like BvS and SS got.

Its the second week that is always the test to see if a movie has sustained audience liking and interest. That's why the second week drop is always so telling because you know if a movie has the quality to bring the audience back again and again.

You see, you assume a lot of nonsense. That's fine. You can assume i ***** thunders for breakfast. You can assume Batman is eating dog food right now in your kitchen. You can assume you are my son. The problem is when you start confusing personal beliefs with facts.

[YT]9agLJLlySLs[/YT]

Now, all that article shows is that there is a correlation between reviews and BO numbers. That's all that matters. Everything else is pure baseless speculation by you.

All that article shows is there is a correlation in the second week which I have been saying to you umpteen times about. How critics don't affect audiences which is why the first week is always so big in spite of the bad reviews hanging over the movie like a dark cloud. People will go and see it because they want to.

Here is a proper in depth diverse analysis for you which covers Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, as well as audience scores on IMDb. It analyses each one in detail, there's a even a video to accompany it to show you how it was done, and the results are conclusive; reviews and ratings have no relationship to box office success;

http://minimaxir.com/2016/01/movie-revenue-ratings/

Let me remind you of something: I never told you that everybody cares about critics. When you look at a movie like BvS, you know a lot of people will watch it REGARDLESS. The fans, the people who were super excited by the trailers. Those people will try to see the movie as soon as possible, no matter what. Most people i see waiting for the second or third week are less enthusiastic viewers. They might be curious about the movie, but they're not big fans or dying to watch it. Those are the people who will probably be highly susceptible to opinions and reviews, because they don't need to spend money on the movie unless the feel it's really worth it. They have other options.

I know you didn't tell me that. I never said you did. I am arguing that they have any sort of significant impact. I don't believe they do. I do believe they do impact some people, of course they do. But not enough to make up any kind of significant consensus. I think most people go and see a movie if they want to see it and make up their own minds.

 

[idiot09]

I remember very vividly when the first batch of reviews came in so many guys here(I remember jmc was one of them ) made sure to let everyone know that they wouldnt watch the movie because of the bad reviews.About how "they dont want to waste their money".There was even a discussion sparked about how ticket prices in Australia are very high after that.Another poster said his dad wouldnt watch SS because of the bad reviews on flickster.

Its madness to assume people dont get turned off to see the movies due to the bad reviews.Maybe not the comic book fans like us,but the general audience sure do.

 

[idiot09]

I'll quote some people from the RT thread :

Rotten Tomatoes does matter. It made me decide not to see this movie in theaters. Of course the movie could be great imo, but more likely it wont be worth of the ticket. I can use that money somewhere else. I'll watch the movie someday on Netflix or something.

Absolutely. I was extremely hyped for this film. But now I'm not going to see it at the cinema. I had plans to go see it this weekend too. Only one of my friends is now going to see it at the flicks and that's only because he pre booked his tickets.

I think I'm going to do the same. I'm not sure I can be bothered watching this any longer.

Exactly right ive actually changed my mind i wont be seing this in theater ill wait till theres a good copy online or just wait till it shows up on cable or what not. Im sure im not the only one either these ratings do influence especially with ticket prices as high as they have ever been.

Anecdotal but my Dad prefers to wait for stuff to come on demand now days. He only made an exception for Force Awakens

Source : http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=511525&page=39

 

[The Joker]

I'll quote some people from the RT thread :

Source : http://forums.superherohype.com/showthread.php?t=511525&page=39

Five quotes, and two of them are invalid. The poster named Sick Boy reneged on it because he later went and posted his opinion on the Joker; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34086301&postcount=638

And the bottom one is just a comment about someone's dad's movie viewing habits. So out of a thread with where over 220 people contributed, you found 3 who said they won't go see it because of the reviews. That's like 1% of the thread.

 

[BlZARRO]

That's besides the point. You criticized him for saying in his personal bubble that may happen, when you were relaying here what happens in your personal bubble to make your point. He never claimed what happens in his personal bubble is universal. You keep saying these type of people exist. Nobody said they don't. Whether they make up any kind of significant consensus, that you have yet to prove.

