Why Do People Care About Rotten Tomatoes Scores?
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 4 май 2024
- Why do people care so much about Rotten Tomatoes scores and get so worked up over critics?
___________________________________
This is a clip from my weekly Ask Me Anything show on Patreon. If you're interested in my box office round up series, my weekly AMAs or other Patreon exclusives check out my Patreon page here: / seanchandler
____________________________________
Title: Decoding Rotten Tomatoes: Why Do Casual Moviegoers Care So Much?
Description:
In this thought-provoking video, we delve into the perplexing phenomenon of why casual moviegoers place so much weight on Rotten Tomatoes scores and often express frustration with critics' opinions. Join us as we dissect the intricacies of this trend and explore the underlying factors driving it.
We start by questioning who exactly constitutes the "casual moviegoer" and the diverse range of perspectives they bring to the table. From devoted cinephiles to everyday movie enthusiasts like the speaker's own mom, the definition of a casual moviegoer is fluid and multifaceted.
Delving deeper, we explore the human desire for a simple, shared point of reference when deciding whether a movie is worth watching. From the era of Siskel and Ebert's iconic thumbs-up, thumbs-down ratings to the rise of Rotten Tomatoes and its aggregated scores, audiences crave a clear recommendation in a sea of cinematic choices.
However, as Rotten Tomatoes replaces familiar critics with impersonal percentages, frustrations arise. We unravel the complexities of how individual tastes and preferences are flattened into numerical scores, leading to misunderstandings and perceptions of critics being "out of touch."
Furthermore, we confront the misconception surrounding what these scores truly represent. A 50% rating doesn't mean a movie is mediocre; it signifies a polarization of opinions. Yet, audiences often misinterpret these percentages, leading to further discontent and division.
Through insightful analysis, we shed light on the nuances of film criticism and the pitfalls of reducing diverse viewpoints to numerical aggregates. Join us as we navigate the complex interplay between audiences, critics, and the ever-evolving landscape of film appreciation.
Don't miss out on this eye-opening discussion that challenges conventional wisdom and invites reflection on how we engage with movie criticism in the digital age.
FIND ME ONLINE
INSTAGRAM @seantalksabout
TWITTER @kirkneverdied
FACEBOOK / seanchandlertalksabout
Patreon / seanchandler
FIND THE SEAN CHANDLER PODCAST:
ITUNES: podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast...
SPOTIFY: open.spotify.com/show/3xv87P7...
GOOGLE PODCASTS: play.google.com/music/m/Ivxlw...
STITCHER: www.stitcher.com/podcast/the-...
PODBEAN: seanchandler.podbean.com
My Merch Store
www.teepublic.com/stores/sean...
Check out the complete list of gear I use for creating my RUclips videos here: kit.co/SeanChandler/my-youtub...
See a list of my posters (and where to get them) here: kit.co/SeanChandler/my-movie-...
See a list of my Funko Pops here: kit.co/SeanChandler/my-funko-...
Fan Mail can be sent to:
Sean M. Chandler
PO Box 1042
Hutto, TX 78634
VIDEO SUMMARY
This video contains Sean Chandler Talks About's Why Do People Care About Rotten Tomatoes Scores?
AFFLIATE DISCLAIMER
I may earn a small commission for my endorsement, recommendation, testimonial, and/or link to any products or services from this video. 
Кино
Nailed it again
Appreciate it
The GOATs meet! 🔥
does anyone know if i can get Hulu without having ti get Disney +
You completely nailed it again! It always bothers me how people don't understand how Rotten Tomatoes and also how they make too much of a big deal out of the scores.
What i always tell everyone is just go see the movie yourself , just because they weren’t high on it doesn’t mean you wouldn’t like it.
0:50-Sean Chandler's Mom Talks About channel announcement coming soon?
Can we just take a moment to appreciate how beatifull and crisp Shauns videos are? The lighting, camera and sound quality are just top-notch!
🙏🏻🙏🏻🙏🏻
I actually bought my current camera for live streams but I instantly thought it just looked great for everything. And it responds well to the back lighting I do.
