|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 5, 2017 2:58:41 GMT
MCU artificially drives up their ratings by banning those who they think would give them rotten reviews. Disney is not, and can not, ban the LA Times from seeing its movies. The LA Times critics can go see (and review) Disney movies, just like everyone else. A LA Times critic was not banned from seeing Thor Ragnarok. He gave it a positive review on RT ... proving DC-Fanboy wrong on every count. Again. NOV. 3, 2017, 6:00 A.M. A note to readers The annual Holiday Movie Sneaks section published by the Los Angeles Times typically includes features on movies from all major studios, reflecting the diversity of films Hollywood offers during the holidays, one of the busiest box-office periods of the year. This year, Walt Disney Co. studios declined to offer The Times advance screenings, citing what it called unfair coverage of its business ties with Anaheim. The Times will continue to review and cover Disney movies and programs when they are available to the public.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Nov 5, 2017 3:05:02 GMT
Disney is not, and can not, ban the LA Times from seeing its movies. The LA Times critics can go see (and review) Disney movies, just like everyone else. A LA Times critic was not banned from seeing Thor Ragnarok. He gave it a positive review on RT ... proving DC-Fanboy wrong on every count. Again. NOV. 3, 2017, 6:00 A.M. A note to readers The annual Holiday Movie Sneaks section published by the Los Angeles Times typically includes features on movies from all major studios, reflecting the diversity of films Hollywood offers during the holidays, one of the busiest box-office periods of the year. This year, Walt Disney Co. studios declined to offer The Times advance screenings, citing what it called unfair coverage of its business ties with Anaheim. The Times will continue to review and cover Disney movies and programs when they are available to the public.That's what Ragnarok had such high ratings. Pre-release, Ragnarok's RT rating was 99% because MCU banned critics they thought would gve them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screening. Now that Ragnarok's been released, the number of rotten reviews has already tripled and the rating has dropped from 99% to 93%, putting it below The Dark Knight. But because MCU banned critics who they thought would give them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screenings, the news headlines pre-release were "Thor: Ragnarok is highest rated superhero movie ever". But we know that isn't true since the rating has had a huge drop since the release now that critics that MCU banned from the pre-release screenings have finally been able to give their rating.
|
|
|
Post by blockbusted on Nov 5, 2017 4:32:13 GMT
NOV. 3, 2017, 6:00 A.M. A note to readers The annual Holiday Movie Sneaks section published by the Los Angeles Times typically includes features on movies from all major studios, reflecting the diversity of films Hollywood offers during the holidays, one of the busiest box-office periods of the year. This year, Walt Disney Co. studios declined to offer The Times advance screenings, citing what it called unfair coverage of its business ties with Anaheim. The Times will continue to review and cover Disney movies and programs when they are available to the public.That's what Ragnarok had such high ratings. Pre-release, Ragnarok's RT rating was 99% because MCU banned critics they thought would gve them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screening. Now that Ragnarok's been released, the number of rotten reviews has already tripled and the rating has dropped from 99% to 93%, putting it below The Dark Knight. But because MCU banned critics who they thought would give them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screenings, the news headlines pre-release were "Thor: Ragnarok is highest rated superhero movie ever". But we know that isn't true since the rating has had a huge drop since the release now that critics that MCU banned from the pre-release screenings have finally been able to give their rating. You have absolutely no idea how the whole thing works, do you? An MCU film falling down to a lower rating on RottenTomatoes has been happening almost all the time. Why? The reason is quite simple - they typically come out in the U.K. first.
It has been noted that critics in the U.K. tend to react to a film a lot more positively than critics in the U.S. I remember 'Kingsman: The Secret Service' starting at somewhere in the 80s and falling down to mid-70s on RottenTomatoes when it came out in the U.S. 'Spectre' was also at somewhere in high-70s to low-80s before it came out in the U.S. and when it did, it fell down to mid-60s. The reason why this didn't happen with 'Spider-Man: Homecoming' is because that film had a same release date for the U.K. and the U.S.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 5, 2017 8:57:45 GMT
Disney is not, and can not, ban the LA Times from seeing its movies. The LA Times critics can go see (and review) Disney movies, just like everyone else. By the time the LA Times critics sees the movie in theaters, the reviews (which has gotten an "artificial booster" from banning critics that MCU thinks will give them unfavorable reviews) have already been mostly favorable ...
That's what MCU did with Ragnarok. Pre-release, Ragnarok's RT rating was 99% because MCU banned critics they thought would gve them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screening.
The “banned” LA Time critic gave Thor Ragnarok a positive review. Argument destroyed. QED.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 5, 2017 9:32:22 GMT
By the time the LA Times critics sees the movie in theaters, the reviews (which has gotten an "artificial booster" from banning critics that MCU thinks will give them unfavorable reviews) have already been mostly favorable ...
That's what MCU did with Ragnarok. Pre-release, Ragnarok's RT rating was 99% because MCU banned critics they thought would gve them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screening.
You really are retarded. The “banned” LA Time critic gave Thor Ragnarok a positive review. Argument destroyed. QED. calm down, cupcake, hissy fits won't make it better. What rating the Times critic gave in the concrete case is not the issue, this just shows they act unbiased and objectively as fair critics. The general issue is the banning of certain media/critics from advanced screening as described in the OP and the additional aspects shown by Akbar. And funny, now you use the "QED" too - but you do not know what it means and when to apply it. Thinking is not your forte, stay with cooking, cupcake. But this is not your kitchen, stay out of it.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 5, 2017 9:35:58 GMT
MCU artificially drives up their ratings by banning those who they think would give them rotten reviews. Disney is not, and can not, ban the LA Times from seeing its movies. The LA Times critics can go see (and review) Disney movies, just like everyone else. A LA Times critic was not banned from seeing Thor Ragnarok. He gave it a positive review on RT ... proving DC-Fanboy wrong on every count. Again. Again, cupcake, this is not the point. The issue is banning of critics from advanced screenings because of past reports. You should really work on your reading comprehension before you make silly unqualified comments. As said, this is not your kitchen.