No. My whole argument was based on personal experience mixed with the knowledge i have regarding the way society reacts to the media, plus the opinions and experiences of other people i've encountered around the web, since i've seen enough people in many sites giving critics more relevance than they deserve and claiming they wouldn't watch a movie because of certain reviews. It's more than enough for me to accept that there are people like this. It's not a simple "i believe this happens this way everywhere because it happened to me". Flint Marko was talking in absolutes. PEOPLE WILL SEE WHAT THEY WANNA SEE REGARDLESS. He is not acknowledging those who won't.

Oh I don't deny there are people who will see a movie in a second week, but for a major anticipated blockbuster, most will be getting their bums to that theater some time in that first week. They don't give a flying fig what critics think that's why they are there giving the movie a big opening week, just like BvS and SS got.

Its the second week that is always the test to see if a movie has sustained audience liking and interest. That's why the second week drop is always so telling because you know if a movie has the quality to bring the audience back again and again.

That's your personal assumption. There's nothing that indicates that there isn't a lot of people who don't care enough about the movie to watch it on the first week. Not everyone watches a movie for the same reason or with the same level of excitement. You might watch it because you loved the trailers and love this type of movie. You might watch it because you're a Batman fan. You might watch it because you go on a date and you like cinema in general so you choose a movie to watch. Some people don't care enough about Batman to go watch the movie regardless of the reviews.

It doesn't really matter what you think. You asked me to provide any sort of evidence of a correlation between critics and BO and that's what i did. You can also pay attention to people in this very forum and you will find plenty claiming they do care about critics. Like i said, just in the last hour i found 2 or 3 without even looking.

The numbers are there for you to see it. You can interpret them however you like, but the correlation is there.

All that article shows is there is a correlation in the second week which I have been saying to you umpteen times about. How critics don't affect audiences which is why the first week is always so big in spite of the bad reviews hanging over the movie like a dark cloud. People will go and see it because they want to.

Here is a proper in depth diverse analysis for you which covers Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic, as well as audience scores on IMDb. It analyses each one in detail, there's a even a video to accompany it to show you how it was done, and the results are conclusive; reviews and ratings have no relationship to box office success

Movies with a Metascore between 91 and 100 made an average of $59.1 million over their opening weekend, while those with a Metascore of 19 or lower averaged an opening weekend gross of just $14 million. The differences grow even more pronounced over the long run: Those in the top decile dropped an average of 37.7 percent in their second weekend, while those in the lowest dropped by 52.5 percent.

Better ranked movies make on average more money in the opening weekend and they also decline less over the second weekend. So they make more money in every circumstance. Overall, they make more money. So, what's your problem?

I know you didn't tell me that. I never said you did. I am arguing that they have any sort of significant impact. I don't believe they do. I do believe they do impact some people, of course they do. But not enough to make up any kind of significant consensus. I think most people go and see a movie if they want to see it and make up their own minds.

Oh, your beliefs...i thought you were the Evidence Man.

 

[idiot09]

Five quotes, and two of them are invalid. The poster named Sick Boy reneged on it because he later went and posted his opinion on the Joker; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34086301&postcount=638

And the bottom one is just a comment about someone's dad's movie viewing habits. So out of a thread with where over 220 people contributed, you found 3 who said they won't go see it because of the reviews. That's like 1% of the thread.

I just skimmed couple of pages.I dont have the time to go over 40 pages to see who has written he wont.Are you really going to argue that people dont listen to reviews to decide when to go watch a movie?If not,you are deluding yourself.Am I saying the vast majority does that?No.But lots of people do.Mainly the GA who didnt follow the movie like us,dont have interest in the characters like us.They see a movie with 27% on RT,scathing reviews against it...they will probably decide not to go watch it,waste 3+ hrs of their time and money.If you dont think any of that is reasonable or does not happen,your head is firmly inside the sand.And I WAS one of them people who were encouraging people to go see the movie without paying attention to the reviews.So if I can accept it...

 

[BlZARRO]

Five quotes, and two of them are invalid. The poster named Sick Boy reneged on it because he later went and posted his opinion on the Joker; http://forums.superherohype.com/showpost.php?p=34086301&postcount=638

And the bottom one is just a comment about someone's dad's movie viewing habits. So out of a thread with where over 220 people contributed, you found 3 who said they won't go see it because of the reviews. That's like 1% of the thread.

