Ban Puncher
Member
I'M TAKING IT BACK
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Brett Ratner claims Rotten Tomatoes is "the worst thing in movie culture" (poor BvS)
- Thread starter Dalek
- Start date
- Status
I'M TAKING IT BACK
SpideySenses
Member
Nothing wrong with review algorithm websites (though Metacritic should be people's preference), the problem is that you should pair it with actual reviewers you trust and too few people do that.
With all due respect...nothing to debate about. Ratner easily.
Rotten Tomatoes, while flawed, is still the best metric we have for films.
And for the most part a fair albeit not perfect representative of a films quality.
Of course Marvel would love RT considering they have been kind to you, i bet you get your dad, Disney pay for your grades don't you Marvel.
What did he mean by this?
Member
Piss jar was a thematic reference to the art piece Piss Christ and its implications about the place of God in our modern world
The sink attack was just a glib reference to the phrase "everything and the kitchen sink"to epitomize the extent of Batman's assault on Superman
The Martha moment, besides it plot significance on Batman's redemptive arc, is a reference Marys of the Bible: one being Mother of Jesus, another Mother of the apostle James, and yet another Sister of Lazarus who resurrected
These are all my current nutjob theories
Fancyarcher
Member
I mean there's an argument to be made about how important RT is, but this just comes off as whining.
Nah, Ratner's had plenty of hits. I think he's turning more to producing these days, though.
Nah, Ratner's had plenty of hits. I think he's turning more to producing these days, though.
Palette Swap
Member
Yeah, I'm not going to cry for the injustice the Ratners and Snyders of this world are suffering at the hand of the evil aggregator.
Fancyarcher
Member
I don't really think Ratner is better or worse than any other hack director out there.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I used to make this argument as well but as time's gone on I've found this probably isn't the case. K-Swiss was making a really good argument against it somewhere on the board today, but basically: RT at least just presents right up front what people said, the numbers attached to that, and lets you get as granular as you need to with those numbers.
Metacritic applies weight to different outlets, doesn't tell you how they apply that weight, and apparently doesn't weight things the same at all times?
RT isn't really a problem. It's how people USE RT. And the industry itself is complicit in people using it the wrong way.
(I also think there might be something to this being a gaming board and Metacritic being such a key, necessary part of the industry's machinations there that consumers just assume the site is just as important across all media)
BvS was garbage, get over it.
I didn't need Rotten Tomatoes to tell me that.
HOW DARE consumers try to find out whether or not a movie they might pay to go and see is worth it or not. Why can't everyone just ignore all reviews and pay to see every Hollywood product whether it's poor or not?
This is review culture in general.
I didn't need Rotten Tomatoes to tell me that.
HOW DARE consumers try to find out whether or not a movie they might pay to go and see is worth it or not. Why can't everyone just ignore all reviews and pay to see every Hollywood product whether it's poor or not?
This is review culture in general.
digita1alchemy
Member
I agree, to some extent, but man he did not articulate what he was trying to say well at all.
I think we know as media consumers how incredibly misleading some trailers and previews can be. You say people are lazy and I say no, people are selective especially when it comes to time and money. Customers want to maximize their utility and RT is a valuable tool to do that.
RT is a decent system that can point you in the right direction of some good critics and some thoughtful reviews. The problem with the current RT is that they aggregate so many reviews that it actively turns people off from investigating a movie beyond its RT meter. The end result is that movies like BvS and SpeedRacer pretty much get a shitty reputations in casual circles despite being well-made films. Anyone with an open mind can see that those movies have a niche appeal that can hit its mark for a certain kind of viewer. In theory, RT should reflect that (I would argue it does!) but that's not what's going on at large.
Let's face it, most people are lazy and would prefer a quick ostentatious blurb instead of a drawn out, nuanced discussion on a particular perspective. They're perfectly satisfied with someone like Jeremy Jahns shouting into the screen with a goofy smile giving a film 4 Snickers Bars out of 5.
The shitting on Brett Ratner is also played out guys. We got tired of those after XMen 3.
Let's face it, most people are lazy and would prefer a quick ostentatious blurb instead of a drawn out, nuanced discussion on a particular perspective. They're perfectly satisfied with someone like Jeremy Jahns shouting into the screen with a goofy smile giving a film 4 Snickers Bars out of 5.
The shitting on Brett Ratner is also played out guys. We got tired of those after XMen 3.
The Artisan
Member
yeah well you fucked x men 3 and you fucked your own rush hour series
I feel like this is also a lot of gamer culture bleeding into a field that they may not have the proper context for. Good and great films getting a more mixed reaction than you would expect is rather commonplace and has been for decades, and coming from a medium where anything that receives less than a 8/10 has achieved leprosy status, that can come as quite a shock. I'm not calling out that poster specifically, but I do see that happen a lot.
