Lady Bird | Wide on November 24 | Now at 99% on RT #CRUMBLING

[AniNate]

It's fine to "not get" why people are liking a movie; it's only once you start saying they're all idiots or sheep or something like that that it becomes a problem.

 

I too do not get why people love this, but that's on me. 

 

 

Edited December 12, 2017 by tribefan695

[Webslinger]

Meh, the mini-backlash to Lady Bird's former 100% rating was as inevitable as someone coming along to give it a negative review.

 

I adored the film, but I can't say that the "That's it?" reactions surprise me - and wouldn't have surprised me even before I saw it. It's such a gentle, character-driven film built more on moments, inferential meanings, and personal reflection rather than plot that it was bound to find its share of detractors. It's not the bold, aggressive, game-changing monolith that I'm guessing most people would assume "The Most Positively Reviewed Film of All Time (on Rotten Tomatoes)" would be - and with how elegantly the film moves from scene to scene and how Greta Gerwig's directorial choices make the whole thing feel exceptionally authentic and heartfelt, it didn't need to be.

[AndyK]

The consensus seems to be that there are no negatives in the film to criticise.

 

But is that a good enough reason to give it an Oscar, because its not bad?

 

If there are no risks taken or difficulty involved, how does it differ from a good TV drama?

[somebody85]

Just noticed this lost it's 100% by the same douche critic who took down Toy Story 3. Recognized his name immediately which is probably what he wanted. A B- is rotten? You're a douchebag Cole.

[somebody85]

On 12/11/2017 at 6:33 PM, stephanos13 said:

 

The Arnold White 2.0 we didn't know existed.

Speak for yourself. He's always been #2.

[ChipDerby]

Context is everything. I had to consider whether to cast “Lady Bird” as Fresh or Rotten in the context of a perfect score that people were using to trumpet “Lady Bird” as the all-time best reviewed movie on RT. A "B-" does not an "A+" make. @RottenTomatoes @LadyBirdMovie pic.twitter.com/fR7PJ5GfZD

— Cole Smithey (@colesmithey) December 13, 2017

The fuck?

[cannastop]

I might watch this tomorrow.

[somebody85]

8 minutes ago, ChipMunky said:

The fuck?

 

 

He basically admitted he did it to screw the score. RT really shouldn't allow that. Armond White I believe got kicked off for a while for his antics.

[somebody85]

It's one thing to have a negative perception of the film and it's another to do it because "this movie isn't perfect". Well no shit Cole, very few films are.

[stephanos13]

1 hour ago, ChipMunky said:

The fuck?

 

[AndyK]

3 hours ago, somebody85 said:

 

He basically admitted he did it to screw the score. RT really shouldn't allow that. Armond White I believe got kicked off for a while for his antics.

I bet critics do stuff like this routinely.

[cannastop]

So, the aspect ratio for Lady Bird is 1.85 : 1. Hopefully the theater I go to doesn't mess that up.

Edited December 13, 2017 by cannastop

[Incarnadine]

8 hours ago, somebody85 said:

 

He basically admitted he did it to screw the score. RT really shouldn't allow that. Armond White I believe got kicked off for a while for his antics.

Someone at AW actually went through all his reviews over the last 10 years, over 1300 total, and this is the only time he gave a B- where it was counted as rotten, every other B- he gave was counted as fresh.

[AniNate]

11 minutes ago, Incarnadine said:

Someone at AW actually went through all his reviews over the last 10 years, over 1300 total, and this is the only time he gave a B- where it was counted as rotten, every other B- he gave was counted as fresh.

I don't care how much of a contrarian he is, that someone needs to get a fucking life. 

 

 

Edited December 14, 2017 by tribefan695

[RichWS]

[Webslinger]

11 hours ago, AndyK said:

If there are no risks taken or difficulty involved, how does it differ from a good TV drama?

Oh, there was plenty of difficulty involved. The film is semi-autobiographical, which presented Gerwig with the challenge of telling a story that very clearly reflected her own experience while not making it an exercise in navel-gazing. The fact that the title character is also self-absorbed by design also could have backfired had the writing, directing, and acting not been spot on. And furthermore, the film contains no true antagonist and eschews not only most of the tried-and-true tropes of teen movies, but also typical Hollywood plot structure in general. It could easily have been a meandering, mumbling mess, but all the pieces come together to instead make it a beautifully self-assured film that feels real and has an awful lot to say about the relationships between teens and their parents, the difficulties of coming of age (especially as they pertain to social class), and the ease with which people become disillusioned with their surroundings - and it does it all while maintaining steady humor, a gentle tone, and an avoidance of easy cliches that would cheapen its themes and undercut the realism Gerwig is going for.

[SteveJaros]

Saw this film a few days ago and liked it.

 

But that's it - i liked it, in a kind of 6 or 7 out of 10 sense. Nice talkie film, doesn't drag out, a pleasant hour and a half at the movies. But absolutely nothing special, maybe the 25th best of the 130 films i've seen this year. 

 

I guess if a hundred out of a hundred critics find a film mildly appealing like i did, that means a 100% tomato rating, right?

Edited December 14, 2017 by SteveJaros

[The Panda]

12 hours ago, ChipMunky said:

The fuck?

 

What he's trying to say is that his site gets more clicks if it's the only rotten review than if it's another fresh review in the swarm of many.

[eXtacy]

Lol what. Attention whores like this should probably be banned from RT.

[AndyK]

Has he reviewed Paddington 2?

 

I don't want him breaking its perfect score.