Bad scores keeping people out of the theater? Make better movies. Problem solved.
38
Memo to Hollywood: Lousy movies are bad for ticket sales. Full stop.
21
If tickets weren't so expensive then viewers wouldn't have o rely on such metrics to decide what to watch. $17.50 in NYC for a non-3D picture is ridiculous.
13
Hollywood is suffering because it keeps trying to sell a white-male-centric, comic book, robot slate of crud that does not sell tickets. This starkly highlights the fact that the demographic they claim to be eternally chasing (18-32, white, male) has neither the interest or wherewithal to see films. In fact, many of them are allergic to paying for much of *anything*, let alone a movie ticket.
As well, it is noted that these same male "consumers" claim to be "preached" to by Hollywood celebrities or by the thematic elements in films (which they claim they don't watch). Such people will never be able to cope with the diversity of opinion, experience and story-telling reflected in cinema and they should stick to Fox News or sports. Add in the industry's toxic attitude toward women, people of color or the basic intelligence of its audience and you have... Brett Ratner.
It is not the concern of art to cater to debased right-wing "sensibilities" or to never disturb the comfort zone of such people. If you expect such privileges you should avoid cinema altogether. If you want coddling and lies, stick to right-wing media.
The result is that this leaves out the very people who love film and might buy the *actual tickets*.
The Thing That Is Rotten is your 'product', Hollywood.
As well, it is noted that these same male "consumers" claim to be "preached" to by Hollywood celebrities or by the thematic elements in films (which they claim they don't watch). Such people will never be able to cope with the diversity of opinion, experience and story-telling reflected in cinema and they should stick to Fox News or sports. Add in the industry's toxic attitude toward women, people of color or the basic intelligence of its audience and you have... Brett Ratner.
It is not the concern of art to cater to debased right-wing "sensibilities" or to never disturb the comfort zone of such people. If you expect such privileges you should avoid cinema altogether. If you want coddling and lies, stick to right-wing media.
The result is that this leaves out the very people who love film and might buy the *actual tickets*.
The Thing That Is Rotten is your 'product', Hollywood.
4
I don't ever go to the movies. Period. I hate people using their cell phones and I dislike the presence of children even more. They scream, cry, babble and cannot sit still and even run up and down the aisles. Their parents are too cheap to get babysitters. They even bring them to R rated movies! You will NEVER see me in a movie theater regardless of how good the film may be.
9
Hollywood is suffering because it keeps trying to sell a white-male-centric, comic book, robot slate of crud that does not sell tickets. This starkly highlights the fact that the demographic they claim to be eternally chasing (18-32, white, male) has neither the interest or wherewithal to see films. In fact, many of them are allergic to paying for much of *anything*, let alone a movie ticket.
As well, it is noted that these same male "consumers" claim to be "preached" to by Hollywood celebrities or by the thematic elements in films (which they claim they don't watch). Such people will never be able to cope with the diversity of opinion, experience and story-telling reflected in cinema and they should stick to Fox News or sports.
Add in the industry's toxic attitude toward women, people of color or the basic intelligence of its audience and you have... Brett Ratner.
It is not the concern of art to cater to debased right-wing "sensibilities" or to never disturb the comfort zone of such people. If you expect such privileges you should avoid cinema altogether. If you want coddling and lies, stick to right-wing media.
The result is that this leaves out the very people who love film and might buy the *actual tickets*. The Thing That Is Rotten is your 'product', Hollywood.
As well, it is noted that these same male "consumers" claim to be "preached" to by Hollywood celebrities or by the thematic elements in films (which they claim they don't watch). Such people will never be able to cope with the diversity of opinion, experience and story-telling reflected in cinema and they should stick to Fox News or sports.
Add in the industry's toxic attitude toward women, people of color or the basic intelligence of its audience and you have... Brett Ratner.
It is not the concern of art to cater to debased right-wing "sensibilities" or to never disturb the comfort zone of such people. If you expect such privileges you should avoid cinema altogether. If you want coddling and lies, stick to right-wing media.
The result is that this leaves out the very people who love film and might buy the *actual tickets*. The Thing That Is Rotten is your 'product', Hollywood.
15
I was longing to go to a decent movie to celebrate my birthday. All the local complexes had the same old drivel. I wanted an upbeat funny movie without tons of special effects and a decent sophisticated dialogue. What a birthday present that would have been! Instead, out of desperation. I chose an on demand flick starring Goldie Hawn and Amy Shumer titled "Snatched". I thought the two woman would be a good mix and the trailer looked entertaining so I bit. Big mistake. What a let down. The dialogue and situations were so crude I was thankful my husband wasn't around. Why would Goldie, one of my favorite stars, accept a role in this awful excuse for a movie? She's older so maybe senility is setting in.
This idea that four letter words and obscene situations are funny is lost on me. I'm not a prude but if I had wanted to watch porno I would have tried a different channel. Hollywood is really, really, in trouble when they offer this type of movie. From now on it will be TCM classics from the good old days.
Lest you think I'm over the hill, I have seen some decent movies recently. I loved, "Lion" and "Fences" (based on play), and "Loving". Yes, and even "Wonder Woman."
This idea that four letter words and obscene situations are funny is lost on me. I'm not a prude but if I had wanted to watch porno I would have tried a different channel. Hollywood is really, really, in trouble when they offer this type of movie. From now on it will be TCM classics from the good old days.
Lest you think I'm over the hill, I have seen some decent movies recently. I loved, "Lion" and "Fences" (based on play), and "Loving". Yes, and even "Wonder Woman."
14
I support Rotten Tomatoes. However I am annoyed at our tendency to rely on ratings for everything and for thinking that we, consumers, only deserve the best. Indulgent
3
Hollywood is suffering because it keeps trying to sell a white-male-centric, comic book, robot slate of crud that does not sell tickets. This starkly highlights the fact that the demographic they claim to be eternally chasing (18-32, white, male) has neither the interest or wherewithal to see films. In fact, many of them are allergic to paying for much of *anything*, let alone a movie ticket.
As well, it is noted that these same male "consumers" claim to be "preached" to by Hollywood celebrities or by the thematic elements in films (which they claim they don't watch). Such people will never be able to cope with the diversity of opinion, experience and story-telling reflected in cinema and they should stick to Fox News or sports.
Add in the industry's toxic attitude toward women, people of color or the basic intelligence of its audience and you have... Brett Ratner.
It is not the concern of art to cater to debased right-wing "sensibilities" or to never disturb the comfort zone of such people. If you expect such privileges you should avoid cinema altogether. If you want coddling and lies, stick to right-wing media. The result is that this leaves out the very people who love film and might buy the *actual tickets*.
The Thing That Is Rotten is your 'product', Hollywood.
As well, it is noted that these same male "consumers" claim to be "preached" to by Hollywood celebrities or by the thematic elements in films (which they claim they don't watch). Such people will never be able to cope with the diversity of opinion, experience and story-telling reflected in cinema and they should stick to Fox News or sports.
Add in the industry's toxic attitude toward women, people of color or the basic intelligence of its audience and you have... Brett Ratner.
It is not the concern of art to cater to debased right-wing "sensibilities" or to never disturb the comfort zone of such people. If you expect such privileges you should avoid cinema altogether. If you want coddling and lies, stick to right-wing media. The result is that this leaves out the very people who love film and might buy the *actual tickets*.
The Thing That Is Rotten is your 'product', Hollywood.
So Hollywood blames Rotten Tomatoes for its crummy summer?
Seems fair enough - Rotten Tomatoes blames Hollywood.
So do most Americans.
Seems fair enough - Rotten Tomatoes blames Hollywood.
So do most Americans.
6
I think all this criticism of Hollywood for producing bad movies is misplaced. Why, just last weekend I shelled out $28 (plus $5 for a small bottle of water) for my girlfriend and I to see a movie in a theater for the first time in over a year. It was wonderful, and I more than got my money's worth!!
That movie? 1977's Close Encounter of the Third Kind.
That movie? 1977's Close Encounter of the Third Kind.
6
These artist are under constant pressure to push the agenda of aggressive radicals that threaten them with accusation and protest. Leave the artist alone and let them create.
3
Ha! We're supposed to be worried about the fact that the world's worst film directors -- like Ratner -- and Hollywood's emptiest, trashiest movies -- like Baywatch -- are financial disasters?
If the studios are serious about addressing their "Rotten Tomatoes problem," they'll start making movies for thinking people again, instead of continuing to churn out mindless, CGI-filled garbage for the overseas markets.
I agree that aggregators like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are not the place to go for nuance -- I'd complain that they too often elevate mediocre Oscar-bait movies like The King's Speech -- but no nuance is required in the case of dogs like King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. These movies should come with warning labels . . . and thanks to Rotten Tomatoes, now they do.
If the studios are serious about addressing their "Rotten Tomatoes problem," they'll start making movies for thinking people again, instead of continuing to churn out mindless, CGI-filled garbage for the overseas markets.
I agree that aggregators like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic are not the place to go for nuance -- I'd complain that they too often elevate mediocre Oscar-bait movies like The King's Speech -- but no nuance is required in the case of dogs like King Arthur: Legend of the Sword. These movies should come with warning labels . . . and thanks to Rotten Tomatoes, now they do.
19
My wife and I took our kids to see Captain Underpants. We both agreed it was the worst move we've ever seen and felt horrified that we'd subjected our children to such trash. I haven't been back to the theatre to see another movie since. I also remember taking my mom to see Die Hard 3 and told myself I'd never watch another film where someone jumps off a bridge with their motorcycle onto a helicopter. Maybe Hollywood should stop blaming Rotten Tomatoes and start producing films of substance.
15
The risks of capitalism are many and varied...except for certain movies the success or failure is a gamble. Sometimes you win sometimes you lose that is why they call it free enterprise.
I go three or four times a month to see movies. I always check with Rotten Tomatoes's critics before and after to see who matches my taste and has fresh outlooks They have links to nationally known critics,and freelance fan ones as well. It is not the only criteria that most of us use,but is really very convenient I am not looking for cheerleaders
3
Movies have gotten ridiculously expensive. I'm not willing to pay for a bad movie in the theater. Rotten tomatoes helps me decide what movies I'll pay to see and what movies I'll wait until I can get for free from the library. If Hollywood has a problem with that they can work with the movie theaters to get the prices down so that families can afford to splurge. Otherwise they're just going to have to deal with it and perhaps make better movies in the process.
10
As a young grade school Catholic I remember a bulletin board in the back vestibule of the Church with newspaper clippings from a Church Movie Rating section in a Catholic newspaper. It literally told us what was permissible to see based on vulgarity, sexual content and violence.Rotten Tomatoes is basically a revised form of that long ago age. Instead of vSV it bases it's ratings on whether it is worth seeing or not. This is definitely a GOOD thing and is worth checking out in today's tight fisted economy. Just keep in mind that sometimes they can be wrong as not all tastes are the same. One man's garbage is another man's treasure.
3
Don't blame Rotten Tomatoes. In the last few years, most movies have been beyond bad -- ultra-violent (with graphic murder and torture), laced with potty-mouthed "humor," and populated by comic-book characters and drug pushers. Why would I pay premium prices to be assaulted by this form of "entertainment"? I used to put faith in the film industry and looked forward to an afternoon or evening at the movies. Now I wait until all the reviews are in, and a good (or even acceptable) movie is on DVD, and I find it at my local library. Such movies are are getting harder to find.
10
People will always go to good movies, so Hollywood, simply make more good ones-aim for more like "Bridge of Spies".
I don't go by Rotten Tomatoes much, I read the reviews, know which directors I do and do not like, and trust my own judgment.
I also choose my theaters carefully and there are now very few I will go to, regardless of what is showing, because most of them charge too much, show 12 ads and 6 previews, and have bad, fake-tasting popcorn for $8. I want no ads, maybe 2 previews, and real popcorn. Hollywood should exert pressure on these theaters to improve; that would really help.
I don't go by Rotten Tomatoes much, I read the reviews, know which directors I do and do not like, and trust my own judgment.
I also choose my theaters carefully and there are now very few I will go to, regardless of what is showing, because most of them charge too much, show 12 ads and 6 previews, and have bad, fake-tasting popcorn for $8. I want no ads, maybe 2 previews, and real popcorn. Hollywood should exert pressure on these theaters to improve; that would really help.
18
I actually prefer Metacritic to Rotten Toms, but RT is fun to read and it's always fun to see when viewer ratings are markedly different from critic ratings.
Absolutely no sympathy for the execs in Hollywood. Anyone with half a brain and functioning eyes can see why the box office has fallen off a cliff... a dearth of decent films that don't feature men in superhero outfits, and an excess of films made by very mediocre writers/directors (who inexplicably keep getting gigs).
Cut the budgets down to size, take some risks, bring in genuinely new talent and we might start to see a turnaround. In other words, do what Amazon, Netflix et al are doing.
Absolutely no sympathy for the execs in Hollywood. Anyone with half a brain and functioning eyes can see why the box office has fallen off a cliff... a dearth of decent films that don't feature men in superhero outfits, and an excess of films made by very mediocre writers/directors (who inexplicably keep getting gigs).
Cut the budgets down to size, take some risks, bring in genuinely new talent and we might start to see a turnaround. In other words, do what Amazon, Netflix et al are doing.
11
Many of the comments are spot on.
In an attempt to avoid repeating the most frequent observations (competitive offerings from streaming services , comic book story lines), I would add the following as significant reasons for the decline in theater attendance:
Exceptionally poor sound systems - I had audiology testing because I frequently cannot discern the audio at movie theaters . My hearingwas normal.
CGI (computer generated images have been overutilized. They often look fake.
CGI part II: Part of the thrill in watching movies in the old days was watching someone accomplishing a "stunt" - think James Bond rocket jet pack escape in Thinderball or Russia with Love, whatever. Presently you watch overglamofied animation characters doing inplausible acts instead of accomplishments. Boring...
Direction . What to say? I have an IQ of 144 and degrees from three Ivy League schools. Most of the time I am 20 minutes into a movie and either (a) still don't care or don't know what is going on.
Characters/ actors almost always have no "chemistry". They have sex, say the right things, but are often not plausible or interesting.
In an attempt to avoid repeating the most frequent observations (competitive offerings from streaming services , comic book story lines), I would add the following as significant reasons for the decline in theater attendance:
Exceptionally poor sound systems - I had audiology testing because I frequently cannot discern the audio at movie theaters . My hearingwas normal.
CGI (computer generated images have been overutilized. They often look fake.
CGI part II: Part of the thrill in watching movies in the old days was watching someone accomplishing a "stunt" - think James Bond rocket jet pack escape in Thinderball or Russia with Love, whatever. Presently you watch overglamofied animation characters doing inplausible acts instead of accomplishments. Boring...
Direction . What to say? I have an IQ of 144 and degrees from three Ivy League schools. Most of the time I am 20 minutes into a movie and either (a) still don't care or don't know what is going on.
Characters/ actors almost always have no "chemistry". They have sex, say the right things, but are often not plausible or interesting.
9
I have over 1000 reviews on Rotten Tomatoes but most are of political documentaries and foreign films deserving wider attention. I never see the junk in local cineplex like Adam Sandler movies because I am not on anybody's payroll and forced to endure such garbage. Starting in November, I starting getting screeners from the studios that are generally marketed to a more knowledgable audience. Weinstein brothers films, etc. When I start watching them to see what I have missed and to be able to make informed votes for the New York Film Critics Online meeting in December, I will occasionally rate something as "rotten". Most of the recent Tarantino films got a "rotten" from me.
I think one of the reasons Hollywood has gone downhill is the failure of film critics writing for the print media to do their job. For example, Peter Travis of Rolling Stone is notoriously generous. I always wondered, before I began reviewing films online, how the NY Times could have given Woody Allen a free ride for most of the past 30 years.
I think there are some great films being made today but not in Hollywood. I consider Nuri Bilge Ceylan and Jafar Panahi to be two of the best directors working today but for the average filmgoer looking for shallow entertainment and allergic to subtitles, they are strictly off-limits. The real shame is that we have no counterparts in the USA making films as smart as theirs. Just a symptom of this nation's deep decline in keeping with the Trump presidency.
I think one of the reasons Hollywood has gone downhill is the failure of film critics writing for the print media to do their job. For example, Peter Travis of Rolling Stone is notoriously generous. I always wondered, before I began reviewing films online, how the NY Times could have given Woody Allen a free ride for most of the past 30 years.
I think there are some great films being made today but not in Hollywood. I consider Nuri Bilge Ceylan and Jafar Panahi to be two of the best directors working today but for the average filmgoer looking for shallow entertainment and allergic to subtitles, they are strictly off-limits. The real shame is that we have no counterparts in the USA making films as smart as theirs. Just a symptom of this nation's deep decline in keeping with the Trump presidency.
7
The Rotten Tomatoes score is significantly flawed. The following is an extreme example but the best way to make the point. Imagine every reviewer gave a score from 1-100. Movie "A" gets 10 reviews, each giving it a score of 60, an RT passing score. Average score = 60 but since RT is Pass/Fail their score is 100. Movie "B" has 5 scores of 100 and 5 scores of 59. The average score is 80 but the RT score is 50 - Splat. I think RT's methodology gets a 'Rotten'.
2
Sorry Hollywood but the Tomatometer is fairly accurate (though I watch some of the bad movies anyway which should please you).
1
Make better movies and people will want to see them. Make more original movies and fewer reboots and pop-culture tie in movies like the Emoji movie (ok, I will admit that the Lego Movie was good).
The last two summers have been pretty bad for movies. I do see the superhero movies but would like something else worth seeing.
The last two summers have been pretty bad for movies. I do see the superhero movies but would like something else worth seeing.
5
Let's face it: Most hollywood movies are terrible. I would say 95 per cent aren't worth to watch even for free let alone pay for them.