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 5, 2017 15:59:27 GMT
You really are retarded. The “banned” LA Time critic gave Thor Ragnarok a positive review. Argument destroyed. QED. What rating the Times critic gave in the concrete case is not the issue, this just shows they act unbiased and objectively as fair critics. You agree that it was quite stupid of DC-Fanboy to make it an issue. Was that intentional? Apparently, you didn’t read DC-Fanboys post trying to tie the LA Times ban to an imaginary pattern of banning critics who write negative reviews. There is no indication of that occurring outside of Fanboy’s tortured imagination. The only “banned” critic mentioned in this thread gave T:R a positive review, destroying Fanboy’s claim and making him (and now you) look like a drooling retard. Was that intentional? QED* has more than one meaning, Ace. You picked the wrong one! ... was that intentional? *Quite Easily Done.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 5, 2017 16:23:02 GMT
What rating the Times critic gave in the concrete case is not the issue, this just shows they act unbiased and objectively as fair critics. QED* has more than one meaning, Ace. You picked the wrong one! * Quite Easily Done.ok that's funny, cupcake. And that's what you do: swindle yourself out. But the day will come when that won't work and you will have to take responsibility. Think about me that day. And when being asked to pick up the soap when under the shower, ask the guy who threw it if his name is Tristan. QED
|
|
|
Post by damngumby on Nov 5, 2017 16:37:36 GMT
And when being asked to pick up the soap when under the shower, ask the guy who threw it if his name is Tristan. QED Which penitentiary are you incarcerated at? I’ll try to avoid it ... or at the very least, your soap dropping stalking grounds. Q. E. D.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Nov 5, 2017 17:15:12 GMT
And when being asked to pick up the soap when under the shower, ask the guy who threw it if his name is Tristan. QED Which penitentiary are you incarcerated at? I’ll try to avoid it ... or at the very least, your soap dropping stalking grounds First rule of shower room penitentiaries: You do NOT talk about shower room penitentiaries. Pink soap or not.
|
|
|
Post by Cooper, the Golden Retriever on Nov 5, 2017 17:20:48 GMT
Disney Bans the LA Times From Seeing Its MoviesBy Mansoor Mithaiwala
Disney is banning the Los Angeles Times from attending advanced screenings of their movies. As a southern California newspaper, in addition to publishing film criticism, the Times frequently covers Disneyland Resort and Disney California Adventure, as well as how both parks affect the city of Anaheim. And in September, they published an article that painted Disney in a bad light, and the Mouse House challenged their outlook. The Times annually publishes a Holiday Movie Preview, and this year, Disney isn’t on that list because the paper was reportedly barred for their “unfair coverage” The Mouse House traditionally screens their films for the press approximately one week to one month, if not longer, in advance of the film hitting theaters, but now, the LA Times won’t be part of that press list going forward, at least for the foreseeable future. The decision on Disney’s part begs many questions. If an outlet writes negatively about Walt Disney Studios or any of its sister divisions, will the Mouse House blacklist that outlet, as well? What’s more, the LA Times is one of the oldest and most respected newspapers in the country, not a personal blog or YouTube review channel. So, to ban them from advanced screenings due to an investigative piece about their theme park unit and its connection with Anaheim, which is unrelated to their movie division, is concerning, to say the least. Yes, I noticed that, too, when it came time to review their latest MARVEL film "Thor".
|
|
|
Post by Cooper, the Golden Retriever on Nov 5, 2017 17:22:24 GMT
Disney is not, and can not, ban the LA Times from seeing its movies. The LA Times critics can go see (and review) Disney movies, just like everyone else. A LA Times critic was not banned from seeing Thor Ragnarok. He gave it a positive review on RT ... proving DC-Fanboy wrong on every count. Again. Again, cupcake, this is not the point. The issue is banning of critics from advanced screenings because of past reports. You should really work on your reading comprehension before you make silly unqualified comments. As said, this is not your kitchen. Just OT but I love that kangaroo (e.g., i.e., no confusing Austria with AUSTRALIA) profile you've got!
|
|
|
Post by Primemovermithrax Pejorative on Nov 5, 2017 17:25:18 GMT
It's a monopoly. Disney is at the forefront of having copyright extensions too. In about 3-4 years they will be going to Washington and having yet another copyright extension.
Wall Street Disney doesn't like competition, uncontrolled opinions, or a public domain.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 5, 2017 18:24:01 GMT
I hope this gets escalated to the Supreme Court. Something needs to be done!
|
|
|
Post by President Ackbar™ on Nov 5, 2017 20:26:12 GMT
By the time the LA Times critics sees the movie in theaters, the reviews (which has gotten an "artificial booster" from banning critics that MCU thinks will give them unfavorable reviews) have already been mostly favorable ...
That's what MCU did with Ragnarok. Pre-release, Ragnarok's RT rating was 99% because MCU banned critics they thought would gve them unfavorable reviews from the pre-release screening.
You really are retarded.The “banned” LA Time critic gave Thor Ragnarok a positive review. Argument destroyed. QED. Admin scabab
|
|
|
Post by scabab on Nov 5, 2017 21:21:56 GMT
Ease up with the insults and provocative behaviour please.
|
|