The problem with RT is that the % represents a binary Good/Bad ratio. However, the % number gives most people the impression it relates directly to the overall quality of a movie. For example, you could have a movie with an RT score of 65%, where the critics who rated it positive gave it high 9/90's or 10s/100s, and the negative critics gave it middle 5.5s/50s for overall score. Which means some people really loved the movie and other thought it was average to below average. Whereas you could have a movie with an RT score of 98% where the overall critic average was 6s/60s. This would indicate that the majority of the critics thought the movie was barely above average. However, when someone looks at an RT score of 98% they think "WOW that must be a really great movie with a RT score so high". But in reality, its a barely above average movie. These are extreme edge cases but they illustrate how the RT % can give a false illusion of the overall quality of a movie when in reality all the RT % does is represent whether overall consensus on a movie is highly equal among critics or highly split among critics. I think it would be more clear and better understood by most people if RT just gave a simple Rotten/Fresh logo on a movie and then listed the average overall critic score.
LOVE LOVE that you brought up Siskel & Ebert. Honestly I'm an actor in SAG in Hollywood and your like a Siskel & Ebert to me.
I’m open to any genre of movie, so the Letterboxd rating is what I trust the most. I feel there’s more variety of people on Letterboxd who enjoy different kinds of movies. The percentage on Rotten Tomatoes means hardly anything to me. But whenever I do look at RT, it’s always the average rating out of ten, not the percent.
Fr. And when you have friends that got your same taste or at least understand it, makes films much easier to recommend
same i don't like RT, but Letterboxd is good, majority of the people there not too snobby, not too easy to please, so the ratings mostly are pretty spot on
Letterboxd is mostly good, especially when there are plenty of people that have rated it. Before Late Night with the Devil was released, there was a lot of review bombing because of the AI use, but now that more people have seen it, the ratings have calmed down a lot.
Letterboxd has become a joke with cringed comments and unserious reviews
@@norm-bb3bbit’s easy to avoid them though
My biggest problem with a lot of RT critics is that they go WAY too subjective when scoring a movie.
Like you read some reviews where it says "it was disappointing", or "I was bored" and they give it a rotten score. Well that is something that entirely depends on the person, not the movie. Disappointment is directly linked with one's expectations. Boredom is directly linked with what one is interested in.
I feel like being a critic on RT means you need to try and review the films as objectively as possible, since it's a website designed to showcase whether movies are good or bad, and whether they're worth watching. If a critic knows they don't like horror films, don't score them, since you know you are very biased in that category. If a critic knows they get bored during 150 min+ biopics, then don't write in your review that you were bored and give a C-.
Critics should score films based on their objective quality, not on their personal experience. RUclips videos are different because there IS that personal element you talked about, like with Siskel and Ebert. But when you a critic gives their actual RT score, they should look at how good the movie is, irrespective of how much they liked it due to personal preferences
So true! Movies should be objectively viewed because when they aren't it turns into a personal battle against whoever wants to fight you in the comments section. If you argue with your personal experience instead of facts and objective information, you can't agree on anything.
Most people in the real world don't care about RT. It really means nothing, and you really can't trust most critics these days. When guys like Reel Rejects for one example get invited to events for just about every MCU or Star Wars series/movie. It's hard to take them or the reviews that seriously.
This was a very insightful and interesting commentary on rottentomatoes. I did know a fair bit about how rt works but I actually did not know the origins of film criticism with that tv show. Good stuff Sean!
Some great points thrown in the air Sean.
A good question for sure
You hit the nail on the head with this one.
Also, do you plan on doing a Ryan gosling rank any time soon since fall guy came out? It’s kl if ur not but I just think it’d be fun since he has such a versatile filmography
I met gene Siskel when I was in high school at a bulls game. He seemed like a nice guy. He died soon after from an illness
Great answer. I watched a movie called The King last night which was recommended to me by a friend who is a far more casual movie fan, and when I didn’t like it, he mentioned that it had a 71% on RT. But you look at the actual reviews for the film, a good portion of them are just like 3/5-3.5/5 reviews, so even though it’s mostly positive on the tomatometer, it’s still misrepresenting what a lot of people are saying.
Also, I’d like to hear your thoughts on the horrible update to Rotten Tomatoes where the movie search now only shows the audience score instead of the critic score. As well as burying the critic consensus and reviews down the bottom of the page. I really hope that this gets changed back because I honestly hate it. Audience scores are even more misleading than critics scores, because audiences will often just review bomb for the sake of it.
