|
|
Post by PromNightCarrie on Oct 11, 2017 22:57:48 GMT
I agree with him. That's why I don't abide by the reviews of critics as much as I used to when Roger Ebert was alive. They are critiquing in the microwave era. |
|
|
|
Post by Pavan on Oct 12, 2017 8:19:42 GMT
Totally agree with him.
|
|
|
|
Post by Ryan_MYeah on Oct 12, 2017 23:14:07 GMT
He’s not wrong. I think some of the argument is one-sided in a way (Can we seriously say Wizard of Oz, Wonderful Life, or Vertigo are comparable to Mother!?), and some of what he picks apart feels like mere symptoms to bigger problems (and seriously, Brett Ratner is the last guy to take word from on this topic), but it can be damaging as much as it can be helpful, and the focus on box office and opening weekends can be very harmful as well.
Granted, I still think the argument here is 50/50.
EDIT: But yeah, Fuck Cinemascores!
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Oct 12, 2017 23:51:46 GMT
He's right of course but let's not forget we are part of that problem too or at least we were on Oscar Buzz/Movie Awards on IMDB when we were looking at RT passionately like a movie had aesthetic worth like a sporting event - and that was even knowing its statistical biases and the way that good films pick up a bunch of follow the leader positive reviews and poorly reviewed ones get kicked when they are down - at a certain point they aren't even "real".
I had tons of (healthy) arguments with Matt Fincher and scrudpup and merc (lol) because those guys always referenced the "critical consensus" like it was 1978 or something and my argument was not only wasn't it the same, its composition had changed and it was something to be questioned as much as it was automatically trusted too.
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Oct 13, 2017 0:41:07 GMT
A lot of people worship the tomatometer these days the way hipsters worshiped Pitchfork in the mid-2000's. I've liked plenty of things where the critical consensus is bad and disliked plenty of things where the consensus is good. Why don't you go see something and decide for yourself?
Cinemascores are worthless, just an industry tool for studios to figure out what audiences like. So much garbage has A or B cinemascores.
|
|
|
|
Post by Johnny_Hellzapoppin on Oct 13, 2017 10:22:50 GMT
A lot of people worship the tomatometer these days the way hipsters worshiped Pitchfork in the mid-2000's. I've liked plenty of things where the critical consensus is bad and disliked plenty of things where the consensus is good. Why don't you go see something and decide for yourself? Cinemascores are worthless, just an industry tool for studios to figure out what audiences like. So much garbage has A or B cinemascores. This The only opinion that matters on a film is your opinion. Is it nice to hear others opinions on films? Sure it is, but if Manohla Dargis or Mark Kermode don't like my #1 film of 2007, then I don't really give a damn, and if I think a film they adore is a heap of shit, then what of it. I'm still right, as mine is the opinion that ultimately matters on films I watch. The Snowman is currently getting blasted by critics, I was the one who posted the thread yesterday pointing this out, but it isn't going to stop me watching it. It was one of my most anticipated of the year. I care that Jonathan Pile of Empire Magazine didn't like it, about as much as I care that Geoffrey Macnab from The Guardian did like it, which is to say very little. In terms of what Scorsese is complaining about. Its the cutthroat nature of the internet Marty. People don't want nice anymore, we don't live in a time when people 'generally respond in a thoughtful manner'. We live in the days of shade. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Oct 13, 2017 22:56:15 GMT
I can't say I disagree entirely. I actually think rotten tomatoes is a fine judgment of what might consistent "quality cinema", if you can't decide for yourself it want to see a film, but it does seem like there's a lot of "arguing" going on from it, especially since lately they've allowed any type of critic to post reviews. So you get a lot of dude "bro bloggers" as a result, writing reviews for major films or something. There's also the fact that I find the tomatometer's percentage increase / decrease to be flawed. It seems like they prefer negative reviews more then positive ones. Just my two cents though. I don't think Rotten Tomatoes is a bad system, it's just one that's very very flawed, and needs to be improved.
I do think this might be the start of most studios skipping Rotten Tomatoes though, especially when a filmmaker like Scorsese is calling them out for being flawed. That's gotta sting, and it will probably change the narrative entirely, so to say.
|
|
|
|
Post by Sharbs on Oct 13, 2017 23:29:56 GMT
I do agree with him on most points. And RT is flawed and reviewers tend to try to find the negatives moreso than the positives and pick apart films. But if a "serious filmmaker" that has been proven to be incredibly competent makes a stinker That filmmaker shouldn't be given a free pass by any consensus-based website I don't care what you call it
|
|
|
|
Post by jimmalone on Oct 14, 2017 10:28:16 GMT
A lot of people worship the tomatometer these days the way hipsters worshiped Pitchfork in the mid-2000's. I've liked plenty of things where the critical consensus is bad and disliked plenty of things where the consensus is good. Why don't you go see something and decide for yourself? Cinemascores are worthless, just an industry tool for studios to figure out what audiences like. So much garbage has A or B cinemascores. In terms of what Scorsese is complaining about. Its the cutthroat nature of the internet Marty. People don't want nice anymore, we don't live in a time when people 'generally respond in a thoughtful manner'. We live in the days of shade. And this is one of the things I most despise about our time. |
|
atn
Full Member
Posts: 680
Likes: 353
|
Post by atn on Oct 14, 2017 11:11:17 GMT
>implying Scorsese is a serious filmmaker
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 14, 2017 13:31:24 GMT
>implying Scorsese is a serious filmmaker calls Scorsese a hack when stanning for Pulp Fiction smh |
|
atn
Full Member
Posts: 680
Likes: 353
|
Post by atn on Oct 14, 2017 21:09:16 GMT
>implying Scorsese is a serious filmmaker calls Scorsese a hack when stanning for Pulp Fiction smh Since when have I expressed anything more than a mild affinity for Pulp Fiction? |
|
anita
New Member
Posts: 19 
Likes: 4
|
Post by anita on Oct 29, 2017 15:57:02 GMT
And he is right again.  |
|