4
Place a tax on the top studios, use funds to pay for independent films and restoring old flicks; not remaking them.. restoring them. Other than that, yea.. I'd be fine with Hollywood going bankrupt. I'm happy with my lectures and books any day of the week.
Rotten Tomatoes is not why I stopped going to movies. I stopped because:
1) The prices are too high
2) Movies in most theaters are no longer for adults
3) Movies have horrible plots, often terrible writing, and are too violent
4) I am not eager to see a movie when I was younger (probably because of all of above). So I don't mind waiting to see it at home
5) The comfort of my own home is better then dirty or noisy theaters
6) Audio quality of movies is just horrible now. In an effort to make really big dynamic ranges, dialogue is now so low, you can't understand it half the time.
But then, an explosion is so loud, it is painful. Take me back to basic surround or even 3 front speakers. I don't need to know that the gun shot is exactly coming from my upper right and that it is a rifle from 100 yards away.
Excessive digital sound editing and George Lucas ILM have RUINED dialogue.
1) The prices are too high
2) Movies in most theaters are no longer for adults
3) Movies have horrible plots, often terrible writing, and are too violent
4) I am not eager to see a movie when I was younger (probably because of all of above). So I don't mind waiting to see it at home
5) The comfort of my own home is better then dirty or noisy theaters
6) Audio quality of movies is just horrible now. In an effort to make really big dynamic ranges, dialogue is now so low, you can't understand it half the time.
But then, an explosion is so loud, it is painful. Take me back to basic surround or even 3 front speakers. I don't need to know that the gun shot is exactly coming from my upper right and that it is a rifle from 100 yards away.
Excessive digital sound editing and George Lucas ILM have RUINED dialogue.
6
What a lot of Hollywood whining. There are high correlations between Rotten Tomatoes scores and more selective ("just the top critics") ratings websites like Metacritic.
1
I rely on the Rotten Tomatoes audience score more than the critics score, especially for certain genres. Certain genres like RomCom, martial arts or children/family films have very little appeal across most of the critic base. But the audience score is more self selecting - people that make the effort to see and review movies in these categories will tend to be more positive. If that self selecting group really hates the movie then I know I won't like it also.
So if it is a category I like, for example martial arts or action drama or science fiction, then I rely on the audience score to estimate its appeal for me more than a very rotten critic score.
"King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" is a example of a movie I would see based on the 71% audience score versus the 27% critic score.
"Passengers" with critics score 31% but audience score 63% and "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)" with critics score 50% but audience score 70% are other examples.
So if it is a category I like, for example martial arts or action drama or science fiction, then I rely on the audience score to estimate its appeal for me more than a very rotten critic score.
"King Arthur: Legend of the Sword" is a example of a movie I would see based on the 71% audience score versus the 27% critic score.
"Passengers" with critics score 31% but audience score 63% and "The Secret Life of Walter Mitty (2013)" with critics score 50% but audience score 70% are other examples.
8
We use to go to the movies every weekend but too many movies aren't that good anymore IMO. We use RT, Peter Travers and NYT and they're pretty accurate imo.
We have Netflix, Amazon and HBO. Many of their offerings are better than movies being made now and with a variety of fresh actors. I think the Hollywood system of using these top tier actors repeatedly is tiresome.
Independent movies have more leeway in choosing a variety of actors which is refreshing. But watching a series like 'Ray Donovan' or 'Breaking Bad' is more entertaining than many full feature movies put out today.
We only saw 'Baby Drive', 'Atomic Blond' and 'Spiderman' this summer. 'Baby Driver' was the most fun. We appreciated seeing some fresh new actors also. But it was fun to see Charlize do a Jane Bond type film.
We have Netflix, Amazon and HBO. Many of their offerings are better than movies being made now and with a variety of fresh actors. I think the Hollywood system of using these top tier actors repeatedly is tiresome.
Independent movies have more leeway in choosing a variety of actors which is refreshing. But watching a series like 'Ray Donovan' or 'Breaking Bad' is more entertaining than many full feature movies put out today.
We only saw 'Baby Drive', 'Atomic Blond' and 'Spiderman' this summer. 'Baby Driver' was the most fun. We appreciated seeing some fresh new actors also. But it was fun to see Charlize do a Jane Bond type film.
I prefer metacritic.com and its two aggregate scores of professional critics and viewers, with abbreviated reviews from the critics and unabridged reviews from the viewing public (usually miserably written with the sophistication of high-school dropouts at best). I compare the difference between the aggregated critics' and viewers' scores. Although the featured viewer reviews show no clue how to write or anything about movies, a comparison of the two scores is generally useful.
6
Rotten Tomatoes = The Invisible Hand?
Who knew?
Who knew?
1
Shouldn't this be called:
Attack Of The Rotten Tomatoes?
It seemed a natural.
Attack Of The Rotten Tomatoes?
It seemed a natural.
3
So it's not because the movies stink, it's because the reviews are bad? Sounds like circular logic to me.
PS: Regarding the bad summer sales, not everyone wants to see an endless stream of superhero movies.
PS: Regarding the bad summer sales, not everyone wants to see an endless stream of superhero movies.
4
I've found Rotten Tomatoes to be pretty accurate. It's word of mouth in the digital age. I *have* gone to see movies that had a bad RT review which I saw after the movie. I can't recall a time where I went 'what? that's crazy! It was good!'
It's not Rotten Tomatoes that is responsible for a decline in movie attendance, it's some really awful movies that have no vision, no talent and aren't even fun.
It's not Rotten Tomatoes that is responsible for a decline in movie attendance, it's some really awful movies that have no vision, no talent and aren't even fun.
4
Didn't see much diversity in that picture of RT employees. Seemed rather young, male, and white. I think the whole PC thing has gone to far, but that was an easy first take from a glimpse. Maybe the studios can convince all the identity groups to protest. I mean there's nothing more important going on in the world right now?
$30 for tickets, then $30 more for "food" and you blame rotten tomatoes? I can buy a brand new bluray movie for $20-25 and watch it at home on a large screen with projector. Oh, and I can pause it to take a bathroom break. One theater visit a year is about all I'm willing to spend.
2
Its simple: we're at the democratization of film review. Make better movies. Dont be so bottom Line driven. Actually tell a good story. And don't ignore people over 25.
3
Hey, not all critics give honest reviews! Some critics will slam a movie, regardless of whether it is good or bad. Some of those critics just like to stick it to certain actors, directors or studios, or simply want to kill a perfect review score. There is no clearer example of this than this year's "Get Out" which had a "100%" rating from about 200 critics for a number of weeks. Then some critic with an axe to grind gave it a bad review, dropping it to "99%". Clearer, movie critics can be haters too!
I used to go to IMDB but they've sold out to industry in a big way. Now you have to endure big splashy pre-loads, look-ups are clumsy, and there is no more comments forum, which used to contain useful information about all the movies and the character actors. Thanks to rotten tomatoes for a sort of informative site.
1
Born and educated in our City Paul Yanover gets a review of 100.We are very proud of his stellar record in Hollywood.
I was at a concert and suffering through a terrible warm up band. Then, I heard the definitive heckle, which applies perfectly to Hollywood.
"Play something we like!"
"Play something we like!"
2
Dear Hollywood,
Three quick things:
1) Stop whining and scapegoating.
2) Start buying my scripts.
3) Make movies, preferably funny ones, that emphasize humans, not computers, and that don't insult our intelligence.
Thanks for considering it.
Three quick things:
1) Stop whining and scapegoating.
2) Start buying my scripts.
3) Make movies, preferably funny ones, that emphasize humans, not computers, and that don't insult our intelligence.
Thanks for considering it.
5
Hollywood is sounding a lot like bitter Hillary, blaming everyone else and not looking at theoir own performance. I expect next we will just need to be educated to better understand their outstanding offerings.
3
Dear Hollywood,
Here is the plan to get back to profitability and business viability:
1) Stop milking superhero franchises forever or rebooting them every 2 years i.e Spiderman! People can only stand at most a trilogy a decade.
2) Lower ticket prices for movies that cost much less to produce. Encourages people to see more films.
3) Stop catering to the lowest common denominator. Green light intelligent/original scripts more often. We are tired of the same junk every year being recycled.
4) Release movies on TV on demand a week or so after the cinema release. I would see a lot more movies and you get to keep more of the profits. We want convenience and going to the cinema is inconvenient and a sure way to get the flu in a confined space with a hundred people.
5) Do not fight sites like Rotten Tomatoes, this is not your problem. I can see a score but it means nothing if the movie looks interesting and appealing. I do not need to see a score to see that Baywatch was a turkey!
6) More plot and dialogue, much less special effects. They are not a substitute for substance.
7) Services like Movie Pass will help you as people will watch more movies. Offer your own subscription service and own the cinemas. Therefore you get to keep all the revenue from $8 popcorn too.
Best wishes!
Here is the plan to get back to profitability and business viability:
1) Stop milking superhero franchises forever or rebooting them every 2 years i.e Spiderman! People can only stand at most a trilogy a decade.
2) Lower ticket prices for movies that cost much less to produce. Encourages people to see more films.
3) Stop catering to the lowest common denominator. Green light intelligent/original scripts more often. We are tired of the same junk every year being recycled.
4) Release movies on TV on demand a week or so after the cinema release. I would see a lot more movies and you get to keep more of the profits. We want convenience and going to the cinema is inconvenient and a sure way to get the flu in a confined space with a hundred people.
5) Do not fight sites like Rotten Tomatoes, this is not your problem. I can see a score but it means nothing if the movie looks interesting and appealing. I do not need to see a score to see that Baywatch was a turkey!
6) More plot and dialogue, much less special effects. They are not a substitute for substance.
7) Services like Movie Pass will help you as people will watch more movies. Offer your own subscription service and own the cinemas. Therefore you get to keep all the revenue from $8 popcorn too.
Best wishes!
30
I have spent the last 35+ years working on film and television production. I like to think of myself as informed on what qualifies as a good show (tv or film) or a bad show...what's original and what's derivative...whats thoughtful and what's foolish. And I have to say that while tv has gotten better and better, the movies have only gotten worse (for the most part). I'm fortunate enough to be in a position where I receive literally dozens of films on DVD in the mail between Thanksgiving and Christmas so that I can vote on them. I try to watch them all, but every year more and more get ejected from my DVD player less than halfway thru. The "Hollywood Industry" is either too blind, proud or stupid to blame itself...but that's where the blame lies. C'mon guys...take a chance, show us something new, original, emotional, thought-provoking, instead of sequels, prequels, remakes and super heroes!
38
If Hollywood had produced something noteworthy this year, sales wouldn't have slumped.
I never read reviews or look at Rotten Tomatoes to select a movie, as beauty is in the eye of each critic.
I read the films' synopses, and zero films have been enticing. I have read a lot of books this year.
Scapegoating one website for Hollywood's failures is a cheap shot. Time to dig deeper, Hollywood, and find some original creators -- maybe some writers who are in touch with human emotion, and not their phone or tablet.
I never read reviews or look at Rotten Tomatoes to select a movie, as beauty is in the eye of each critic.
I read the films' synopses, and zero films have been enticing. I have read a lot of books this year.
Scapegoating one website for Hollywood's failures is a cheap shot. Time to dig deeper, Hollywood, and find some original creators -- maybe some writers who are in touch with human emotion, and not their phone or tablet.
13
Ok. The reviews aren't always applicable or accurate. However, when it comes to choosing a movie to watch in the theater, it's very helpful.
First I ask, "Should this best be seen in the theater on a large screen, with great sound, and possibly in 3D?" If yes, then I decide on spending that money on an 80% or more.
Otherwise, I will await the inevitable release to my home network.
Who wants to spend more than $30 taking their wives to see a Woody Allen movie in public when they can ruin it for her by sneering at it in the privacy of their homes?
First I ask, "Should this best be seen in the theater on a large screen, with great sound, and possibly in 3D?" If yes, then I decide on spending that money on an 80% or more.
Otherwise, I will await the inevitable release to my home network.
Who wants to spend more than $30 taking their wives to see a Woody Allen movie in public when they can ruin it for her by sneering at it in the privacy of their homes?
1
The images on the silver screen used to be special. Nowadays, TV production quality is higher and production costs are lower for amateurs and other competitors, so movies just aren't an attractive option.
Plus, when was the last time people talked about movies? All I hear about at work is Game of Thrones and a bunch of other TV shows.
Oh, and the quality of films has greatly declined. The movie business is no longer striving for cinematic art or immortality, but rather hack films costing millions of dollars that merely lowers the bar for what qualifies as a "film" so that every other studio can also try to cash in their hack films. Why people even want their name in the credits is beyond me.
Plus, when was the last time people talked about movies? All I hear about at work is Game of Thrones and a bunch of other TV shows.
Oh, and the quality of films has greatly declined. The movie business is no longer striving for cinematic art or immortality, but rather hack films costing millions of dollars that merely lowers the bar for what qualifies as a "film" so that every other studio can also try to cash in their hack films. Why people even want their name in the credits is beyond me.
4
I have most of the same factors as everyone else mentions in the comments from ill behaved audiences to films which are often commercial rehashes. But I have another which I have not seen mentioned. I am 69 years old. I have hearing and vision problems plus also had a total knee replacement. My iPads and Mac Air enable me to see anything I want and with automatic disability assistance. I set up my preferences with my problems and I am always good to go. Add to this that I can balance my knee on a therapy ball, eat better food, drink better drink, etc., and it is no wonder that I have not used a movie theater since 2004. I was someone who want to art cinema houses at least 2-3 times a week throughout my younger decades. So I stream via Netflix, Amazon Prime, and Acorn and buy whatever else I need at iTunes or Amazon. I also have full online access to streaming from my library, one of the best big city libraries in the country. The movie theaters near me are not art houses either. They are those terrible 10 screens in a mall with terrible food. I use Rotten Tomatoes from time to time but I usually have a fairly good idea what I want to see without even bothering. I think there must be a lot of "Baby Boomers" in the same circumstances I am. Wake up, movie studios.
2
When I was a kid I enjoyed watching great adventure movies--Raiders of the Lost Ark, Star Wars, Jaws, Stand By Me. But with only rare exception, the adventure film has been replaced by the redundant cartoonish "superhero" movie, which all follow the same recipe of excessive violence and VFX, poor dialogue, one-dimensional characters and an overly dark tone.
Make better movies, get better RT ratings.
Make better movies, get better RT ratings.
5
Lots of Hollywood bashing (that I agree with) about recent movies that seem mediocre, derivative, and childish. What should Hollywood produce?
I want to cite examples, as shown in the photo of Rotten Tomatoes office break room: Office Space, Breakfast at Tiffany's, and Pulp Fiction. While perhaps not great in the classic sense, these were all notable and on my personal favorites list. They were all innovative and engaging, and very entertaining (even after multiple viewings). No big stars (or at least big stars playing themselves). Very clever writing and directing. (BTW, the Rotten Tomatoes scores range from 79 to 94%.)
I hesistate to ask Hollywood to make more films like these, since the current crop of executives will then call for scripts that are remakes, or sequels, or prequels--and guarantied to be bad. Perhaps a recommendation to throw some money at creative writers and directors (and less at stars)--take a risk!
I want to cite examples, as shown in the photo of Rotten Tomatoes office break room: Office Space, Breakfast at Tiffany's, and Pulp Fiction. While perhaps not great in the classic sense, these were all notable and on my personal favorites list. They were all innovative and engaging, and very entertaining (even after multiple viewings). No big stars (or at least big stars playing themselves). Very clever writing and directing. (BTW, the Rotten Tomatoes scores range from 79 to 94%.)
I hesistate to ask Hollywood to make more films like these, since the current crop of executives will then call for scripts that are remakes, or sequels, or prequels--and guarantied to be bad. Perhaps a recommendation to throw some money at creative writers and directors (and less at stars)--take a risk!
5
I do not necessarily let a below 60 rating dissuade me from seeing a movie. I have enjoyed many movies over the years that do not meet the general consensus on the Tomatometer and I hope people who use this web site keep in mind that the general consensus is not always right or does not necessarily line up with their taste in movies. For example, Roger Ebert often disagreed with Gene Siskel. He tended to put more emphasis on general entertainment value in movies than Mr. Siskel and I found him to be correct in his assessments more often than not.
2
Personally, I wonder at the dearth of creativity in movies, television, books, and theater nowadays. They make movies out of TV shows and Broadway shows out of movies. Often these are adaptations of books but sometimes it's the other way around and all of the genres keep repeating the same stories in a different medium. If the material, the acting, and the effects are any good it may survive the multiple retellings but I can think of few examples. We need new stories or new takes on stories. Not everything has to be a book, a series, a movie and a theatrical production and fewer pieces are worthy of such attention!
1
With no exceptions, Rotten Tomatoes has provided me with a nuanced and accurate assessment of close to 100 movies and television shows. The Tomatometer is an excellent starting point but not definitive. Culling through the reviews -- professional and amateur -- makes all the difference. Great website.
1
How astonishingly arrogant of Hollywood to blame the site for their failed films. As consumers of their products, we have every right to express our opinions on the quality of that product--whether we're expert critics or not--PARTICULARLY when we're asked to shell out nearly $30 of our hard-earned dough for a ticket, a popcorn and a drink. Brett Ratner should zip it and start making better quality movies if he wants that all-important Tomatometer to tick upwards. Now, off to post my review of The Big Sick.
4
I'm with Chris. Sequels, comic books, romcoms, and no end to detective, thug, cop,wham bang crash boom thunder violence and special effects. Yaawwn. Hollywood is turning out garbage. "Cable" TV is much better as are independent films.
9
Thank god for Rotten Tomatoes. I always count on there opinion before I select a movie. There's nothing worse than spending an average of $50 for two adults to watch a truly awful movie. Unfortunately, awful movies seem to be the norm these days. Sorry studios, you have brought this on to yourselves.
4
At least they aren't blaming the Russians...or should we have some special investigator make sure the Russians aren't somehow colluding with whoever runs Rotten Tomatoes? Hmmmm? They both start with an "r" after all..."how much more obvious does it have to be?!"
