Fan petition to shut down Rotten Tomatoes

[Darth Knox]

Apparently the reviews of Suicide Squad have not been favourable. I haven't read any of them, but that is the rumour. However, a fan from Egypt was so upset at the low score on Rotten Tomatoes he has created an online petition to shut the site down, even though they are an aggregator, not a movie review website.

Read more about it here:
https://www.facebook.com/ScreenRant/posts/10154043704313197

[Darth Justicar]

Wow, that's pretty ridiculous.  But I guess that's what people do about contrary opinions these days... 

I don't even care about Suicide Squad, and I find this sad.

[Jev Moldara]

One could always do what I do regarding these situations... I just ignore reviews and judge a movie on its merits as I see them.

Entertainment is a subjective thing. What one person sees as a fantastic movie could be seen as utterly boring to someone else. For instance, many people see Pulp Fiction as one of the greatest movies of all time, but I found it to be a complete snoozefest. Many people loved Avatar, but I thought it was utterly derivative. A lot of people hated Thor and Captain America: The First Avenger, but I thought they were solid films.

[Kham-Ryn Kurios]

This petition is beyond ridiculous, however the standard to which DC films are held is equally as ridiculous.

It was mentioned in the "Best DC Movies" thread, but there is a very clear, and impossibly high standard that the DCEU is being held too. I understand that movies are subjective, but there is an over-eagerness to go on the offensive against the DCEU. Even when films in Marvel's own stable are guilty of: pacing, lazy writing and a myriad of other complaints that are used to argue that DC films flat out suck.

I guess I'm just as stubborn though, because I have a hard time believing that the people involved in DC's recent films, have lost all their tact, and talent.

[Darth Knox]

They discuss this topic on this episode of movie talk

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujwbadkmBCQ&amp;spfreload=10" target="_blank" class="aeva_link bbc_link new_win">http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ujwbadkmBCQ&amp;spfreload=10</a>

And I agree with Kham that a lot of people expectations of the DC movies is too high and very unrealistic.

[Obese Wan Kenobese]

That's it!! I'm offended, and I'm reporting this thread!!!  

Some movies stink. Some people like the way stuff crashes when you drop a plate or something. Rotten Tomatoes lets folks express their own view. Most reviews there are easily skimmed. People who mention things I look for in a movie help me know if I'll like it. With or without a good review or high overall score. I find it helpful.

[scifidude79]

Yeah, dumb idea.  I don't care what "score" a movie has on that site, I like what I like.  If you don't like what sites like Rotten Tomatoes report, don't look at them.

Honestly, with the type of movie Suicide Squad is, it's no surprise it's not a hit with critics.  Critic reviews have nothing to do with whether a movie is a success, ticket sales do.  That will tell the real story.

[Darth Knox]

Personally i never use rotten tomatoes. There are a couple of youtube channels whose opinions i trust and i always like the critics who write for empire magazine. Other than that i always make up my own mind.

And as Schnepp said, some of the most beloved movies of all time were not popular with critics, blade runner and the shawshank redemption to name two

[Jev Moldara]

Personally i never use rotten tomatoes. There are a couple of youtube channels whose opinions i trust and i always like the critics who write for empire magazine. Other than that i always make up my own mind.

And as Schnepp said, some of the most beloved movies of all time were not popular with critics, blade runner and the shawshank redemption to name two

Not to mention Star Wars. That movie got raked over the coals when it released in 77.

[Darth Knox]

Not to mention Star Wars. That movie got raked over the coals when it released in 77.

what is this "Star Wars" you are talking about? Don't think i've ever seen it. Is it any good?

[Jev Moldara]

what is this "Star Wars" you are talking about? Don't think i've ever seen it. Is it any good?

Eh, it was okay. Doesn't hold a candle to The Day The Earth Stood Still, though.

[scifidude79]

Yeah, some really popular movies get blasted by the critics.  But, who really cares?  In my opinion, most critics are full of hot air anyway.

Personally i never use rotten tomatoes.

Me neither.  I really don't pay much attention to reviews at all.  Maybe some viewer reviews, but that's about it.  I try to mainly stay away from the big movie sites, though, and anything I read on there doesn't sway me.  I prefer sites like this, where I know people are going to be fair and post honest opinions.  I also have a friend who has a blog where he occasionally reviews a movie, but he hasn't done one in ages.

[LivingBrain]

A list of truths:

- Rotten Tomatoes is an aggregate site, which means they collect reviews from approved critics that write for other publications, so they themselves have no say in how a movie is received.

- Along with the percentage there is an "average rating" criteria that's important to look at (I.E., you could have one movie at 90% but only with a rating of 6.4/10, then another at 78% with an average rating of 7.2/10).

- Time Warner owns 30% of the shares for Rotten Tomatoes, so the idea that they would intentionally make their own movies look bad is ridiculous.

- The binary "fresh/rotten" rating for reviews leaves no room for nuance, as it limits critics just to saying whether a movie is good or bad, which makes it complicated when there's a good movie with some really bad parts or a bad movie with some incredible parts (for example: one of my favorite critics gave SUICIDE SQUAD a "fresh" because he thought Will Smith, Margot Robbie, Viola Davis, and Jay Hernandez were fantastic, while the rest of the movie was a mess).

- What you like is what you like and that's what ultimately matters.

