|
Post by harpospoke on Apr 26, 2018 23:35:44 GMT
First off, if you're going to debate with me then at least do me the favor of not misrepresenting my words. I never blamed political correctness solely for why IF failed or for why BP and WW got such high scores. These things help the score but don't MAKE the score. I've been saying the same thing since the start and I don't know how many more times I need to say it for you to understand. Now... critics didn't just "mention" the fact that BP starts black people or that WW stars a woman. They didn't just go, "Oh hey, just want to mention that BP had a mostly black cast" or "By the way, it's kinda cool that WW stars a woman". What they did was actively PRAISE these movies for casting either a black or female cast. Overwhelmingly praise in some cases. Look at this top critic review for BP, at least half of it is centered on how great BP is for tackling African culture: www.salon.com/2018/02/18/black-panther-is-a-film-about-history-that-makes-history/Here is a review of Wonder Woman where the summary is "Wonder Woman embraces issues of female power and the need to turn from hate to love, war to peace in a mainstream delivery system. And the female lead is not solely a mother, sister, girlfriend or hooker, however gold her heart: wonder of wonders!" - observer.com/2017/06/wonder-woman-movie-review-gal-gadot/And these are just 2 examples. Go over the critic reviews of these 2 films and you'll see that quite a number of reviews mention things in the same vein. Now let me explain to you how critic reviews work. A critic will write down what they like and dislike about a movie, and depending on these things that they liked and disliked they will then give it an overall score. Sometimes it's the other way, they'll give it an overall score then write down things they liked and disliked as a justification of why they gave it that score. Regardless, the fact is that the overall score they give this is dependent on things they liked and disliked about it. And if "political correctness" or "tackling a social issue" is one of the things they overwhelmingly praise then it's quite obvious it's something about the movie they really liked, then obviously their final score will be affected by this. And deciding whether a movie is fresh or rotten usually only has a difference of one star, sometimes half a star, and just adding one more thing that you like can contribute to a movie being fresh or rotten in a critic's eye. First off, I wasn’t misrepresenting what you said. I’m aware of what your nonsensical conspiracy theory of an argument is. I was simply pointing out that you have no basis for your argument. Bringing up some reviews that mention these movies being “historically significant” is not proof of “artificial boosters”. If critics like a movie, they will praise it regardless of any political aspects to it. The political aspects are just a side thing. You have no idea what critics are thinking deep down, so stop pretending that you do. Your argument that critics go easy on movies starring black people is frankly racist and condescending as all hell. Why did you even argue that point to begin with? Because you’re salty that IW doesn’t have a 500%? Get over yourself. Also, you seem to have NO IDEA how Rotten Tomatoes works, do you? Critics are the ones who decide whether or not their reviews will be counted as “fresh” or “rotten”. It has nothing to do with any numerical rating. A movie can have an 8/10 on RT, and it could still be deemed “rotten” if the critic who reviewed it doesn’t like the movie. Also, not every critic gives movies a numerical score. You just made skaathar's argument for him. People actually aren't allowed to even broach that subject without being accused of racism?? That demonstrates the political climate that also effects critics. I remember one Youtube critic who had to stress that he wasn't a racist before he did his review of BP. ...And he liked it. That's the pressure they were under.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Apr 26, 2018 23:37:57 GMT
Well that's what I was going to say. If something as irrelevant as the gender or race of the cast causes the reviewer to increase their score, that's an artificial booster. It's not actually about the movie itself. And if the reviewer praises the gender or the race, it was obviously a positive aspect of the movie in their eyes...thus it increased their score. Again, there’s been no indication that critics will just suddenly inflate a movie’s score just because of the race or gender of the people involved. It didn’t help AWIT, so why would it help any other movie? The indication is in the reviews. When they mention it as a positive in the review, that means it was a positive on their score. How is that debatable?
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Apr 26, 2018 23:43:00 GMT
First off, I wasn’t misrepresenting what you said. I’m aware of what your nonsensical conspiracy theory of an argument is. I was simply pointing out that you have no basis for your argument. Bringing up some reviews that mention these movies being “historically significant” is not proof of “artificial boosters”. If critics like a movie, they will praise it regardless of any political aspects to it. The political aspects are just a side thing. You have no idea what critics are thinking deep down, so stop pretending that you do. Your argument that critics go easy on movies starring black people is frankly racist and condescending as all hell. Why did you even argue that point to begin with? Because you’re salty that IW doesn’t have a 500%? Get over yourself. Also, you seem to have NO IDEA how Rotten Tomatoes works, do you? Critics are the ones who decide whether or not their reviews will be counted as “fresh” or “rotten”. It has nothing to do with any numerical rating. A movie can have an 8/10 on RT, and it could still be deemed “rotten” if the critic who reviewed it doesn’t like the movie. Also, not every critic gives movies a numerical score. You just made skaathar's argument for him. People actually aren't allowed to even broach that subject without being accused of racism?? That demonstrates the political climate that also effects critics. I remember one Youtube critic who had to stress that he wasn't a racist before he did his review of BP. ...And he liked it. That's the pressure they were under. No one has ever said that a person is racist for not liking a movie. That sure as hell wasnt what I was saying. What I said was racist is this idea that people can’t judge movies about anyone who isn’t a white man fairly. I didn’t make anyone point for them.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Apr 26, 2018 23:43:33 GMT
Again, there’s been no indication that critics will just suddenly inflate a movie’s score just because of the race or gender of the people involved. It didn’t help AWIT, so why would it help any other movie? The indication is in the reviews. When they mention it as a positive in the review, that means it was a positive on their score. How is that debatable? When has any review ever said “this movie is good because it has black people in it”?