1
So Rotten Tomatoes' reviews killed Baywatch? I didn't think people who would consider seeing Baywatch could read or use the Internet.
5
Hollywood should blame themselves. They should write, produce, and make better movies for us to spend $12.00+ each to watch a movie. Just look at how many sequels they produced over the years. Is that a brain drain or what? In addition, Hollywood makes so many bloody, cruel, and tasteless killing movies which has a very bad influence for younger generation. I say they deserve what they get.
5
Aw, not even a nod to David Weisman, whose monstrous tomato (from the Attack of the Killer Tomatoes movie poster) is being aped/ripped? Not even an "after Weisman"?
2
Good grief! It's not the job of Rotten Tomatoes to suckle the movie industry. This reminds me a bit of a restaurant review at a newspaper where I worked. The review was a bit negative. But the restaurant was downtown, and one of the city's unofficial booster types wrote a Letter to the Editor that complained of our review at a time when the city was trying to revitalize the downtown. How could we?
The appropriate response is "Soooooo....?" It's not a newspaper's job to boost local businesses, and it's not a website's job to boost the movie industry.
What IS their job is to tell the truth. Grow up, Hollywood.
The appropriate response is "Soooooo....?" It's not a newspaper's job to boost local businesses, and it's not a website's job to boost the movie industry.
What IS their job is to tell the truth. Grow up, Hollywood.
11
Its amazing to me how slow the entertainment industry has been to react to implications of the digital world on their business models.
The motion picture industry, with all its access to all the latest technology, could be making the most amazing movies we have ever seen. But they don't. They spend mega millions on special effects but don't have two cents to rub together for a good story. The only movies worth watching these days are independent ones. The days of any industry deciding what the consumer is allowed to consume are over. We have choices now.
Adjust or die!
The motion picture industry, with all its access to all the latest technology, could be making the most amazing movies we have ever seen. But they don't. They spend mega millions on special effects but don't have two cents to rub together for a good story. The only movies worth watching these days are independent ones. The days of any industry deciding what the consumer is allowed to consume are over. We have choices now.
Adjust or die!
11
I never look at RT. Neither does my husband. I find out what to watch by asking my husband who reads a lot of reviews. He tells me which ones get decent reviews. I choose from those. If we can get it at home on Netflix etc, we watch at home because the only theater with decent movies is 45 miles away. There is rarely anything watchable in our small town.
2
Yay rotten tomatoes. something to be said for the common folk speaking up, not some geek paid by the movie industry to pimp the product.
5
Acme super mega LOL :D
Shooting the ambulance + Breaking the thermometer ?!
Shooting the ambulance + Breaking the thermometer ?!
1
"Rotten Tomatoes is killing our box-office." No, Hollywood, you're just not making very good movies this summer. (Mostly true.)
"Because the movies are so repetitious and childish, I haven't been to the movies in X-number of years." No, that's just because you've gotten old, lazy, and/or boring. (Also true, sad to say.)
Granted, there are a lot of sequels and comic-book movies out these days. (Not all of them are bad, by the way.) But this summer also gave us "Dunkirk," "Detroit," "The Hero," and "Wind River." All of these are original, adult films that were also very good movies. The fact that you didn't bother to go see any of these movies at the theater, even though that's what you say you are looking for, means that Hollywood won't bother to keep making them. Self-fulfilling prophecy, I suppose.
"Because the movies are so repetitious and childish, I haven't been to the movies in X-number of years." No, that's just because you've gotten old, lazy, and/or boring. (Also true, sad to say.)
Granted, there are a lot of sequels and comic-book movies out these days. (Not all of them are bad, by the way.) But this summer also gave us "Dunkirk," "Detroit," "The Hero," and "Wind River." All of these are original, adult films that were also very good movies. The fact that you didn't bother to go see any of these movies at the theater, even though that's what you say you are looking for, means that Hollywood won't bother to keep making them. Self-fulfilling prophecy, I suppose.
8
Maybe they can get with Hillary and write a book about how it's everyone else's fault but their own?
6
Quick, somebody write an equally inane and irrelevant comment about Trump so we can get the idiotic politicking out our systems.
Good, thanks!
Good, thanks!
3
I'm not going to like a movie because some erudite critic says it is good and tickles their fancy. Hogwash is my opinion about most of the titles in some of the recent articles about 'must see' movies of this year, decade, or since the turn of the century. I go to be entertained, amazed and then educated or enlightened.
If the movie I'm watching doesn't do that for me, I'm giving it a low rating. I'm not the same as even another member of my family, and at my age I don't have to jump on the bandwagon to extol a film that isn't what I want to attend.
Hell or High Water is one of the few that had me guessing all the way through, interested in characters on both sides, and amazed at the clever moments written into the story ("What don't yuh wunt?")
The multiple comments all reflecting the problem (movies no longer have the monopoly on big budgets or must-see viewing, now infringed by deep pockets TV on 'cable' that have started inroads into the money machine. And with video offering far more choices, they can attract audiences who otherwise would be forced to go bowling or to the movie as their only choices.
I'm spending my money (less of it) on good films when they are introduced since I still find the theater experience superior to my diminuative screen at home. It is an event when it is deserving of my attention, and please let me be the final arbiter of what I like.
If the movie I'm watching doesn't do that for me, I'm giving it a low rating. I'm not the same as even another member of my family, and at my age I don't have to jump on the bandwagon to extol a film that isn't what I want to attend.
Hell or High Water is one of the few that had me guessing all the way through, interested in characters on both sides, and amazed at the clever moments written into the story ("What don't yuh wunt?")
The multiple comments all reflecting the problem (movies no longer have the monopoly on big budgets or must-see viewing, now infringed by deep pockets TV on 'cable' that have started inroads into the money machine. And with video offering far more choices, they can attract audiences who otherwise would be forced to go bowling or to the movie as their only choices.
I'm spending my money (less of it) on good films when they are introduced since I still find the theater experience superior to my diminuative screen at home. It is an event when it is deserving of my attention, and please let me be the final arbiter of what I like.
1
Yes, about as credible as Hillary blaming the Russians, Bernie Sanders, widespread misogyny, global warming....................for her failure. Could it just that the movie or you are awful?
3
Hollywood decided years ago to stop paying writers properly and to bombard the public with 'safe bets': sequels, prequels, remakes and tepid adaptations of comic and bestselling books. The writers fled to the emerging series-for-streaming market, and the public, slowly but steadily, has followed suit. And Rotten Tomatoes is to be blamed? What were they expecting?
11
I check RT when considering a movie, but I also seek out reviews from the critics that I tend to agree with most often. Who wants to waste time and money going to a bad movie?
8
Sites like rotten tomatoes are indispensable for consumers who want to get a good value for their dollar. However the article missed one of the most important utilities of rotten tomatoes, the user reviews.
I actually do not pay any attention to the critics whom I typically find jaded and whose values are nearly always at odds with mine. I do however trust ordinary viewers.
Yahoo used to have an excellent movie review sub-portal. Then they decided to hide user reviews and receive payment from studios to promote their bilge instead. Not catering to the consumer is one reason why Yahoo went down the toilet.
Unfortunately Rotten Tomatoes seems to be trending in the same direction. The users are more important than paid critics, which is still not grasped. When media sites start to understand this, they will prosper. When film studios realize that their political propaganda and their commitment to demoralizing society causes them to go bankrupt, then maybe they will start producing a quality product again.
I actually do not pay any attention to the critics whom I typically find jaded and whose values are nearly always at odds with mine. I do however trust ordinary viewers.
Yahoo used to have an excellent movie review sub-portal. Then they decided to hide user reviews and receive payment from studios to promote their bilge instead. Not catering to the consumer is one reason why Yahoo went down the toilet.
Unfortunately Rotten Tomatoes seems to be trending in the same direction. The users are more important than paid critics, which is still not grasped. When media sites start to understand this, they will prosper. When film studios realize that their political propaganda and their commitment to demoralizing society causes them to go bankrupt, then maybe they will start producing a quality product again.
1
considering the poor quality of most movies produced by the studios, how can any website with the public's comments on those movies be despised by those same studios?
Maybe Hollywood can fix this problem by turning out better movies?
Maybe Hollywood can fix this problem by turning out better movies?
5
Sequels, sequels, sequels! We've had enough! Diversity and Women Directors! We need more! Lower the price of going to a movie - not just the ticket price, but the OUTRAGEOUS cost of refreshments before people start throwing rotten tomatoes at the nice kids selling the poporn. Rotten Tomatoes is not the problem, a look at the budgets&credits of CGI genrated films might be in order.
4
Hollywood is out of ideas and has been for north of a decade. So maybe Hollywood needs to cultivate some fresh talent, especially among screenwriters, producers and directors, maybe even with some women and minorities in the mix, so that they can offer something better than what's in the cineplex today.
The other problem is that movies are competing against increasingly pleasant home experiences, where people have wall size screens and sophisticated sound systems, and no one kicking the back of their seat and yapping on their cell phone, and the ability to make our own bowl of popcorn instead of being price gouged at the concession stand. Given that reality, multiplex owners need to shoulder some of the responsibility for offering a better experience to audiences.
The other problem is that movies are competing against increasingly pleasant home experiences, where people have wall size screens and sophisticated sound systems, and no one kicking the back of their seat and yapping on their cell phone, and the ability to make our own bowl of popcorn instead of being price gouged at the concession stand. Given that reality, multiplex owners need to shoulder some of the responsibility for offering a better experience to audiences.
6
“Most importantly, studios are panicking because moviegoing is no longer a habit for most Americans. Because of climbing prices and competition from other forms of entertainment, a trip to the multiplex has become a special event. In particular, more movie fans are ignoring low- and mid-budget films when they are in theaters: Ehh, let’s wait until they show up on Netflix.”
Now hold on. It sounds like they actually know what a big part of the problem is and it’s even spelled out in the article. Let’s add to this equation growing income disparity, as graphed in this NYT article.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/07/opinion/leonhardt-income-...
The combination of stagnant income + skyrocketing cost + awful movies = declining audiences and studios pointing the finger at Rotten Tomatoes. That makes total sense.
Maybe they should get involved in politics. If they lobbied for helping the average American and shrinking wealth disparity, while also pushing to lower the absurd cost of going out to the movies, I think they might see the change they want. And maybe if they stopped slinging schlock like the Emoji Movie, Baywatch, and a 12 year old’s fantasy of King Arthur, that might help a little, too.
We will go out for a good time, but it can’t be financially crippling (because, yeah, there are better things to spend our money on), and we don’t want to pay to be insulted.
Now hold on. It sounds like they actually know what a big part of the problem is and it’s even spelled out in the article. Let’s add to this equation growing income disparity, as graphed in this NYT article.
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2017/08/07/opinion/leonhardt-income-...
The combination of stagnant income + skyrocketing cost + awful movies = declining audiences and studios pointing the finger at Rotten Tomatoes. That makes total sense.
Maybe they should get involved in politics. If they lobbied for helping the average American and shrinking wealth disparity, while also pushing to lower the absurd cost of going out to the movies, I think they might see the change they want. And maybe if they stopped slinging schlock like the Emoji Movie, Baywatch, and a 12 year old’s fantasy of King Arthur, that might help a little, too.
We will go out for a good time, but it can’t be financially crippling (because, yeah, there are better things to spend our money on), and we don’t want to pay to be insulted.
7
I'm 54, used to go out and see tons of films. Over the past decade. My wife and I have seen, I think, two. Why? Ticket prices are insane. Add in outrageously priced popcorn, sodas, etc., and you're talking a serious cash outlay. And for what? 20 minutes of ads and unintelligible coming attractions followed by a sequel of a sequel of a prequel. We vastly prefer staying in (or having friends over) to watch a serious HBO or Netflix series that costs us less, per month, than a single movie ticket (and $1 popcorn).
13
Gave up buying popcorn and soda years ago - serves two purposes.
1. saves money for other meals that are tastier
2. Better for your health, less calories
1. saves money for other meals that are tastier
2. Better for your health, less calories
1
I always use Rotten Tomatoes. However, what is telling for me is not the critic score, but the audience score. Sometimes the two can be very different, but the audience score typically does not let me down!
2
I guess someone has suggested Fandango post the audience reviews at RT instead of the critics? They are always higher.
Have to say the averaged critics reviews are just about right on. I do read some of the top critic reviews and do puzzle sometimes when they are very mixed , thinking they should be given no score value at all.
Agree with the comments here that there is good movies I don't go see because of too much been-there-done-that to an industrial strength degree!
Have to say the averaged critics reviews are just about right on. I do read some of the top critic reviews and do puzzle sometimes when they are very mixed , thinking they should be given no score value at all.
Agree with the comments here that there is good movies I don't go see because of too much been-there-done-that to an industrial strength degree!
2
My husband and I frequently use Rotten Tomatoes and find it to be very reliable. We tend to steer clear of shows where there is a big disparity between the critics's score and the audience score and any movie with an 85 or higher on both sides is generally a safe bet. Hollywood shouldn't shoot the messenger, it should make better films. It should also focus on films that would lose some of the magic on smaller screens and in increasing VIP seating, for which adults will pay a premium. Few people are going to pay Cinema prices for the latest rom-com when they can rent it at home. Adapt or die.
"In some cases, studios create spreadsheets of which critics to invite to early screenings — often at festivals — based on questions such as who liked what in the past and who gives positive reviews more often than not."
Cherry picking results if ever I've seen it.
Cherry picking results if ever I've seen it.
1
When Hollywood execs make stinkers, what do they expect? I now go the the movies fairly regularly, and have seen some good ones, e.g. Wind River, La
Lla Land, and even Manchester by Sea, to name a few. As for sequels, prequels, monster movies etc., forget about them
Lla Land, and even Manchester by Sea, to name a few. As for sequels, prequels, monster movies etc., forget about them
1
The quality of most movies started falling in the tank about three decades ago. Producers and directors dicovered special effects and forgot plot and character development. One car chase or fireball is pretty much like another.
6
Agree with the sentiment of other comments that Hollywood is to blame. I'm sure there are many, layered reasons why, including corporations, market, risk, industry blah blah blah, but the bottom line is that movies are mostly sequels, remakes, and superheroes now, and it's incredibly boring. Meanwhile, television is in a very interesting and creative age, full of new voices and ideas. These days when people at work or in social circles talk about what they've just seen, they are talking about TV, not the movies.
6
Rotten tomatoes scores are generally very indicative of movie quality. I have only seen one movie rated above 90% that I disliked greatly (Gravity); typically such a high score means the movie is excellent. I won't see movies less than 70%. The solution is for the studios to bring in original ideas and generally improve movie quality.
3
The power of critics to shape tastes has grown immensely in recent years; not only for movies. For TV, series have short, commercial free runs that serve primarily to increase viewership, subscriptions, and market share for the network; critical praise is essential.
Where do most of these critics come from? By and large, they come from elite liberal arts colleges, and are immersed in that value system. They are able to survive as critics because they are not the ones paying the bills at home. They are clueless about life as it is lived by most Americans, but experts in literature and film representations of that life.
I think we should be careful with the level of importance given to the estimations and evaluations of film, book, and movie critics.
Where do most of these critics come from? By and large, they come from elite liberal arts colleges, and are immersed in that value system. They are able to survive as critics because they are not the ones paying the bills at home. They are clueless about life as it is lived by most Americans, but experts in literature and film representations of that life.
I think we should be careful with the level of importance given to the estimations and evaluations of film, book, and movie critics.
No, stupid movies, same old same old. Hollywood has only themselves to blame.
6
Hollywood only has itself to blame. Cranking out one sequel after another. Casting actors that the public can't stand. Seriously, who wants to see Ben Affleck as Batman after Christian Bale's excellent performances.
So I applaud Rotten Tomatoes. Now instead of being held hostage to the Suit and Ties of the Hollywood Complex viewers can warn others to save their money on a movie ticket.
So I applaud Rotten Tomatoes. Now instead of being held hostage to the Suit and Ties of the Hollywood Complex viewers can warn others to save their money on a movie ticket.
6
I quit when movies went to $12 and Oprah said: I think he's the one.
4
Oh please! Hollywood is blaming everyone but themselves when they really need to be looking inward. I keep tabs on the movies playing in all the local theaters and in the last six months I've only wanted to see "Wonder Woman" and "Get Out." Why would anyone pay +$10 for tired tropes like "Baywatch" when we can stay home and watch much better shows and movies on Netflix and Amazon Prime? Even the supposedly good movies, like "Baby Driver" and "Dunkirk," have completely unappealing titles. Hollywood should be investing in unique, cheap, and better-written movies. Maybe then they'll get their next big payback like they did years ago with "My Big Fat Greek Wedding."
6
Well, it figures that the radical, alt-Left, anti-American, socialist, Progressive Hollywood types would blame their failures on someone or something else. Manning up and doing a mea culpa would expose their self-identified, safe space, delusion for the lunatic alternative reality that it is.
2
I've checked Rotten Tomatoes and find the scores often way too forgiving of the drivel coming out of Hollywood. Spiderman XXII anyone?
3
A team of critics kills the entire movie industry?
You could make a movie about this.
You could make a movie about this.
8
While I agree that an independent scoring service is a good thing, trying to boil down a movies entertainment score into a single number is not going to satisfy anybody.
Case in point:
The Matrix: Tomatometer: 87% and Audience Score 85% -- OK reasonable
The Matrix Reloaded: TM: 73% and Auidence Score 72% -- again, reasonable
The Matrix Revolutions: TM: 36% and Audience Score 60% -- WAY OUT OF WHACK!!
You can't justify a Tomatometer score of 36% if the Audience Score is 60%. It makes no sense and lends credence to the detractors of the Tomatometer scoring system. I say throw that measurement away and keep the Audience Score, which is what should matter to people.
