Captain Marvel The Rotten Tomatoes/Critic's Reaction Thread

[Hammer!]

27 straight fresh reviews!

 

[Holy Slapper]

Of course it's my opinion. Y'all really need not bother with this type of redundant statement.

Well since I'm of the opposite opinion, then I'll conclude that the reviewers are right in their assessment. So in summary, you're wrong and I'm right and i'll fight you to death with pillows over it!

 

[Webfoot Hero]

The RT is a good binary system for those looking for a quick Y/N answer as it functions the same way as Thumbs Up/Down did for Siskel and Ebert. I see the average rating as the degree to which a movie is liked/disliked and more useful for those who want a slightly more nuanced approach than just Y/N.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

27 straight fresh reviews!

I was trying to avoid saying how many consecutive positives they've had because I didn't want to jinx the streak.

 

[Nicko-Ray]

Back to 85%, sweet. No way it drops below 80% now, so we can all step away from the ledge.

Also how rottenly spoiled has the MCU fanbase gotten? an 85% rating is cause for a pseudo-meltdown? God forbid the day we get a movie that gets a rotten score...

Exactly lol. Ngl, I need to tell myself this sometimes haha. I haven't seen the flick yet, but I'd imagine, yes, it falls into some origin story tropes but 85% is damn good for the first entry/origin lol.

DCEU flicks debut with 33%-50% on RT.

 

[Hammer!]

With a lot of the doom and gloom around here, you'd think this film was getting an Aquaman type critical reception and fans were worried it might creep under the 60% benchmark.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Yeah, that's the key to both Siskel & Ebert and Rotten Tomatoes' success, and the reason they both became the go-to critical sources for the populace. Because while film fans like myself and a lot of folks here might love to read critical analysis of a film, the vast majority of the movie-going public ONLY reads a review searching for one answer: do you recommend this film or not? S&E figured that out with their "thumbs up" system and that's the ideal upon which RT was founded, as it forces each critic to answer that question bluntly.

The other reason it is so popular is that it has basically every critic of importance. Even for those more serious film fans looking deeper into critical analysis, it is far quicker and easier to use RT and click on a couple of links than search for 20 different independent sites on Google or scan a gazillion Twitter feeds.

 

[Iceman]

I disagree. The problem with the average rating is that it misrepresents highly polarizing films. For example, let's say some controversial film comes out and of 200 hundred critics, half give it a 1 and half give it a 10. The gives an average rating of 5/10, suggesting an average or mediocre film, which isn't at all what was being said.

But in that case the Tomatometer would yield the same result, ie 50%. It just gives less information. The average includes the Tomatometer's indication of proportion of reviewers that liked a film and adds on how much they liked/disliked it.

 

[jmc]

Well since I'm of the opposite opinion, then I'll conclude that the reviewers are right in their assessment. So in summary, you're wrong and I'm right and i'll fight you to death with pillows over it!

Pistols at 20 paces.

 

[JOE]

This film is so not worthy of that score. Part of my issue with Rotten Tomatoes is they don’t have a middle ground option. This film is getting a lot of passing grade fresh scores that it frankly doesn’t deserve.

That’s your fault for not understanding how Rotten Tomatoes works. It’s the percentage of users who gave the movie a passing grade. Always has been. Their passing grade being 3/5 or better to the critics discretion. Nobody claims that’s the average score out of 10 by the critics so I’m not sure why everyone acts that way.

 

[Holy Slapper]

Pistols at 20 paces.

Water pistols!

 

[Webfoot Hero]

TOMATOMETER
84%
Average Rating: 6.99/10
Reviews Count: 180
Fresh: 152
Rotten: 28

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

But in that case the Tomatometer would yield the same result, ie 50%. It just gives less information. The average includes the Tomatometer's indication of proportion of reviewers that liked a film and adds on how much they liked/disliked it.

Using a binary system whether a film is viewed as average or whether it is extremely polarizing is irrelevant though. In both cases, it means that 50% of critics (and thus hopefully the audience) who see the movie, like the movie. But an average rating is supposed to measure quality. A 1 is garbage, a 10 is a classic, and and a 5 is average. In theory at least, as mentioned in other posts, critics and readers are certainly far from agreement in what is average and what is negative and what is positive, another flaw with the average rating. Anyways, a highly polarizing film can't be measured properly with that scale because it averages out to average film, which isn't at all representative of what the critics are actually saying. The average rating isn't doing what it is supposed to be doing in that case, whereas the Tomatometer still is. An average rating really depends on the results being a bell curve distribution to be truly accurate, which in critical reviews of art, it often isn't.