But you can find more posts of people confessing they don't see certain movies if they have a bad score

I use it on movies that I have no hype for prior or movies that I am iffy about. Like Black Swan for example. I would never have watched that movie if it was 20% on RT.

Why do you keep denying it? How is it such a small percentage if we can easily find examples pretty much everywhere?

 

[The Joker]

No. My whole argument was based on personal experience mixed with the knowledge i have regarding the way society reacts to the media, plus the opinions and experiences of other people i've encountered around the web, since i've seen enough people in many sites giving critics more relevance than they deserve and claiming they wouldn't watch a movie because of certain reviews. It's more than enough for me to accept that there are people like this. It's not a simple "i believe this happens this way everywhere because it happened to me". Flint Marko was talking in absolutes. PEOPLE WILL SEE WHAT THEY WANNA SEE REGARDLESS. He is not acknowledging those who won't.

That's still personal experience. 'I've seen this and encountered that on websites'. You're doing nothing but repeating the same old tired song of what you heard and what you saw.

That's your personal assumption. There's nothing that indicates that there isn't a lot of people who don't care enough about the movie to watch it on the first week. Not everyone watches a movie for the same reason or with the same level of excitement. You might watch it because you loved the trailers and love this type of movie. You might watch it because you're a Batman fan. You might watch it because you go on a date and you like cinema in general so you choose a movie to watch. Some people don't care enough about Batman to go watch the movie regardless of the reviews.

Didn't I just say I know not everyone watches a movie in its first week? Yes, I believe so. I can see the words above. I said for a highly anticipated blockbuster, like these movies, most people will go and see it in its first week, and I am including weekend as part of first week. Again this is why the second week is always the clincher on the sustaining power of a movie. If reviews were a significant factor influencing people, the opening week would take a big hit and not be as massive. But the fact the opening weeks for both movies were huge, even breaking records of movies that got great reviews, shows people don't give a toss about bad reviews. Its the second week where you see if the movie has the power to pull back the audiences again and again.

It doesn't really matter what you think.

Of course not. That's why you've spent all this time here discussing what I think.

You asked me to provide any sort of evidence of a correlation between critics and BO and that's what i did. You can also pay attention to people in this very forum and you will find plenty claiming they do care about critics. Like i said, just in the last hour i found 2 or 3 without even looking.

No you didn't. You found two links, one which stated flat out there's no evidence to link box office and reviews, and another which showed the second week is always the deciding factor on how movies perform. Two things I have been saying to you again and again.

The numbers are there for you to see it. You can interpret them however you like, but the correlation is there.

Of course it is. And Batman is eating dog food in my kitchen, too

Movies with a Metascore between 91 and 100 made an average of $59.1 million over their opening weekend, while those with a Metascore of 19 or lower averaged an opening weekend gross of just $14 million. The differences grow even more pronounced over the long run: Those in the top decile dropped an average of 37.7 percent in their second weekend, while those in the lowest dropped by 52.5 percent.

Better ranked movies make on average more money in the opening weekend and they also decline less over the second weekend. So they make more money in every circumstance. Overall, they make more money. So, what's your problem?

What do you mean what's my problem? How is this a problem? Naturally better movies generally make more money overall in the first and second week because they don't suffer the drop in the second week.

Where is the problem here?

Oh, your beliefs...i thought you were the Evidence Man.

I am. I don't base them on nothing like yourself. That's why I believe them.

 

[The Joker]

I just skimmed couple of pages.I dont have the time to go over 40 pages to see who has written he wont.Are you really going to argue that people dont listen to reviews to decide when to go watch a movie?

Go read the last few pages. That is exactly what I am arguing. No significant consensus does it. Not nobody ever. And several pages later still waiting for proof of otherwise.

But you can find more posts of people confessing they don't see certain movies if they have a bad score

Why do you keep denying it? How is it such a small percentage if we can easily find examples pretty much everywhere?