For example, Five Nights At Freddy’s. It has an 87% audience score but a lot of that isn’t because of how good the movie is, it’s because the fans are excited to see a film adaptation of the games so it’s automatic 5 stars.
Or last years Nefarious. It’s got like a 95% with audiences, and that’s only because a lot of audiences members were thrilled to have their own ideologies be represented on the big screen when most films nowadays have a more liberal agenda. Again, nothing to do with the films quality, it’s just that some audiences will be immediately giving it 5 stars because it presents their own opinions to them.
There are quite a few scores I agree with, but I mostly end up disagreeing with at least one, or sometimes both of them. All I can do is view the picture in question from my own perspective.
Funny how you described the Siskel & Ebert back in the day because I watch four movie critics on RUclips and I decide trough them if I’ll watch a movie. For example I know that 8/10 movies you like, I like but with YMS it’s 2/10 so if he really loves a movie I probably won’t. So that’s how I decide what films I watch
Well, that's why rotten tomatoes gives you the option to read the individual critics reviews as well.......I will always check the individual critics as some I am more curious about their take than others as well as the overall nunber if critics giving reviews ratings......
eh, the Man of Steel rating years ago is what made me lose faith in RT scores. Along with a number of my favorite movies coming up as rotten. I found it much better to find a few reviewers that I tend to fall in line with their tastes in movies like Sean, Jeremy Jahns, Harloff and Campea and take those reviews into account instead when considering going to see a movie.
You are so right that the Internet has dehumanized people into collective groups that are undefined. This obviously would include movie critics. These days people always think in a collective or grouping mindset.
Yeah I think the confusing part for me was thinking it’s what % someone rates the movie out of 100 vs what % of critics just recommended it
I like to immerse myself in reviews and film discussion after I watch/play/read/listen to something. I don't use the critic scores as a decider when it comes to finding something to consume, but I find the differences in opinion and the varying perspectives fascinating. I watch Dan Murrell because I like and connect with him as a person, his final scores aren't why I go to his channel.
I always found the critics vs audience score difference interesting.
perfectly said. Anytime I see a comment or hear about critics being awful or something because some franchise movie got a rotten score, I feel the comment comes from not knowing how the site actually works
Ultimately, the system itself is a flawed metric and it gets even worse when people dont understand that a critic review is only amounted to it being either fresh or rotten
Theres such a wide spectrum to explain a movie's quality and the fact that the percentage which most people notice only takes into account either FRESH or ROTTEN is a disservice to the critic's reviews/thoughts
I say we all going to like we want to like. I think we take too much stock on what other people think instead having our own opinions and sticking to it. But everyone wants to be liked and accepted instead of being an individual. If you like a movie and Rotten Tomatoes doesn’t who cares
I don’t let critics tell me what to watch and not to watch. If I did, I would have missed some of my favorite critically panned movies. But I do watch Sean Chandler, Dan Murrell, Cody Leach, Austin Burke, Jeremy Jahns, Chris Stuckman, John Flickinger, and Cris Parker at 3C Films. (The Double Mount Rushmore of RUclips critics) for entertainment and to see if my opinions line up. Most times they do.
In my opinion, i think what really sets up the idea of critics being out of touch is how high the bar is set for what is considered "a good movie on Rotten tomatoes".
Like you have said, Man of Steel having 56% on rotten tomatoes means that over half of the critics recommend it, but the system calls that a rotten score, meaning it's "a bad movie".
So when people see that, they only see that it's considered rotten.
So in my opinion, i think a way they could fix that is making 50% or higher considered freah (not certified fresh).
Thank you for coming to my Ted talk
I care about Rotten Tomatoes good and bad. Some tomatometer ratings have aged poorly like The Phantom Menace. It’s unfair why it’s sitting at 52% and say what you will about the Star Wars prequels. I’m glad Phantom Menace has been re-evaluated for so much love for the movie after 25 years of online backlash (before social media was a thing). Fans waited 16 years after Return of the Jedi and The Phantom Menace was brutally hyped with the ads and the toys and the video games. And when it was finally released, fans were divided. Even worse, they threw a curveball on Jar Jar Binks as the most hated character of the Star Wars universe. And Ahmed Best spoke out in interviews that he almost killed himself after the prequel trilogy ended and he saw the negative backlash towards his character, which is very sad. That goes to show you that social media is shit and criticizing an actor’s performance is stupid. Just because you don’t like something doesn’t mean you should jump to the internet and bash someone. Ahmed deserves his flowers and I’m glad the Jar Jar hate train all died out because we’re adults now.
