GODZILLA vs. KONG | March 31 2021 | Adam Wingard to direct

[Firepower]

1 hour ago, Lucas said:

Whether any of these things matter isn't a debate worth having, but I'm very curious why an interest in a Rottentomatoes rating is "a lot worse" than an IMDb one. The critic score on the former is substantially more credible, and actually interesting to follow.

Imdb - audience rating based on hundreds of thousands of votes, RT - critics (a big word considering they literally let anyone in these days) rating based on around 500 votes, many of them are completely insane and base their opinion on ideological and political bias, ignoring quality of a movie. Review bombing happens on both platforms, but the difference is it doesn't affect final imdb rating (even Cap Marvel managed to get a decent score), but RT review bombing does affect its rating. So RT is completely useless, only your personal opinion is credible. Also:

Roger Ebert thought Junior was worth audience's attention more than Predator and True Lies. And Pauline Kael thought Clint Eastwood is a terrible talentless actor. And many many more examples like that.
It might be fascinating to read their opinions, but it's silly to think they are actually credible.

1 hour ago, Eric #TeamKong said:

Dude's one of those guys whose entire personality is "grr woke critics bad". Pay him little mind

Woke critics are bad, woke admins are as bad  Most people have this opinion, so I guess you should pay little mind to many many people, if you have one.

[XXRDJisDoctorDoom]

10 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Most people have this opinion

 

You should stick to speaking for yourself. 

[Lucas]

14 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Imdb - audience rating based on hundreds of thousands of votes, RT - critics (a big word considering they literally let anyone in these days) rating based on around 500 votes, many of them are completely insane and base their opinion on ideological and political bias, ignoring quality of a movie. Review bombing happens on both platforms, but the difference is it doesn't affect final imdb rating (even Cap Marvel managed to get a decent score), but RT review bombing does affect its rating. So RT is completely useless, only your personal opinion is credible. Also:

Roger Ebert thought Junior was worth audience's attention more than Predator and True Lies. And Pauline Kael thought Clint Eastwood is a terrible talentless actor. And many many more examples like that.
It might be fascinating to read their opinions, but it's silly to think they are actually credible.

Woke critics are bad, woke admins are as bad  Most people have this opinion, so I guess you should pay little mind to many many people, if you have one.

Thank you for this very entertaining Onion article, it's just what I wanted. Incredibly hype that RT is the one blamed for "letting anyone in these days" but IMDb gets a pass for doing just that, but for real. Also hype that critics having opinions that don't necessarily align with everyone else is worth bringing up, but not the millions of regular people with even more unusual thoughts on film. Very excited about all of this.

 

EDIT: I'll take a critic I disagree with but who has dedicated their entire professional life to studying film as an art form when it comes to analyzing the merits of one over... well most anyone on IMDb probably.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Lucas

[Menor the Destroyer]

12 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Imdb - audience rating based on hundreds of thousands of votes, RT - critics (a big word considering they literally let anyone in these days) rating based on around 500 votes, many of them are completely insane and base their opinion on ideological and political bias, ignoring quality of a movie.

If you actually read through critic reviews on RT and compare them to user reviews on imdb, it will be readily apparent that imdb reviews have far more ideological and political bias.

[SnokesLegs]

14 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Roger Ebert thought Junior was worth audience's attention more than Predator and True Lies. And Pauline Kael thought Clint Eastwood is a terrible talentless actor. And many many more examples like that.
It might be fascinating to read their opinions, but it's silly to think they are actually credible.

To quote Clint Eastwood himself: Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. I might disagree with Ebert and Kael there, but to say their opinions aren’t credible is just ludicrous. Everybody is allowed an opinion, whether they’re a professional critic or not. Just because they don’t align with my thoughts doesn’t mean their opinion is somehow invalid.

[Firepower]

11 minutes ago, Menor said:

If you actually read through critic reviews on RT and compare them to user reviews on imdb, it will be readily apparent that imdb reviews have far more ideological and political bias.

I read them and it's not true, most of them don't even mention that. When I read a critic review about some action flick, I want to know if story/action/direction/music/editing/acting is good, not another crazy rant about racism, sexism, misoginism, Trump and NRA, people don't care about that, they want to know if the actual movie is good or not.

14 minutes ago, VenomXXR said:

You should stick to speaking for yourself. 

I speak for myself, but it's extremely obvious that woke groups are loud minority. Very very few people think RT rating is actually credible. Or maybe you want to say that Old Guard and Mulan 2020 are anywhere near, let's say, Scarface and Fight Club?