You haven't found examples everywhere. You found one example. The other poster found 3. Out of a thread with hundreds of people posting.

Maybe math isn't your strongest subject, but that doesn't come close to showing any kind of significant consensus.

 

[Jekecy]

Both these sides are sort of losing focus on the lack of constant which is dictating people's actions in the first place; personal interest. I'm sure you'd find widely contrasting studies between the performance of a blockbuster vs. critics, and that of an indie or even just a modestly promoted release. I'm mostly convinced RT is used as a back-up metric anyway, to push or gravitate based on the current individual interest at the time.

In the case of BvS, I think absolutely the biggest detriment to its overall box office was poor WOM. In a month of dead weight and gearing up towards full-on blockbuster season, it's hard not to consider (especially after that gargantuan opening). But for better or for worse critical reviews are an important factor nowadays too. Not just in movies, but media consumption in general. With so many options out there today, it's simply the most accessible metric to determine a product's worth.

I'm an avid moviegoer and will go almost every week out to the theater. But even I'll check out critical reviews because I don't feel my interest derived from sole marketing alone is enough of a contributor to pay out of pocket and devote my time. For CBMs and most blockbusters, I'll shell out no matter what. The rest, I'll carefully choose. I imagine people with not such a vested interest in the theater experience will be even pickier.

The question is just how much of the potential audience isn't caught up in the marketing blitz or at least not completely sold. That's when external factors come into play. And certainly the more definitive a critical score is (good or bad) is going to affect people's choices more so than the middle ground. The problem is that audience number will always be in flux. Not just by the type of movie it is, but the type of story being told (a quasi-existential Batman/Superman story versus a no-holds-barred action epic).

 

[BlZARRO]

Go read the last few pages. That is exactly what I am arguing. No significant consensus does it. Not nobody ever. And several pages later still waiting for proof of otherwise.



You haven't found examples everywhere. You found one example. The other poster found 3. Out of a thread with hundreds of people posting.

Maybe math isn't your strongest subject, but that doesn't come close to showing any kind of significant consensus.

Dude, you just had another guy in this thread saying he also checks RT out because he doesn't feel like paying for ****** movies. In your own thread that you just created you have another guy saying he pays attention to critics. How many quotes of people confessing it do you need in order to ACCEPT the fact that a substantial percentage of moviegoers DO CARE about what critics say from time to time? How many quotes? 100? 1000? Maybe if i give you 10000 quotes you will still say "well, what's 10000 in billions of people. That means nothing". You just don't wanna accept the simple fact that it's not unusual at all for someone to pay attention to reviews before paying money to watch certain movies. You just don't wanna accept it because you can't stand being wrong. You really wanna believe that maybe in 10 000 people 1 cares about criticis. It's totally irrelevant.

 

[BlZARRO]

That's still personal experience. 'I've seen this and encountered that on websites'. You're doing nothing but repeating the same old tired song of what you heard and what you saw.



Didn't I just say I know not everyone watches a movie in its first week? Yes, I believe so. I can see the words above. I said for a highly anticipated blockbuster, like these movies, most people will go and see it in its first week, and I am including weekend as part of first week. Again this is why the second week is always the clincher on the sustaining power of a movie. If reviews were a significant factor influencing people, the opening week would take a big hit and not be as massive. But the fact the opening weeks for both movies were huge, even breaking records of movies that got great reviews, shows people don't give a toss about bad reviews. Its the second week where you see if the movie has the power to pull back the audiences again and again.



Of course not. That's why you've spent all this time here discussing what I think.



No you didn't. You found two links, one which stated flat out there's no evidence to link box office and reviews, and another which showed the second week is always the deciding factor on how movies perform. Two things I have been saying to you again and again.



Of course it is. And Batman is eating dog food in my kitchen, too



What do you means what's my problem? How is this a problem? Naturally better movies generally make more money overall in the first and second week because they don't suffer the drop in the second week.

Where is the problem here?



I am. I don't base them on nothing like yourself. That's why I believe them.

Dude, you wanted some sort of evidence that there's a correlation between well reviewed films and good BO and i just gave it to you. On top of that, several people in this very forum during the last couple hours have confessed they do care about critics. Why is it so difficult for you to accept this? Critics do have an impact. Some people do care about what critics say. You have absolutely no way to disprove that.