Personally, I like to look at Rotten Tomatoes to get the general initial reception of a movie (they can't account for long-term reception, unfortunately), but I have a few critics of my own that I respect and read from often to get their thoughts. And the reason I say "respect" is because I do disagree with them at times, but I always enjoy reading what they come up with, especially since they bring a knowledge of film history, their own personal life experiences and, in the case of some, filmmaking itself to give me some interesting new thoughts that I wouldn't have normally considered. Some of them are even quite funny in their writing!

It's always up to you to decide what you like or dislike, but film criticism is worth looking into for the sake of learning (it's not particularly useful as a buying guide unless you find a critic whose taste matches up really well with yours). For me, the fun doesn't end when I finish watching a movie, but continues with good discussion and well-written criticism from people I respect. As a result, I LOVE film criticism and think it's an absolute blast.

What about you guys? Do you have any critics you especially like? And, if so, who?

[Jev Moldara]

A list of truths:

- Rotten Tomatoes is an aggregate site, which means they collect reviews from approved critics that write for other publications, so they themselves have no say in how a movie is received.

- Along with the percentage there is an "average rating" criteria that's important to look at (I.E., you could have one movie at 90% but only with a rating of 6.4/10, then another at 78% with an average rating of 7.2/10).

- Time Warner owns 30% of the shares for Rotten Tomatoes, so the idea that they would intentionally make their own movies look bad is ridiculous.

- The binary "fresh/rotten" rating for reviews leaves no room for nuance, as it limits critics just to saying whether a movie is good or bad, which makes it complicated when there's a good movie with some really bad parts or a bad movie with some incredible parts (for example: one of my favorite critics gave SUICIDE SQUAD a "fresh" because he thought Will Smith, Margot Robbie, Viola Davis, and Jay Hernandez were fantastic, while the rest of the movie was a mess).

- What you like is what you like and that's what ultimately matters.

Personally, I like to look at Rotten Tomatoes to get the general initial reception of a movie (they can't account for long-term reception, unfortunately), but I have a few critics of my own that I respect and read from often to get their thoughts. And the reason I say "respect" is because I do disagree with them at times, but I always enjoy reading what they come up with, especially since they bring a knowledge of film history, their own personal life experiences and, in the case of some, filmmaking itself to give me some interesting new thoughts that I wouldn't have normally considered. Some of them are even quite funny in their writing!

It's always up to you to decide what you like or dislike, but film criticism is worth looking into for the sake of learning (it's not particularly useful as a buying guide unless you find a critic whose taste matches up really well with yours). For me, the fun doesn't end when I finish watching a movie, but continues with good discussion and well-written criticism from people I respect. As a result, I LOVE film criticism and think it's an absolute blast.

What about you guys? Do you have any critics you especially like? And, if so, who?

I usually just go with the moviegoer that shares my interests and values, which usually means I look at the webforums I am a member of to read reviews. They generally follow the same ideas and such that I do while also having the benefit of being more reliable and intrinsically honest.

As you said, Warner Bros has a stake in RT, so it follows that they might be seeding their website with good reviews in much the same way that Sony was deleting negative posts and comments from the Ghostnusterse trailers.

[LivingBrain]

I usually just go with the moviegoer that shares my interests and values, which usually means I look at the webforums I am a member of to read reviews. They generally follow the same ideas and such that I do while also having the benefit of being more reliable and intrinsically honest.

As you said, Warner Bros has a stake in RT, so it follows that they might be seeding their website with good reviews in much the same way that Sony was deleting negative posts and comments from the Ghostnusterse trailers.

Sony was the one that uploaded the trailer on YouTube so they're absolutely allowed to disable comments on it. You can do that for any video you upload yourself. Besides, critics don't post to YouTube comment sections, so there's nobody they could pay off or anything.

Also, Time Warner only holds shares, which means they get some of the site revenue, but they're not part of the staff that actually runs the site.

As for putting good reviews into Rotten Tomatoes, RT takes their reviews from other websites and publications. The only reviews hosted on the site are user reviews, not critic reviews (maybe the user reviews are paid for by studios? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯ ). If you go to a page and click on "read full review" for a critic's blurb about the movie you'll be taken to the publication they write for which, again, is separate from RT itself.

Critics don't get paid by studios for good reviews. They can get free trips to early screenings with nice hotel rooms paid for by the studio, yes, but this is in a case where the studio put together an event they wanted to invite them to in hopes that they'll give a good review, but that's not guaranteed. These screenings usually only happen for movies the studio feels confident in and might expect some good reviews for but, again, that's not guaranteed.

The reason I keep saying it's not guaranteed is because one thing film critics all have in common is that they're very prideful of their work and full of their own opinions. Many of them would rather die than have something or someone influence their thoughts. This is further compounded by the fact that film criticism is not a well-paying job, and many critics go into it for one simple reason: they're intensely passionate about movies and love to share their thoughts on them. Because of this intense passion and pride that comes along with this line of work, the idea that any of them would be paid for good buzz just isn't likely, and even the low-paying nature of the job would not be enough to motivate them to take some extra cash to butter up a movie (funnily enough, I've seen some critics try to raise money to pay their rent on Kickstarter or other crowd-funding sites   ).

However, I have heard reports of this happening in video game criticism (I remember reading recently that Pewdiepie got in trouble for being paid to give SHADOWS OF MORDOR some good buzz) so it's not something that doesn't happen, but film criticism doesn't work the way you've described.

All of that aside, that's really awesome that you've found like-minded people to listen to! It's always a great feeling when you find someone that thinks similarly to you.