Case in point:
The Matrix: Tomatometer: 87% and Audience Score 85% -- OK reasonable
The Matrix Reloaded: TM: 73% and Auidence Score 72% -- again, reasonable
The Matrix Revolutions: TM: 36% and Audience Score 60% -- WAY OUT OF WHACK!!
You can't justify a Tomatometer score of 36% if the Audience Score is 60%. It makes no sense and lends credence to the detractors of the Tomatometer scoring system. I say throw that measurement away and keep the Audience Score, which is what should matter to people.
1
God forbid someone share their thoughts ans save others from wasting time and money.
5
This complaint is stupid. I've never seen the website but I will look for it now. The last movie my wife and I attended at an AMC theater cost us over $50. Do they really think I am going to waste my time and that kind of money on mediocrity at best. Make quality movies and I will pay to see them.
6
There are already more movies made than could ever be watched. A little paring of the choices is a good thing. If rotten tomatoes contributes to some bad ideas and bad actors never reaching any kind of screen, the money and human effort can be spent on something actually useful.
4
I rank movies into 3 categories. 1) Movies I want to see in a theater. 2) Movies I am not as interested in, which I will stream. And then there are the Red Box movies if their is nothing else to watch. The topic of the movie first, then the actors and finally the reviews on rotten tomatoes. The studios are correct that I use rotten tomatoes as a deciding factor but it is not the primary one.
Rotten Tomatoes has resulted in me watching more movies, not fewer. I'm willing to take a look at just about anything that gets gets strong ratings including many movies I probably would not otherwise come across. People will always watch good movies.
2
Oh, please.
Here we go: the movie industry, with a highly vested interest in blaming failure on heretics outside the Holy City of Los Angeles, has settled on the Martin Luther clique of Rotten Tomatoes rather than accept the fundamentally flawed culture they structure, rule, order and inhabit.
They need investors who need to trust them so it has to be someone else who caused this.
But it wasn't. Not Rotten Tomatoes, not Trump, not Clinton... Hollywood did this as Hollywood has been doing for decades.
These bad ideas alone can account for not at least meeting last year revenue:
1. The Mummy (Tom Cruise? Really? Whose idea was that...?)
2. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (Because.... why?)
3. Transformers: The Last Knight (Sounded like a good idea when the vodka was flowing...)
4. Valerian (What the f....?)
5. City of a Thousand Lights ( Maybe if it had been 10 million or so ... nah, not then, either)
By the way, just because "Wonder Woman" was great, please, don't rush out and do the same thing 10 more times, okay? But they're already in the can, aren't they?
Here we go: the movie industry, with a highly vested interest in blaming failure on heretics outside the Holy City of Los Angeles, has settled on the Martin Luther clique of Rotten Tomatoes rather than accept the fundamentally flawed culture they structure, rule, order and inhabit.
They need investors who need to trust them so it has to be someone else who caused this.
But it wasn't. Not Rotten Tomatoes, not Trump, not Clinton... Hollywood did this as Hollywood has been doing for decades.
These bad ideas alone can account for not at least meeting last year revenue:
1. The Mummy (Tom Cruise? Really? Whose idea was that...?)
2. Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Men Tell No Tales (Because.... why?)
3. Transformers: The Last Knight (Sounded like a good idea when the vodka was flowing...)
4. Valerian (What the f....?)
5. City of a Thousand Lights ( Maybe if it had been 10 million or so ... nah, not then, either)
By the way, just because "Wonder Woman" was great, please, don't rush out and do the same thing 10 more times, okay? But they're already in the can, aren't they?
17
This reminds of what happened when CD sales started plummeting and the music industry blamed a website (Napster) rather than confront the profound changes needed in its business model. And we know how that turned out.
6
I love Rotten Tomatoes and have used it for years to help choose the best movies to watch. Hollywood makes bad movies and expects hype and marketing to sell them. Now, they can't get away with that and they're looking for someone to blame other than themselves. It's simple. Make good movies!
6
I use rotten tomatoes, and find it good, except the ratings for comedy. Always rated low, so I just adjust my criteria. If it gets over 60 I may watch it. Rotten Tomatoes is a gauge to be used as such, having said that, they are pretty much right on.
4
Terrible movies this summer. We have searched the ads and decided not to go. It also seems that we have less variety, the local theaters all seem to have the same movies and the turnover of movies has slowed. So we are reduced to watching DVDs and online offerings. Redbox isn't offering more or better movies than the online channels. And the online channels are barely interesting.
3
Moviemakers seem to believe that shooting the messenger has always worked out well.
4
I'm not going to watch The Emoji Movie unless you tie me down like Alex in "A Clockwork Orange". And for that I have trusted critics' reviews to thank. Thank you.
4
Comments are moderated... So much for the New York Times being the arbiters on the right side of free speech. Anyhoo. I love it when the studio executives whine about Rotten Tomatoes when the real problem is the warmed over, unoriginal garbage they put out and expect us to shell out serious cash for.
Kind of like the news print business, going out to see a movie is a dying concept and the era of the blockbuster has had it's day. I only see a movie about once a year because I hate shelling out big money and dealing with rude patrons who do not understand basic cell phone etiquette. Concessions are stupidly expensive also now, to make up for flagging ticket sales. Rotten Tomatoes is not the problem studio dummies.
Kind of like the news print business, going out to see a movie is a dying concept and the era of the blockbuster has had it's day. I only see a movie about once a year because I hate shelling out big money and dealing with rude patrons who do not understand basic cell phone etiquette. Concessions are stupidly expensive also now, to make up for flagging ticket sales. Rotten Tomatoes is not the problem studio dummies.
11
You're on the NY Times' property here. They can moderate all they like. Don't like it? Start your own paper.
3
Sometimes I purposely watch movies because of bad reviews. Remember Batman vs Superman? Because that was so bad, Wonder Woman looked amazing in comparison. Some movies are so bad they're good. But please don't try to make money off solely from the box office revenue. I just don't have time to go to the theater for every movie that's out there. I have other entertainment options. I only watched Dunkirk since I had to watch the trailer like 10 times in theater from last year sometime. That repetitive ad worked only because it didn't look bad from the trailer. Hollywood needs to make movies that can be enjoyed again and again via home viewing options or it will die. If I can sense the whole movie from the trailer I'm not going to see it. If I can guess that movie will be bad because of the trailer I'm not going to see it. You need to make good movies to make good trailers and have people watch before seeing any reviews. You need to make people so excited they don't want any spoilers from the reviews. But movies have to compete with good TV shows now. I was way more excited for Game of Thrones this summer. I only watch HBO because of no tv ads, so I only watch movie trailers in theaters. If I don't hear people talking about how great the movies are in the theater, I'm not going. People are using more social media and if the content is not good enough to excite sharing online, it's probably not going to survive.
2
They still make movies that are not about superheroes???
15
So making a lackluster movie with overpaid actors and it reads like it was written by a 6th grader has nothing to do with it.
12
It's pretty pathetic for Hollywood filmmakers to blame Rotten Tomatoes for people staying away from their lousy films. They need to take responsibility. On another note, I hope Rotten Tomatoes employs more people of color than are shown in the photos in this piece.
1
Sometimes I do use RT to decide if a film is worth a trek to the cinema. But the site is indeed misleading - initially I thought the scores were an aggregate of reviews of recognized, credible, and trustworthy critics (though I am not a huge fan of critics and tend to rely on other factors to decide whether to watch a film), but the RT aggregate includes reviews of average joes and janes - eliminating such reviews from the aggregate would be step towards restoring credibility.
2
Does "HoolyWeird" credit RT with a film's success ?
2
Interesting how they conveniently forget to mention liberal Hollywood and it's out of touch actor's war on Trump and the right. That's why everyone I know quit going. Those idiot never Trumpers alienated about 40 million people.
3
Why is it that some, especially those on the far right, want to bring politics to an article where politics is not mentioned?
The problem with movies is that too much emphasis is on profit and not on the craft of making a good movie.
Once is genre proves successful, then that's the template for other studios to follow, regardless of whether the script is good or no.
The problem with movies is that too much emphasis is on profit and not on the craft of making a good movie.
Once is genre proves successful, then that's the template for other studios to follow, regardless of whether the script is good or no.
12
love R T. i give praise for R T! hollywood needs to get over themselves. (and sometimes, the movie going experience is not great, ie annoying audience members, locked-in reserved seating, paying more for 3D movies that look exactly the same as 2D). unless i'm really jonesin' for it, if a film has a poor review score, sorry, not going to see it on the big screen.
2
The Trump-Effect rubbing off on Hollywood now- Blame everyone, but yourselves?
There's been fewer good movies out this summer or dare I say,this year. And of all released thus far, only two for me. Dunkirk,being the best and surprisingly, Girls trip, which I figured would be a pass-time film, but I found myself chuckling from start to finish.
Too many hypered films didn't deliver.Like The Dark Tower. Sorry, Idris but what a waste of 2 hours.
There's been fewer good movies out this summer or dare I say,this year. And of all released thus far, only two for me. Dunkirk,being the best and surprisingly, Girls trip, which I figured would be a pass-time film, but I found myself chuckling from start to finish.
Too many hypered films didn't deliver.Like The Dark Tower. Sorry, Idris but what a waste of 2 hours.
2
"The Dark Tower" was only 90 minutes long. It just felt like two hours.
WOW! What a surprise, I can't believe a movie like Baywatch got a score of 19!!! It's as if people aren't sick of recycled trash with faces from contemporary pop-culture. I bet these people writing reviews aren't even real cinema fascists!
3
I'm surprised! The fact that it even got 19% of the critics to give it a fresh rating means that we have some pretty lousy critics out there!
1
Attention Hollywood......
Maybe those mentioned in the article really are just bad movies. Hows about making something worthwhile and not blaming a website on bad sales?
Maybe those mentioned in the article really are just bad movies. Hows about making something worthwhile and not blaming a website on bad sales?
8
Talk about shooting the messenger.
10
The movie( corporate) seem to think they have special entitlements,
because well, their Hollywood types. They want me to throw away $15
for a ticket and an Extra $15 on drinks and popcorn not including the family
cost's so i will go watch their disappointing movies with out the benefit
of a critical review. I read Rotten Tomatoes before I decide on
a picture and so far they've been right. I went and saw Dunkirk and
Wonder Woman based on they reviews and they were right. My Money
was well spent.
because well, their Hollywood types. They want me to throw away $15
for a ticket and an Extra $15 on drinks and popcorn not including the family
cost's so i will go watch their disappointing movies with out the benefit
of a critical review. I read Rotten Tomatoes before I decide on
a picture and so far they've been right. I went and saw Dunkirk and
Wonder Woman based on they reviews and they were right. My Money
was well spent.
4
Funny to hear Brett Ratner claim Rotten Tomatoes to be the destruction of the film industry: I always considered his films to have that honor. Hercules, Tower Heist, and all his franchise-killing sequels (Rush Hour 3, X-Men 3)...? Slapping his name on a film is worse that any tomatometer.
11
Self-important KNOW-nothings.
1
I rarely go to the movies anymore. There are several reasons such as the sound is so loud I get a blinding headache, but the most important is that Hollywood has lost creativity in the drive to make billions in profit, Most of the movies shown in our 3 movie house town are remakes of earlier films, some are even remakes of remakes. How many "Star Wars" films are too many? How many "gross out" not funny comedies are too many? The rest are pitched to teenagers or morons. It has been years since I've seen a really good film. Give me good films and I'll go at least weekly to see them.
7
Prices are so high that we can use anything we can get to determine if it is worth 2 hours of our time, our sanity, and $80 for a family of four (including popcorn) to see a movie. More and more, we are waiting till it hits TV. I don't know of any movie ever made that is good enough to get me into a theater in the first couple of weeks it is running. Too much of a hassle.
4
The real issue is that this summer's movies were of very low quality, and over reliant on franchises that are of no interest to most.
Add to this the many high quality original tv shows being created, why go to the movies? To spend $70 for a family of 4?
The movie industry is still acting like it's 1975. The consumer experience at the movie theatre, both product and service, needs to be re-thought to win against tv
Add to this the many high quality original tv shows being created, why go to the movies? To spend $70 for a family of 4?
The movie industry is still acting like it's 1975. The consumer experience at the movie theatre, both product and service, needs to be re-thought to win against tv
2
I've always felt that Rotten Tomatoes was, on the whole, very lenient in its ratings. Particularly with independent movies, they seem to go high.
1
yes, rotten tomatoes is highly influential. and yes, it is no longer adequately reliable (could unduly inluence moviegoers positively or negatively).
recent example: we chose to see two very different films recently, "wind river", with an r.t. rating of 86, and "tulip fever", with an r.t. rating of 9. we found both films to be good, but flawed. we enjoyed both, but for different reasons, and would encourage friends to see each.
"wind river" has very good photography and acting by the lead actors. the script, for the first two acts, is outstanding. in the third act, it has too much unjustified violence and obvious audience manipulation. but at the end, we liked it a lot.
"tulip fever" has very good photography, a great score and sets, and judi dench is wonderful. the first act has too much uninspiring sex, and there is an implausible story line, but the film comes to life a bit after the middle.
we enjoyed each almost equally, despite the differences, and were happy to have seen each. but, in part because of the vastly different r.t. scores, audiences are increasing at "wind river" and avoiding "tulip fever".
remember, if every critic believes a film is "so-so" and gives it a "three out of five" star rating, the film will have an r.t. score of 100.
by contrast, if half the critics rave about the film, rate it five stars, but the other half thinks it is "so-so" and give it a two start rating, its r.t. score is 50.
is that a reliable way to judge a film?
recent example: we chose to see two very different films recently, "wind river", with an r.t. rating of 86, and "tulip fever", with an r.t. rating of 9. we found both films to be good, but flawed. we enjoyed both, but for different reasons, and would encourage friends to see each.
"wind river" has very good photography and acting by the lead actors. the script, for the first two acts, is outstanding. in the third act, it has too much unjustified violence and obvious audience manipulation. but at the end, we liked it a lot.
"tulip fever" has very good photography, a great score and sets, and judi dench is wonderful. the first act has too much uninspiring sex, and there is an implausible story line, but the film comes to life a bit after the middle.
we enjoyed each almost equally, despite the differences, and were happy to have seen each. but, in part because of the vastly different r.t. scores, audiences are increasing at "wind river" and avoiding "tulip fever".
remember, if every critic believes a film is "so-so" and gives it a "three out of five" star rating, the film will have an r.t. score of 100.
by contrast, if half the critics rave about the film, rate it five stars, but the other half thinks it is "so-so" and give it a two start rating, its r.t. score is 50.
is that a reliable way to judge a film?
3
If movie producers want people to come to theaters, they need to provide a product that justifies the expense. For young people, that means special effects and loud music. For adults, that means good story lines and cinematography that is really better on a big screen. Unfortunately, the latter type of fill will never draw the huge crowds that movie producers want. If Hollywood paid more attention to small budget movies, they might not get the pots of gold at the end of the rainbow, but they might find more positive reviews, and a good, steady cash flow.
7
I'm one of those who always reads the Rotten Tomatoes score (and usually several reviewer blurbs) before deciding to go to a movie. You have to take the score with a grain of salt - I like movies from some genres more than the score indicates, others less - but, ultimately, I do this because it's useful.
Hollywood is having a bad summer because a lot of their movies were not very good. Part of it is that they are extremely slow to change their approach (e.g., making multiple sequels of highly reviewed/commercially successful movies, lots of adaptations from books, etc.). To be fair, though, that approach does work sometimes - it just didn't work very much with this summer's movies.
People used to simply accept watching a lot of mediocre TV shows and movies, but there's a lot more content out there - including more high quality content. Peoples' expectations are just getting higher. Rotten Tomatoes is an effect of that trend, not a cause.
Hollywood is having a bad summer because a lot of their movies were not very good. Part of it is that they are extremely slow to change their approach (e.g., making multiple sequels of highly reviewed/commercially successful movies, lots of adaptations from books, etc.). To be fair, though, that approach does work sometimes - it just didn't work very much with this summer's movies.
People used to simply accept watching a lot of mediocre TV shows and movies, but there's a lot more content out there - including more high quality content. Peoples' expectations are just getting higher. Rotten Tomatoes is an effect of that trend, not a cause.
9
Peoples' expectations are just getting higher
at $14 a pop they better be.
at $14 a pop they better be.
4
Interestingly enough, somehow last year's "Suicide Squad" managed to defeat a 25% rating and beat expectations, even while "Ghostbusters" heavily underperformed despite their 73% rating. Even more, Hollywood was OK with the concept back then, even if there was a significant backlash against Rotten Tomatoes from what was described as rabid fans.
At this point, the biggest problem with Rotten Tomatoes seem to be the fact that there's a significant disconnect between pro critics (which is what aggregated by Rotten Tomatoes) and people who are actually willing to go to the movies (who also may be quite unrepresentative of general population).
At this point, the biggest problem with Rotten Tomatoes seem to be the fact that there's a significant disconnect between pro critics (which is what aggregated by Rotten Tomatoes) and people who are actually willing to go to the movies (who also may be quite unrepresentative of general population).
You mean ticket buyers are actually tired of comic book movies, endless sequels, "prequels", and "reimaginings" of old ideas? But what about the bean counters that run the studios? Looking backward is their (ONLY!) forte. How else could one justify spending someone else's money on a "creative" (remember those?) project?
What could possibly happen next? Would these people actually accept responsiblity for, and be accountable for producing poor quality "entertainment"?
The "destruction of our business" happened when creative people were pushed out of the process by "money people", who couldn't be bothered to see how the viewing public was, and is changing. If your "product" is obviously just that, with any artistic or creative content an afterthought, then the "destructors" are in the mirror.
What could possibly happen next? Would these people actually accept responsiblity for, and be accountable for producing poor quality "entertainment"?
The "destruction of our business" happened when creative people were pushed out of the process by "money people", who couldn't be bothered to see how the viewing public was, and is changing. If your "product" is obviously just that, with any artistic or creative content an afterthought, then the "destructors" are in the mirror.
