191–200 of 421 posts
The people who leave IMDB reviews are probably also pretty far away from the average audience - only a small set of people post reviews their and there’s probably a lot of sampling bias towards film nerds.
One of the interview questions I ask all UX Researchers is to open up rottentomatoes, sort recent films by rating and then look at the movies that have the lowest critic scores. Almost always you can see the audience score for those movies is much higher than the critic scores. I then ask why this is the case. The overwhelming majority of answers involve critics being out of touch with the audience, critics being per…
and whats the explanation for the opposite? when critics scores are much higher than audience scores? I assume "out of touch" but almost any explanation I think of and ridicule could be seen as a strawman argument, so I'll wait for your response.
1) Most of the categories that are over-represented are ones that individuals watch out of obligation, rather than desire. A large portion of people watch documentaries (and biographies/historical films) because they feel they "should", because they feel like they should learn something.
Same for drama - these often include Oscar-bait that many people watch exclusively because it's nominated, not because they're actually interested in the movie itself.
Likewise, animation is (by volume) mostly synonymous with children's entertainment, so there are going to be a lot parents forced to watch what their kids are watching.
All of these line up with OP's hypothesis of obligation over choice.
2) War and westerns being overrepresented, well... film critics historically have a reputation of being Men of a Certain Social Demographic, and this is likely reflected even in modern film critic culture.
[1] https://stephenfollows.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/03/Differ...
I feel like the mass of people are ossifying around the familiar. People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Even when it comes to something like online forums, something like reddit is mostly a wasteland of the same 50…
> People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Weird, why would mass of people try to escape reality instead of watching more documentaries and getting inspired to change the world for better? This truly is a conundrum. Wh…
Critic reviews are prescriptive: what they think the masses should watch. User reviews are retrospective: how much did they actually enjoy watching the movie. I think there has always been a fundamental disconnect, in that critics think the masses should be watching 'smarter', 'more artistic' or, less flatteringly, more pretentious movies. The world has become a lot more political over the past couple decades. I woul…
This does not seem to be accurate description of movie reviews I have read. Like, not at all.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> "they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies" This in particular. I don't mind the odd superhero movie, but they seem wildly overrepresented in big budget movies. It feels it's also frequently a retelling of Spiderman or Batman. I don't think I can stand another Spidey or Batman origin story, or another "...and the next villain is hinted at to be the Joker!". Occasionally there's a…
Sony literally cannot stop making spiderman movies. Part of the deal when they bought the rights from Disney in 1998 was they have to make at least one spiderman movie every 5.75 years, or the rights are forfeit. https://www.octalcomics.com/when-does-sonys-spiderman-rights...
Normal folks rate movies subjectively. Was it really awesome and did I love it? Then it’s a 10.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>They don't like being challenged by anything. "Challenging" is such a bullshit term. It implies there's something meaty for your brain to chew on, but 9/10 times it's a pretentious way to write off people who don't like hamfisted righteousness that fits squarely into run-of-the-mill positions and ideas that are Hollywood-safe. Those movies are pablum just as much as marvel franchises or 90 minutes of fart and dick j…
Look wider. I think you can find plenty that would be described as challenging, that is a legitimate artistic exploration or funny/dramatic/frightening in a new way. Foreign films are a relatively easy way to explore this now. If you are concerned about escaping a filter bubble of foreign directors palatable in your country, start with a country that interests you, then search for their top films by decade or their m…
You're not getting the direct filmgoer experience of that culture, just the best fruits, and that's perfectly fine because if you like their best you may find more in their second-best that you will also absolutely enjoy, just like in Westernized media.
It seems to me that film critics used to focus on films. Nowadays, film critics seem focused on themselves.
I feel like the mass of people are ossifying around the familiar. People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Even when it comes to something like online forums, something like reddit is mostly a wasteland of the same 50…
> People like re-watching the same stuff that they've already watched, they're comfortable these days watching reboots of the same superhero movies. They like big budgets and flashy special effects. They don't like being challenged by anything. Weird, why would mass of people try to escape reality instead of watching more documentaries and getting inspired to change the world for better? This truly is a conundrum. Wh…
it’s more that this shit gets shoved down people’s throats intentionally because it’s a way to prevent people from organizing to improve their lives and stop being exploited. if all anyone has ever seen is capeshit, they’re going to be less mentally capable to deal with the complexity of real life. same reason why china bans blood in video games: so you don’t have a language to even express what is happening to you, so you can’t even start to do anything about it. think about why the movie idiocracy got shat on. they didn’t market the movie bc they wanted it to fail bc they don’t want people to see it bc they don’t want them to be self aware bc they want them to be stupid because it’s easier to control people that way. it’s the same reason why the NPC meme was banned from twitter: because it’s too accurate and too problematic for the people who know all to well how accurate it is and whose full time job is manipulating braindead npc-like morons that use twitter.
Critics seem to rate movies on a global scale. How can I give this movie 9/10 when Citizen Kane is a 9/10? On that scale, this movie is at most a 6. Unsurprisingly, popular genres get trashed on that scale. Normal folks rate movies subjectively. Was it really awesome and did I love it? Then it’s a 10.
Format would be something like:
Compared to the best 10/10 all-time movie of the Genre, Movie A, Movie X is a 7/10. Compared to the other movies of the genre in the last year, Movie X gets a 8.5/10. Compared to the other movies of the genre this decade, Movie X gets a 7.75/10. Final verdict, 7.75/10, if you like movies in this genre you will probably enjoy Movie X.
