|
|
Post by The Harald PaulsLaugh on Oct 22, 2019 21:54:45 GMT
I see some people still don't know how aggregates work. Or even that RT IS an aggregate. I have several film critics I will pay attention to when gauging whether I should bother with a film or not. Most of the RT reviewers are just that: reviewers. They are not film critics.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toxicalicity on Oct 22, 2019 21:55:10 GMT
Does anyone take RT seriously? One of my favorite movies of all time is a 33%. I mean that's all it took for me to realize the numbers there don't exactly line up with my own critiquing of films. Not really since they consider a film with a 60% rating as "rotten." Why is anything between 60% and 50% not part of the positive majority opinion? 59% is rotten. 60% is fresh. They wanted to raise the bar a bit, which makes perfect sense to me.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Harald PaulsLaugh on Oct 22, 2019 21:57:48 GMT
Not really since they consider a film with a 60% rating as "rotten." Why is anything between 60% and 50% not part of the positive majority opinion? 59% is rotten. 60% is fresh. They wanted to raise the bar a bit, which makes perfect sense to me. How are they raising "the bar?"
|
|
|
|
Post by Toxicalicity on Oct 22, 2019 21:58:34 GMT
I see some people still don't know how aggregates work. Or even that RT IS an aggregate. I have several film critics I will pay attention to when gauging whether I should bother with a film or not. Most of the RT reviewers are just that: reviewers. They are not film critics. Eh, the people from Roger Ebert.com and Richard Roeper are professional film critics, as are many of the other reviewers. But even the ones you don't consider "critics" are still mostly paid and published professionals. You want amateurism (the good kind and the bad kind), look no further than the user review sections.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toxicalicity on Oct 22, 2019 22:02:08 GMT
59% is rotten. 60% is fresh. They wanted to raise the bar a bit, which makes perfect sense to me. How are they raising "the bar?"
By raising the fresh threshold from 51% (which is, of course, the majority) to 60%. I would do it too, because does a movie that scores 51% really feel "fresh" to you? Nah. Movies are going to have to work a little bit harder than that, which is fine.
|
|
|
|
Post by The Harald PaulsLaugh on Oct 22, 2019 22:05:05 GMT
I have several film critics I will pay attention to when gauging whether I should bother with a film or not. Most of the RT reviewers are just that: reviewers. They are not film critics. Eh, the people from Roger Ebert.com and Richard Roeper are professional film critics, as are many of the other reviewers. But even the ones you don't consider "critics" are still mostly paid and published professionals. You want amateurism (the good kind and the bad kind), look no further than the user review sections. I remember though...back on the old broad when each film had its individual page...bringing up the BO and RT score was what the naysayers used when they hated a particular film. It could have been a good movie but because something like the all female Ghostbusters got made, they had to trash it 24/7 using whatever "proof" they could muster. This probably was the impetus for IMDb to close down the boards.
|
|
|
|
Post by Toxicalicity on Oct 22, 2019 22:16:08 GMT
Ah yes, the glory days of mob mentalities, fanboy wars and rampant trolling. It was very......Interesting. I'm kind of sad those days are gone, especially because those individual boards often gave us excellent insider information and insights from certain posters. I strongly suspect that, due to the boards closing, I'm now considerably less up-to-speed about the movie world.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Oct 22, 2019 22:42:24 GMT
Who cares? The critics have been angrily wagging their fingers at this movie since it was announced.
What’d you expect?
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Oct 22, 2019 22:52:50 GMT
Does anyone take RT seriously? One of my favorite movies of all time is a 33%. I mean that's all it took for me to realize the numbers there don't exactly line up with my own critiquing of films. Not really since they consider a film with a 60% rating as "rotten." Why is anything between 60% and 50% not part of the positive majority opinion? I have no idea. Lol |
|
|
|
Post by mslo79 on Oct 23, 2019 7:31:51 GMT
dazzI don't really use RT (I am used to IMDb's stuff) as I just kind of assumed the basic percentage shown sums things up (i.e. 68% for Joker and 78% for Captain Marvel on what I assume is critics (since the other specifically mentions 'audience score')) which is why I said what I said. I never looked into the details. because just assuming what you said is correct... why don't they just show stuff in a more straight forwards sense when it comes to their ratings? ; I don't see why they would over-complicate things for the average person because the average person who don't mess with RT much will just see that 68%(Joker) and 78%(Captain Marvel) and assume Captain Marvel is rated higher with general critics (since I assume that's what it is given the other one says 'audience score') which is what I basically did. but after clicking on the 'more info' on their site I do see the average rating on the critics side is higher for Joker like you said. but it seems like they would use something like that on their page for critics instead of the basic 68% vs 78% stuff which is a bit misleading. but thanks for your time.