 

[The Joker]

Dude, you just had another guy in this thread saying he also checks RT out because he doesn't feel like paying for ****** movies. In your own thread that you just created you have another guy saying he pays attention to critics. How many quotes of people confessing it do you need in order to ACCEPT the fact that a substantial percentage of moviegoers DO CARE about what critics say from time to time? How many quotes? 100? 1000? Maybe if i give you 10000 quotes you will still say "well, what's 10000 in billions of people. That means nothing". You just don't wanna accept the simple fact that it's not unusual at all for someone to pay attention to reviews before paying money to watch certain movies. You just don't wanna accept it because you can't stand being wrong. You really wanna believe that maybe in 10 000 people 1 cares about criticis. It's totally irrelevant.

Wow, two whole people. That's it. I'm convinced. I'll ignore the three other people in the thread who said no, even though the thread is barely an hour old, because that one person is more compelling evidence than anything else. Can't argue with a number like that.

I think you missed your calling as a statistician. Go root through the Hype archives. I'm sure you can find at least a handful more from a few years ago.

Dude, you wanted some sort of evidence that there's a correlation between well reviewed films and good BO and i just gave it to you. On top of that, several people in this very forum during the last couple hours have confessed they do care about critics. Why is it so difficult for you to accept this? Critics do have an impact. Some people do care about what critics say. You have absolutely no way to disprove that.

I have this weird habit of not accepting things that aren't true, or have not been proven especially in the face of contradictory evidence. Its a life long habit I just cant seem to shake. Its bizarro

 

[BlZARRO]

Wow, two whole people. That's it. I'm convinced. I'll ignore the three other people in the thread who said no, even though the thread is barely an hour old, because that one person is more compelling evidence than anything else. Can't argue with a number like that.

I think you missed your calling as a statistician.

How many people do you need to tell you straight up that they care about what critics say?

If it's between the high-50s and mid-70s, it I think it is so split, I won't be dissuaded or encouraged. If it is in the high '70s or up, it encourages me to see the movie if I was on the fence or already wanted to see it. If it is in the 40s or lower--though there are exceptions where I disagree with critic consensus, most of the time they're dead-right at those lows--I skip seeing it in theaters if at all.

I like to head there to check out reviews. I also use it to sway my wife into seeing movies she’s not all that interested in. If I mention that it’s got a high rating on Rottentomatoes, she’ll raise an eyebrow. OR if she wants to see a movie I’m not interested in, I’ll use a low rating (if the movie has one) to suggest we wait for DVD.

I use RT to look the reviews and if it has a good RT score, then I'll pay for it. If not, I'll either won't watch or wait until it hits cable or netflix. I don't want to waste money on a film that may suck. There are exceptions though.

Same here. For example after the last two disasters I wasn't going to watch First class. But with the outpouring of good reviews I might change my mind.

I listen to Rotten Tomatoes. On the whole, I agree with the tomatoemeter
Worst case scenario, I follow the tomatoemeter and don't see a movie that has a low rating in theaters. But then I see it at home and end up liking it and disagreeing with the RT score. All that happened was that I didn't see the movie in theaters. That's it.

I think people take it too seriously

Same here.

It pretty much makes me decide if I'm willing to spend my money on a potentially ****** movie. And who the hell wants that? Like chas, I do it on movies I'm iffy about.

RT is a valuable source of information. I want my money's worth when I go see a film, generally any film south of 60% won't get my money unless I'm really bored and there's nothing else playing.

I like RT a lot and use it as a reference quite a bit.

Usually when a film is rated 30-40% or lower or 80% or higher, the critics are spot on and I go see it. It's when the tomato-meter gets around the 50-70% range that it gets a bit iffy because that means the critics are split and I'll probably have to see it for myself.

I look at different reviews and see if they point to something that's going to be a deal breaker for me. Not every film I see has to be perfect. Sometimes I just want to be entertained. I think it's worth checking out reviews , trailers , and clips before deciding but to base your decision purely on a RT score isn't the best way to go about it.