Now that said, I do think the average rating is a useful tool in addition to the Tomatometer. If Film A gets 80% on the Tomatometer and an 8/10 average rating and Film B gets an 80% and 6/10 average rating, that tells you a lot. But it is definitely not a superior substitute.

 

[Xeno]

What makes you think that would be more accurate? It measures something that involves a whole heck of a lot more vague, subjective analysis. The Tomatometer, by contrast, measures something pretty inarguable: "Do I recommend this movie, yes no". Its pretty inarguable that when Critic A says they recommend a movie, that it actually is a true and accurate fact. Whether a movie is 'actually' 7/10, or 3/5, or any other measure? Not so much.

Don't let the illusion of exactness make a measure look better, when that exactness is just that: illusory.

The problem with putting more weight on the average rating is that not all reviewers will give an average or a star/letter rating that can be converted into an average. Therefore, the average rating only takes into account the opinions of some of the critics whose reviews are included in the meter percentage. That makes the average rating less than useful for assessing the true critics' consensus of the film's quality.

What is the Average Rating? How is it calculated?
Answer ID 881 | Published 05/03/2016 09:50 AM | Updated 05/03/2016 09:50 AM

What is the Average Rating? How is it calculated?

The Average Rating is an average of the individual critic scores, based on a 1-10 scale. Each critic's original rating scale (star, letter grade, numeric) is converted to a number between 1 and 10, and then the numbers are averaged. Reviews without original ratings are not counted, and a minimum of five reviews with original ratings is required.

 

[roxas99]

'Captain Marvel' Now Being Review Bombed On IMDb

well that didn't take long

It looks like their attempt at a review bomb is already failing

I just saw an updated version on this

the people giving the movie a 1 dropped from 32.7 to 28.7 and its overall imdb score jumped from 5.6 to 6 ( its imdb score is still rising as we speak )

they better hope the movie is not well received by general audiences otherwise their attempt at a review bomb will turn into an even bigger failure than it already is

 

[jmc]

That’s your fault for not understanding how Rotten Tomatoes works. It’s the percentage of users who gave the movie a passing grade. Always has been. Their passing grade being 3/5 or better to the critics discretion. Nobody claims that’s the average score out of 10 by the critics so I’m not sure why everyone acts that way.

We really stop acting like people don't know how the system works. I know exactly how it works, the critics are giving this film an undeserved pass.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

We really stop acting like people don't know how the system works. I know exactly how it works, the critics are giving this film an undeserved pass.

Or maybe they just liked it more than you did.

 

[jmc]

You only have to read the reviews to see even the positive ones aren't exactly glowing with praise.

 

[Hammer!]

We really stop acting like people don't know how the system works. I know exactly how it works, the critics are giving this film an undeserved pass.

You thought it was more of an Aquaman quality film then?

 

[Webfoot Hero]

TOMATOMETER
84%
Average Rating: 6.96/10
Reviews Count: 181
Fresh: 152
Rotten: 29

Latest negative review came in from a film reviewer (he's a conservative film reviewer) who's been taking Larson's comments about wanting a more diverse critic pool a bit personally by retweeting potshots from other conservatives, including the one from James Woods.

 

[jmc]

You thought it was more of an Aquaman quality film then?

I haven't seen Aquaman so can't comment.

 

[Holy Slapper]

You only have to read the reviews to see even the positive ones aren't exactly glowing with praise.

You do understand that there's such a concept as good but flawed film? To me, Aquaman was such a film.

 

[Xeno]

The self inflicted meltdown is difficult to watch. Just give it a few more days you will see that people are going to vote with their money where it counts.

The reaction to CM's RT score is disappointing but predictable. From some of the sentiment, you would think the score was languishing in the 50% range. This nearly always happens in RT threads, which is why I dislike them.

It's weird. Plenty of blockbusters with really mixed or rotten scores have earned hundreds of millions and even billions at the box office, which proves that critical consensus is pretty much meaningless unless it falls into the single digits. And many of those films have been enjoyable in spite of what critics thought of them. In the long run, the RT scores of these movies don't matter as much as the true audience reaction does.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

TOMATOMETER
83%
Average Rating: 6.93/10
Reviews Count: 184
Fresh: 153
Rotten: 31

 

[Hammer!]

I’m getting the feeling, hope I’m right, that they follow the first Thor three act structure: super powered by unworthy/lost, humbled earth based with amazing fish out of water humor and motifs, self discovery/realization come to form.

Most worried about first half non-linear flashbacks. I liked it in Batman Begins, but normally I think it can ruin the tempo. It made the first act on Man of Steel an absolute chore for me.