Speaking as someone in middle america, I did literally look at the score and go "I'm not seeing that." I have pretty lax standards though. Generally ill only have second thoughts on something if it scores below a 50% on rt, and even then there are exceptions. I mean, I saw the Shack (21%) and enjoyed it. Conversely, Boyhood and Moonlight were fawned on and I found both exceptionally mediocre. In the end RT is just a tool, not the end all be all.
The real problem is that I read the reviews and they pointed out editing, pacing, and character motivation issues that break the film.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
I don't even know what "review culture" means, really.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Dude..up until last week, BvS had broken the March box office record held since 2012. The movie made fucking bank. It's rep is based on the majority of folks not digging it as much as you do, not Rotten Tomatoes. I literally know one person in my life that even pays attention to RT..and they hit the theater every Friday anyway.
We need to stop calling people stupid lazy idiots because they don't like what we like..that shit is WAY more played out than shitting on your boy Ratner.
Poor Abed.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
We gotta stick culture behind everything now..this culture culture is getting a bit ridiculous.
Sibersk Esto
Banned
How so.
Batman v Superman made alot of money in its opening weekend because Batman and Superman have mass appeal.
Speed Racer didn't make money because it was a movie about a long forgotten 60s anime property releasing in 2008. May I remind you that Iron Man was in its second week when Speed Racer released? And then a new Narnia film the next week? AND THEN INDIANA JONES 4 THE WEEK AFTER THAT? It was doomed.
Well is it RTs fault then? If they'd educate themselves they would quickly understand that 8/10 critics gave the film a decent/passing grade which I believe is 6/10 on RT. Math is just too complicated for people. And they do include the average rating.
Rotten Tomatoes IS terrible, but it has nothing to do with how awful BvS is or how people reacted to it.
I do think RT is an absurd metric, though.
It's RT's fault for having a shitty averaging algorithm that has no gradients.
100 C+ reviews is a 100% movie, 100 C- reviews is a 0% movie. It's pointless.
I do think RT is an absurd metric, though.
It's RT's fault for having a shitty averaging algorithm that has no gradients.
100 C+ reviews is a 100% movie, 100 C- reviews is a 0% movie. It's pointless.
killdatninja
Banned
It's doing it's job, higher percentage = more critics liked the film as opposed to disliking. The bad part of RT is them having to convert various rating mechanics that don't fit on the like or dislike scale. A lot of critics rate movies middle of the road, RT goes off the tone of the review... this causes problems because I've read so many reviews where critics just slam the movie throughout the entire review (I really hate when people nitpick every single fucking thing) and the at end they put one sentence on how they enjoyed watching it..
RT should never be trusted with comedies though, critics have a pretty terrible sense of humor.
RT should never be trusted with comedies though, critics have a pretty terrible sense of humor.
It's down right terrible in gaming right now.
The Jim Sterling Zelda incident showed the ugliest face of both sides.
It's a shame really, and I think it keeps newcomers away from looking at the hobby critically.
Do you mean MetaCritic instead of RottenTomatoes.
sugarhigh4242
Banned
Ratner sucks, and if anything RT overrates his movies.
I do think RT has a problem in that its methodology promotes crowdpleasing films over truly great ones. It's just an average of people saying "better than bad", not any quantification beyond that. I prefer metacritic for this reason.
I do think RT has a problem in that its methodology promotes crowdpleasing films over truly great ones. It's just an average of people saying "better than bad", not any quantification beyond that. I prefer metacritic for this reason.
Bobby Roberts
Banned
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Yeah..RT has certainly destroyed the Transformers franchise. They barely make a nickel..😒
Well , Is there a 538 like site for movies reviews with different statistical analysis?
Sibersk Esto
Banned
This. From what I've seen, review aggregators only pop up in enthusiast circles that care about that sort of thing. The movies that make tons of money and the movies that don't seem to have little to do with review scores.
Strangelove77
Member
Ive always viewed Ratner as the 100% talentless version of Zack Snyder. At least Snyder has an identity, Ratner has nothing.
That's not skew, that's a conflation of what these numbers represent. Metacritic is attempting to average (with a weight) the review scores. Rotten Tomatoes is doing a basic survey.
Treating an RT score like a Metacritic score is like seeing that 4 out of 5 dentists agree about new Trident gum and saying "Oh this gum is 80% good."
EDIT: Maybe someone should just repurpse Rotten Tomatoes data with the Everybody Votes Wii channel visualization.
BadAss2961
Member
You know. Everyone on GAF should know.
The anticipation, the amount of replies, and the aftermath of review threads for big games and movies should tell you all you need to know about review culture. Some people seem to live for those moments more than the products themselves.
Gordon Shumway
Banned
Damn lol..
- Status