I'm rather the guilty one when it comes to OCD behavior with rotten tomatoes...

..for the past week i checked the site like over 10 times a day to see any changes to the X-men first class meter...

Pretty much this, although 40s I usually include in the middle category and 30s and below are the skips. There are rare exceptions, but usually that is pretty accurate.

I don't care for Metacritic. They go with a simple average, which I don't find nearly as informative as a simple 'yes or no' recommendation. Also, the number of reviews posted isn't near what you get at Rotten Tomatoes and not enough to get a proper consensus in my opinion. I disagree with Rotten Tomatoes rarely (for films that I was already interested in, if I hate the genre I won't see it no matter what the critics say), but I disagree with Metacritic all the time.

I like Rotten Tomatoes and use it often. The fact that it collects together a high number of critics' reviews and presents them as an average of passes and failures, makes it quite useful to refer to as a guide for how things are going to play out. I usually find that my own ratings are well reflected against the RT results, with only a few exceptions.

I use Rotten Tomatoes frequently, but I think that Disney animated movies and biographical movies based on celebrities and politicians get way to high of a rating every single time. There seems to be some sort of bias towards favoring these ones for some reason. But otherwise I always find it to be fairly reliable too.

I like rotten tomatoes, when Big movies come out its fun to watch throughout the week as it drops or goes up.

Like some others have said if its a movie im dying too see then im stumbering enough no matter what they say. Now with academy award movies or smaller unknown ones like taken ill ussually let the rating decide if im going to shell out the cash. I dont care what that site says bad boys 2 was great.

I always go there for movies I am iffy on. Transformers 3 for example, looks mediocre to me. I'm not very excited for it and if it has a 20% on RT like the second movie, there's no way in hell I'd pay to see it. Only way I'll see Transformers 3 is if it has a fresh score simply because I'm not really looking forward to it in the first place. But a fresh score would at least ease my feelings of going into an awful movie.

I think RT is great. I use it when I'm on the fence about seeing a movie. I don't use it for all the movies (I'll see the superhero movies whether they have good or bad reviews).

It depends on the movie ...at least for me.
I'll watch the movies that i've been following regardless of the ratings , however i'll use the RT meter for flicks which i don't follow but seem interesting.


Although i'll have to admit that lately i've been upgrading the ratings of several movie that i hated and had bad reviews based on the RT meter.
THey're showing TF ROTF , IM2 and CLash of the TItans on cable here in holland and while i was disasppointed with them when i saw the movie in cinemas , i found to to be enjoyable now.

If all the critics say it's bad, it usually is.

So, what are you gonna say now?

"Oh, just 20 quotes. That's nothing"

What amount of quotes would satisfy you? Just look at the amount of regular posters that straight up admit they care and make decisions based on RT. Why is it so hard for you to accept the fact that critical reception can dissuade people from watching a movie, therefor affecting the BO numbers? Why is it so difficult for you to wake up from denyal?

Listen, this was a quick search. I could find a lot more people JUST HERE. I can easily find people who care about RT here. I can easily find people who care about RT in my personal circle. I can easily find people who care about RT on every movie forum/site. What's so baseless about my views? I think i'm simply stating something pretty obvious: A percentage of people care. And since they're not hard to find, that percentage must not be that small. If it isn't that small, maybe it has some significant impact.

 

[The Joker]

So, what are you gonna say now?

"Oh, just 20 quotes. That's nothing"

Bingo. 20 quotes out of how many users do we have here?

What amount of quotes would satisfy you? Just look at the amount of regular posters that straight up admit they care and make decisions based on RT. Why is it so hard for you to accept the fact that critical reception can dissuade people from watching a movie, therefor affecting the BO numbers? Why is it so difficult for you to wake up from denyal?

From this forum? At least triple digits with the number of people that post here. Over half of them that you quoted are not regular posters btw. Not surprising considering the age of the thread you had to go back and find to dig them up.

I don't accept something that isn't true. You had to go rooting through an RT thread from what 5 years ago to find those quotes.

