The Unreliability of Modern Critics
- Thread starter Samtemdo8_v1legacy
- Start date
Recommended Videos
After wasting 3 minutes of my life watching this, I refuse to waste a further 13 minutes on a thesis based on "I dislike it when biased critics refuse to reflect my own biaises."
It would also be more believable if the user used more than three examples of supposed critic-audience divide (Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad, Ghostbusters). In contrast, let's look at some other RT scores:
-Sausage Party: 82% vs. 62%
-War Dogs: 58% vs. 74%
-Ben Hur: 28% vs. 67%
-Bad Mums: 62% vs. 76%
-Jason Bourne: 57% vs. 62%
-Secret Life of Pets: 74% vs. 65%
-Florence Foster Jenkins: 86% vs. 76%
-Star Trek Beyond: 83% vs. 83%
Now, to cite the movies he mentioned:
-Suicide Squad: 26% vs. 68%
-Batman v Superman: 27% vs. 65%
-Ghostbusters: 73% vs. 57%
Even Ghostbusters seems to have normalized, though its user score is suspect given the controversy it stored. But apart from that, the movies he cites as the divide are comic-book based, where most other movies listed, with the exception of Ben-Hur, fall within a reasonable length of consensus. But hey, I guess the critics are only biaised against movies the poster likes. Bear in mind, I actually like Suicide Squad, but I don't feel the need to rationalize me being in the minority.
Oh, and he defends Gamergate, which is frankly hilarious on its own, but I've realized that I've wasted 13 minutes of my life anyway writing this so...
Bleh. ;p
It would also be more believable if the user used more than three examples of supposed critic-audience divide (Batman v Superman, Suicide Squad, Ghostbusters). In contrast, let's look at some other RT scores:
-Sausage Party: 82% vs. 62%
-War Dogs: 58% vs. 74%
-Ben Hur: 28% vs. 67%
-Bad Mums: 62% vs. 76%
-Jason Bourne: 57% vs. 62%
-Secret Life of Pets: 74% vs. 65%
-Florence Foster Jenkins: 86% vs. 76%
-Star Trek Beyond: 83% vs. 83%
Now, to cite the movies he mentioned:
-Suicide Squad: 26% vs. 68%
-Batman v Superman: 27% vs. 65%
-Ghostbusters: 73% vs. 57%
Even Ghostbusters seems to have normalized, though its user score is suspect given the controversy it stored. But apart from that, the movies he cites as the divide are comic-book based, where most other movies listed, with the exception of Ben-Hur, fall within a reasonable length of consensus. But hey, I guess the critics are only biaised against movies the poster likes. Bear in mind, I actually like Suicide Squad, but I don't feel the need to rationalize me being in the minority.
Oh, and he defends Gamergate, which is frankly hilarious on its own, but I've realized that I've wasted 13 minutes of my life anyway writing this so...
Bleh. ;p
Ok seriously, people need to stop doing this. People need to stop posting ten minute plus videos without adding anything of their own. That's not having a discussion. I'm not watching that thing.
As it stands, judging by Hawki's comments, it comes down to people complaining that critics don't agree with them, so the making of the video has nothing new, nor nothing of value to add to the discussion.
Then again I gave a game that has 90% positive reviews on Steam a 5.5, so I guess I'm part of the problem or something.
As it stands, judging by Hawki's comments, it comes down to people complaining that critics don't agree with them, so the making of the video has nothing new, nor nothing of value to add to the discussion.
Then again I gave a game that has 90% positive reviews on Steam a 5.5, so I guess I'm part of the problem or something.
I think people need to move away from using aggregate sites. Find critics that seem to reflect your own tastes, and just rely on them instead. Who cares what the rest think?
Unless the subject is Doctor Who, everybody is way too generous when it comes to Doctor Who reviews.
Unless the subject is Doctor Who, everybody is way too generous when it comes to Doctor Who reviews.
Critics can have whatever opinions they want, it honestly not a big deal.
I just find it curious when critics praise/hate a movie for one thing, then turn around and hate/praise another movie for the same thing.
Case in point, and lets be polite and respectful here, MovieBob. His review of Suicide Squad was critical of the movie's many plotholes and threads that either made no sense or went no where.