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Apr 26, 2018 23:48:05 GMT
You just made skaathar's argument for him. People actually aren't allowed to even broach that subject without being accused of racism?? That demonstrates the political climate that also effects critics. I remember one Youtube critic who had to stress that he wasn't a racist before he did his review of BP. ...And he liked it. That's the pressure they were under. No one has ever said that a person is racist for not liking a movie. That sure as hell wasnt what I was saying. What I said was racist is this idea that people can’t judge movies about anyone who isn’t a white man fairly. I didn’t make anyone point for them. The problem is, you said something that wasn't the original argument. That is usually what happens when "race" comes into it. No one is saying anything that wasn't present in the reviews. When I get more time, we can go into them. It was everywhere.
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Apr 26, 2018 23:48:36 GMT
The indication is in the reviews. When they mention it as a positive in the review, that means it was a positive on their score. How is that debatable? When has any review ever said “this movie is good because it has black people in it”? Because that's what I said, right? Come on....
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Apr 26, 2018 23:50:05 GMT
No one has ever said that a person is racist for not liking a movie. That sure as hell wasnt what I was saying. What I said was racist is this idea that people can’t judge movies about anyone who isn’t a white man fairly. I didn’t make anyone point for them. The problem is, you said something that wasn't the original argument. That is usually what happens when "race" comes into it. No one is saying anything that wasn't present in the reviews. When I get more time, we can go into them. It was everywhere. Skaathar explicitly said that if IW was about black women, it would’ve scored “way higher” on RT. That would imply that he thinks critics don’t judge movies fairly, unless they revolve around white men.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 26, 2018 23:52:23 GMT
First off, if you're going to debate with me then at least do me the favor of not misrepresenting my words. I never blamed political correctness solely for why IF failed or for why BP and WW got such high scores. These things help the score but don't MAKE the score. I've been saying the same thing since the start and I don't know how many more times I need to say it for you to understand. Now to your main point... critics didn't just "mention" the fact that BP stars black people or that WW stars a woman. They didn't just go, "Oh hey, just want to mention that BP had a mostly black cast" or "By the way, it's kinda cool that WW stars a woman". What they did was actively PRAISE these movies for casting either a black or female cast. Overwhelmingly praise in some cases. Look at this top critic review for BP - at least half of it is centered on how great BP is for representing African culture: www.salon.com/2018/02/18/black-panther-is-a-film-about-history-that-makes-history/Here is a critic review of Wonder Woman where the critic specifically says "And, yet, as a chick critic, I feel honor-bound to support this female-driven-and-directed blockbuster."- observer.com/2017/06/wonder-woman-movie-review-gal-gadot/ - clearly the critic put a lot of weight on how the lead character was female. And these are just 2 examples. Go over the critic reviews of these 2 films and you'll see that quite a number of reviews mention things in the same vein. Now let me explain to you how critic reviews work. A critic will write down what they like and dislike about a movie, and depending on these things that they liked and disliked they will then give it an overall score. Sometimes it's the other way, they'll give it an overall score then write down things they liked and disliked as a justification of why they gave it that score. Regardless, the fact is that the overall score they give this is dependent on things they liked and disliked about it. And if "political correctness" or "tackling a social issue" is one of the things they overwhelmingly praise then it's quite obvious it's something about the movie they really liked, then obviously their final score will be affected by this. This is flat out common sense. And deciding whether a movie is fresh or rotten usually only has a difference of one star, sometimes half a star, and just adding one more thing that you like can contribute to a movie being fresh or rotten in a critic's eye. Well that's what I was going to say. If something as irrelevant as the gender or race of the cast causes the reviewer to increase their score, that's an artificial booster. It's not actually about the movie itself. And if the reviewer praises the gender or the race, it was obviously a positive aspect of the movie in their eyes...thus it increased their score. Exactly. If a critic says something like, "The acting in this movie was awesome", then obviously the acting is something that will influence them in how high they rate the movie. I mean, what else is a critic supposed to rate a movie on if not for things they liked about it right? So if they clearly mention that they liked the social representation in the movie, then it's obvious that will affect how they rate the movie. What ThisGuy is looking for is for a critic to specifically say "I'm rating this movie great because it tackled diversity"... and that just goes to prove how absurd his thinking is. No critic ever writes a review and says "I'm rating this movie great because it had a great soundtrack". A critic's opinion is swayed by numerous factors in the movie, and asking for a specific critic to attribute it to only one factor is ridiculous.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 26, 2018 23:55:31 GMT
The problem is, you said something that wasn't the original argument. That is usually what happens when "race" comes into it. No one is saying anything that wasn't present in the reviews. When I get more time, we can go into them. It was everywhere. Skaathar explicitly said that if IW was about black women, it would’ve scored “way higher” on RT. That would imply that he thinks critics don’t judge movies fairly, unless they revolve around white men. Jeeze dude. Can you please stop making stuff up and misrepresenting my words? That was completely not what I was trying to imply and you know it. Can you please learn to debate without resorting to such underhanded tactics?