They all jumped on the "The Sequels Are Bad" train now... It is exhausting...
@@brent.b.productions2015Just because “the sequels so bad” doesn’t mean that it made a lot of money and if you (that includes you commenting for no reason) don’t like sequels, don’t watch them. I, myself, don’t have a problem with sequels. That’s what Hollywood works when it comes to studios pumping out money.
Why is that unfair though? It means 52% of critics like and recommend The Phantom Menace. That's a majority.
@@tronam52% of critics meaning it’s still mixed as in good but has some flawed moments. The reason why I said “unfair” is that some of the critic responses have aged terribly. When it comes to Rotten Tomatoes, they don’t care what you think. You don’t trust movie critics if you enjoyed the movie.
@@KadeemG61 The score just means that 52% of critics liked it. Ignore the 48% who didn’t. It’s not personal. As someone who lived through it, skipping class to wait in line 6 hours for the best seat, The Phantom Menace was and is divisive among both critics and audiences, and that’s okay. I like plenty of movies that aren’t universally loved.
RT does not make or break my decision to see a movie, but I do find that when both critics and audiences are mostly aligned with each other it's rare that I'll disagree with them.
I prefer imdb
I hate how clunky and cumbersome that website is. Too many hidden features. It’s definitely gone downhill. On a side note, I rarely find user reviews any more useful than critic reviews. In fact, I find them more often unreliable than not.
Keep in mind Armond White is allowed to be an RT critic even though he's a dumpster fire of a reviewer.
I will check rotten tomato but my main sources on if I think I will like a movie is Sean and 3c films
It’s weird Metacritic isn’t more of a mainstream reference point for more people. I think the Metacritic score is determined the way most people think the Rotten Tomatoes score is since it’s actually just the average score of critics out of 100 not the percentage of critics that give it a thumbs up or thumbs down. 🤔
I do think people make too big of a deal out of it, I always want to form my opinion instead of just going off what others think. People always have two questions with movies; What’s it about? Who’s in it? And if they aren’t interested in who’s in it or what it’s about and if the review scores aren’t great then they’ll ask; What else is on?
Amen!
I personally just use RT scores to get a general critical consensus before I watch a movie. I try to come to my own conclusions
The only useful element of RT is that offers up links to the Top Critic reviews. I have a handful of critics whose opinions I value since history has shown our tastes line up. A blanket 65% or 90% doesn’t mean anything. Movies are subjective, not a calculus exam.
Ppl only care about scores when it’s comic book movies.
Don't forget video game movies too because critics hated The Super Mario Bros. Movie (2023) and Five Nights At Freddy's (2023)
@@lexramstudios1386 hated? Super Mario had almost 60% rating meaning more fresh reviews than rotten. How is this the same as critics hating it? It is literally explained in the video above
I usually see RT score before watching cinematic project, but sometimes to switch it up abit, i see the score afterwards, just to see if i agree wiz critics n movie goers
I generally agree with most scores I’ve seen so I guess I’ve just learned to trust them
People think in terms of grades, it’s a side effect of school.
Its a problem most people dont understand how RT works. Most people or "average movie go-ers" think the RT% means how good the movie is, like a score out of ten. But its actually an average of how many critics recommend the film and agree its worth watching and that can be for a range of reasons
People like to feel validated in their opinions.
From what ive seen i dont think people cared since like 2019/20 unless its a comic book movie.
Hi bro i am from india should i open a movie review channel
Is it in demand nowadays ?
The question is "do you have something new and unique to offer?" There's always people looking for movie content on the internet. But there's no shortage of normal movie reviews. So you need to have something unique to offer.
Quick question, if there was an animated Fortnite movie how much money do you think it would make?
I’ve never cared about RT scores, it’s nice to see what the consensus is but a bad score never made me not want to see something that I was already interested in.
