The Rotten Tomatoes experience

[Beaddle]

First who is following the Dave Chappelle comeback comedy skit? trashed by critics, loved by the hard to impress comedy audience? Chappelle is also receiving support from his fellow comedians about the critics trashing. Good for him.



The site is now one of the most controversial, famous and infamous aspect of entertainment. Every few years things get more controversial and riles up debate among people. Apparently the site was first lunched in 1998. I don't know if their were scores then but I know scores were around by the early 2000s. I can't 100% pin point when it became a defining part of the movie experience but the site from my experience rose to prominence with the rise of MCU movies. This was the very first time I was aware of a franchise where the movies were supposedly good based on rt not on any film making merit worth talking about far cry from the days of batman and robin or x-men 1.

I say this as person who was part of the X3 and Spiderman 3 were let downs bandwagons because their stories made no sense and the directing of the film was was off. Bret Ratner is not a story teller and it was obvious Sam Raimi was uncomfortable with Venom. RT was not in the conversation as a back up to this opinions from most fans including myself. In fairness, I do remember the ''Nolan boys'' attacking critics over TDKR and the site had to shut down. This was a big news back then and one of the first times we see how impactful the site had become.

https://www.businessinsider.com/rott...critics-2012-7
''After Death Threats, Rotten Tomatoes Suspends 'The Dark Knight Rises' Comments To Protect Critics''


However the first two Nolan batman movies, rotten tomatoes scores played no impact in their success or popularity, those films were good to many because we saw Nolan's talent as a film maker, we did not need rotten tomatoes to convince us the films were good. I also remember movie fantasy juggernauts like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings, rotten tomatoes never impacted fans or the average movie goer and these were well received fantasy films but RT was never in the reasons for making the decision. Harry potter fans called Alfonso Cuaron a genius film maker before the Oscars took notice and gave him 5 awards many years later. . his movie is still not the best rated RT HP film though. David Yates who is a mixed bag harry potter director , maybe even disliked now because of fantastic beasts has the best rated HP film.

As time has gone on, the site got more controversial, although it is not rt that is directly to blame, all they do is gather reviews, fast forward to 2019, the site is what I will say infamously relevant and used as laugh tracks. two films alone this year are not polarizing enough when rt concerned, first captain marvel and now Joker. I do think the Joker will likely get a best picture nomination but what does it say when the best picture nominated comic movie is in the high 70s or high 60s? What does that say about films, critics and the site?

This is my own experience with rotten tomatoes. what of you guys?

when did you take notice of the site

when did things start getting controversial

when did you decide just because a movie has a higher score does not mean it is the objective fact that it is better than another movie

Lastly what do you think is the future of the site? would it get more irreverent and loose any little credibility it has left has time goes on?

[jetengine]

People often mistake how RT works.

Also Chapelles work is getting shat on by critics because whilst funny its also hideously lazy and unimaginative. For a man of his skill and talent he's no real need to punch down.

[Killerbee911]

Dave Chapelle's review has a whopping 16 critics(only 3 by top critics) who reviewed it. An average movie review gets like 100 more reviews. No more needs to be said

[Beaddle]

People often mistake how RT works.

Also Chapelles work is getting shat on by critics because whilst funny its also hideously lazy and unimaginative. For a man of his skill and talent he's no real need to punch down.

Not entirely true. its seems more politically targeted.

https://www.forbes.com/sites/andrewh.../#714b12523ed1


https://www.vox.com/2019/8/29/208356...cancel-culture


https://www.dailywire.com/news/51354...-prestigiacomo

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/09/07/dave...dont-care.html

[Midvillian1322]

People often mistake how RT works.

Also Chapelles work is getting shat on by critics because whilst funny its also hideously lazy and unimaginative. For a man of his skill and talent he's no real need to punch down.

I disagree I think Chappele fairly attacks everyone, he was just pointing out it's only certain people who cant take a joke. I thought it was a amazing special. But yea this thread is unneccessary and only started because someone was told to stop talking about RT on the Joker thread. Anyway agree to disagree on Chappele. I hear other comedians talk about how it's a master class on setting up punchlines. Esepcialy the punchline about the being able to say the N word but not the other other F word on the chappele show. And I agree thought it was well written but yea Chappeles Post credit stuff where he is just Bullhsitting is hilarious so he could get away with being lazy if he wanted to
.. hes that funny. But I actually thought it was well written.