12 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Thank you for this very entertaining Onion article, it's just what I wanted. Incredibly hype that RT is the one blamed for "letting anyone in these days" but IMDb gets a pass for doing just that, but for real.

Do you realize that the point of audience score is letting anyone in and the point of critics score is letting only specific people in?  At least it was I guess.

12 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Also hype that critics having opinions that don't necessarily align with everyone else is worth bringing up, but not the millions of regular people with even more unusual thoughts on film. Very excited about all of this.

Yeah, opinions like trashing a movie on its release and changing the review completely to a positive one when it becomes a cult film is very credible.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Firepower

[Lucas]

I think a very important point here is it's very easy to do research on a critic, and learn how they think & see film as an art form, and judge their supposed "merits" or "credibility" from there. You just don't have that with random users on IMDb (no matter how many they are), and that - if anything - fundamentally makes them far less credible.

 

You can't claim IMDb users to be more credible sources just because you can't pick and choose from their past reviews and use it against them like an RT critic.

[Firepower]

13 minutes ago, SnokesLegs said:

To quote Clint Eastwood himself: Opinions are like assholes, everybody has one. I might disagree with Ebert and Kael there, but to say their opinions aren’t credible is just ludicrous. Everybody is allowed an opinion, whether they’re a professional critic or not. Just because they don’t align with my thoughts doesn’t mean their opinion is somehow invalid.

Their opinions are valid to them, sure, but critics should be a little more objective and consider that they might dislike this or that movie because they have some personal bias against it, which is fine, but at the same time aknowledge that other people likely don't have this bias and would enjoy it. Ebert claimed he was trying to evaluate movies based on whether their target audience will like them or not, but he clearly didn't do a good job at that.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Firepower

[Eric Quinn]

27 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Woke critics are bad, woke admins are as bad  Most people have this opinion, so I guess you should pay little mind to many many people, if you have one.

Well if you don't like us "woke admins", then feel free to leave and go to another forum. I'm not leaving anytime soon, and I think you will be much happier if you post in a forum that doesn't have "woke admins" in it.

15 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Thank you for this very entertaining Onion article, it's just what I wanted. Incredibly hype that RT is the one blamed for "letting anyone in these days" but IMDb gets a pass for doing just that, but for real.

This is always very weird whenever this dude (and others on this forum) go off on a tangent about how RT is letting too many people pass through as critics. They always go on and on about how critics don't understand what audiences want and they're all elitists and political extremists or whatever (though as somebody who regularly reads several critics, filmmaking aspects are plenty brought up alongside political and ideological themes. Almost as if they play a big part. So wouldn't they...want more critics to be verified on RT? So that things are more balanced towards people who don't talk about politics or lean more towards right-wing or centrist? It's literally like IMDb where more people are given a voice. But now suddenly it's a bad thing they're letting more people in? It's so weird!

[Lucas]

4 minutes ago, Firepower said:

I read them and it's not true, most of them don't even mention that. When I read a critic review about some action flick, I want to know if story/action/direction/music/editing/acting is good, not another crazy rant about racism, sexism, misoginism, Trump and NRA, people don't care about that, they want to know if the actual movie is good or not.

If a movie contains so much racism and sexism that a critic spends their entire review discussing it, it's probably not a very good movie. For being... y'know, racist and sexist.

[Brainbug]

Long ago (2 years more or less and after many many pointless online debates about the validity of sites like RT or Imdb) ive personally come to the conclusion that theres only one critic that really matters in the real word and the digital world. One critic, that you can always rely on, that truly has no agendas besides the ones you maybe have yourself and that you can always trust if you want to find out if a movie is truly good or bad.

 

That one critic for me is me and for you (whoever reads this) its you.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Brainbug

[Firepower]

13 minutes ago, Lucas said:

I think a very important point here is it's very easy to do research on a critic, and learn how they think & see film as an art form, and judge their supposed "merits" or "credibility" from there.

Sure, but people care only about average rating, not who contributes to it, which is the problem and it does have a negative effect on the industry.

13 minutes ago, Lucas said:

You just don't have that with random users on IMDb (no matter how many they are), and that - if anything - fundamentally makes them far less credible.

But we were talking about average ratings, not individual opinions. Imdb rating reflects overall consensus of a large number of people around the world which is a lot more credible to me than overall consensus of a small group of people with very specific biases. But it doesn't mean you can't like/love movies with low ratings.

13 minutes ago, Lucas said:

You can't claim IMDb users to be more credible sources just because you can't pick and choose from their past reviews and use it against them like an RT critic.