I don’t give a tiddlywink about Rotten Tomatoes but I definitely care about iMDB & Letterboxd
Edit: & Sean chandler
It makes me laugh how people still don’t understand how RT works 🤣
RT is content that creates content that creates content. Critics create and rate movies, all of that is aggregated in RT to give a score that is then used to create articles and videos. This is the pinnacle of internet behavior and why everyone kinda love/hate it.
I honestly trust IMDb more than RT, especially after hearing RT reviewers get paid off apparently
IMDB is the best site for me
They didn’t get paid, I mean yes they did but not really.
What happened is this small independent film studio paid a group of critics to watch a movie and review it. They didn’t care if they gave it a great review, bad review, they didn’t care as along as they shared their opinions out there on the internet. That’s all that happened, big studios like Disney, WB, Universal, etc don’t pay critics to watch their movies. People often misread that headline actually said.
You shouldn’t really make your opinion because of someone else’s. You should go and see if you like it.
@@GoulGames Bruh, reviews exist to help tell you if a movie sucks or not. I get what you mean, tho.
The Rotten Tomatoes redesign is absolutely terrible
Yeah I don't like the new design at all. It's made everything dramatically worse.
Most critics are absolute sheeple even before rotten tomatoes they absolutely check each others work. On par with Art Critics who are too afraid of being the outlier… lest they be labeled as not sophisticated enough to “get it”.
The only critic worth listening to was Roger Ebert (RIP) who was a great writer, but also understood that films can be enjoyed as entertainment and separately as art. He definitely did not have an elitism streak. Famous example was his willingness to stand as an outlier, he defended Asian American directors who were being accused of poorly representing Asian Americans for just showing their POV, how they lived their lives and not a romanticized trope.
I stopped listening to critics when under the advice of top ten lists citing I ❤️the huckabees as some sort of holy than thou artistic achievement. To this day I am trying to lobotomize any parts of my brain that recall that film.
Roger Ebert gave the film 2 stars… I should’ve stopped there.
I think the problem is the binary system, bit enough people know about it & think a 90% means 9/10 average. I wish they would show the average critic score rather than the amount of critics who gave it a thumbs up because if they just show the average scores, a lot of these numbers would be a lot less extreme to one way or the other, such as Spider-Man FFH having a 91% where the average rating is a 6.9/10
I stopped caring about rotten tomatoes joker 2019
I agree sean
why? It has near 70% score meaning almost 70% of all critics gave a fresh rating. Fresh can mean a lot of things and so can rotten.
your real problem would lie with the actual reasons for the reviews. some felt it was just a rehash of older movies but worse or that it was too shallow. Others felt it was really good and did its job fine (a movie elevated by Joaquin Phoenix ultimately)
@@nms7872Joker is a movie that has aged really well, imo, better than most Oscar winning movies, I just hope the sequel doesn't ruin the first movie.
You and DRUMDUMS are my Siskel and Ebert
I only look at RT as a last resort when looking for a new film to see
I'm a horror/b movie fan, fuck movie critics.
Rotten dollar
I don't care about them nobody should to be honest
I used to care and think oof that's bad and then I would watch these supposed badly rated films and then end up loving these movies and I realised that I don't care about the scores at all they don't mean shit. The rotten tomatoes scores suck
I watch scores and review before watching movies because i don't want waste my time watching poor movies
Sheep mindedness and intellectual laziness... Thats all you had to say.
Rotten tomatoes is trash
Movie reviewers don’t matter now because theaters are dead.. people used to use critics as a gage on what movie to see in theaters, now they’re all on Netflix and watching things for free.
movie theaters are not dead 😂
0 views bro fell off
I've actually had this problem since i started. For some reason all of my videos start with 0 views. I really really want themm to start with like a million views but it just hasn't worked like that yet.
@@SeanChandlerTalksAbout got em 😂😂😂
@@SeanChandlerTalksAboutlol
Metacritic is easily the most useful
Not really. It is a notoriously buggy website and has maybe a quarter of the amount of critics compared with that of RT. RT interface isn’t great, but it’s significantly better than Metacritic. You can’t even search for half of the shit on Metacritic. Also, people seem to forget that you can still view an average critic score on RT. Literally the only things that Metacritic have over RT are Game and album reviews.
I really never care about them cuz they are usually are far off RT has never been very helpful