Listen, this was a quick search. I could find a lot more people JUST HERE. I can easily find people who care about RT here. I can easily find people who care about RT in my personal circle. I can easily find people who care about RT on every movie forum/site. What's so baseless about my views? I think i'm simply stating something pretty obvious: A percentage of people care. And since they're not hard to find, that percentage must not be that small. If it isn't that small, maybe it has some significant impact.

I can easily find people who hate the taste of chocolate, too, but that doesn't mean its not one of the most beloved and popular foods in the world. You rooting up a handful of quotes from a thread 5 years ago doesn't prove a single thing. Yes you found a percentage of people who care. A very small minority one.

 

[BlZARRO]

Bingo. 20 quotes out of how many users do we have here?



From this forum? At least triple digits with the number of people that post here. Over half of them that you quoted are not regular posters btw. Not surprising considering the age of the thread you had to go back and find to dig them up.

I don't accept something that isn't true. You had to go rooting through an RT thread from what 5 years ago to find those quotes.



I can easily find people who hate the taste of chocolate, too, but that doesn't mean its not one of the most beloved and popular foods in the world. You rooting up a handful of quotes from a thread 5 years ago doesn't prove a single thing. Yes you found a percentage of people who care. A very small minority one.

Loooooooooooooooooooooool!

Denyal...

You see, i bet chocolate companies would make a lot more money if all those chocolate haters started buying chocolate. And i know quite a few people who don't particularly love chocolate. It's not that rare.

Anyway...

I took those quotes from a RT thread. At least 50%(maybe even more) of the people who posted admited they care about RT.

But listen, the number doesn't even need to be that high. Even if it's just the minority. Even if only 10% of the moviegoers care about critics, that's still a lot of money.

If the number were as low as you suggested, in a forum like this, which is not THAT BIG(you see a lot of the same people posting), it would be much more difficult to find people who care about RT. If it was 0.5% i wouldn't be able to present you 20 quotes in 15 minutes, just from one small topic. If i can find that many quotes that easily in a forum like this, you better bet that the number is way higher than what you believe.

Your thread is 60/40. So close. Let's see if in the end the number of people who care is really 1% or something like that. I have the feeling it's going to be way higher.

 

[The Joker]

I should have actually read the comments you posted, too before I replied as I suspect you didn't read them all carefully;

'I like to head there to check out reviews. I also use it to sway my wife into seeing movies she’s not all that interested in. If I mention that it’s got a high rating on Rottentomatoes, she’ll raise an eyebrow. OR if she wants to see a movie I’m not interested in, I’ll use a low rating (if the movie has one) to suggest we wait for DVD.'

This guy just said he uses it to sway his wife. He never said he bases his movie viewing decisions on it.

Usually when a film is rated 30-40% or lower or 80% or higher, the critics are spot on and I go see it. It's when the tomato-meter gets around the 50-70% range that it gets a bit iffy because that means the critics are split and I'll probably have to see it for myself.

This guy doesn't say anywhere that he lets RT decide what movies he'll see.

I'm rather the guilty one when it comes to OCD behavior with rotten tomatoes...

..for the past week i checked the site like over 10 times a day to see any changes to the X-men first class meter

This guy just said he spent the week watching First Class' rating. No mention of letting RT decide if he goes to watch movies or not.

I like Rotten Tomatoes and use it often. The fact that it collects together a high number of critics' reviews and presents them as an average of passes and failures, makes it quite useful to refer to as a guide for how things are going to play out. I usually find that my own ratings are well reflected against the RT results, with only a few exceptions.

This guy simply says he likes it a lot and how the reviews are graded, and often their grades match his.

I use Rotten Tomatoes frequently, but I think that Disney animated movies and biographical movies based on celebrities and politicians get way to high of a rating every single time. There seems to be some sort of bias towards favoring these ones for some reason. But otherwise I always find it to be fairly reliable too.

Another one that said he finds it a great site, but nowhere does he mention he uses it to decide if he'll watch a movie or not.

So your 20 just went down to 15. Read more carefully next time.

 

[The Joker]

Loooooooooooooooooooooool!

Denyal...

You can't even spell denial

You see, i bet chocolate companies would make a lot more money if all those chocolate haters started buying chocolate. And i know quite a few people who don't particularly love chocolate. It's not that rare.