14
you are too hard on the studios. What about the fact they have so many placements and push so many toy tie-ins? does that not help the viewer experience.
Hollywood's love affair with themselves shows in their movies. Their "values" such as they are, are the movie's values. The sacred tenets of PC are dutifully presented with no critical examination, much less questioning of the dogma.
Leftists dogma is the movie and the movie is leftist dogma. We are sick to death of being preached at from bishops of the high church of PC.
When or if Hollywood starts consistently making PC-free movies and instead telling human stories without the political commercials injected, then they will see a resurgence in people returning to the box office.
Produce entertainment, not propaganda and we'll be back. But you'd better hurry, we won't wait for much longer. We're changing our entertainment viewing habits.
Leftists dogma is the movie and the movie is leftist dogma. We are sick to death of being preached at from bishops of the high church of PC.
When or if Hollywood starts consistently making PC-free movies and instead telling human stories without the political commercials injected, then they will see a resurgence in people returning to the box office.
Produce entertainment, not propaganda and we'll be back. But you'd better hurry, we won't wait for much longer. We're changing our entertainment viewing habits.
5
The site's name is a misnomer: should be called Ripe or Rotten Tomatoes, since many of its verdicts are positive. That said, there is something rotten in the state of Hollywood these days, but don't blame it on tomatoes, whatever their condition.
1
Why do people talk like action is new to movies. North by Northwest had a lot of action (for its time). So did To Catch a Thief. The problem isn't action. The problem is simplifying dialogue for the overseas markets. Great dialogue/characterization is not incompatible with action. Consider Casino Royale or Batman Begins or Blade Runner.
7
The fact that people turn to Rotten Tomatoes (if in fact they are) means that people have come to trust their reviews, pure and simple, if people routinely saw movies they liked (or didn't like) and Rotten Tomatoes had the opposite reaction, they would ignore it, much the same way that people abandon financial advisors or handicappers whose numbers don't work.
In the past, when ticket prices were relatively cheap, people would go see a movie that critics had panned, figuring for that couple of bucks and a couple of wasted hours, they could afford to take the risk. These days, with people's time limited and with ticket prices often pushing closer and closer to 20 bucks (not to mention the cost of concessions), they can't afford to do that. So if faced with the choice of bing watching something on Netflix or Amazon, or paying 20 bucks for a movie ticket, having to leave the house,etc, they will only go if it seems worthwhile to go. The real problem is in this competitive world Hollywood thinks it can turn our formulaic, badly made tripe, or stuff conceived on God knows what premise (the Emojii movie), or the sequels on sequels, and have a captive audience, and it no longer has that. Mediocre movies are best left to digital watching at home, it is only the good movies that will attract audiences to the theater; put out swill, and expect no one to go.
In the past, when ticket prices were relatively cheap, people would go see a movie that critics had panned, figuring for that couple of bucks and a couple of wasted hours, they could afford to take the risk. These days, with people's time limited and with ticket prices often pushing closer and closer to 20 bucks (not to mention the cost of concessions), they can't afford to do that. So if faced with the choice of bing watching something on Netflix or Amazon, or paying 20 bucks for a movie ticket, having to leave the house,etc, they will only go if it seems worthwhile to go. The real problem is in this competitive world Hollywood thinks it can turn our formulaic, badly made tripe, or stuff conceived on God knows what premise (the Emojii movie), or the sequels on sequels, and have a captive audience, and it no longer has that. Mediocre movies are best left to digital watching at home, it is only the good movies that will attract audiences to the theater; put out swill, and expect no one to go.
4
The quality of recent cable TV is, I think, forcing Hollywood more into action. a 2hr film simply cannot cover the story arc of a show like Mad men, Breaking Bad, or even True Detective. Part of what is making Hollywood more give to pyrotechnics and special effects is the explosion of great cable shows. Nowadays, I go to see ONLY action movies in the cinema, because i want dialogue and character, I can just binge watch cable TV.
1
Hollywood's response to Rotten Tomatoes is typical of many American industries: It takes more time, thought, work and money to improve the product than it does to discredit and/or suppress the sources of accurate information about the product.
2
I haven't been to a movie theater in over ten years, and I have no plans to go back any time soon. Why should I bother? I buy movies from iTunes. Buying them gives me the option of watching movies any time I want, as many times as I want to and, more importantly, I can pause them if I need to get away momentarily.
It's about time Hollywood, as the excessive moneymaker for many actors who don't deserve it, realize movie theaters are a thing of the past. The trend we've seen in the last few years with fewer people bothering to waste time driving to see a film has sent a message to Hollywood its film-industry will continue to be favored by more and more people like me, who are grateful to technology that has given us the freedom to make choices we have no plans to abandon.
Regarding Rotten Tomatoes, I rarely ever buy a moving before I find out what rating it's given a film I may choose to buy. Go ahead, Hollywood! Fight all you want. In the end you'll come to realize you're wasting your time.
It's about time Hollywood, as the excessive moneymaker for many actors who don't deserve it, realize movie theaters are a thing of the past. The trend we've seen in the last few years with fewer people bothering to waste time driving to see a film has sent a message to Hollywood its film-industry will continue to be favored by more and more people like me, who are grateful to technology that has given us the freedom to make choices we have no plans to abandon.
Regarding Rotten Tomatoes, I rarely ever buy a moving before I find out what rating it's given a film I may choose to buy. Go ahead, Hollywood! Fight all you want. In the end you'll come to realize you're wasting your time.
1
I am sure it has nothing to do with the actors out of touch political rhetoric they like to spew. I for one refuse to buy or see any movie from these actors who try to put their own out of touch political views to the public.
2
I appreciate Rotten Tomatoes- it's just a meta-review site, so it's only aggregating information people already could find. If studios and producers hate it, maybe they should start making better movies. There's been a significant dearth of new and fresh stories in movies these days. You can't get mad when people don't want to see endless reboots and remakes.
1
I know that for many people, a night out at the movies is a treat and it's a shame there isn't better stuff for them to see.
But honestly, I'm perfectly content to wait a few months and watch in my own home, where I can pause the action to take a bathroom break, not be disturbed by Millennials texting, children who should be home with a babysitter kicking the back of my seat or adults carrying on "whispered" conversations that may (but usually are not) related to the film being screened, eat my favorite snacks without paying 5x their normal price, etc.
Nope, there is not one thing about the "experience" of seeing a movie in a theater that I miss.
But honestly, I'm perfectly content to wait a few months and watch in my own home, where I can pause the action to take a bathroom break, not be disturbed by Millennials texting, children who should be home with a babysitter kicking the back of my seat or adults carrying on "whispered" conversations that may (but usually are not) related to the film being screened, eat my favorite snacks without paying 5x their normal price, etc.
Nope, there is not one thing about the "experience" of seeing a movie in a theater that I miss.
1
I used to love going to the movies. Haven't gone for 20 years. Why?
4 letter words abound. No thank you.
Blatant sex scenes. No thank you.
Viewers talking through the movie. Ditto
Viewers using distracting cell phones which light up. Ditto.
I think back to the days when we smoked at the movies (ye gads), brought in food from outside, stuck our feet on the seat in front of us, met boyfriends in the upper section ... childish behavior to be sure. But we weren't there for the movie.
Adults go for the movie. Make some that matter.
4 letter words abound. No thank you.
Blatant sex scenes. No thank you.
Viewers talking through the movie. Ditto
Viewers using distracting cell phones which light up. Ditto.
I think back to the days when we smoked at the movies (ye gads), brought in food from outside, stuck our feet on the seat in front of us, met boyfriends in the upper section ... childish behavior to be sure. But we weren't there for the movie.
Adults go for the movie. Make some that matter.
38
Fantastic reply!
1
Some of those issues can be solved by going to a film during a matinee on a weekday with less annoying people in attendance.
Hollywood: stop making sequels and remakes of the same bad material. Audiences are longing for new IPs. We're so desperate to see something new that we'll even see something as terrible as The Emoji Movie. Attempt to have one original thought, and we will reward you with our money from movie tickets. Great movies from the past year: Baby Driver, Colossal, The Big Sick, Your Name. What do they have in common? They're all new material.
58
Is it a law that "Planet of the Apes", "Batman" and "Spiderman" have to be redone every 5 years?
I agree, the old studio system did its share of dreck, but they knew that new ideas, new stories and new faces and places are what keeps cinema alive. Now it is all recycled dreck with the rare exception. The movies of the 70's before Spielberg are unthinkable in this climate.
I agree, the old studio system did its share of dreck, but they knew that new ideas, new stories and new faces and places are what keeps cinema alive. Now it is all recycled dreck with the rare exception. The movies of the 70's before Spielberg are unthinkable in this climate.
2
The truth is that television is telling better stories in greater depth on big screens with good sound and excellent actors, while movies are increasingly predictable, boring and expensive. Rotten tomatoes isn't killing the movie business. The movie business is committing suicide.
164
Television has COMMERCIALS. They RUIN anything that's at all interesting.
MOVIES are still "your best entertainment" (as long as they're commercial-free!). Let's treat this too-long creative drought a s a particularly bad cycle (too optimistic?), and hope someone with an appreciation for the art of cinema gains power and influence.
MOVIES are still "your best entertainment" (as long as they're commercial-free!). Let's treat this too-long creative drought a s a particularly bad cycle (too optimistic?), and hope someone with an appreciation for the art of cinema gains power and influence.
1
Have heard of this brand new thing called streaming? Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu. Look it up.
2
No commercials on HBO, Showtime or Starz. No commercials on iTunes. No commercials on Netflix. Nice try, Communist elitist snob who hates free enterprise.
2
There are precious few movies that are worth the price of admission. I go occasionally and the ones I see are worth it, but more often I decide they might be worth it, but I can wait and I eventually see some of them on Netflix, etc. I can honestly say, I haven't made the wrong decision yet.
3
Being of the conservative bent I have grown tired of the entertainment industry trying to dictate to me what I should believe and who I should vote for. 20 years ago one prominent actor said if you don't like it don't come see us. So I quit. I have probably seen 5 movies in a theater in that time. I used to go once a week just to try to see as many as I could. The sports entertainment industry is getting to be the same. I quit watching sports reporting 2-3 years ago as they became increasingly preachy. I just don't need the aggravation. As a result my reading has picked up dramatically. Much of what I read is left of center as well, but at least I believe the authors in general are better educated or as well educated as I am and not some one who's main claim to being an authority is because they have a skill that requires no intellectual prowess.
4
Whatever happened to Metacritic -- never mentioned in your otherwise fine article? Meticritic is much more legitimate canvassing only about 75 solid film critics from recognized media outlets. And it gives a clear percent approval number at the top. And it shows viewer review percent on the right side.
35
I find Rotten Tomatoes ratings to be not as accurate as they were a few years ago. IMDB.com ratings are much better.
3
I have a 60" plasma, cable, and a ROKU box. Not to mention a clean bathroom and a kitchen of snacks and drinks, and a nice recliner.
Why would I want to drive to a theater and pay a premium to put up with the hell that is other people?
Why would I want to drive to a theater and pay a premium to put up with the hell that is other people?
18
Nicole: what you say, 10,000 times.
And I don't even have that stuff. I have an older 40" HDTV that I inherited from an elderly relative -- no cable -- RABBIT EARS!!! -- but I have a library card. The library has about a zillion FREE DVDs -- the latest movies, but also great old stuff and out of print stuff, and the Criterion Collection and more.
You can check out 20 DVDs at a time -- blue ray if you want that -- and keep them for about 3 weeks (and can renew them about 10 times) -- it is very rare I cannot find just what I want and we have a constant variety of new movies, plus compilations of cable series and movies, plus documentaries of all types.
There is literally so much, we could never watch it all. And as you say -- the bathroom is clean, there are no lines -- we have snacks & drinks for a tiny fraction of what a greedy theatre-owner charges -- we can invite all of our family & friends (or watch all alone, or at 3AM) -- and pause if we need to take a potty break.
While would I drive to a theatre, in the dark -- pay a fortune -- go out in the cold or rain or brutal heat -- or for families: PAY A BABYSITTER????
Hollywood is grossly out of touch, and I have no pity for them.
And I don't even have that stuff. I have an older 40" HDTV that I inherited from an elderly relative -- no cable -- RABBIT EARS!!! -- but I have a library card. The library has about a zillion FREE DVDs -- the latest movies, but also great old stuff and out of print stuff, and the Criterion Collection and more.
You can check out 20 DVDs at a time -- blue ray if you want that -- and keep them for about 3 weeks (and can renew them about 10 times) -- it is very rare I cannot find just what I want and we have a constant variety of new movies, plus compilations of cable series and movies, plus documentaries of all types.
There is literally so much, we could never watch it all. And as you say -- the bathroom is clean, there are no lines -- we have snacks & drinks for a tiny fraction of what a greedy theatre-owner charges -- we can invite all of our family & friends (or watch all alone, or at 3AM) -- and pause if we need to take a potty break.
While would I drive to a theatre, in the dark -- pay a fortune -- go out in the cold or rain or brutal heat -- or for families: PAY A BABYSITTER????
Hollywood is grossly out of touch, and I have no pity for them.
Here's a novel idea for you Hollywood---how about holding the people who produce this crap accountable?
2
The seeming failure of Rotten Tomatoes to provide a nuanced view is telling. This is unlike Roger Ebert, whose reviews left you with a better understanding of a film, whether or not you agreed with him about its overall merit.
1
Rotten Tomatoes? Never heard of it...How about the silent majority speaking very loudly with the wallets...We Hate Hollywood...Cha Ching...
3
Love the illustration by Chris Lyons!!!
1
Blaming Rotten Tomatoes is classic shoot the messenger mentality. No other industry or even any small business can get away with delivering dreck over and over again, and still be in business. Suggest the film industry stop whining and make better movies.
2
The movie studios' complaints are laughable. Bad reviews are hurting ticket sales? You don't say.
2
Make better movies.
4
So we're back to shooting the messenger? Got it.
“I think it’s the destruction of our business,” Brett Ratner, the director, producer and film financier, said at a film festival this year."
Right, when you put out garbage and it smells, blame the air-freshener.
Right, when you put out garbage and it smells, blame the air-freshener.
14
Dear Hollywood:
Actually, your movies have mostly been really bad. Don't go looking for scapegoats. It's not us or RT. It's you.
Actually, your movies have mostly been really bad. Don't go looking for scapegoats. It's not us or RT. It's you.
5
Maybe if Hollywood stopped making the same movie over and over again. Hello Spider Man? Or stopped filling movies with anti-men, and anti-white messages.
People are just not paying to see the same ol, same ol. There is too much competition for entertainment now. If you provide an inferior product it is not going to sell. Hollywood needs to step its game up.
People are just not paying to see the same ol, same ol. There is too much competition for entertainment now. If you provide an inferior product it is not going to sell. Hollywood needs to step its game up.
2
Wow! Anti-white messages. Really. From movies made almost entirely by white men. And financed by white men. And starring white peoples. You (and those who have offered strangely similar opinions on this article) are in for an very disheartening next 5000 years. Get over it and join the party. The world you lament is not coming back. Ever.
2
Well, alrighty then. We should pay outrageous prices at the movie theatre for tickets to real dogs and overpriced, lousy refreshments. And then Hollywood can keep on making lousy movies that have been focus grouped into mediocrity and blandness. Are they suggesting we are obligated to support terrible products? Of course they are. Silly ole white guys. Always longing for the past and pointing fingers.
2
Bret Ratner's victimhood is the equivalent of Madoff blaming his swindle's collapse on The Dow 500.
4
It's interesting that some think big-outlet critics (such as those working for major newspapers) should carry more weight than critics working in more nearly outsider settings. Members of the public don't all think the same way, and in particular, don't necessarily think the way movie critics for, say, The New Yorker do.
People relate to movies in terms of their own personalities, lifestyles, educational levels, tolerance for violence, and values, and these factors vary among Americans more than they once did. We aren't just a unified crowd any more, all rushing to see *It's a Wonderful LIfe* or the latest Bing Crosby musical. I find it ironic that the movie industry seems not to get that, especially since that industry usually is seen as being on the "global" side of the "globalists vs. nationalists" brouhaha.
People relate to movies in terms of their own personalities, lifestyles, educational levels, tolerance for violence, and values, and these factors vary among Americans more than they once did. We aren't just a unified crowd any more, all rushing to see *It's a Wonderful LIfe* or the latest Bing Crosby musical. I find it ironic that the movie industry seems not to get that, especially since that industry usually is seen as being on the "global" side of the "globalists vs. nationalists" brouhaha.
33
If I'm to pay $14, I want an experience that I can't replicate in my living room for $4 for an HD Amazon rental. So it either going to the theater itself needs to be worth it -- better food, better seats, better behavior from fellow movie goers -- or the movies need to be such a spectacle that I couldn't appreciate it on my 21'' screen.
3
Who loves NBS's "This Is Us"?
Should be a good hint, Hollywood.
Should be a good hint, Hollywood.
As a professional screenwriter currently writing 3 studio movies, I take the world of Rotten Tomatoes very seriously. Yet, there is often a disconnect between what critics like and what audiences enjoy.
The person who wants to watch 100 movies a year and write about them (and on Rotten Tomatoes many of the reviewers are making little or no money) often has very different tastes and interests than the one who wants to go to the theater for a couple hours on Saturday night to laugh or be scared. The number of movies that got great reviews and fell flat with audiences is too high to count. Ultimately, people need to make up their own minds.
The person who wants to watch 100 movies a year and write about them (and on Rotten Tomatoes many of the reviewers are making little or no money) often has very different tastes and interests than the one who wants to go to the theater for a couple hours on Saturday night to laugh or be scared. The number of movies that got great reviews and fell flat with audiences is too high to count. Ultimately, people need to make up their own minds.
6
Usually if a movie is a good movie it will get a good rating and promote ticket sales.So what's the problem? Hollywood makes a lot of bad movies. Off to see Lego 2 the Aftermath.
