Um, do any CAF members particularly trust Rotten Tomatoes?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Maxirad
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
I would say that I “somewhat” trust Rotten Tomatoes. I actually do make something of a living off writing film reviews. Finding a film critic online who you find favorability with helps a good deal. Personally, I was an avid reader of Roger Ebert and found his taste to be almost spot on with mine. After his passing, I admittedly have difficulty finding another critic who I match up with.

Back to the OP, there are some films that I just can’t deal with. For example, the horror film, The Babadook, has a 98%. Upon screening, I absolutely detested it. I would rate it at a mere 10% or one star out of a classic four star scale. It’s just awful.
As a horror movie, yes, but as psychological drama The Babadook is brilliant, probably better than The Shining. Same for the non-horror It Comes At Night, which is not a horror movie - excellent movie that was poorly promoted as horror. Both movies are infinitely superior to all the comic book movies and sequels out there.
 
Rotten Tomatoes is just a review aggregator. It averages out what many reviewers are giving movies.

I find RedLetterMedia gives me more reliable reviews, but I have similar artistic inclinations as they do. Warning: RLM is not safe for children or work.
There is also Metacritic, which gives a weighted average score to each movie/tv show/whatever, rather than just giving a percentage of critics who gave a “thumbs up”.

metacritic.com/about-metascores
 
I will check current movies to see what the audience rating is, but I think it gave the
movie Arrival 99% or 100% and I would have rated it at 10%. The movie was awful.
Lies. Arrival was great.

And sure, I trust RT, in some sense. All they’re doing is aggregating reviews from different people. It’s not like there is a particular Rotten Tomatoes.com stance on a particular movie.

What’s the case for not “trusting” them?
 
As a horror movie, yes, but as psychological drama The Babadook is brilliant, probably better than The Shining. Same for the non-horror It Comes At Night, which is not a horror movie - excellent movie that was poorly promoted as horror. Both movies are infinitely superior to all the comic book movies and sequels out there.
That’s just my issue with the film, the filmmakers should have realized it was a psychological drama, and not horror. I cannot look at a film like The Babadook, and say even though it’s a terrible horror film, and great as a psychological drama; therefore I should give it a favorable review. No way would I write my film column to have the audience think like that.

Not to argue, but not all superhero films out there are that good. Off the top, I can say that none of the new Spider-Man films, Avengers 2, or Suicide Squad…got favorable review from me.
 
Aside from not liking the name, I no longer care about what they think.
Rotten Tomatoes doesn’t “think” anything. They don’t take a position on whether a movie is good or bad. They just give you all the reviews and then the percentage of reviewers who liked/disliked the movie.
 
Rotten Tomatoes doesn’t “think” anything. They don’t take a position on whether a movie is good or bad. They just give you all the reviews and then the percentage of reviewers who liked/disliked the movie.
You can argue “don’t shoot the messenger” here. The problem is more so with the critics than anything else. RT just catalogs what it finds.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top