|
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Oct 23, 2019 7:36:49 GMT
Ghostbusters 2016 film is higher on RT 😂🤮
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Oct 23, 2019 8:05:13 GMT
Who cares? The critics have been angrily wagging their fingers at this movie since it was announced. What? Who told you that? Ghostbusters 2016 film is higher on RT 😂🤮 Only in the Tomatometer, not the average rating, which is what truly matters. Actually, why would this even matter? One's a psychological drama, the other's a sci-fi comedy. Different standards.
|
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 23, 2019 14:53:27 GMT
dazz I don't really use RT (I am used to IMDb's stuff) as I just kind of assumed the basic percentage shown sums things up (i.e. 68% for Joker and 78% for Captain Marvel on what I assume is critics (since the other specifically mentions 'audience score')) which is why I said what I said. I never looked into the details. because just assuming what you said is correct... why don't they just show stuff in a more straight forwards sense when it comes to their ratings? ; I don't see why they would over-complicate things for the average person because the average person who don't mess with RT much will just see that 68%(Joker) and 78%(Captain Marvel) and assume Captain Marvel is rated higher with general critics (since I assume that's what it is given the other one says 'audience score') which is what I basically did. but after clicking on the 'more info' on their site I do see the average rating on the critics side is higher for Joker like you said. but it seems like they would use something like that on their page for critics instead of the basic 68% vs 78% stuff which is a bit misleading. but thanks for your time. That is fair enough, if you don't pay attention to it you wouldn't just get how it works, I agree btw I think how they show that stuff is daft, they used to do it where the % and the score were shown together, though the % was shown more prominently, I guess because the tomatometer is their gimmick they want to promote it, but it is silly, why they then decided to try and hide the actual score is beyond me.
|
|
|
|
Post by DSDSquared on Oct 23, 2019 15:34:37 GMT
The fact that people still do not know how Rotten Tomatoes works baffles me. Also, Captain Marvel was average at best. Just throwing that in.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Oct 23, 2019 16:08:29 GMT
Who cares? The critics have been angrily wagging their fingers at this movie since it was announced. What? Who told you that? No one told me it. It’s been obvious with every think piece and eventual movie review talking about how this movie was going to inspire violence and shouldn’t be made. |
|
|
|
Post by anthonyrocks on Oct 23, 2019 16:12:40 GMT
I actually never Pay Attention to Rotten Tomatoes.
I usually just like to go and see a Movie and just judge it for myself.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Oct 23, 2019 16:41:21 GMT
No one told me it. It’s been obvious with every think piece and eventual movie review talking about how this movie was going to inspire violence and shouldn’t be made. That wasn't written by any real critic. It was written by some journalists and mostly paranoid moviegoers (before the movie even came out).
|
|
|
|
Post by sdrew13163 on Oct 23, 2019 17:01:35 GMT
No one told me it. It’s been obvious with every think piece and eventual movie review talking about how this movie was going to inspire violence and shouldn’t be made. That wasn't written by any real critic. It was written by some journalists and mostly paranoid moviegoers (before the movie even came out). So movie critics don’t write movie reviews? Got it. |
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Oct 23, 2019 17:56:49 GMT
Does anyone take RT seriously? One of my favorite movies of all time is a 33%. I mean that's all it took for me to realize the numbers there don't exactly line up with my own critiquing of films. MCU fans take it seriously. And this thread proves you do as well
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Oct 23, 2019 18:34:14 GMT
So movie critics don’t write movie reviews? Got it. They do. They wrote it about this movie, but most of them didn't accuse it of encouraging violence.
|
|
