She-Hulk: Attorney at Law

[80sbaby]

That makes sense. But what about a movie like Poor Things which features gay romance, discussions of feminism and communism, touches on the idea of female liberation and trauma. Obviously that's just one example, but it has reach. The Oscars definitely props these movies up. So why is it always the billion dollar franchise installments that get review bombed?

Yes but that film doesn't cater to a predominantly cis hetero white male demographic like action movies do (and have done for years.) There's no sense of entitlement to "artsy" films the way there is with action blockbusters.

[James Cameron]

Yes but that film doesn't cater to a predominantly cis hetero white male demographic like action movies do (and have done for years.) There's no sense of entitlement to "artsy" films the way there is with action blockbusters.

That's a fair point. But does none of it seem artificial to you?

When Disney puts out yet another bland boring corporate dreck and says that a huge portion of the negative audience reception is due to review bombing or a targeted harassment campaign, I am dubious. But what you said make sense, these are franchises that normally cater to the same demographics that cross over with the anti woke crowd

[j9ac9k]

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

The instances of review bombing or "alleged" review bombing happens because those films are threatening the assumed domain of these narrow-minded trolls who feel that "their space" is being taken over. The movies that are "supposed to be for them" are no longer targeting them with the same straight while male exceptionalism they've become entitled to, so they're lashing out against the perceived slight of something being taken away from them. And they justify it by crying about a corporate agenda to promote diversity, even though maintaining a lack of diversity before was just as much a corporate agenda. So, they never cared much about indie films to begin with because they didn't have the same entitled sense of ownership over them - those were always "fringe" anyway. (yes, this is speaking in huge generalities but I think it still applies)

That's a fair point. But does none of it seem artificial to you?
When Disney puts out yet another bland boring corporate dreck and says that a huge portion of the negative audience reception is due to review bombing or a targeted harassment campaign, I am dubious. But what you said make sense, these are franchises that normally cater to the same demographics that cross over with the anti woke crowd

From just my pov and experience of media, Disney (or whomever) didn't invent the idea of blaming review bombing to deflect from failure out of nowhere. Two things can be true - that review bombings did and sometimes do happen, and big corporations will try to save face by overinflating the effects of said bombings on the performance or reception of their bad movie. (if a movie is good, then obviously any attempt at bombing gets overshadowed anyway and thus there's no need for them to mention it)

[80sbaby]

That's a fair point. But does none of it seem artificial to you?

When Disney puts out yet another bland boring corporate dreck and says that a huge portion of the negative audience reception is due to review bombing or a targeted harassment campaign, I am dubious. But what you said make sense, these are franchises that normally cater to the same demographics that cross over with the anti woke crowd

Well, I'm a black American living in the US. So no,but doesn't seem artificial at all to me. I'm very well aware how much bigotry exists here and abroad. And it's only gotten worse since that can be monetized with these "anti-woke" grifters all over social media.

And just look at the comments people make when something is announced with a non-white male lead, like the new Star Wars Acolyte show. Without seeing any footage, supposed fans will complain about "DEI bad, woke, etc." Trolling has become pervasive in our society. We literally elected a man who uses trolling methods to POTUS.

[James Cameron]

The instances of review bombing or "alleged" review bombing happens because those films are threatening the assumed domain of these narrow-minded trolls who feel that "their space" is being taken over. The movies that are "supposed to be for them" are no longer targeting them with the same straight while male exceptionalism they've become entitled to, so they're lashing out against the perceived slight of something being taken away from them. And they justify it by crying about a corporate agenda to promote diversity, even though maintaining a lack of diversity before was just as much a corporate agenda. So, they never cared much about indie films to begin with because they didn't have the same entitled sense of ownership over them - those were always "fringe" anyway. (yes, this is speaking in huge generalities but I think it still applies)

I know the type of people you're talking about and I definitely see it a lot. There are a few youtubers and commentators I've had to unfollow and unsubscribe from because of it. My issue with the corporate-backed "wokeness" trend is that it's all just to tick boxes and reel in more box office numbers than legitimately being more progressive. So I prefer to call it virtue signaling than woke.

There are no doubts about the ideology and intent. But do these people have numbers to sway a review score? And does this trend of saying something was review bombed for being woke pose a risk of these corporate-studio movies trying to become exempt from criticism? I think that's where I take issue. The director of the Marvels said the movie was review bombed and it failed at the box office because of the anti-woke crowd. But why would that be true more than people just didn't like it/didn't care to see it and where is the data to prove such a thing?

[James Cameron]

Well, I'm a black American living in the US. So no,but doesn't seem artificial at all to me. I'm very well aware how much bigotry exists here and abroad. And it's only gotten worse since that can be monetized with these "anti-woke" grifters all over social media.

And just look at the comments people make when something is announced with a non-white male lead, like the new Star Wars Acolyte show. Without seeing any footage, supposed fans will complain about "DEI bad, woke, etc." Trolling has become pervasive in our society. We literally elected a man who uses trolling methods to POTUS.