Then in his Sausage Party review, he never brings up the plotholes like how sometimes its the food that's alive, and other times its the food containers that's alive. Here we have a utopia of puritanism, and yet no one seems to care that jars are filled with ground up grapes and strawberries. How is it okay to have living tomatoes, and also jars of tomato sauce(with pictures of said sauce on pasta no less) and yet no one knows food is meant to be eaten?! Also bread loafs? Is each individual slice alive, or the loaf as a whole? Or the packaging? At what point does the food become sentient? If we have a living bag of sugar, is each grain inside also alive?
I know its reading to much into things, but holes are holes.
But like I said, I don't really care what a critics gives a movie. I just like consistency of criteria.
I just find it curious when critics praise/hate a movie for one thing, then turn around and hate/praise another movie for the same thing.
Case in point, and lets be polite and respectful here, MovieBob. His review of Suicide Squad was critical of the movie's many plotholes and threads that either made no sense or went no where.
Then in his Sausage Party review, he never brings up the plotholes like how sometimes its the food that's alive, and other times its the food containers that's alive. Here we have a utopia of puritanism, and yet no one seems to care that jars are filled with ground up grapes and strawberries. How is it okay to have living tomatoes, and also jars of tomato sauce(with pictures of said sauce on pasta no less) and yet no one knows food is meant to be eaten?! Also bread loafs? Is each individual slice alive, or the loaf as a whole? Or the packaging? At what point does the food become sentient? If we have a living bag of sugar, is each grain inside also alive?
I know its reading to much into things, but holes are holes.
But like I said, I don't really care what a critics gives a movie. I just like consistency of criteria.
What's worked for me is...
A: Avoid the ones with REALLY blatant political agendas (especially anyone who id's as GamerGate)
B: Read from multiple critics who seem to want similar things from movies that I do (but not biases, as addressed above).
C: See what the common factors are in all their reviews.
A: Avoid the ones with REALLY blatant political agendas (especially anyone who id's as GamerGate)
B: Read from multiple critics who seem to want similar things from movies that I do (but not biases, as addressed above).
C: See what the common factors are in all their reviews.
Dude don't be stubborn and watch the whole video so that your response to it at least understand the bigger picture.Hawki said:
Certain people with certain biases contribute to the rotten tomatoes scale.
He is saying that if it were not for these Biased agendas the scail would have been much fairer.
As in BvS could have been 50%
Oh my god, this shit again?
You know what I'd like to watch? A 15 minute video about intellectually insecure people who throw stroppy fits every time "critics" or "the media" or whatever high society group they've identified as infiltrated by their political opposition review a product and assign it a different score then the one they believe was merited.
Their opinion was not validated!
A completely subjective score failed to reflect their views! THEIR views! What views could be more important!?
The system is broken! Broken!
You know what I'd like to watch? A 15 minute video about intellectually insecure people who throw stroppy fits every time "critics" or "the media" or whatever high society group they've identified as infiltrated by their political opposition review a product and assign it a different score then the one they believe was merited.
Their opinion was not validated!
A completely subjective score failed to reflect their views! THEIR views! What views could be more important!?
The system is broken! Broken!
Heres the thing...reviewers are biased. We are biased.
I don't really pay too much attention to reviews as a whole. I don't even really pay attention to movie reviews at all.
So I will use game reviews instead to discuss this. I love Dynasty Warriors. Jim Sterling loves Dynasty Warriors. Adam Sessler doesn't love Dynasty Warriors. I prefer Jim's reviews of Dynasty Warrior games, because they match my biases. He is more likely to praise what I will praise, and be disappointed by what I would be disappointed by.
Now, lets put that to movies. I love Marvel. I currently absolutely love the MCU. If I was to read a movie review on the next MCU movie before I decided to see it (though currently any MCU movie is guaranteed to get my money) I would rather read the review of someone who loves Marvel, and has been enjoying the MCU. A reviewer who wants what I want, and will like and dislike what I do, so I can know if I will also like or dislike it.
Basically, I don't care about a vegan's review of a steak house.
I don't really pay too much attention to reviews as a whole. I don't even really pay attention to movie reviews at all.
