Alpha Male
Spare me your daps
I'll only NOT watch a movie because of RT if the score is deplorably low. If it's in the 60's-70's it could just be a hidden gem that went unappreciated.
"Rotten Tomatoes is ruining the film industry..."
- Thread starter Kaypain
- Start date
Now the cypha complete
Martha
I fukks with Iron Fist and it's at 17% or some shyt
Plus a few other superhero properties 
BelowTheMasonDixon
Veteran
Chances are they are more than likely shytty films though.
filial_piety
Banned
The bigger issue is people putting too much stock into what professional critics and award shows have to say about it...that's what needs to change
It's exactly why I take em with a grain of salt...those things are all too much about fraternities, clicks and politics. You'll see movies, and artists who you don't give a damn about being oooed and ahhed over...and then your favorite movie or artist getting the
all because of who theyre signed to or who produces their movie.
It's exactly why I take em with a grain of salt...those things are all too much about fraternities, clicks and politics. You'll see movies, and artists who you don't give a damn about being oooed and ahhed over...and then your favorite movie or artist getting the
all because of who theyre signed to or who produces their movie.
Majestic
Believe in myself and the Coles and Kendricks
He actually has a point. Why on earth are reviews on the first line of a google search of a film? that's shyt can put people off, especially when the film can be good but other people had different opinions. I have not issues with reviews but I don't believe reviews should be on the first page or first line of a movie search. Its kinda not fair.
Lord_Chief_Rocka
Superstar
Action and Comedy I don't listen to RT at all
Kilgore Trout
Banned
Pauline’s Kael was the GOAT critic but those days are over.
the first 5 replies in a coli thread will sway my opinion on whether or not to watch a movie.
the first 5 replies in a coli thread will sway my opinion on whether or not to watch a movie.
AyBrehHam Linkin
First Black Brehsident
People dont gaf about rotten tomatoes as much as some think
NZA
LOL
google knows what people are clicking for when they type those keywords. the review is very likely the most searched for thing, especially in the first week of a movie's release. they have to give the people what they want
Saysumthinfunnymike
VOTE!!!
What nobody has brought up yet is that most of the "critics" on Rotten tomatoes have no actual background in film or anything relating to film. they are bloggers with opinions. They are no more credible or versed in the arts than people posting here.
Ill watch a wack scored flik just to see if that shyt deserved that score
Weed
Weed
Norrin Radd
To me, my board!
Whatever you have to tell yourself to keep working, Brett 
Zee Scribe
Pro
But they're much more likely to be actual film buffs and that counts a lot. Except when it's something that they culturally wouldn't understand. Like, would you not want to see what the more respected posters on the coli say about an album verses a random 13 from the suburbs?
While I don't agree with damn near anything Brett has filmed
(even though he's produced a lot of gems, which always blows my mind) I do agree with him on the basic point about the lack of nuance. I was thinking of posting this when he first said it but passed but props to OP for that.
Reducing a movie or film criticism to a score is ass backwards, even though he's wrong in saying they were the first to do it. Siskel and Ebert reduced it to thumbs, two thumbs up, two thumbs down, or one up, one down. However, there was nuance in their reviews and they actually discussed the films rather than just doing the thumbs. But being sheep and instantly citing a score can lead to less film discovery, which sucks. I've even heard critics talk about their frustrations with the system because they hate having to reduce their criticisms to a "fresh" or "rotten" because there's no in between. If they think a movie is just "fine" they have a binary choice to make but since its subjective, the next critic may not make that choice. If I say this movie is fresh even though I think its just fine and the next guy thinks its rotten even though he thinks its just fine, that's not the most efficient way of doing things. OP didn't post his whole quote and not sure if anyone bothered to click the link for the rest of the story but he said criticism is necessary and he's not against it at all. He's against giving a number or value system to it because it does reduce the actual practice. How many cats actually read reviews as opposed to just looking at a score somewhere?
Said it before but not all critics are white but that's a coli myth that will never get dispelled.
But you're right. It's weird how this is a hip hop message board first and foremost and this particular section puts so much stock into what other people say about something rather than focusing on what they think and just not giving a shyt what someone else thinks. Hip Hop is supposed to be this rebellion thing. Also it's "fukk the critics" when they don't like something you do like but then we cite those same critics for validation when they do like something we like.
(even though he's produced a lot of gems, which always blows my mind) I do agree with him on the basic point about the lack of nuance. I was thinking of posting this when he first said it but passed but props to OP for that.Reducing a movie or film criticism to a score is ass backwards, even though he's wrong in saying they were the first to do it. Siskel and Ebert reduced it to thumbs, two thumbs up, two thumbs down, or one up, one down. However, there was nuance in their reviews and they actually discussed the films rather than just doing the thumbs. But being sheep and instantly citing a score can lead to less film discovery, which sucks. I've even heard critics talk about their frustrations with the system because they hate having to reduce their criticisms to a "fresh" or "rotten" because there's no in between. If they think a movie is just "fine" they have a binary choice to make but since its subjective, the next critic may not make that choice. If I say this movie is fresh even though I think its just fine and the next guy thinks its rotten even though he thinks its just fine, that's not the most efficient way of doing things. OP didn't post his whole quote and not sure if anyone bothered to click the link for the rest of the story but he said criticism is necessary and he's not against it at all. He's against giving a number or value system to it because it does reduce the actual practice. How many cats actually read reviews as opposed to just looking at a score somewhere?
The booth: fukk them cac critics
Coliseum: fukk them nerd ass analysts
Arcadium: fukk them bought and sold ass reviewers
Filmroom: 97% on Rottentomatoes
Said it before but not all critics are white but that's a coli myth that will never get dispelled.
But you're right. It's weird how this is a hip hop message board first and foremost and this particular section puts so much stock into what other people say about something rather than focusing on what they think and just not giving a shyt what someone else thinks. Hip Hop is supposed to be this rebellion thing. Also it's "fukk the critics" when they don't like something you do like but then we cite those same critics for validation when they do like something we like.