None of them are really credible, only your opinion is.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Firepower

[Menor the Destroyer]

8 minutes ago, Firepower said:

I read them and it's not true, most of them don't even mention that. When I read a critic review about some action flick, I want to know if story/action/direction/music/editing/acting is good, not another crazy rant about racism, sexism, misoginism, Trump and NRA, people don't care about that, they want to know if the actual movie is good or not.

I speak for myself, but it's extremely obvious that woke groups are loud minority. Very very few people think RT rating is actually credible. Or maybe you want to say that Old Guard and Mulan 2020 are anywhere near, let's say, Scarface and Fight Club?

Do you realize that the point of audience score is letting anyone in and the point of critics score is letting only specific people in?  At least it was I guess.

Yeah, opinions like trashing a movie on its release and changing the review completely to a positive one when it becomes a cult film is very credible.

If you took the one second to look at the average rating on RT, you would see that Scarface and Fight Club are significantly higher than Old Guard and Mulan. So this seems like complaining just to complain. 

 

Btw I took a look down Captain Marvel's imdb reviews. Many of the ones rated highest in "helpfulness" complain about "too much forced feminism" in the movie. By your standards this will be a rant about political agendas that has no place in reviews, right? 

[Lucas]

2 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Sure, but people care only about average rating, not who contributes to it, which is the problem and it does have a negative effect on the industry.

But we were talking about average ratings, not individual opinions.

Lmao is this why you spent an entire paragraph on Roger Ebert and Pauline Kael.

[TheDarkKnightOfSteel]

Saying the whole SnyderCut community is bad and are bombing GvK is like saying...anyway I don’t want to get banned... just don’t judge a whole fandom by the actions of few. Outlets are very quick to forget all the good they have done (charities etc.)

[Firepower]

12 minutes ago, Lucas said:

If a movie contains so much racism and sexism that a critic spends their entire review discussing it, it's probably not a very good movie. For being... y'know, racist and sexist.

Lol no, they complain about it in most movies, it has nothing to do with reality, it's purely ideological, they see racism/sexism everywhere. The Gentlemen, Rambo, Sin City, recent Tarantino films, among many examples, were all trashed by those people as racist and sexist. It would be more concerning if they didn't complain about it because when they don't, it's usually related to movies like Mulan 2020.

4 minutes ago, Lucas said:

Lmao is this why you spent an entire paragraph on Roger Ebert and Pauline Kael.

Just discussing 2 different topics.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Firepower

[Lucas]

2 minutes ago, Firepower said:

Lol no, they complain about it in most movies, it has nothing to do with reality, it's purely ideological, they see racism/sexism everywhere. The Gentlemen, Rambo, Sin City, recent Tarantino films, among many examples

All these films were certified fresh on RT, if you want to stick to the narrative that "it's about the average rating" and not individual critics, these examples are pretty monumental failures on that point.

[Firepower]

10 minutes ago, Menor said:

If you took the one second to look at the average rating on RT, you would see that Scarface and Fight Club are significantly higher than Old Guard and Mulan. So this seems like complaining just to complain.

I meant their percentages, very few people even notice average rating.

10 minutes ago, Menor said:

Btw I took a look down Captain Marvel's imdb reviews. Many of the ones rated highest in "helpfulness" complain about "too much forced feminism" in the movie.

And it still got a decent rating. Even a friend of mine who doesn't care about all this still noticed "too much forced feminism", so I guess it's a problem.

10 minutes ago, Menor said:

By your standards this will be a rant about political agendas that has no place in reviews, right? 

If it takes more than half of the review with barely any mention about the movie itself.

Edited March 28, 2021 by Firepower

[Lucas]

4 minutes ago, TheDarkKnightOfSteel said:

Saying the whole SnyderCut community is bad and are bombing GvK is like saying...anyway I don’t want to get banned... just don’t judge a whole fandom by the actions of few. Outlets are very quick to forget all the good they have done (charities etc.)

Sure no one is claiming everyone in the SnyderCut community is doing this, but similarly no one can claim that it's some other community that's doing it.

[Menor the Destroyer]

3 minutes ago, Firepower said:

I meant their percentages, very few people even notice average rating.

And it still got a decent rating. Even a friend of mine who doesn't care about all this still noticed "too much forced feminism", so I guess it's a problem.

If it takes more than half of the review with barely any mention about the movie itself.

Ok, at least this is a consistent standard. Now why don't you go take a look through the RT reviews for a movie and find a representative set of reviews that fit your standard? And then compare that to a random sample of the imdb reviews? At last that would be a properly sourced claim. 

Edited March 28, 2021 by Menor