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Apr 26, 2018 23:59:49 GMT
Skaathar explicitly said that if IW was about black women, it would’ve scored “way higher” on RT. That would imply that he thinks critics don’t judge movies fairly, unless they revolve around white men. Jeeze dude. Can you please stop making stuff up and misrepresenting my words? That was completely not what I was trying to imply and you know it. Can you learn to debate without resorting to such underhanded tactics? No, actually, I don’t know it. That definitely sounded like it was what you were implying. If that wasn’t what you meant, either you need to do a better job of explaining yourself, or your point makes no sense to me.
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Apr 27, 2018 0:05:46 GMT
Jeeze dude. Can you please stop making stuff up and misrepresenting my words? That was completely not what I was trying to imply and you know it. Can you learn to debate without resorting to such underhanded tactics? No, actually, I don’t know it. That definitely sounded like it was what you were implying. If that wasn’t what you meant, either you need to do a better job of explaining yourself, or your point makes no sense to me. I've been explaining myself to you for the last 5 pages but you're obviously not interested in actually understanding what I say. Why else would you invent stuff up just to make your argument look better? For example, you keep bringing up "white men" when neither myself nor Harpospoke ever mentioned them.
|
|
|
Post by thisguy4000 on Apr 27, 2018 0:10:09 GMT
No, actually, I don’t know it. That definitely sounded like it was what you were implying. If that wasn’t what you meant, either you need to do a better job of explaining yourself, or your point makes no sense to me. I've been explaining myself to you for the last 4 pages but you're obviously not interested in actually understanding what I say. Why else would you invent stuff up just to make your argument look better? For example, you keep bringing up "white men" when neither myself nor Harpospoke ever mentioned them. If I’m misrepresenting what you’ve been saying, that wasn’t my intention. I know you didn’t directly mention anything about white men, but given that you implied that critics would’ve given this movie better reviews if it was about black women, that seemed like an indication that you were suggesting that movies about minorities are graded on a curve, compared to movies about non-minorities (in other words, movies about white men). Again, if I’m misrepresenting you, I apologize, but that was never what I sought out to do. I’m not relying on any underhanded tactics. I’m simply pointing out what I assume is what your argument has been.
|
|
NormanClature
Junior Member
![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png) ![*](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/stars/star_yellow.png)
"Anyone would think tin-pot-dictatorship is a bad thing???!?"
@armyofone
Posts: 2,108
Likes: 1,196
|
Post by NormanClature on Apr 27, 2018 0:13:36 GMT
Skaathar explicitly said that if IW was about black women, it would’ve scored “way higher” on RT. That would imply that he thinks critics don’t judge movies fairly, unless they revolve around white men. Jeeze dude. Can you please stop making stuff up and misrepresenting my words? That was completely not what I was trying to imply and you know it. Can you please learn to debate without resorting to such underhanded tactics? LOL! Putting his own imaginary spin on what you say is his specialty, doncha know?! I don't even think he does it on purpose.
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Apr 27, 2018 7:19:16 GMT
93% Audience score so far, so much for the Anti-Disney bots
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Apr 27, 2018 7:23:30 GMT
You should change your username to that.
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Apr 27, 2018 7:29:40 GMT
You should change your username to that. I like Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Ducktales and a few other Di$ney things though
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Apr 27, 2018 7:33:00 GMT
You should change your username to that. I like Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Ducktales and a few other Di$ney things though Yeah but those were made back when hating Disney wasn’t cool.
|
|
|
Post by darkpast on Apr 27, 2018 7:40:06 GMT
I like Who Framed Roger Rabbit?, Ducktales and a few other Di$ney things though Yeah but those were made back when hating Disney wasn’t cool. Messing up the Muppets, Star Wars and anything they get their greedy hands on will do that
|
|
|
Post by darkknightofgotham on Apr 27, 2018 12:08:31 GMT
Its #11 on the Imdb top 250 with a 9.2 rating right now. Looks like Shawshank is going to be replaced as #1 soon lol.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Apr 27, 2018 13:01:54 GMT
currently 85% on RT, and 68 on Metacritic. Yet +90% on user votings. I guess the evil Disney-conspiracy of bot voters plaguing Star Wars and BP is still in sleeper mode. ![(rofl)](//storage.proboards.com/forum/images/smiley/rofl.png)
|
|