I'm trans and I totally get it. Different lived experiences but I understand what you're talking about and I've seen it myself It's just very difficult for me to trust the words of a company like Disney. They are far from woke. So I wonder how much is legit review bombing and targeted harassment, and how much is Disney or whatever other big studio trying to save face, and using the notion of these harassment campaigns as a way to obfuscate legitimate criticism

[James Cameron]

From just my pov and experience of media, Disney (or whomever) didn't invent the idea of blaming review bombing to deflect from failure out of nowhere. Two things can be true - that review bombings did and sometimes do happen, and big corporations will try to save face by overinflating the effects of said bombings on the performance or reception of their bad movie.

This makes sense. I guess both can certainly be true

[HollowSage]

The Last of Us TV show was review bombed after the 3rd episode aired. Now did the show take a dive in quality 3 episodes in or was it the fact that it centered on a gay couple?

Some of this stuff is just common sense.

[James Cameron]

The Last of Us TV show was review bombed after the 3rd episode aired. Now did the show take a dive in quality 3 episodes in or was it the fact that it centered on a gay couple?

Some of this stuff is just common sense.

Some of it is common sense and some of it necessitates a more rigorous breakdown. Like was Madame Web "review bombed" because it had an all-female cast? Perhaps. But it was also a dogshit movie

[80sbaby]

I'm trans and I totally get it. Different lived experiences but I understand what you're talking about and I've seen it myself It's just very difficult for me to trust the words of a company like Disney. They are far from woke. So I wonder how much is legit review bombing and targeted harassment, and how much is Disney or whatever other big studio trying to save face, and using the notion of these harassment campaigns as a way to obfuscate legitimate criticism

It sounds like your a bit cynical and aren't a big Disney (the company) fan, so may be a bit biased? But it's not a stretch to see that review bombing does happen. And I don't see them using it as a shield, either since you agree that these people do exist.

And you're right that a company doesn't really care about social issues but they don't have to. Companies aren't people, despite what some may tell you. It's only concern is the bottom line and that's ok.

But it's made up of people who DO care about those things. So when they make something like Black Panther or even the Marvels, it's not merely virtue signaling to them.

[James Cameron]

It sounds like your a bit cynical and aren't a big Disney (the company) fan, so may be a bit biased? But it's not a stretch to see that review bombing does happen. And I don't see them using it as a shield, either since you agree that these people do exist.

And you're right that a company doesn't really care about social issues but they don't have to. Companies aren't people, despite what some may tell you. It's only concern is the bottom line and that's ok.

But it's made up of people who DO care about those things. So when they make something like Black Panther or even the Marvels, it's not merely virtue signaling to them.

That's valid and yeah I'm definitely biased. I'm still dubious how much of an impact these people can have and I worry that it can be used to skirt legitimate criticism, but I can certainly concede that the review bombing is a real practice and is prevalent.

[Bunch of Coconuts]

Evidence of review bombing is simply supported by the reporting site stating that review bombing happened and that they adjusted policies to police and prevent review bombing.

If you want to know what internal systems, devices, or techniques they use to determine what is review bombing and what isn't, I'd suggest you ask a representative of that site. I don't think anyone here works for any of those sites or would be able to disclose such information on an open forum such as this one.

One thing I can probably suggest: In my line of work, when researching a customer's accounts for fraudulent activity, we look at the timestamps of events happening, because every action taken on an account is logged.

[James Cameron]

Timestamps and recency of the account creation seem to be the biggest metrics in determining if a review is legitimate or not. But in the case of really popular stuff that is getting reviewed by a ton of people at once, like on a release day, I wonder what systems are in place to weed out the real from the fraudulent since in my mind there would no doubt be some overlap.

I've seen targetted harassment campaigns against indie creators or game developers and those campaigns are more than enough to legitimately hurt those people's businesses. But seeing it become this regular thing for billion dollar franchises has me curious of how they can be so effective.

[Bunch of Coconuts]

Timestamps and recency of the account creation seem to be the biggest metrics in determining if a review is legitimate or not. But in the case of really popular stuff that is getting reviewed by a ton of people at once, like on a release day, I wonder what systems are in place to weed out the real from the fraudulent since in my mind there would no doubt be some overlap.

I've seen targetted harassment campaigns against indie creators or game developers and those campaigns are more than enough to legitimately hurt those people's businesses. But seeing it become this regular thing for billion dollar franchises has me curious of how they can be so effective.

Maybe some interesting reads for you, then:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paultas...h=6c302c579c81

https://theconversation.com/review-b...out-art-199005

[Bunch of Coconuts]

To add the most recent example, X-Men '97 and the hullabaloo that spawned out of that one Empire article didn't seem to hurt the show (still waiting for Morph's pronouns to actually be brought up in the show, however).

From my POV, the more interesting question is this: if review bombing doesn't actually hurt anything (and if a product fails, it failed of it's own merits), then why do the review bombers...bomb?

That's mostly a rhetorical question, by the way. We know why.