[Jokerz79]

I disagree I think Chappele fairly attacks everyone, he was just pointing out it's only certain people who cant take a joke. I thought it was a amazing special. But yea this thread is unneccessary and only started because someone was told to stop talking about RT on the Joker thread. Anyway agree to disagree on Chappele. I hear other comedians talk about how it's a master class on setting up punchlines. Esepcialy the punchline about the being able to say the N word but not the other other F word on the chappele show. And I agree thought it was well written but yea Chappeles Post credit stuff where he is just Bullhsitting is hilarious so he could get away with being lazy if he wanted to
.. hes that funny. But I actually thought it was well written.

His current stuff reminds me of Carlin he takes shots at all sides if he sees something wrong and can be laughed at.

[WebLurker]

Rotten Tomatoes is a review aggregate site that lets the general audience log in to voice their opinions. Nothing more, nothing less.

Boom, we're done here.

(Besides, how many people really take Rotten Tomatoes as the final word on good film and just use it to vindicate themselves, either by "See? The critics agree with me," or "They're idiots to not see the greatness in it." Heck, I'm very fond of the 2017 Power Rangers movie. Critics didn't like it. It's not a perfect movie, but I still enjoy it a lot more then a lot of objectively better movies of the genre, like, say X2. Goes back to the subjectivity of art and what speaks to you. I think X2 has the better plot but flatter characters and performances.* Power Rangers may have the most basic plot ever, but it goes for broke with its five leads in terms of making their growth push the story forward and has a uniformly memorable cast. At the end of the day, I find the characters are what make the story most worthwhile for me, hence why Power Rangers > X2 for me.)

*Not all of them, but five (Professor X, Magneto, Wolverine, Stryker, and Nightcrawler) out of a larger team cast is really sad, esp. when we've seen it done so well since by Marvel Studios.

[Geraldofrivia]

First who is following the Dave Chappelle comeback comedy skit? trashed by critics, loved by the hard to impress comedy audience? Chappelle is also receiving support from his fellow comedians about the critics trashing. Good for him.



The site is now one of the most controversial, famous and infamous aspect of entertainment. Every few years things get more controversial and riles up debate among people. Apparently the site was first lunched in 1998. I don't know if their were scores then but I know scores were around by the early 2000s. I can't 100% pin point when it became a defining part of the movie experience but the site from my experience rose to prominence with the rise of MCU movies. This was the very first time I was aware of a franchise where the movies were supposedly good based on rt not on any film making merit worth talking about far cry from the days of batman and robin or x-men 1.

I say this as person who was part of the X3 and Spiderman 3 were let downs bandwagons because their stories made no sense and the directing of the film was was off. Bret Ratner is not a story teller and it was obvious Sam Raimi was uncomfortable with Venom. RT was not in the conversation as a back up to this opinions from most fans including myself. In fairness, I do remember the ''Nolan boys'' attacking critics over TDKR and the site had to shut down. This was a big news back then and one of the first times we see how impactful the site had become.

https://www.businessinsider.com/rott...critics-2012-7
''After Death Threats, Rotten Tomatoes Suspends 'The Dark Knight Rises' Comments To Protect Critics''


However the first two Nolan batman movies, rotten tomatoes scores played no impact in their success or popularity, those films were good to many because we saw Nolan's talent as a film maker, we did not need rotten tomatoes to convince us the films were good. I also remember movie fantasy juggernauts like Harry Potter and Lord of the Rings, rotten tomatoes never impacted fans or the average movie goer and these were well received fantasy films but RT was never in the reasons for making the decision. Harry potter fans called Alfonso Cuaron a genius film maker before the Oscars took notice and gave him 5 awards many years later. . his movie is still not the best rated RT HP film though. David Yates who is a mixed bag harry potter director , maybe even disliked now because of fantastic beasts has the best rated HP film.

