She-Hulk: Attorney at Law

[Colossus1980]

BUt they were talking about Captain Marvel, not The Marvels. Not sure why you brought that into it.

If the audience score for CM was 45%, the majority of the audience probably is not interested in the sequel. And judging by the box office receipts, they definitely weren't.

[Powerboy]

If the audience score for CM was 45%, the majority of the audience probably is not interested in the sequel. And judging by the box office receipts, they definitely weren't.

My point in mentioning the 45% audience reviews for Captain Marvel was that it does not add up. The movie made a billion dollars. Movies make that kind of money because people go to see them over and over and over. People clearly loved the movie. What the sequel made is irrelevant.

I just noticed that Aquaman and the Lost Kingdom that more or less flopped has a higher audience score on RT than the original that made a billion. Again, audience scores based on a few people reviewing it doesn't give any basis to draw a conclusion as to its true popularity. Making a billion bucks? Now, that's a pretty strong clue.

With television, it's ratings. With streaming, it's ratings/ views, I suppose. We've had conservatives whining "Get woke, go broke" about stuff that made a billion dollars for so long that conservatives are a joke. It's just ignoring the facts and declaring themselves correct. Heaven help us that a movie they don't like finally does flop. Clearly, that proves them right.

[skyvolt2000]

Why don't indie filmmakers get "review bombed?"

Because when it comes to review bombing and attacking-those who do it choose what they want to attack.

Take IMDB (Internet Movie Database) excluding actual historical black event movies or certain leads-you would see LOW rating tossed at almost every black lead movie the moment it is announced.

It was only AFTER the movies came out did the ratings actually improve.

The Wayan Brothers's White Chicks and Michael B Jordan in Fantastic Four-the trolls on that website came out the WOOD WORK to attack those movies and Jordan. And gave them all sort of one star ratings.

Yet you saw NONE of that with Denzel's Equalizer movies or any Kevin Hart movie or Will Smith movies.

And you never hear about the good movies being review bombed.

Yes they do HOWEVER those reviews and low ratings get buried under higher and better reviews. Like on IMDB-it might take say 3-6 months before you really see the improvement.

All I'm asking is, what data/metrics do they use to determine whether something is review bombing or legitimate criticism?

You have to pay attention for the following-

They can tell you what they did like and what they didn't like (that is rule number ONE)
Look for the buzz words of the anti-diversity crew "woke" "indoctrination" and so on.

When Strange World was bombing-a writer for Yahoo BLAMED the gay son. I had to set him straight and my comment was deleted. The son being gay played NO part in that movie. The time spent talking about the boy he like was less than 2 minutes. That reviewer for Yahoo did not bother to watch the movie.

Lmao that's wild. And those are most of the audience reviewers? Can people rate without reviewing?

YES.

Go down the rabbit hole of some of these online hiring sites.

There are folks who will PAY you to give fake reviews. It's why Amazon has limited reviews to folks who have actually bought something from the website over a period of time.

And some are paying big time money.

[James Cameron]

Appreciate the breakdown skyvolt. Very illuminating.