WEEKEND THREAD | 3-DAY ESTIMATES: Pirates - 62M ; Baywatch - 18M; Alien - 10.5M (71% drop) like. F8 crosses 1B OS.

[JohnnyGossamer]

4 minutes ago, Alli said:

Excellent idea!!

This is already done by metacritic. 

[grey ghost]

If you think SM3 is superior to CW then maybe RT isn't out of touch.

 

Maybe you're out of touch.

 

I have unpopular opinions too but at least I can admit I'm probably out of synch with most people in those instances.

[franfar]

It's simple business: If you don't want the movie to underperform, churn out a better product. Suppressing RT doesn't get to the root of the issue

[That One Girl]

Reviews don't phase me unless it's an Oscar-bait movie that I was only gonna see if it gets strong recommendations from critics (this doesn't mean every Oscar-bait movie since I still watched movies like Billy Lynn and Bleed for This).  I'll see any movie if the premise, stars, director etc. interest me.  On the contrary, strong reviews can convince me to see a movie I wouldn't have otherwise seen.  Prime examples from last year: Moonlight, Lion, Elle, The Lobster, Bridget Jones's Baby, Midnight Special.

[Biggestgeekever]

Here's what I think is getting lost in this discussion: the problem Hollywood has with rotten tomatoes isn't the binary system or how it is operated. They're upset that critic reviews are now 1,000 times more visible now than in the past. Even if you don't like the site, you should care about Hollywood wanting to take it down or removing it from Fandango. They're basically saying "We want to make sure audiences are as uninformed as possible when separating with their hard earned cash."

[franfar]

@The Panda of the Caribbean to elaborate, I'm talking about passing up the movie in theaters. I'll watch it eventually on streaming if I feel like it

Edited May 28, 2017 by franfar

[That One Girl]

So what you're saying is...

 

Valerian needs to just get good reviews?

[grey ghost]

11 minutes ago, cheesypoofs said:

I believe some franchises are critic proof, until audiences get burnt out. That seems to be the case here. I've heard people say it's the best one since the first one, but if a majority is burnt out then they're burnt out. Not much else you can do. 

 

Exactly.

 

WB should be able to save DCEU because WW is getting favorable reviews.

 

But they can't be mad if they make a shitty Wonder Woman movie and Justice League flops despite being a decent movie.

 

You had four chances, bro.

[filmlover]

2 minutes ago, Biggestgeekever said:

Here's what I think is getting lost in this discussion: the problem Hollywood has with rotten tomatoes isn't the binary system or how it is operated. They're upset that critic reviews are now 1,000 times more visible now than in the past. Even if you don't like the site, you should care about Hollywood wanting to take it down or removing it from Fandango. They're basically saying "We want to make sure audiences are as uninformed as possible when separating with their hard earned cash."

When Hollywood succeeds, they bask in their success, but when they fail, they just point fingers instead of assessing what went wrong. Like clockwork.

[The Panda]

Also, I'll tend to watch big blockbusters in theaters anyways despite critic opinions.

 

But smaller and mid-budget movies I'll often skip if they get mixed reviews.

[franfar]

1 minute ago, That One Valerian said:

So what you're saying is...

 

Valerian needs to just get good reviews?

Good reviews are only a part of the equation

 

Not trying to sound like an asshole, but it doesn't change the fact that it looks like a true mess in ads. Just like GITS

[Barnack]

Just now, That One Valerian said:

So what you're saying is...

 

Valerian needs to just get good reviews?

 

No, obviously, Baywatch is opening above most wide release with terrible reviews, pirates will be a top movie of the year with bad reviews, The Founder, Kubos, NIce Guys, many good reviewed movie flopped.

 

You need much more than good reviews (and bad reviews for a certain type of movie is not a death on arrival), but it would help a lot a movie like Valerian, a movie that people have look fun, look nice but suspicious about it being actually good.

[LaughingEvans]

At least studios haven't started using RT/Metacritic scores in their promotions yet.

[dudalb]

2 hours ago, filmnerdjamie said:

 

It's even funnier that some refuse to see this as the under-performer that it is.

 

A franchise that broke the 3-day and Memorial Day record is now down to $62M in its 3-day.

No one is saying that POTC 5 is a flop.

What they are saying is that it is not going to make the kind of jack that Disney is expecting from a POTC movie.

It's all about expectations. The expectations for POTC 5 were much higher then what it is going to end up making.

[franfar]

1 minute ago, LaughingEvans said:

At least studios haven't started using RT/Metacritic scores in their promotions yet.

[Barnack]

10 minutes ago, The Panda of the Caribbean said:

Also, I'll tend to watch big blockbusters in theaters anyways despite critic opinions.

 

But smaller and mid-budget movies I'll often skip if they get mixed reviews.

 

That tend to be common I think, that why a certain category of movie (say adult drama) are almost completely dead on arrival without good reviews, even an Allied type of reception is a kiss of death for them. 

 

Those still need the critics, for the big blockbuster they could do without them (and often do, not letting them talk about the movies hours before the release to audience, you cannot do that outside the blockbuster/genre movie).

Edited May 28, 2017 by Barnack

[Cmasterclay]

There's this sensation on the internet where suddenly poorly received movies aren't actually flawed, they're actually misunderstood works of genius everyone would love if it wasn't for that RT score, so let's hang the critics! It's fine to like a movie that other people don't like. It's another to say that BvS is actually this generation's The Godfather and RT critics are just too out of touch to admit it.

[John Marston]

19 minutes ago, DAARRRRR said:

Best way is to not completely dismiss what critics say nor is hanging on their every word.  Pick your local critic and maybe one or two national ones.  And of course trust your own instincts.  

 

 

yeah I like to read reviews from certain reviewers rather than take opinions of critics as a whole

[baumer]

56 minutes ago, filmnerdjamie said:

Rotten Tomatoes has always been a shitty rating system. Never understood how anyone could take them seriously especially when they don't even read the reviews half the time, something that was proven when RT gave "Fresh" ratings to mixed reviews for Avatar. It's all bullshit.

 

But blaming them for your crappy films' under-performing? Fuck off, Disney and Paramount. Look in the mirror.

 

That's not entirely true. You are assuming these movies are bad but you yourself have not seen them. You are also assuming that Pirates of the Caribbean is bad because the fourth one sucked. But the audience scores for both of these films are actually pretty good. It is possible to make a better film then you did the previous one.

[MrGlass2]

RT is flawed, I use Metacritic. But it sounds like studios are angry at critics in general so both would be affected. Hollywood has tried to hide movies from critics before, and it just signals to the audience that the movie is probably awful. Maybe the solution is to make better, original films?

 

4 minutes ago, That One Valerian said:

So what you're saying is...

 

Valerian needs to just get good reviews?

Besson just needs to schedule the press screenings a week after release.