• CleoTheWizard@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      Honestly Rotten Tomatoes is basically useless when discussing film. I’ve been using Letterboxd for reviews and I get much more insight on if I’ll like the movie.

      Because consider that people who post on RT are either snobs, frequent movie goers, or are emotional about the movie in some way. And a critics aggregate is an awful way to do anything which is why metacritic is useless most of the time.

      What people should do is take some of their favorite movies or games or whatever and look up reviews. Find ones that you agree with. And then use those sites or people as sounding boards for new movies. If that doesn’t work, move on to the next critic till you find one whose perspective aligns with yours.

      • rwhitisissle@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Letterbox is where you go to find some truly wild takes. It’s filled with people who have no genuine sense of media literacy, combined with a profoundly unjustified sense of confidence in the universality of their own opinions.

  • Graz@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    10 months ago

    I only ever use those sites if i really disliked a movie but can’t figure out why.

    As a way to select a movie they’re really pointless, I think a system that matches tastes of people and recommends movies based on that would be more promising.

    • doctorcrimson@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      10 months ago

      I was surprised the Little Mermaid live action remake was so well received. Those live action remakes only even exist as a way to milk the older cows without paying royalties due to obscure Hollywood laws. I like Halle Barry’s acting too, but a 94% audience rating? The fuck?!

  • GluWu@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    I’ve only seen rotten tomatoes enough to have looked harder at this macro to see it is in fact that. I judge my movies by how many people are seeding them. I have the digital space and real life time to watch whatever. I’ve seen the worst shit and the most incredible masterpieces. People should be more thankful for everything, good and bad. You won’t have it forever.

  • SpaceCowboy@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    10 months ago

    Film critics are the people that went to film school but couldn’t get a job making movies. They tend to judge a movie on it’s technical merits.

    Audiences mostly just want a good story. If the cinematography isn’t great, if the shot composition is boring, the editing is janky, the audience may not care as much about those things, but a film critic will obsess over those kinds of problems.

    A film critic can be so wowed by technical proficiency they don’t notice it’s in service of a poorly written story.

    Also a film critic watches movies as their job. They’re more likely to notice when a movie isn’t all that original. They tend to want something that’s unique to make their job of watching movies to be less boring. Someone in the audience doesn’t care about that so much, mostly it’s just important that the movie is entertaining. If the movie is sort of like a movie they didn’t see, why would they care?

    So I think a high critic score low audience score means the movie looks really good, but probably has a poorly written story. The critics went to film school, not writing school. For the converse, it’s probably going to be fun and entertaining but isn’t going to change my life.