As time has gone on, the site got more controversial, although it is not rt that is directly to blame, all they do is gather reviews, fast forward to 2019, the site is what I will say infamously relevant and used as laugh tracks. two films alone this year are not polarizing enough when rt concerned, first captain marvel and now Joker. I do think the Joker will likely get a best picture nomination but what does it say when the best picture nominated comic movie is in the high 70s or high 60s? What does that say about films, critics and the site?

This is my own experience with rotten tomatoes. what of you guys?

when did you take notice of the site

when did things start getting controversial

when did you decide just because a movie has a higher score does not mean it is the objective fact that it is better than another movie

Lastly what do you think is the future of the site? would it get more irreverent and loose any little credibility it has left has time goes on?

Rotten Tomatoes says a lot about our society .

Anyway, In which universe is Captain Marvel controversial. It is painfully average MCU movie both by critics and audience. Only thing it showed RT was wide open to Brigading while IMDB had excellent Brigading detection system.

[Nine Crocodile]

I have never used RT to determine whether or not to see a film. It means nothing to me.

[Beaddle]

I have never used RT to determine whether or not to see a film. It means nothing to me.

I find the scores more curious than meaningful. One good example was star wars episode 7. As a person who liked Star Trek 2009, I did fall for the high rt score of the force awakens especially it being the same director. When I saw the film I was quite surprised. it felt as if I was been punked. it deserved no where the same score as star trek 2009. I was so let down and hollow after episode 7.

Last Jedi had already gotten controversial before I saw the film but I knew the rt score was high , so I went in knowing what was going on among fans and the media, the first time I saw it, I was confused, didn't really decide where I stood and the controversy was beginning to have a big influence on people's mind including mine. when i saw the film for the second time and had time to think about it, all the flaws came screaming to me. I had to ask myself how could critics not have noticed some of the jarring problems with the film.

Of all the franchises, if any flaws were to be obvious, it was star wars since the prequels were there and critics came with knives when they reviewed the prequels. How could these same critics not see these new films are potentially worse than the prequels and it is their jobs to expose that. So rt does not mean anything to me either, but it makes me curious of what goes into the mind of critics now when they review films and decide what they want to give rotten or a fresh.

[WebLurker]

Rotten Tomatoes says a lot about our society .

Anyway, In which universe is Captain Marvel controversial. It is painfully average MCU movie both by critics and audience. Only thing it showed RT was wide open to Brigading while IMDB had excellent Brigading detection system.

In the case of the Captain Marvel movie, it was my observation that the usual suspects (They Who Must Not Be Named, SJW conspiracy theorists, and other like-minded trolls) were the only ones making a big deal out of the movie being some controversy. Most of what I observed (anecdotally) from those who didn't have a stake in the movie failing, was along the lines of "it was perfectly fine as an origin story and fun, as is the MCU norm, or, at worst, okay, and it's great that we've finally gotten a woman as the lead."

Honestly, all the "controversy" over Rotten Tomatoes was just They Who Must Not Be Named throwing a temper tantrum since they couldn't review bomb Captain Marvel and other so-called SJW movies coming out anymore and have something to point to as a "victory" (hence the lie being peddled around that Rotten Tomatoes changed the policy to protect Captain Marvel when it's on the books that the company had been planning this for some time prior in response to previous instances like this). It all goes to show how they don't understand the actual change; anyone can still post their thoughts, they just don't get counted with the verified ticket purchases.

[MyriVerse]

I've seen positive reviews get considered negative by RT. That's when I pretty much realized the site was a fraud. Plus the system RT uses doesn't really tell you how good a movie/show is. Something can still get 100% and still be mediocre. I generrally trust the general public more than critics, anyway.

[WebLurker]

I've seen positive reviews get considered negative by RT. That's when I pretty much realized the site was a fraud. Plus the system RT uses doesn't really tell you how good a movie/show is. Something can still get 100% and still be mediocre. I generrally trust the general public more than critics, anyway.

It is my understanding that the site labels the reviews "Fresh" or "Rotten," not the critic. The system doesn't tell you anything other then what percentage of the critics who submitted reviews liked or didn't like it. That's all.

[wjowski]

It's an aggregate site. It's literally just a collection of other people's reviews. Claiming it's 'biased' is absurd.

[WebLurker]

It's an aggregate site. It's literally just a collection of other people's reviews. Claiming it's 'biased' is absurd.

Thank you.