2
Sooner or later, multi-plex movie theatres will die out, just like the malls. I haven't been to one in 15 plus years. Until last year, I didn't see any movie outside my home. There's a small, 50 seat theatre near me which plays indie/art house films. Even so, I've only been to a couple of movies there.
I recently saw LaLa Land on DVD. It was an okay movie (great cinematography, but no plot). I would have been upset had I paid big bucks and had to sit through two hours straight in an uncomfortable outside environment. It wasn't a bad movie, but I didn't think it was that good, either. The previews actually were better (before all that Oscar nonsense).
Rotten Tomatoes is no different from reading a book review on Amazon (even though RT apparently has "professional" reviewers included). Someone somewhere is going to like the book or movie, despite most people not liking it, or hate it even if it gets stellar reviews (especially true nowadays). It's a personal choice.
There's nothing to compare to Siskel and Ebert, imo, when it came to movie reviews, but even they disagreed many times and often quite vociferously. Siskel probably would have hated LaLa Land, while Ebert would have given it thumbs up (or maybe the other way around).
I recently saw LaLa Land on DVD. It was an okay movie (great cinematography, but no plot). I would have been upset had I paid big bucks and had to sit through two hours straight in an uncomfortable outside environment. It wasn't a bad movie, but I didn't think it was that good, either. The previews actually were better (before all that Oscar nonsense).
Rotten Tomatoes is no different from reading a book review on Amazon (even though RT apparently has "professional" reviewers included). Someone somewhere is going to like the book or movie, despite most people not liking it, or hate it even if it gets stellar reviews (especially true nowadays). It's a personal choice.
There's nothing to compare to Siskel and Ebert, imo, when it came to movie reviews, but even they disagreed many times and often quite vociferously. Siskel probably would have hated LaLa Land, while Ebert would have given it thumbs up (or maybe the other way around).
4
The way for the Hollywood industry to fight the Rotten Tomatoes effect is to make better movies! I generally won't see a movie that gets a rotten score (unless it's part of a series that I've been following from the start). When I do see a movie with a rotten score, I usually regret having wasted my two hours on it. (It's almost always the script that's to blame.) Hollywood can reinvent itself by looking to the recent success of cable networks with imaginative programming, and empowering auteurs to make non-deriviative films, as was more the case back in the '70s.
2
The discomfort of the cineplex experience ranks up there with a long trip on a crowded city bus.
5
" Hollywood, we have a problem... " just how many Marvel heroes, and sequels and prequels, can people stomach before simply staying home, planted in front of the flat screen?
18
I correlate RottonTomatoes.com with our federal Consumer Financial Protection Bureau. Both contribute immensely to protecting consumers. Congress and movie makers should keep their cotton-pickin hands off both.
6
How very Trump of Hollywood to blame Rotten Tomatoes on producing bad movies.
11
I came to like Rotten Tomatoes only in recent months, and this makes me feel even better about what they do. Although I give you some depth may be missing from aggregated consumer responses, I have to say that some movies didn't deserve to be made (think Baywatch, King Arthur, Emoji movie), and certainly don't deserve our dollars. I noticed when Yahoo took away their movie ratings (but don't know why), because I relied on those as an initial judge, when critic reviews were absent. It would be a shame if this site were driven to destruction by the studios, then we'd only be subject to fabricated reviews, sponsored by the production/distribution companies.
Maybe this site will finally make studios try harder to make better movies, and not waste money on thoughtless remakes or sequels, or worse.
Maybe this site will finally make studios try harder to make better movies, and not waste money on thoughtless remakes or sequels, or worse.
5
I'm surprised you didn't compare the impact of movie reviews with theater reviews. While single assessments of movies have always meant nothing, new plays live or die by the judgement of critics. Make that critic.
If the New York Times comes forth with a negative finding, a Broadway play is doomed. The same is never true of a Hollywood product.
Success in the Big Apple is Rotten Tomatoes-proof.
If the New York Times comes forth with a negative finding, a Broadway play is doomed. The same is never true of a Hollywood product.
Success in the Big Apple is Rotten Tomatoes-proof.
1
The fresh rating is a very lose guide and I think it probably does hurt sales.
But hey if all thats on offer is Transformers 11, F&F 9, and one of the 50 Marvel comic book films, you cant count me out anyway.
But hey if all thats on offer is Transformers 11, F&F 9, and one of the 50 Marvel comic book films, you cant count me out anyway.
5
Nothing really outstanding is coming out of Hollywood. In comparison, streaming series offer varied subjects that are explored in-depth and take the time to build a relationship with their audience. Add to this, that the public in movie theaters can be highly annoying, munching non-stop on popcorn or chips, popping feet on seats, talking, checking phones... I once endured a person sitting next to me eating popcorn and sipping loudly on an XL coke through the whipping scene in "12 years of slave." I re-watched the movie later in the quiet of home and got to really appreciate it.
When movies started to pay more attention to special effects than say, a good story, with very good dialogue they lost me. Also many movies now rely so much on music to replace honest dialogue, this has become a cheap and boring trick. Bring back excellent writing and skip the extravagant special effects, you will attract more adult viewers. Hire good writers !!!!
4
I think many of the recent super hero films have great story lines: X-Men, Dark Knight trilogy, Iron Man trilogy, Captain America, Avengers. The Iliad has a lot of action too. Writers like Shane Black and Joss Whedon love storyline. I feel lucky to be alive.
The R. Tomatoes site is filled with critic's that I have never heard of; instead I always go to the New York Times where an intelligent review is always available. Second, the only movies that are good come out at the fall to qualify for the Oscars. However, last year I wasn't interested in any of the films. La La Land-PLEASE!
2
We go to the movies almost every week and sometimes it is really tough to find one that seems to be even halfway decent. I look at Rotten Tomatoes scores but I also look at the descriptions of the films that come with them and often we go to movies with low Rotten Tomatoes scores because of them.
The studios make some really terrible movies and it is hard to understand what they were thinking when the shelled out all that money.
It is also ture that theaters are also competing with Netflix and Amazon and similar sites which admittedly have some really low level stuf. It seems to me that things are only going to get worse for the theaters and the studios should put make more modest movies and concentrate on making films with some content not not just lot of special effects and noise and violence.
The studios make some really terrible movies and it is hard to understand what they were thinking when the shelled out all that money.
It is also ture that theaters are also competing with Netflix and Amazon and similar sites which admittedly have some really low level stuf. It seems to me that things are only going to get worse for the theaters and the studios should put make more modest movies and concentrate on making films with some content not not just lot of special effects and noise and violence.
"Between the first weekend in May and Labor Day, a sequel-stuffed period that typically accounts for 40 percent of annual ticket sales...."
Yup. Hollywood is built on sequels, particularly super hero sequels, aimed at 18-34-year-old white men. But the moviegoing public is made up of a diverse coalition of ages, skin colors, and genders. Every one of these movies more or less looks and sounds like all of its predecessors. It's tiresome and not worth one's time or money.
The studios should look in the mirror and stop whining about critics.
Yup. Hollywood is built on sequels, particularly super hero sequels, aimed at 18-34-year-old white men. But the moviegoing public is made up of a diverse coalition of ages, skin colors, and genders. Every one of these movies more or less looks and sounds like all of its predecessors. It's tiresome and not worth one's time or money.
The studios should look in the mirror and stop whining about critics.
4
Oooohh the poor male executive whiners that represent a business that is overwhelmingly white and male. They produce bomb after bomb to segmented audiences that marginalize non--white citizens, stereotype behavior rand then blame movie goers and commentators who take films more seriously than they do? The dearth of imagination in pursuit of big bucks-is-all-that-counts is revolting. Can we line them up and throw rotten tomatoes at them?
4
Ha! That's just choice. Large corporations complaining about the same method being applied to their movies that they apply to their employees. SPLAT!!
1
Oh no! We can find out about bad movies before we see them! Such a terrible thing.
1
I haven't been to a commercial movie theater in ten months. Back in the day, I would see 3-4 movies in a theater every week. Now I will only pay to see films screened at my local art museums, where film is still considered an art and curated as such. In college we read Pauline Kael and argued about Lina Wertmuller. There was something called film literacy at the time. There are very few people these days who have any interest in treating film as an art form rather than a commercial product, and most Americans have no sense of cinematic legacy.
82
Once a film has been released, it gets reviewed by professional reviewers and readers can see those on many sites. It would seem Hollywood is most concerned about Rotten Tomatoes' polling of opinions given by average moviegoers. Readers can decide for themselves whether to give the same weight to the latter as to the former.
Gotta love that movie studios are upset about bad reviews. What about the public? We're upset about wasting our limited time and hard earned money on bad movies.
226
Why I don't go to the movies:
1. Movie stars who insult me over my views and politics
2. Don't care for superheroes
3. Don't care for computer special effects
4. Don't care for computer animated characters
What's left to go see? Nothing.
1. Movie stars who insult me over my views and politics
2. Don't care for superheroes
3. Don't care for computer special effects
4. Don't care for computer animated characters
What's left to go see? Nothing.
3
The photo evokes the Late Night special "Attack of the Killer Tomatoes" - No sequel, please! But if you want to produce the story of a conference of film critics, in the style of Altman's "Nashville" or "Health" - get in touch and I'll write the screenplay!.)
For those who like gritty, try "l'Enfant" - Cannes Palme d'Or winner from 2005. RT 86% Audience 72%
I watched "The Girl on the Train" with no sound, during a long flight and rather liked the cinematography, as seen on the little screen. RT 79% Top critics 86% Audience 42% After reading a few reviews and the summary, I didn't buy the DVD. Might later if that genre of cinematography becomes relevant to me.
I seldom see films from the last 40 years that don't have RT ratings over 80%.
What of an art film like
Notre Musique RT67% top crits 70% Audience 71%
Well, I just bought a book that discusses this film...and the film too.
Esoteric even for RT critics...
"35 Shots of Rum" RT 97% top crits 100% Audience 64%
Were the critics smoking something? The film was too slow for the friend
who saw it with me, so that would have helped... but there were some great shots, as well as good human relationship interest. Fresh, at least to me.
For art films, quality might be objective, even if tastes vary.
For popular entertainment, the Audience rating seems most reliable.
The critics served as well as they ought to.
It is great to have a range of opinion from RT, in order to decide whether to spend time and money on a film!
For those who like gritty, try "l'Enfant" - Cannes Palme d'Or winner from 2005. RT 86% Audience 72%
I watched "The Girl on the Train" with no sound, during a long flight and rather liked the cinematography, as seen on the little screen. RT 79% Top critics 86% Audience 42% After reading a few reviews and the summary, I didn't buy the DVD. Might later if that genre of cinematography becomes relevant to me.
I seldom see films from the last 40 years that don't have RT ratings over 80%.
What of an art film like
Notre Musique RT67% top crits 70% Audience 71%
Well, I just bought a book that discusses this film...and the film too.
Esoteric even for RT critics...
"35 Shots of Rum" RT 97% top crits 100% Audience 64%
Were the critics smoking something? The film was too slow for the friend
who saw it with me, so that would have helped... but there were some great shots, as well as good human relationship interest. Fresh, at least to me.
For art films, quality might be objective, even if tastes vary.
For popular entertainment, the Audience rating seems most reliable.
The critics served as well as they ought to.
It is great to have a range of opinion from RT, in order to decide whether to spend time and money on a film!
Sorry, Frank:
Return of the Killer Tomatoes!
Tomatometer Score: 0 percent
Audience Score: 48 percent
Return of the Killer Tomatoes!
Tomatometer Score: 0 percent
Audience Score: 48 percent
1
Additionally:
Killer Tomatoes Strike Back
Killer Tomatoes Eat France!
Attack of the Killer Tomatoes (Animated Series)
It's also less evocative and more "directly copying for parody, almost ironically" David Weisman's original poster art for Attack.
Return, which stars, no lie, George Clooney, has one of my favourite product placement gags ever, though.
Killer Tomatoes Strike Back
Killer Tomatoes Eat France!
Attack of the Killer Tomatoes (Animated Series)
It's also less evocative and more "directly copying for parody, almost ironically" David Weisman's original poster art for Attack.
Return, which stars, no lie, George Clooney, has one of my favourite product placement gags ever, though.
They should look at ticket prices. When it costs around $50 to take my two daughters and myself to the movies, not including the popcorn, I really have to pick and choose which ones to splurge on. Rotten Tomatoes is not a factor for me.
2
Hey Hollywood how about the movies you are releasing are just plain awful. At the price of a ticket I am not going to sit in a theater watching a movie that does not entertain but preaches. How about non-political love stories or comedies? How about movies that entertain? How about movies other than poor re-makes?
4
"Over lunch last month, the chief executive of a major movie company looked me in the eye and declared flatly that his mission was to destroy the review-aggregation site."
Rather, why not make movies people want to see? For too long, Hollywood has stuck to its same old, same old: action movies meant for the younger crowd, fantasies, rom-cons invariably set in either NYC or California. Their attitude seems to be, "Take what we give you and like it."
How about expanding your repertoire a bit? Hollywood is a business, after all. Every other enterprise sees its mission as providing what the customer wants, not the other way around. How about films set in the mid-west or the south (not everyone is as enamored with the two coastal populations as you think)? Adult movies about relationships or with historical narratives. Maybe (horrors) a movie or two with a religious bent, since a large portion of the population you are trying to attract affiliates itself with one or another faith. More movies about African Americans. And, the real pot of gold, films with Mexican-American or other Hispanic casts, a huge segment of our population embarrassingly underrepresented in both movies and television.
Stop trying to be the tail wagging the dog. Give the people what they want, not what you want.
Rather, why not make movies people want to see? For too long, Hollywood has stuck to its same old, same old: action movies meant for the younger crowd, fantasies, rom-cons invariably set in either NYC or California. Their attitude seems to be, "Take what we give you and like it."
How about expanding your repertoire a bit? Hollywood is a business, after all. Every other enterprise sees its mission as providing what the customer wants, not the other way around. How about films set in the mid-west or the south (not everyone is as enamored with the two coastal populations as you think)? Adult movies about relationships or with historical narratives. Maybe (horrors) a movie or two with a religious bent, since a large portion of the population you are trying to attract affiliates itself with one or another faith. More movies about African Americans. And, the real pot of gold, films with Mexican-American or other Hispanic casts, a huge segment of our population embarrassingly underrepresented in both movies and television.
Stop trying to be the tail wagging the dog. Give the people what they want, not what you want.
5
There are lots of factors. I'll skip the obvious and mention an overlooked reason: The political activism of Hollywood. People on the right are vilified and hated by leftist Hollywood. Why should republicans go see a movie involving persons who hate them? Then you have the left pushing their ideology and political correctness. It is bad business to attack half the country as Hollywood does. How we feel about stars or filmmakers affects how much we want to see their work. And politics, ideology and religion are polarizing. Hollywood film and TV has been getting more involved than ever in promoting leftist views. Maybe they should focus on entertainment and less on social engineering.
3
You mean go back to the days when movies catered only to white people? And starred only white people?
Maybe you are embarrassed by your views and resent creative people exposing them in ways that can't be condemned and easily ignored.
Maybe you are embarrassed by your views and resent creative people exposing them in ways that can't be condemned and easily ignored.
2
When I was a kid, I had 4 brothers and sisters. On Saturday, my mom would give us $5.00 and drop us off at the Manor theater to see the Saturday Matinee. We went across the street to the 5 & Dime and each bought 50 pieces of candy. Then we lined up and paid $.50 for a movie. With that, we got cartoons, a B Movie and a feature film. We were there for 3 hours.
What do you think that would cost a mother today? Probably over $100.00
What do you think that would cost a mother today? Probably over $100.00
10
If Hollywood had produced something noteworthy this year, sales wouldn't have slumped.
I never read reviews or look at Rotten Tomatoes to select a movie, as beauty is in the eye of each critic.
I read the films' synopses, and zero films have been enticing. I have read a lot of books this year.
Scapegoating one website for Hollywood's failures is a cheap shot. Time to dig deeper, Hollywood, and find some original creators -- maybe some writers who are in touch with human emotion, and not their phone or tablet.
I never read reviews or look at Rotten Tomatoes to select a movie, as beauty is in the eye of each critic.
I read the films' synopses, and zero films have been enticing. I have read a lot of books this year.
Scapegoating one website for Hollywood's failures is a cheap shot. Time to dig deeper, Hollywood, and find some original creators -- maybe some writers who are in touch with human emotion, and not their phone or tablet.
1
I don't feel bad for the studios at all and am in favor of anything that helps me identify where i want to spend what little discretionary money i have left at the end of the day. Ticket prices are too high in large part because the "stars' are over paid. Seriously, no entertainer or athlete is worth the money these people make. Our priorities are seriously messed up.
2
When it costs as much as it now does to go to a movie, and the movies are to a large extent tepid remakes of old movies or TV series which were not too good to start with, then people like myself will tend to wait for HBO or Netflix. What Rotten Tomatoes does is to give me a chance to see what other people have said about the movie before I plunk down $20.00 to see it.
1
Rotten Tomatoes is a little bit like hacked emails: Once you know what's in them, the author seems a whole lot less appealing. And then, once the public uses knowledge gained thereby to shun movies no matter how nuanced, or erstwhile presidents no matter how entitled, no one ever denies the veracity of the contents revealed, but instead blame those who reveal that the glitzy can contains awful gruel. How awful for them. Maybe Holl and Hill should write a book together blaming everyone else for their failures.
Hollywood should look inward for its lousy results rather than attribute its poor performance to critics and sights such as Rotten Tomatoes. Every week I read the reviews to find movies that I think my wife and I would enjoy. Even before the summer began, I frequently found myself disappointed. The problems include the subject matter and lack of maturity. I think we saw two movies this summer. Had the offerings been better, it would have been more
This remind me of many years ago when Electronic Data Systems was bought by General Motors. As EDS lore has it, Cadillac was complaining that their car sales were down and they could not figure out why? Ross Perot, who was now on the GM board via the EDS acquisition stated well, if you made a quality car, you would not be having this problem! Well, Hollywood, if you made a decent movie, people would go. Stop blaming other people, institutions, web sites, reviewers, for your inability to produce a decent product worthy of having people pay money and devote 1.5 - 2 hours of their lives to view.