So I will use game reviews instead to discuss this. I love Dynasty Warriors. Jim Sterling loves Dynasty Warriors. Adam Sessler doesn't love Dynasty Warriors. I prefer Jim's reviews of Dynasty Warrior games, because they match my biases. He is more likely to praise what I will praise, and be disappointed by what I would be disappointed by.
Now, lets put that to movies. I love Marvel. I currently absolutely love the MCU. If I was to read a movie review on the next MCU movie before I decided to see it (though currently any MCU movie is guaranteed to get my money) I would rather read the review of someone who loves Marvel, and has been enjoying the MCU. A reviewer who wants what I want, and will like and dislike what I do, so I can know if I will also like or dislike it.
Basically, I don't care about a vegan's review of a steak house.
Another person complaining about suicide squad's reception? Eh, Adam from your-movie-sucks said it best, and he still got crucified by DC fanboys. No way I'm stepping into that quagmire
Where's my rolled up newspaper of humourous dismissal? Some serious batting needs to be done. If I had a penny for every man child that rants online about "teh biased critics lie!" I would be a very shiny magpie human bear that clinks all the time. Wait, I mean rich...yes, rich! The sea of salt is vast in this murky digital ocean, with no hint of it ever stopping the thrashing flow. You can't go a day without an upload of a narcissist rant about how critics are unprofessional and it is they themselves who hold a more correct opinion, but if only the world could know this! Well now they do...and they laugh. But you have at least found something that validates your opinion I guess, if it's that important for your self-esteem.
I don't follow the guy, but films are a case by case experience, there is no consistent rule by which to mathematically review each work. In your case, suicide squad is attempting to take itself seriously which gives it a different light in which to observe. Yet Sausage party is a small, not-highly budgeted lighthearted slightly insane comedy. Not the type of thing that really demands clinical accuracy with in world logic.Silentpony said:
Just... fuck the average moviegoer. Fuck fanboys. Fuck fan culture in general. In fact, fuck everything.
Have we entered some third alternative? A world where it's not our leaders who will stamp us down with love or hate, but each other stamping each other down with hate over things we love.
Have we entered some third alternative? A world where it's not our leaders who will stamp us down with love or hate, but each other stamping each other down with hate over things we love.
I have an expression, "If you going to hang someone, use the right rope." I think this was the point of the video. Critics should review movies, games, etc. based on the quality of the work, and not if the works matches their political beliefs. I don't think that should be a controversial perspective to have. He is not saying, "You can't give something I like a negative review." If you going to pan a movie, the reasons for panning the movie shouldn't be that it conflicted with your politics.
Wah wah critics don't like shitty DC movies wah wah. Maybe if DC/WB got off their fucking asses and made a decent film we wouldn't have this problem.
Media analysis is an entirely subjective process. The reasons one might have for "panning" or embracing a piece of media are nigh limitless, and all speak to that person's individual predilections. If you do not like the criteria a particular critic uses to assess media, then it falls to you to find a critic who is more in line with your tastes.KissingSunlight said:
This whole "politics should never be a part of media analysis" horseshit is the most transparently veiled "I don't like the personal politics of the reviewer" imaginable. Too bad, so sad. Don't like the politics of the reviewer? Find a different one. Having a hard time finding reviewers who share your politics? Write your own reviews, or have a moment of self-reflection to try and determine why your personal viewpoint isn't commonly reflected in media criticism.
At no point is the answer "muzzle what criteria critics can and cannot employ when assessing media", unless you're undertaking an object lesson in sneaky fascism.
I agree with you that reviews are subjective. I believe that the point being made is the difference between a good critic and a bad critic. A good critic will review the product. A bad critic will make it about him/herself.BloatedGuppy said:
Honestly, I like to read a wide selections of reviews. A negative review sometimes have made want to see the movie.
If someone wants to be a shitty critic, they have a right to be one. However, people like this youtuber have a right to call out the shenanigans that shitty critics do.
Completely agree, modern critics are not at all reliable. Why? Because they have opinions and opinions are subjective. What we need are objective reviews. Reviews that don't take personal tastes, political opinions, or any other biases into account. Doesn't that sound great? In fact, Jim did a wonderfully objective Final Fantasy XIII review and I think movie critics could learn a thing or two from him.