Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

philly.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

151–160 of 216 posts

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#151

Post by platz »

derblitzmann wrote: post #148
always_good wrote: post #141

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Critics in general are bad signals. It's like how HN and /r/programming users brag by hating on things that are popular and loving the esoteric such that they peacock to the other neckbeards about how refined their tastes are. Ugh, DAE hate Javascript? I prefer IMDB user ratings and Metacritic's user ratings, basically the opinions of the unwashed masses who can at least tell you if a movie is actually enjoyable.

Also, an interesting thing about metacritic (at least from what I can remember) is that they are silent about how they weight differing review sites/critics in how they calculate their overall rating. Whereas (as far as I know) RT has a simple average for critic reviews and general internet user reviews.

You don't even need to look at the overall rating because you can see each individual critic score and review

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#152

Post by TYPE_FASTER »

slg wrote: post #49

These type of articles never explore the potential results of the Rotten Tomatoes voting system. As the article mentions the RT rating is not a measure of how good a movie is, it is a measure of the percentage of people who viewed the movie positively. A 100% doesn't mean a movie is perfect or even particularly good, it means no one thought it was bad. A movie designed to do well on a RT score needs to please everyon…

> The end result is something that tries to be bland, uninteresting, and inoffensive.

"Happiness" is none of those things, and scored 85 on RT.

> It is safer to invest in the next mediocre superhero movie that most people will be fine with than an innovative middle budget drama that might have a harder time finding an audience. That is what is hurting the movie industry.

That, I completely agree with.

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#153

Post by robterrell »

horusthecat wrote: post #119
Sangermaine wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you've been going to the wrong movies, at least for your tastes. You seem to be exclusively seeing blockbusters. Maybe you'd prefer smaller, less action-focused films.

The thing I find crazy is that in 2017 $20M movies with B-list names are getting picked up as "independent". Ridley Scott's name shows up on IFC movies now; It Follows had an excellent ROI compared to most "blockbuster"; Get Out was a sold-out hit with audiences and critics... but it's all just a blip compared to the latest Transformers or DC or Marvel franchise shit-show. A few millenia from now archaelogists and hi…

Get Out: 252.4 million USD. Not a blip. Break $100M and they're paying attention.

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#154

Post by amyjess »

slg wrote: post #49

These type of articles never explore the potential results of the Rotten Tomatoes voting system. As the article mentions the RT rating is not a measure of how good a movie is, it is a measure of the percentage of people who viewed the movie positively. A 100% doesn't mean a movie is perfect or even particularly good, it means no one thought it was bad. A movie designed to do well on a RT score needs to please everyon…

> It is safer to invest in the next mediocre superhero movie that most people will be fine with than an innovative middle budget drama that might have a harder time finding an audience. That is what is hurting the movie industry.

The "innovative middle budget drama[s]" are moving to television. The rise of high-quality programming on cable TV has a lot to do with the state the film industry is currently in.

I find it fascinating that ever since television launched, film has gone out of its way to be different from TV, but the specific way it does that constantly changes. Back in the '70s, it was the opposite from where it is today!

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#155

Post by amyjess »

hrktb wrote: post #98
MBCook wrote: post #84

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The way things are setup is also designed to make me feel like I’m being ripped off. Go to see a brand new very popular movie. They know high ticket prices scare people away, so I can easily get tickets for $9/each (no 3D) for most films. That’s perfectly fair. A small bottle of water is $6. A small popcorn is like $10. So the total cost is about $25 but most of that is hidden in two cheap/basic snacks. How about jus…

Is there such a pressure to buy snacks ? 2h without eating doesn’t feel so difficult.

2h without doing anything with my hands is a nightmare.

Normally, I'm doing all kinds of things with my hands. Usually, I'm at a computer, I have my phone, I'm playing with my cane, or I'm flicking my fidget cube, etc. But I can't do any of those things at the movies. I need to snack during movies because I'd go nuts if I didn't have something to do with my hands. A bag of popcorn is a godsend... I can keep grabbing pieces of popcorn and sticking them in my mouth, which keeps my hands occupied.

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#156

Post by hkmurakami »

ericd wrote: post #111
Sangermaine wrote: post #92

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It sounds like you've been going to the wrong movies, at least for your tastes. You seem to be exclusively seeing blockbusters. Maybe you'd prefer smaller, less action-focused films.

Eh, I love a good action movie, but it's hard to get into movies that you can't believe. I watched a very low rated one from the 80s the other day ( https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/blood_of_heroes/ ), and while it had very little plot, and the production value was incredibly low compared to recent movies, and just generally wasn't a very good movie, I enjoyed it more than the vast majority of very expensive recent b…

Time to watch Jack Reacher.

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#157

Post by hkmurakami »

gozur88 wrote: post #90

Hollywood movies are getting objectively worse, and there's a good reason for it. The market is global now - the North American box office is just a vehicle for pricing deals when the international rights are sold. So they have to make movies that appeal to the global lowest common denominator. No witty or understated dialog. No cultural signifiers that might be missed by someone from another culture. All the money a…

Malcolm Gladwrll called, regarding something about his spaghetti sauce.

(Completely agree with you that making something with the widest possible audience appeal will be very bland and uninspiring)

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#158

Post by fishywang »

noncoml wrote: post #35
fishywang wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Are you confused RT with IMDb by any chance? IMDb do have inflated rating for new-ish movies, but I don't think RT has the same issue (if you are looking at critic rating a.k.a. freshness, not the user rating)

No, RT. For example look at "Wind River". Rating is at 86% By comparison, some older movies around or lower than that rating: "The Big Lebowski": 81% "Gladiator": 76% "The Wolf of Wall Streer": 77%

Do you have a better example? Because there's no guarantee that The Big Lebowski or Gladiator or The Wolf of Wall Street should be better than Wind River.

Re: Is Rotten Tomatoes Killing the Movie Industry? No, Bad Movies Are

#160

Post by mcphage »

mattkevan wrote: post #79
Animats wrote: post #19

The movie industry doesn't seem to be able to figure out if a movie will be a dud up front. Most of the dud movies are broken at the script and actor selection phase. Maybe productions need to do a staged reading in front of an audience as a test before going into production. Perhaps with slides and sketches from the storyboard for the action. The CG people have their act together. When was the last time a big-budget…

I’ve just finished reading ‘Adventures in the screen trade’ by William Goldman, the guy who wrote ‘All The President’s Men’, Butch Cassidy & The Sundance Kid’ and ‘The Princess Diaries’. While written in the early 80s, it’s thoroughly entertaining and very insightful as to how movies actually get made. His main point is that nobody knows anything. No one knows why one film was a hit and another wasn’t. So successful…

You mean, "The Princess Bride".
Post reply on HN