5
“I think it’s the destruction of our business,” — Brett Ratner
Maybe bad ideas, sad remakes and a whole slew of generally crappy movies has something to do with this?
Make great, original, engaging movies and this whole question answers itself.
Maybe bad ideas, sad remakes and a whole slew of generally crappy movies has something to do with this?
Make great, original, engaging movies and this whole question answers itself.
12
Sorry Hollywood, I have decided not to ever support, hate filled, seditious haters. so I will continue to do my small part in bankrupting your hate filled elitist industry. It makes it easy to do with all the worthless crap coming out of Hollywood and over priced movie tickets.
2
The movies coming out these days are rarely worth the effort to go the the theater or the expense of taking a family. Dinner and movie for two adults is now a $100 affair. Sorry, but no.
9
Wake up Hollywood and television. We aren't watching because we're tired of all the scripted "reality" shows, violence, cops, reruns, and basic non-entertainment that Wall Street greedsters have ushered in.
"This is Us", was the most popular television show last season. The new season starts on September 26 at 10 p.m. on NBC. I predict it will be the most watched show in decades because this is the kind of entertainment people want. It is the one show that every generation in my family loves and discusses.
Here's a hint, Hollywood and television. Hire some decent writers - like the genius who writes/wrote "Law and Order" and use a little of that hoarded, tax-evasion money stashed overseas to create some real, decent entertainment. Or die. I don't really care which because I love to read REAL books and it's a much better way to entertain myself than watching the Steve Bannon cash cow - reruns of the Seinfeld show.
WE THE PEOPLE are starting to be much more careful of whose pockets we put money into and that is Good News!
"This is Us", was the most popular television show last season. The new season starts on September 26 at 10 p.m. on NBC. I predict it will be the most watched show in decades because this is the kind of entertainment people want. It is the one show that every generation in my family loves and discusses.
Here's a hint, Hollywood and television. Hire some decent writers - like the genius who writes/wrote "Law and Order" and use a little of that hoarded, tax-evasion money stashed overseas to create some real, decent entertainment. Or die. I don't really care which because I love to read REAL books and it's a much better way to entertain myself than watching the Steve Bannon cash cow - reruns of the Seinfeld show.
WE THE PEOPLE are starting to be much more careful of whose pockets we put money into and that is Good News!
4
The last time I went to a cinema in New York City was several years ago. The ticket cost $14, and a large popcorn and soda was another $12. Before the feature started, I was forced to sit through approximately 20 minutes of trailers, plus another pitch for refreshments. I can't remember the movie, but I do remember the prices.
Now, I pay $7.99 a month for unlimited Netflix streaming and downloads. I spent much of the Labor Day weekend binge-watching "Narcos," a superbly crafted Netflix production on the Colombian cocaine trade. Online streaming delivers a rich choice at a fraction of the cost of the cinema experience, and I can view what I want, when I want.
Short the stock of the major film producers, distributors, and cinema chains and you'll have a sure winner there!
Now, I pay $7.99 a month for unlimited Netflix streaming and downloads. I spent much of the Labor Day weekend binge-watching "Narcos," a superbly crafted Netflix production on the Colombian cocaine trade. Online streaming delivers a rich choice at a fraction of the cost of the cinema experience, and I can view what I want, when I want.
Short the stock of the major film producers, distributors, and cinema chains and you'll have a sure winner there!
3
The movie producers, et. al., can blame whomever they choose, but in order to stay in business, they need to face the FACTS. People have a finite amount of time and money to spend. There are more options today than ever before. In addition to the great outdoors, (many more are getting into hiking, paddle boarding, etc), we also have options to stream whatever we want, including binge watching some series we never saw when they first came out. There are also newer facilities for leisure activities that are popping up. All of these things compete for what is becoming more scarce.....our time and money. So movie makers, you've had it pretty good up until now, either make something worth watching........or end up in the red, but quit blaming people and critics, it's just making you look worse.
5
You get better plots in video games these days.
5
It's not a dirty little secret anymore.... Hollywood makes a lot of bad pictures. Why? The lack of talent on the production and creative side that been given a pass by the media for y-e-a-r-s. Rotten gets to the nub of it all. The people speak: MAKE BETTER FILMS.
10
There are 2 ways that studios can deal with bad reviews such on Rotten Tomatoes: make a better film, make a better film. Rotten Tomatoes reviews increase my likelihood I will go to a movie. Over the years, I've learned that their combination of expert and audience reviews are the only reviews I can trust -- a rarity in the online world. They have earned my trust. All brands should take a lesson from Rotten Tomatoes.
5
Rotten Tomatoes makes a fabulous contribution to American culture. For those who are interested in understanding why critics like or dislike a movie, one can read the reviews, which are provided.
1
Basically watch the previews and trailers for upcoming movies. If YOU are interested in the movie go and see it for yourself. Don't let a company like Rotten Tomatoes decide for you whether or not you go. Do your own research, and make your own decisions.
26
Trailers are increasingly misleading, both in promoting the quality of the film, but in some cases misrepresenting what the film really is. Having worked on commercials and on feature films for many years, I've come to almost ignore trailers since they're more a reflection of marketing goals that a the essence of the film.
2
yup do your own research, say, go to rotten tomatoes .....
2
I have not found that basing my buying decisions on ads yields the best results. My husband and I have been using Rotten Tomatoes for many years and it very rarely steers us wrong.
2
I think these squeals&complaints are hilarious.
I think Rotten Tomatoes is a fantastic resource, although it's best used as a database to find good reviews to read, while taking the topline score with a grain of salt. If you don't do the latter you'll think every Marvel movie is oscar-caliber (why these keep getting such positive reviews is beyond me).
Also, I miss Roger Ebert.
Also, I miss Roger Ebert.
2
The algorithm will get you every time. Hollywood just needs to make better movies. Rotten Tomatoes : the people have spoken.
I just saw Close Encounters of the Third Kind, (40th anniversary). It is a stark reminder of what movies used to be and what was worthwhile seeing on a large screen. If you make movies for 14 year old boys, why would you expect a mature audience? Close Encounters: no one dies, wonderful story, effects and acting. Today you get noise, incomprehensible "dialogue", and nothing requiring an emotional investment. I miss the good, old movies.
4
"'I think it’s the destruction of our business,' Brett Ratner, the director"
That's rich coming from a man who's best movie is probably Rush Hour.
That's rich coming from a man who's best movie is probably Rush Hour.
1
Rotten Tomatoes is usually very accurate. Maybe the haters in Hollywood should concentrate and making better, more intelligent movies with original stories....
2
The article is writtten as if Rotten Tomatoes is the only critic aggregation site out there. I'm surprised it made no mention of Metacritic; I've been relying on their scores for well over a decade. And they're slightly more nuanced--scores are grouped into green (best reviews), yellow (caution), and red (worst reviews), though still on a 100-point scale. These sites have been around for a long time (just like Yelp & TripAdvisor for other services), and aren't going away. Studios would much better spend their time to respond to them rather than fight a losing battle against them.
1
Hollywood filmmakers whining? Please call them a waaambulance. I choose not to see 98% of what's out there because most are nothing but exercises in doom and gloom armgeddons, gratuitous war and violence, ludicrous fantasy, tired and redundant sequels, misogyny, mindless drivel and patronizing, been-there-done-that nothingness.
More and more, when I actually am willing to go out to see a film, I want a great story line and real character development, things in VERY short supply these days.
When Hollywood returns to making better movies, I'll start going more often, that is if I can sit through one without having to put up with a cacophony of cell phones, texting and talkers, something not likely to change in our grotesquely self-involved hairball of a society.
More and more, when I actually am willing to go out to see a film, I want a great story line and real character development, things in VERY short supply these days.
When Hollywood returns to making better movies, I'll start going more often, that is if I can sit through one without having to put up with a cacophony of cell phones, texting and talkers, something not likely to change in our grotesquely self-involved hairball of a society.
2
First of all, watching movies in a theater is dead. Why go and sit among groups of unruly people and pay exorbitant prices to watch something that you can see in the privacy of your home a few weeks later for $5? Furthermore, most of the movies today are so bad as to be unwatchable. For most of the movies released now, the consumer is better off simply watching the trailer - there one may see (for free) the only decent scenes in the movie. I watch a lot of movies and only find about 3 a year that favorably impress me.
5
I don't go to movies often because they are hackneyed, cliched, aimed at 12 year olds, and dull. There are very few movies I'd consider going to the theater for, and that's not the diet of entertainment I want my kids watching either. For the quality of dialogue we get in most Hollywood movies I can sit my children in front of PBS kids or even unboxing videos on YouTube, spend the money on new shoes.
Most recently we regrettably saw Logan. I don't think I've ever felt so bamboozled in a theater. Psychodrama? Maybe if you're nine years old. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 93%. In the future, I will just not go see that studio's movies. If that's the best they've got--the gore wasn't even creative!--then I'm done.
Rotten Tomatoes is not your problem, Hollywood. It's that you are atrophied, have no young blood or new blood, and you are too self-absorbed.
Most recently we regrettably saw Logan. I don't think I've ever felt so bamboozled in a theater. Psychodrama? Maybe if you're nine years old. Rotten Tomatoes gave it a 93%. In the future, I will just not go see that studio's movies. If that's the best they've got--the gore wasn't even creative!--then I'm done.
Rotten Tomatoes is not your problem, Hollywood. It's that you are atrophied, have no young blood or new blood, and you are too self-absorbed.
5
For years, the studios have charged higher and higher ticket prices for a lot of crappy movies, because they figured audiences would continue to show up. The answer is simple: stop making expensive crappy movies. Their own fault.
2
How typical of Hollywood executives to point the finger of blame away from the true culprit. If they would stop producing bad movies, in numerous cases, really awful movies, perhaps critics and the public alike will find something worth spending money on.
Even with the new, reserved seating, the movie-going experience is an exercise in futility. The cost is staggering. The noise is deafening. The folks addicted to cell phones is nauseating. The endless commercials alone are worth avoiding at all costs. And sitting through 20 bad previews is not a great first-course to your really bad feature film.
It's time for Hollywood to look in the mirror and see where the true problem lies. I love rottentomatoes. Those folks save me a lot money and wasted time. Plus, they save me from being furious at myself for being stupid enough to get sucked in by a billion dollar marketing campaign and spend a fortune on a really bad film.
Thank you movie lovers at rottentomatoes!
Even with the new, reserved seating, the movie-going experience is an exercise in futility. The cost is staggering. The noise is deafening. The folks addicted to cell phones is nauseating. The endless commercials alone are worth avoiding at all costs. And sitting through 20 bad previews is not a great first-course to your really bad feature film.
It's time for Hollywood to look in the mirror and see where the true problem lies. I love rottentomatoes. Those folks save me a lot money and wasted time. Plus, they save me from being furious at myself for being stupid enough to get sucked in by a billion dollar marketing campaign and spend a fortune on a really bad film.
Thank you movie lovers at rottentomatoes!
2
Blame the Tomatoes!
That's right, Ratner, the "industry" is simply an innocent victim of these awful people (cue: tears) at Rotten Tomatoes. Such classic LA/NY bicoastal blame-game stuff, instead of looking in the mirror, at the ever-diversifing, fractured entertainment market and the quality of . .. The Product. Pull the covers over your eyes, Ratner, and let me know when you wake up!
That's right, Ratner, the "industry" is simply an innocent victim of these awful people (cue: tears) at Rotten Tomatoes. Such classic LA/NY bicoastal blame-game stuff, instead of looking in the mirror, at the ever-diversifing, fractured entertainment market and the quality of . .. The Product. Pull the covers over your eyes, Ratner, and let me know when you wake up!
1
The fight against elitism has caused our current state of boobocracy. Some people spend years trying to become experts - sometimes they know more than your average joe.
C'mon people. It's about quality--or lack thereof. Make better movies. I'm a movie buff and I see lots of them--rarely the summer Hollywood movies--why waste my money on junk? And reviews are important to me. I check the tomato meter. If you create for the lowest common denominator, you deserve your splat.
Yeah, I'm sure none of this has to do with producers, directors and actors declaring half of Americans their enemies. None of this has to do with Americans who love this nation not wanting to put dollars in the coffers of an ideology that wants to eliminate the citizens rights to self defense, the nations rights to a sovereign country with limited immigration and protected borders, none of this has to with anti-white racism that exudes from every aspect of Hollywood, none this has to with Hollywood supporting terrorist organizations that want police dead like BLM. None of this has to do with Hollywood support and Unconstitutional socialist centralized government, none of this has to do with Hollywood supporting Anti-American globalism. yeah it's WEBSITE'S FAULT.
1
It continually amazes me how lame most Hollywood movies are. Even the ones that pass as entertaining generally have much to criticize about them. Then there are the ones that have endless sequels, like the Fast and Furious series, that are in my view an abomination -- so I guess we have to put a lot of the blame on the audience.
On the other hand, there have been number TV series over the years that have great writing, story lines, acting, and production values. What gives? Perhaps being limited to a couple of hours is one of the problems with Hollywood movies.
On the other hand, there have been number TV series over the years that have great writing, story lines, acting, and production values. What gives? Perhaps being limited to a couple of hours is one of the problems with Hollywood movies.
2
Here in NYC, more theaters are running ticket buyers through hoops: avoid the box office -- buy online ahead of time; and put up with the folly of reserved seating in the theater. Naturally, I use Fandango (and the like) to order tickets, putting Rotten Tomatoes right in my face. With prices going up, I take their ratings seriously. Before all this online ordering nonsense, I had never heard of RT. I just appeared at the theater and took my chances at getting a seat. The Good Old Days!
1
It's totally outrageous that awful movies are being labelled as awful, thereby preventing studios from turning a profit on worthless crap, as occurred for decades, ala Adam Sandler.
The solution is simple: MAKE BETTER MOVIES!
The solution is simple: MAKE BETTER MOVIES!
2
This kind of scapegoating does not bode well for the next few years for the industry - Rotten Tomatoes really just aggregates critic reviews, so if a film is universally disliked, it will be so with or without RT. Besides, way too many well reviewed films have ranked among the disappointments in recent years (Planet of the Apes, Detroit, Logan Lucky, Megan Leavey, last year's Star Trek), while some films hovering around 10% positive have exceeded expectations (Emoji Movie, Fifty Shades Darker). Franchises, on a whole, saw major declines, and reductive films that seemed to be written by committee flopped. BUT, original films, such as Get Out, Split, and Dunkirk, tended to perform exceedingly well, as did low-budget but well-crafted horror flicks. Perhaps that is the takeaway - make good movies, and make more original movies. While some franchises have life (Avengers, Star Wars), even the well-reviewed installments of many franchises seem to be failing to find an audience.
1
This is end result of elderly billionaires sitting around a conference table making decisions for what we should see at the theaters. Rather than learning something from Netflix, Hulu, and TV programs to get an idea of what's actually working right now. There are tons of examples to learn from. The movie "Get Out" is a prime example of a fantastic film that never had the chance with the larger studios, who likely declined that film in favor of some rotten sequel.
I always consult Rotton Tomatoes before I decide to drop $36 + fees on two tickets for the privilege of enjoying a movie with adult beverages and no kids allowed. Hollywood's dependence on comic books and their hopes of scoring a quick thoughtless buck is their undoing, not Rotten Tomatoes who is doing all of us a favor by helping consumers avoid garbage.
I always consult Rotton Tomatoes before I decide to drop $36 + fees on two tickets for the privilege of enjoying a movie with adult beverages and no kids allowed. Hollywood's dependence on comic books and their hopes of scoring a quick thoughtless buck is their undoing, not Rotten Tomatoes who is doing all of us a favor by helping consumers avoid garbage.
6
"But should reviewers from Screen Junkies and Punch Drunk Critics really be treated as the equals of those from The Los Angeles Times and The New Yorker?"
Considering I've been doing this for 10 years, write 200 reviews a year, and built our blog up from 2 readers a day to about 80K, I say yes, I should be considered on the level of bigger outlets.
But then I'm biased.
Considering I've been doing this for 10 years, write 200 reviews a year, and built our blog up from 2 readers a day to about 80K, I say yes, I should be considered on the level of bigger outlets.
But then I'm biased.
137
I would add that while the New Yorker and LA Times may have some good critics, the reality is that all critics have blind-spots and some level of personal bias. Combining multiple reviews in a score blunts the review of a critic that thinks the last good movie was Gone with the Wind.
It would also be interesting to see how many of the panned movies were generally thought to be good or even passable movies. My own experience is that Rotten Tomatoes is imperfect. I might find a movie rated a 45 as okay, but I do not ever remember leaving a theater thinking a movie rated a 45 should be a 90. In other words, it is not all that imperfect and I doubt many movie goers stay away from a 55 if it has a favorite actor/actress or a subject matter that interests them.
It would also be interesting to see how many of the panned movies were generally thought to be good or even passable movies. My own experience is that Rotten Tomatoes is imperfect. I might find a movie rated a 45 as okay, but I do not ever remember leaving a theater thinking a movie rated a 45 should be a 90. In other words, it is not all that imperfect and I doubt many movie goers stay away from a 55 if it has a favorite actor/actress or a subject matter that interests them.
Hollywood practicing the art of deflection...
If Producers want to see an uptick in business a good first step would be to ween themselves of their franchise addiction. Franchise saturation is driving audiences away from theatre attendance. Whats drawing them in?....anything new. Case in point...
"Baby Driver" is a good movie.
Its not a great movie.
Its good craftsmanship.
Its not art.
Its fresh, new, interesting, entertaining and fun...