Sure they would. You always hear of chocolate companies struggling to sell their product.

Anyway...

I took those quotes from a RT thread. At least 50%(maybe even more) of the people who posted admited they care about RT.

Not even close. 50 people posted in that old thread, and 15 of them said they use it to sway them on certain movies.

But listen, the number doesn't even need to be that high. Even if it's just the minority. Even if only 10% of the moviegoers care about critics, that's still a lot of money.

You can't find a source that shows 10%. You can't find anything substantial. You have to go back 5 years on this forum alone just to find a small handful of comments for goodness sake.

How many more old threads will you spend time and energy rooting through. I can hardly wait to see

If the number were as low as you suggested, in a forum like this, which is not THAT BIG(you see a lot of the same people posting), it would be much more difficult to find people who care about RT. If it was 0.5% i wouldn't be able to present you 20 quotes in 15 minutes, just from one small topic. If i can find that many quotes that easily in a forum like this, you better bet that the number is way higher than what you believe.

Well lets see, we have a forum with over 53'000 registered members, and you had to go back 5 years to find 15 comments.

Yes, I am really convinced by this display of proof.

Your thread is 60/40. So close. Let's see if in the end the number of people who care is really 1% or something like that. I have the feeling it's going to be way higher.

Of course you would get excited about a 5 vote total so far on a brand new thread. Small numbers do seem to impact you

 

[BlZARRO]

I should have actually read the comments you posted, too before I replied as I suspect you didn't read them all carefully;



This guy just said he uses it to sway his wife. He never said he bases his movie viewing decisions on it.



This guy doesn't say anywhere that he lets RT decide what movies he'll see.



This guy just said he spent the week watching First Class' rating. No mention of letting RT decide if he goes to watch movies or not.



This guy simply says he likes it a lot and how the reviews are graded, and often their grades match his.



Another one that said he finds it a great site, but nowhere does he mention he uses it to decide if he'll watch a movie or not.

So your 20 just went down to 15. Read more carefully next time.

You're so desperate that it becomes funny.

I wonder what your excuse is going to be when your topic actually ends with a decent percentage of people who do care instead of the meaningless 1%(or less) you have been suggesting. Yeah, because in order to have no impact on BO it really has to be an incredible small percentage.

 

[The Joker]

You're so desperate that it becomes funny.

Sticks and stones

I wonder what your excuse is going to be when your topic actually ends with a decent percentage of people who do care instead of the meaningless 1%(or less) you have been suggesting. Yeah, because in order to have no impact on BO it really has to be an incredible small percentage.

When it does? Very confident it will aren't you. Keep rooting through the archives. Extend your search back 10 years. Might find a handful of posts there.

 

[BlZARRO]

You can't even spell denial

Sure. This is very important to the discussion.

You're right, i can't spell denial. If you pay close attention you will find that i can't spell a big number of other words. I'm still happy and proud that i can be here debating with you in a language i didn't start learning until less than 10 years ago. I can also communicate in Spanish, Portuguese, Japanese and french. Not perfectly, of course. I'm often wrong. You're the Evidence Man. You're always right.

 

[The Joker]

Sure. This is very important to the discussion.

You're right, i can't spell denial. If you pay close attention you will find that i can't spell a big number of other words. I'm still happy and proud that i can be here debating with you in a language i didn't start learning until less than 10 years ago. I can also communicate in Spanish, Portuguese, Japanese and french. Not perfectly, of course. I'm often wrong. You're the Evidence Man. You're always right.

Keep your hat on, bucko. I was kidding with you, hence the winking smiley. I've been taking your personal insults with gentle good humor, so don't get uppity over me making a friendly joke out of you trying to accuse me of something you couldn't even spell.

For the record in spite of that one grammar error your English is wonderful. No sarcasm.

 

[BlZARRO]

Keep your hat on, bucko. I was kidding with you, hence the winking smiley. I've been taking your personal insults with gentle good humor, so don't get uppity over me making a friendly joke out of you trying to accuse me of something you couldn't even spell.

For the record in spite of that one grammar error your English is wonderful. No sarcasm.

Who is bucko?