>Box office is the undercurrent in almost all discussions of cinema, and frequently it's more than just an undercurrent. The brutal judgmentalism that has made opening-weekend grosses into a bloodthirsty spectator sport seems to have encouraged an even more brutal approach to film reviewing. I'm talking about market research firms like Cinemascore, which started in the late '70s, and online "aggregators" like Rotten Tomatoes, which have absolutely nothing to do with real film criticism. They rate a picture the way you'd rate a horse at the racetrack, a restaurant in a Zagat's guide, or a household appliance in Consumer Reports. They have everything to do with the movie business and absolutely nothing to do with either the creation or the intelligent viewing of film. The filmmaker is reduced to a content manufacturer and the viewer to an unadventurous consumer.
>These firms and aggregators have set a tone that is hostile to serious filmmakers — even the actual name Rotten Tomatoes is insulting. And as film criticism written by passionately engaged people with actual knowledge of film history has gradually faded from the scene, it seems like there are more and more voices out there engaged in pure judgmentalism, people who seem to take pleasure in seeing films and filmmakers rejected, dismissed and in some cases ripped to shreds.
there's nothing wrong with rotten tomatoes if you interpret it as what it actually is - an average of how many critics liked the film vs. how many didn't like it
there are plenty of films that are "rotten" at 50%, but that means half of all critics thought the movie was good
there are exceptions, but RT scores at 0-10% are usually your emoji movies and your Norm of the Norths, and your 90%+ movies are usually, but not always, worth watching
Carson Diaz
He's right and Irishman was the best film of 2019 t. zoomer
Marty is based as always. If you use shit like rt to judge if a film is worth watching you are a retard.
Ryan Moore
Ok boomer.
Gabriel Baker
>there are plenty of films that are "rotten" at 50%, but that means half of all critics thought the movie was good Yeah and then retarded normies don't go watch the movie and form their own opinion because they already know it's """rotten""". It's a nefarious system
Luke Ross
just remember that rotten tomatoes lefty politically correct fag critics gave picard, nu- star wars and the watchmen series high scores.
Nathan Davis
Watchmen was capekino Watchmen was capekino too
Colton Turner
Can't wait until this dusty ass wop die
Carter Allen
Post your favorite film with an under 50% rotten tomatoes critic rating
Josiah Baker
Aside from comedies, I can't think of a single time I watched a rotten movie and didn't think the rating was completely justified, whether I liked it or not.
Nathan Johnson
Kingdom of Heaven Batman v Superman Prometheus
Xavier Cox
marty is literally the most knowledgable man in cinema today
James Taylor
hes right if we're talking about art
but we aren't
we're talking about hollywood movies
Carson Peterson
The fact that Marty is complaining about a system that doesn't affect him negatively at all whatsoever is what gives this legitimacy.
He has never received a critically shat on movie ever. Of course you have contrarian faggot ((((critics))) going after him for notoriety but look at his RT scores, they're all 80+
He was prompted to write the stuff in the OP by pic related, which he thought was one of the best movies of the decade but ended up polarizing critics and getting a "F" on CinemaScore
I unironically loved this and couldn't understand the hate.
Henry Thompson
he's off script, somebody #metoo him fast!
Charles Baker
I blame Siskel and Ebert's style of criticism for this one. No real critical viewing of any films that they watch, just a few minutes of describing what happens in the films and then saying "I like it" or "it sucked". It's an assembly line rather than criticism, it's all made to tell the retarded audience whether or not they should consume product rather than actually making them engage with the work.
Gabriel Clark
Good stuff user, saved.
Jason Brooks
Source? I doubt Marty gives a fuck about Rotten tomatoes or any of the online film critics since, you know, actual film criticism is dead. Literal whos talking about a movie plot or the politics related to said plot do not qualify. Those are uneducated opinions at best while criticism entails analysis and analysis in turn implies knowledge. Knowledge about cinematography, movie edditing, lighting, photography, music, writting, acting, genres, colour theory and so on.
I know what you are going to say, that´s elitist as fuck and regular people don´t care about that stuff and that´s exactly right. Regular people are not critics, and can´t participate or care for that kind of discussions. Sadly this has resulted on real critics leaving their spots to people that can or will only give a vague opinion about how a movie made them feel. (and sometimes not even that. Sometimes their only "job" is to sugarcoat the POV of their employers and overlords).
That however is not the job of the critic. The job is to know about all those technical and aesthetical aspects of film i mentioned earlier, as well as film history, art history and culture in general to make an analysis as objective as possible. Tergiversation in the name of some political banner is the opposite of that.
Cameron Bell
i’m with you, it’s a really good film, but come on, it is quite out-there. i’m sure you can understand why huge swathes of the filmgoing audience were repulsed by it.
based zoomer you have a bright future ahead of you
Aaron Williams
He's completely right, but this pertains to the audience score as well.
Robert Hernandez
southland tales
Hunter Sanders
>there are more and more voices out there engaged in pure judgmentalism, people who seem to take pleasure in seeing films and filmmakers rejected, dismissed and in some cases ripped to shreds.
Holy shit, he got us. I have never read a better description of EVERYONE on Zig Forums. How do we get our revenge?
