The MCU having as many good scores as it does is the biggest giveaway that RT is influenced by money or connections. Like there’s no way in hell the MCU has THAT many good movies when most of them are boring AF.
IGN | Rotten Tomatoes Under Fire After PR Firm's Scheme to Pay Critics for Positive Reviews Uncovered
Submitted 1 year ago by TheSparrowPrince@lemmy.world to moviesandtv@lemmy.film
Comments
HellAwaits@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Hiccup@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 year ago
Not really. Up until recently, most of the MCU was good to great. I’m not exactly sure where the shift happened, but a lot of the more recent ones have been trash. I’m talking about the secret invasions and black widows, where they’ve completely lost the script.
PopOfAfrica@lemmy.world 1 year ago
After End Game was that shift. It felt like they told all there was to tell, and the stakes were gone.
Cethin@lemmy.zip 1 year ago
The peak is at whatever point you realized you had seen the same movie before.
ArghZombies@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Which is why RT scores were usually good. Because a RT percentage is just the percentage of critics that thought the film was good or better.
Too many people treat RT scores as a single “this is a film that has a quality rating of 90%” whereas it’s “90% of critics think it’s not shit”.
Really, this is RTs fault for picking a metric so often used in a different way.
money_loo@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Yeah everyone knows if something is popular it sucks.
Ghostalmedia@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The best part - Rotten Tomatoes can be manipulated by paying several people $50. Five Hamiltons.
I know reviewing movies doesn’t pay well, but I didn’t know it was that bad.
jordanlund@lemmy.one 1 year ago
How many $50 reviewers did they have to buy though?
Looking at Ophelia… huh, it’s not on Rotten Tomatoes anymore…
Well, looking at ANOTHER crappy Daisy Ridley movie, Chaos Walking:
www.rottentomatoes.com/m/chaos_walking
21% rating on 154 reviews.
So 32 positive reviews and 122 negative reviews.
To hit 60% they would need to add 151 positive reviews. 183/305 total reviews.
At $50 a pop, those 151 positive reviews would run $7,550. Chump change.
psycho_driver@lemmy.world 1 year ago
If you really want to get depressed research how much representatives and senators have been bought off with in the recent past.
Four_lights77@lemm.ee 1 year ago
The user reviews are where it’s at on rotten tomatoes. The critic reviews have been kinda suspect for a while.
neonspool@lemmy.world 1 year ago
the critic reviews have always been complete dogshit. too many movies get 100% or 0% on rotten tomatoes.
if i’m not mistaken IMDB ratings are only user based, and in my opinion, i almost never disagree with IMDB ratings and i think it’s because it has a vastly larger voting group to get a more accurate viewer consensus even if a small number of critics give a 0/10 or 10/10
Endorkend@kbin.social 1 year ago
Who would've thought that this was happening on a site with often massive disparities between Critic and Public reviews, almost always related to content with big marketing budgets.
betwixthewires@lemmy.basedcount.com 1 year ago
Good god has the world not figured this out already? Or was it a conspiracy theory until now?
zcd@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
Yeah no shit, RT end IMDb have been review shills for years, completely worthless
metallic_substance@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Anybody got good suggestions for alternatives?
dlpkl@lemmy.world 1 year ago
The issue is that every site uses the same critics to aggregate scores from. That being said I like using metacritic since you can view it by audience rating, and excluding the anti-woke, incel brigades on some media it usually aligns pretty well with what score I’d personally give a movie.
artsii@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Check out Letterboxd. But the star rating system is used a bit differently than you might be used to, like an average move will get a 3/5 stars, and that’s not a “bad” score. Just took me a bit getting used to
trachemys@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Forget aggregators. Find a couple critics you usually agree with. People have different tastes.
spittingimage@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Uncovered? I thought it was public knowledge for years.
AceFuzzLord@lemm.ee 1 year ago
I always just assumed that the badly rated ones might be legit but that the higher ones may have had a few bought off critics (because capitalism) here and there, but now I know I’m right.
psycho_driver@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Anybody who hasn’t noticed the change in recent years hasn’t been paying attention.
Naatan@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Movie / TV reviews are such a shit show. I rarely find myself agreeing with the averaged out rating.
These days I’ll just make sure the rating is above say 30 and beyond that I’ll rely on trailers and reading actual reviews. But finding new movies and tv shows to watch is quite a chore as a result.
I hope someday soon AI can be employed to give you real personalized recommendations that don’t suck. But realistically it’ll just be more shitty algorithms meant to serve the interests of the highest bidder.
someguy3@lemmy.ca 1 year ago
This is why I liked rotten tomatoes, it separates the critics scores from the audience scores.
Naatan@lemmy.one 1 year ago
Yeah I definitely assign more value to the audience reviews. Critics are mostly useless, unless you identify ones that align with your personal taste.
detun3d@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Oh, people still pay attention to review scores? 🤣
MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee 1 year ago
So what if they do? It’s anybody’s right to conduct a free transaction. If somebody wants to hire me to write a lovely review, why not? If I want to hire people to write some bad reviews about my competition, that’s a free transaction. Crazy communists want to exert big government control over the free review market.
Deftdrummer@lemmy.world 1 year ago
It’s called integrity and readers have faith in the writer. When it’s discovered you’re full of shit there’s zero service to anyone.
Your letting your lemmygrad bullshit seep into this community.
abbotsbury@lemmy.world 1 year ago
This person is the opposite of a lemmygrad loony
MrBusinessMan@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Integrity means if you take money from somebody you do your best to write an excellent review. Also, be equal and fair, charge the same price to write a good review for Oppenheimer as you do to write a good review for Barbie. Take pride in your work and write good compelling reviews, people will pay you what you are worth.
I’ve never even been to Leningrad, I only know it from the Billy Joel tune.
Commiunism@lemmy.wtf 1 year ago
Nice bait Mr Business Man
Unlocalhost@lemmy.world 1 year ago
You either die a hero slowly becomes a villain
TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 1 year ago
And another site is enveloped by shitifacation.
cmbabul@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Remember IMDB in the early 00s? It was you needed from what it set out to be. I recently went back to grab some lists for automation and holy shit it’s a wasteland of bullshit. I can’t imagine getting lost in it for hours learning about movies and deciding what I wanted to watch next if it was what it has become
KillAllPoorPeople@lemmy.world 1 year ago
I really loved IMDb back in the day. While the user ratings weren’t perfect, there used to be a formula you could use to figure out the worthiness of a movie to watch. Now (10 years or so), IMDb user ratings are inundated with conservatives and older generations who tend to rate based on their fragile feelings rather than on how watchable a movie is.
Someonedifferent@sh.itjust.works 1 year ago
I miss the IMDb message boards so much. It was so neat to be able to ask a question about a movie or read a post someone made three years before explaining the ending.
echoplex21@lemmy.world 1 year ago
Letterboxd has been slowly filling that void for me
nevernevermore@kbin.social 1 year ago
The term is enshittification, penned by Cory Doctorow
Shitifacation was my last international holiday where the airline lost my luggage
TransplantedSconie@lemm.ee 1 year ago
Oof. THAT must have royally sucked
funktion@lemm.ee 1 year ago
RT was shit from the start though.
downpunxx@kbin.social 1 year ago
not from the start, it wasn't no. after they sold out, it became a corrupted willing tool of the studios. i made the move to metacritic 10 years ago.