Rotten Tomatoes removes Want To See percentages for films not released yet.

[Jokerz79]

Heh, yes and no. Those films aren't really connecting tissue to LOTR or the Harry Potter series. They share the universe, but the other movies can be enjoyed without them. Marvel wanted to set up a dynamic here where fans would feel they had to see Captain Marvel before seeing Infinity War, part two, Avengers: Endgame or whatever it's called or they would be missing needed information.

They are the same it's backstories for characters in the main films. Also I can't take you seriously because you obviously know Endgame is the name of the upcoming Avengers film yet fictitiously act like you're not sure it is the name because you can't be bothered with such information or something it makes your entire argument look disingenuous.

[bobellis75]

Yes, I'm sure. You might consider them that now, but they weren't when they originally came out.

I think the way Marvel has carefully put everything into play...most movie goers/Marvel fans assumed at the time they came out the characters would be very important to the overall Marvel story arc. Just my two cents. Marvel hasn't done anything without a purpose.

Futhermore...you could make that argument about the first time any character was introduced. Iron Man wasn't the movie that kicked off an entire universe...until it was. Captain America didn't know Iron Man...until he did. Thor wasn't an Avenger in his first movie...But later, he was.

You're just arguing for the sake of arguing...and are a good example of why Rotten Tomatoes is making some of the changes they are making.

[jetengine]

"Culture warriors" are so sad. Literally nothing better to do with their time.

[Chickfighter]

Futhermore...you could make that argument about the first time any character was introduced. Iron Man wasn't the movie that kicked off an entire universe...until it was. Captain America didn't know Iron Man...until he did. Thor wasn't an Avenger in his first movie...But later, he was.

You're just arguing for the sake of arguing...and are a good example of why Rotten Tomatoes is making some of the changes they are making.

I think you just made my point for me. None of those films were marketed to me as a must see so I could see something else. They stood on their own. Yes, guys, Marvel was building a universe as they went, but they were making films that could stand alone at the same time. I'm saying that the placement and marketing of Captain Marvel being what it is indicates a fear on the part of Marvel that this film wouldn't pass the standalone test.

You all seem to be the ones arguing for the sake of arguing. Go enjoy your film. It's going to do just fine. It would be interesting if we could jump five or ten years ahead and see what everyone thinks of it then in retrospect. A great leaping off point for a new phase of a franchise or the beginning of the downward spiral?

[The Negative Zone]

They are the same it's backstories for characters in the main films. Also I can't take you seriously because you obviously know Endgame is the name of the upcoming Avengers film yet fictitiously act like you're not sure it is the name because you can't be bothered with such information or something it makes your entire argument look disingenuous.

This is the most comic book forum post I've ever seen and I love it.

[SuperiorIronman]

Honestly in the ideal world the films wouldn't be able to get a review unless someone has actually seen it.

Ways to solve this is simply removing the ability to post audience reviews until it has come out in that territory. With profiles on websites all one needs is to select the territory they live be it in the United States, Japan, or whatever and thus you wouldn't be able to post a review until it releases there. What's to go wrong if it's not even officially released beforehand? And otherwise these websites usually have forums so if somehow someone saw it there beforehand, you can have a dedicated thread for the people who have seen it in those areas up to and maybe even a little bit after the film officially releases in that territory.

And on that other note, how fucking sad is somebody's life that they feel the need to attack a movie because it features autism, an Asian woman, or simply having a female lead?

[Bl00dwerK]

Interesting that the Want To See percentages have been removed for all films not released yet. I wonder why? Anyone know?

People were fine w/it as long as the movies they like were highly anticipated. When something they want to see isn't as anticipated.. now they want to cry about it. You can have an opinion as long as it's the correct one.

[Bl00dwerK]

Because of the targeted attack to bomb the Want to See percentage on Captain Marvel. Hell, I think they should go all the way and remove audience reviews too.

Yeah, that'd be great. Then all we'd have to go on are reviews from so-called critics, the people RT deems worthy of having their reviews posted. Many times critics hate a movie and the audience loves it. What about those?

[Divine Spark]

[Forseti]

People were fine w/it as long as the movies they like were highly anticipated. When something they want to see isn't as anticipated.. now they want to cry about it. You can have an opinion as long as it's the correct one.

The whole thing was always pointless. Why would anyone care how many other people claim not to want to see a movie? The very notion is ridiculous.

[Bl00dwerK]

The whole thing was always pointless. Why would anyone care how many other people claim not to want to see a movie? The very notion is ridiculous.

RT did. I'm guessing they got a bunch of complaints from fans of the film (a film they haven't even seen yet, I might add) and decided to take it down. We're only allowed one opinion per subject nowadays.

[SuperiorIronman]

The whole thing was always pointless. Why would anyone care how many other people claim not to want to see a movie? The very notion is ridiculous.

Film is a tricky business. You invest millions into a project usually over the 40 million range and then some when it comes to marketing (though marketing costs are allocated by studio not production budget).

Film is expensive to produce, it's also very expensive to consume. You could in-general spend in upwards of 10 dollars for a ticket assuming you are watching it during its initial run. DVD/Blu-ray costs can be 10-20 dollars or more. You also have costs of streaming and that can be 8 dollars or more monthly, but that's assuming you use a streaming service. Otherwise costs on digital are always going to vary which can be 3 dollars in excess of 20.

The problem with review bombing a film and even hype bombing a film is that it damages sales. People only have so much money and if you have more money to spend on film, fantastic, most people don't. People watch these sort of things to gauge whether they should spend money on a product or not because as I said, film is an expensive business. People simply trying to handle their money are going to take these sort of things seriously. Just because someone may want to see Captain Marvel doesn't mean that the film would be any good and if people say otherwise the consumer may take their money elsewhere. That's why this sort of thing is such a problem.

[superduperman]

By the look of it, the only reason anyone is downvoting it at all is because they took what Larson said out of context. Other than that, there is no reason to vote on it because it's not even out yet. What is your downvote based on? Some sort of company loyalty? That's a stupid reason also. Basically there is no reason to give this movie, which, again, hasn't even come out yet, a downvote. And there is no reason why you should be able to do so. What is the purpose of that?

[Midvillian1322]

RT did. I'm guessing they got a bunch of complaints from fans of the film (a film they haven't even seen yet, I might add) and decided to take it down. We're only allowed one opinion per subject nowadays.

it's a business and when they know something is disingenuous and it's being reported in meain stream media it's bad for credability. The whole point of the site is to represent people genuine feeling about the movie. RT says they found most the reviews came from the same couple of ISPs and geographical locations. That's not an honest representation of how people feel. It's how a couple of trolls with no life feel. RT doesnt wsnt to go the way of the IMDB forums. IMDB scores became completely unreliable because of trolling and the forums were a mix of hate speech and run of the mills trolls. The posts of people really trying to talk about something would get burried.

Feel like the only people getting upset about this are people who already think there is some kinda Dinsney conspiracy. Despite the fact that two of Dinsey biggest competitors own RTs.

[Bl00dwerK]

By the look of it, the only reason anyone is downvoting it at all is because they took what Larson said out of context. Other than that, there is no reason to vote on it because it's not even out yet.

That's not right, at all. RT removed the "Want to see" feature. It wasn't a review. It was a guage of whether or not you were interested in seeing the movie. It didn't specify why you did or didn't want to see it. One reason is as good as another.