...for all of those reasons it was highly anticipated, well attended, well received and very lucrative.
Franchise movies, by contrast, are formulaic and predictable and... often lack basic filmmaking competence (there are exceptions to the rule.... "Guardians of the Galaxy" volumes 1 and 2 are proving that some franchises can produce good movies.... although the test is whether they can pull off a third movie that is as well received as the first two).
The well known problems going on with the "Star Wars" franchise as well as the tepid response to most of the DC Universe films isn't an unexpected outcome.... at least outside the studio/producers bubble. The studios need to balance their franchise output with more middle budget films that that offer much needed variety.
If Producers want to see an uptick in business a good first step would be to ween themselves of their franchise addiction. Franchise saturation is driving audiences away from theatre attendance. Whats drawing them in?....anything new. Case in point...
"Baby Driver" is a good movie.
Its not a great movie.
Its good craftsmanship.
Its not art.
Its fresh, new, interesting, entertaining and fun...
...for all of those reasons it was highly anticipated, well attended, well received and very lucrative.
Franchise movies, by contrast, are formulaic and predictable and... often lack basic filmmaking competence (there are exceptions to the rule.... "Guardians of the Galaxy" volumes 1 and 2 are proving that some franchises can produce good movies.... although the test is whether they can pull off a third movie that is as well received as the first two).
The well known problems going on with the "Star Wars" franchise as well as the tepid response to most of the DC Universe films isn't an unexpected outcome.... at least outside the studio/producers bubble. The studios need to balance their franchise output with more middle budget films that that offer much needed variety.
1
I've nearly stopped going to the movies, and for the simple reason that it's a financial risk I'm no longer willing to make without some pre-planning. That's where the review sites come in. Plus, the theater experience has changed enormously since I was a kid many decades ago. I think ticket prices are generally reasonable, but the drive to the theater, plus the gouge for refreshments, not to mention the rampant cellphone use and relentless, high decibel soundtracks and special effects, especially in action movies, (which, granted, the younger generation seems to want) often makes the experience for me more annoying than entertaining, sometimes even for the good flicks.
I use the review sites simply to get an idea of the movie and if it might it be worth the time and money to go see it. I read Rotten Tomatoes, but I don't pay attention to the Tomatometer, preferring to access the full reviews for a better all-around idea of what's in store.
Also, I think the studios shoot themselves in the foot with endless, over-the-top previews and promotions, sometimes months in advance, such as that for "Snatched," the preview which had me shouting to myself, "Thanks for the warning!" It's gotten to the point where I consider a film's relentless hyping as a lack of confidence in the movie by the executive producers, who are hoping the push will get as many people into the seats as possible on opening day before word of mouth keeps them home on Saturday night.
I use the review sites simply to get an idea of the movie and if it might it be worth the time and money to go see it. I read Rotten Tomatoes, but I don't pay attention to the Tomatometer, preferring to access the full reviews for a better all-around idea of what's in store.
Also, I think the studios shoot themselves in the foot with endless, over-the-top previews and promotions, sometimes months in advance, such as that for "Snatched," the preview which had me shouting to myself, "Thanks for the warning!" It's gotten to the point where I consider a film's relentless hyping as a lack of confidence in the movie by the executive producers, who are hoping the push will get as many people into the seats as possible on opening day before word of mouth keeps them home on Saturday night.
2
I have to put earplugs in when I decide that its worth it to me to pay the overpriced ticket of a new release. Others have said and I will say make better movies. Plus an ethics free economy.
Honestly it comes down to 3 things-
1- Lack of GOOD original content- everything is a sequel, reboot, re-imagining or adaptation.
2- Lazy Story development/execution- so many summer blockbusters with nothing but bloated special effects budgets thrown on the screen.
3- Ticket pricing vs cost of similar at home experience- I recently tried to take my family of 5 to a Sunday matinée figuring on matinee pricing. Nope doesn't exist anymore and neither does kid pricing. Would have been $60 before even getting to the concession stand. We went down the street to Target and bought a brand new kids movie (Boss Baby), movie theatre style popcorn, soda and candy for under $35 and wen home and watched it on our 55" big screen with surround sound.
Simple economics- they are offering lousy product for high prices and they wonder why they are doing poorly.
1- Lack of GOOD original content- everything is a sequel, reboot, re-imagining or adaptation.
2- Lazy Story development/execution- so many summer blockbusters with nothing but bloated special effects budgets thrown on the screen.
3- Ticket pricing vs cost of similar at home experience- I recently tried to take my family of 5 to a Sunday matinée figuring on matinee pricing. Nope doesn't exist anymore and neither does kid pricing. Would have been $60 before even getting to the concession stand. We went down the street to Target and bought a brand new kids movie (Boss Baby), movie theatre style popcorn, soda and candy for under $35 and wen home and watched it on our 55" big screen with surround sound.
Simple economics- they are offering lousy product for high prices and they wonder why they are doing poorly.
11
The truth is Hollywood rarely makes appealing movies. How many superhero or raunch-comedies can one stomach? Most of the decent films are from lower-budgeted groups. A good product (movie) will always draw crowds, but not clinkers, especially when movies are overpriced.
Hollywood will become a dinosaur anyway, with Netflix, Amazon, others getting into the act. They will learn, too late, like the big-box retailers and die a slow corporate death.
Hollywood will become a dinosaur anyway, with Netflix, Amazon, others getting into the act. They will learn, too late, like the big-box retailers and die a slow corporate death.
Solution is simple make more cheaper movies that appeal to groups other than 14 year olds. I would happily pay to see movies but there is never anything appealing playing locally.
12
I have used Rotten Tomatoes since the very early 2000s. I've never used it as a measure of how much I would like the movie, I use it in order to be able to read multiple reviews at one time. The reviews are linked so it's easy to get to them. I can usually get a sense of what I'd like from reading 7 or 8 of them from both sides.
To be honest I've also used it to find interestingly bad movies by looking for movies scoring under 10. Some of the zero movies were actually fun to watch.
To be honest I've also used it to find interestingly bad movies by looking for movies scoring under 10. Some of the zero movies were actually fun to watch.
3
When my husband and I go to the movies in our small town, which happens to be at an IMAX theatre, order a small popcorn to share and two small drinks, we pay $56.00.
$56 for two people.
Therefore, we only go to the movies when we're really excited about something. We don't look to Rotten Tomatoes or other reviews for feedback, but take our cue from the trailer itself and decide whether we think the movie would be worth the evening and all that money. We've learned that we don't always agree with the critics.
But, it's really not about the money as much as it seems. Although we'd be willing to take a chance on more films if costs should decrease, we would still go to the movies almost every weekend with the current prices if we were truly interested. But we're not.
Hollywood has itself to blame.
$56 for two people.
Therefore, we only go to the movies when we're really excited about something. We don't look to Rotten Tomatoes or other reviews for feedback, but take our cue from the trailer itself and decide whether we think the movie would be worth the evening and all that money. We've learned that we don't always agree with the critics.
But, it's really not about the money as much as it seems. Although we'd be willing to take a chance on more films if costs should decrease, we would still go to the movies almost every weekend with the current prices if we were truly interested. But we're not.
Hollywood has itself to blame.
16
Rotten Tomatoes calls them as we see them. I love that my kids will now no longer go to see a movie based solely on the ads and trailers or even the actors - it needs to be fresh, too. My son on the autism spectrum who will insist on seeing a good movie more than once (Beauty & the Beast, Finding Dory) honors the system, too, saving me from going to The Emoji Movie by pointing to his phone: "Not enough Tomatoes, Mom."
3
Trailers LIE. They are often brilliantly created, directed, edited to make awful dog movies look funny or exciting.
How often have you seen a GREAT trailer, and gone to the film, only to discover that the trailer had ALL of the funny parts, and the movie itself is terrible?
How often have you seen a GREAT trailer, and gone to the film, only to discover that the trailer had ALL of the funny parts, and the movie itself is terrible?
1
There has not been a movie I am interested in paying for in the theaters for years. Too dark, overly sappy, too much music ( Beauty and the beast!), or just boring like watching Barbara Streisand or Diane Keaton play someones mom.. I'd rather watch Seinfeld re-runs, on the whole, than anything in the movies..
11
You know the bigger issue. Movie ticket prices are too high. When it costs $16 to watch a movie, instead of $8 or 10, of course people aren't going to watch 6 movies in the summer.
And as everyone said, studios need to create a good product.
And as everyone said, studios need to create a good product.
55
I am often perplexed by how Rotten Tomatoes determines whether a particular film review (which usually says both good and not-so-good things) merits a whole tomato or a splashed one...
3
Hollywood wants to have it both ways. They want to make lowest-common-denominator movies that are dumbed down enough to play around the world, regardless of language and cultural differences. But they expect that the domestic audience will still pay high prices to see the insipid nonsense that results. Well, clearly we won't. And their solution to that seems to be, try to kill the messenger.
195
Could be the movies are terrible. Could be.
27
When the studios quit dumping their garbage on the theaters, perhaps there will be more interest in their films. Frankly, my viewing decisions are based on players and subject matter only. The Studios need to look inward and admit their general incompetence at making decent films.
17
Wall Street hated the rating agencies too, until the financiers found ways to corrupt them... and that turned out so swell in 2008. Bravo Rotten Tomatoes! Stay independent. Stay fresh. Hey, Hollywood, if you don't like your ratings make better movies.
26
Why blame RottenTomatoes? All they do is aggregate reviews into one handy site. I love the service, mainly because I can find all the reviews for obscure films that don't see widespread distribution. So Hollywood is really the minor character in this play. And don't forget, RT aggregates separate scores for "pro" critics vs. non pro viewers. Many times the difference between the two is meaningful.
Now as to Hollywood's bad year, maybe if you PAID A WRITER for a decent plot line. Maybe stop using COMIC BOOKS for inspiration? Try pretending - just pretend - THAT YOUR AUDIENCE THINKS!
Now as to Hollywood's bad year, maybe if you PAID A WRITER for a decent plot line. Maybe stop using COMIC BOOKS for inspiration? Try pretending - just pretend - THAT YOUR AUDIENCE THINKS!
53
The first thing I look at is whether a movie is made by 20th Century Fox -- I refuse to watch anything made by the Murdoch-controlled Fox empire that gave us our current president.
3
CGI and story are not fungible ingredients. If anything, the Tomatometer is too kind to the typical Hollywood movie.
10
You are correct. Basically, the equivalent of a C+ is enough to count as a positive review, and then a film only needs to receive 70% of those C+ reviews to receive a "certified fresh" designation. One example of such a release from this year is Alien: Covenant.
3
Exactly! When I actually read some of the reviews that get a tomato instead of a splat, the review is much less kind than Tomatometer's choice.
Also, another killer is the fact that movie theaters aren't "just around the corner" anymore...you used to just "drop in" the local theater...now, you have to PLAN to go to the multi-plex, which takes the serendipity out of the equation..i know I might be seeing a "B" movie, but what the hay.
BUT, I'm not going to pay through the nose for that same movie I have make an "appointment" for either.
BUT, I'm not going to pay through the nose for that same movie I have make an "appointment" for either.
9
We lost our local theaters YEARS ago....first they remodeled, to become small screen "multiplexes" showing 4-12 films -- instead of big gracious movies houses -- prices increased 4 fold -- the cost of getting something simple like a box of popcorn or a pop, went from a couple dollars to the downpayment on a house! and the fresh, incredible smell of hot popping popcorn replaced by giant bags of totally stale popcorn trucked in.
Theatres are, alas, a giant rip off and most people now realize this. The film industry is eating its own, and destroying their own business model. In 10 years or less, it will be as quaint to think of "going out to a movie in a theatre" as it is today to have a landline hardwired to the wall.
Theatres are, alas, a giant rip off and most people now realize this. The film industry is eating its own, and destroying their own business model. In 10 years or less, it will be as quaint to think of "going out to a movie in a theatre" as it is today to have a landline hardwired to the wall.
2
I turn to Rotten Tomatoes for advice. But I take the advice with a grain of salt. Just because this week's superhero movie has a score in the 90s does not mean I will be impressed with it. And I have seen movies with scores in the 40s or 50s that I thought were good. The scores seem useful, but the arbitrary cut-off between fresh and rotten seems unfair. What would be useful would be a site that was more like a dating site, and started by asking some questions of its audience: How old are you? What is your gender? Do you have a college degree? What kind of movies do you like most? Where do you live? Then, the site could say, "OK, among the people who are most like you, this movie has a score of XYZ." We have the technology to provide more in the way of nuanced data. Netflix has a system that guesses at how I will judge a movie based on my judgements of other movies. But Rotten Tomatoes prefers to paint every movie with a broad brush, as if my tastes as a middle-aged college educated man are likely to be the same as all the nine-year-olds who are attracted to the "Emoji" movie.
My other pet-peeve is that when I search for a movie on Rotten Tomatoes, it does not show me the most recent movies with similar titles. It orders the movies in some other order, so that I might have to scroll through a dozen movies going back decades to find the one I am interested in.
No Rotten Tomatoes does not deserve the success it has achieved. We need a better site.
My other pet-peeve is that when I search for a movie on Rotten Tomatoes, it does not show me the most recent movies with similar titles. It orders the movies in some other order, so that I might have to scroll through a dozen movies going back decades to find the one I am interested in.
No Rotten Tomatoes does not deserve the success it has achieved. We need a better site.
2
For us, Rotten tomatoes no longer provides meaningful feedback for our tastes in movies.
Some movies that get amazing reviews, we think are horrible (remake of True Grit for instance), and others that get low ratings, we have really, really enjoyed (Collateral Beauty and CHIPS with its bad humor, although we could have done without the pushing sex taboo boundaries, so prevalent today).
We generally stop the trailers midstream too, as now trailers basically give you the entire movie.
Point is: Be your own critic!
Some movies that get amazing reviews, we think are horrible (remake of True Grit for instance), and others that get low ratings, we have really, really enjoyed (Collateral Beauty and CHIPS with its bad humor, although we could have done without the pushing sex taboo boundaries, so prevalent today).
We generally stop the trailers midstream too, as now trailers basically give you the entire movie.
Point is: Be your own critic!
2
I am a huge fan of the website Metacritic.com. It is extraordinary.
Since I abhor excessive violence and torture, I research new films carefully.
I sAw Zero Dark Thrity after researching Metacritc, and am glad I saw the film. It was homework.
I look forward to an in depth analysis or comparison of Metacritc to Rotten Tomatoes.
This article is interesting, and it raises many questions, which are brought up by angry commenters. Ticket and popcorn prices are too high, intermissions too infrequent. Volumes are too high.The violence has gotten out of control. When I saw Dunkirk in Cincinnati, the day Inconvenient Sequel came out and was sold out, the theater showed a preview of a horror film about killing young women, called something like the Snowman Head murdering monster. It was grotesque, and I was deeply offended, that I was exposed to such images. I complained to the manager, but the there are plenty of reasons, why I go less and less to the movie theater.
I posted on my blog, InconvenientNewsWorldwide.wordpress.com, a favorable review of Dunkirk. I agree with the NYT metacric score of 80. I did not enjoy the film, but found it gripping, and extremely useful history and homework. What an amazing story. For those of us who love small yachts, it is a great story.
Since I abhor excessive violence and torture, I research new films carefully.
I sAw Zero Dark Thrity after researching Metacritc, and am glad I saw the film. It was homework.
I look forward to an in depth analysis or comparison of Metacritc to Rotten Tomatoes.
This article is interesting, and it raises many questions, which are brought up by angry commenters. Ticket and popcorn prices are too high, intermissions too infrequent. Volumes are too high.The violence has gotten out of control. When I saw Dunkirk in Cincinnati, the day Inconvenient Sequel came out and was sold out, the theater showed a preview of a horror film about killing young women, called something like the Snowman Head murdering monster. It was grotesque, and I was deeply offended, that I was exposed to such images. I complained to the manager, but the there are plenty of reasons, why I go less and less to the movie theater.
I posted on my blog, InconvenientNewsWorldwide.wordpress.com, a favorable review of Dunkirk. I agree with the NYT metacric score of 80. I did not enjoy the film, but found it gripping, and extremely useful history and homework. What an amazing story. For those of us who love small yachts, it is a great story.
3
Simple answer. Make better movies.
3
Welcome to the 21st century, even movie goers are waking up.
5
Okay, I could have gone out to a movie this summer, at a cost of $24 for two of us, after being subjected to a half hour advertising assault, at a movie time convenient for packing as many people as possible per night into the theater (not a good time for dinner and a movie), and after all that, see a movie geared to young white males, but the reason I didn't buy into that was Rotten Tomatoes?
35
With just a handful of exceptions, Hollywood hasn't had an original thought in years. It just recycles the already recycled. The good news is that consistently creative, intelligent and challenging entertainment is still readily available. it can be found on on what used to be Hollywood's red-headed step-child, television. Shows like "Mad Men", "Homeland", "Six Feet Under" and "The Sopranos" have proven time and again that engaging entertainment hasn't disappeared, it's just relocated.
9
Rotten Tomatoes also exposes a disconnect between reviewers and audiences. Take this summer's King Arthur movie. It got 27% rating from Rotten Tomatoes critics, but 71% approval from the audience.
I saw King Arthur and enjoyed it. It wasn't a Citizen Kane but it was a good popcorn movie.
I really don't trust many of the critics that Rotten Tomatoes bases its ratings on. And I'm always suspicious of a herd mentality in reviews.
Take last year's film "The Witch." Rotten Tomatoes said 91% of the critics liked it but only 56% of the audience did. I went. At the end of the movie there was a collect "huh" from the audience. It was not a good reaction. I went back and read some of the reviews and, honestly, wondered what planet the reviewers are living on.
Truly, the audiences and critics have a different set of interests. Audiences want to be entertained. Critics want some weird form of enlightenment.
But seriously, if Hollywood is worried, its real problem are critics who appeared cowed by invisible standards the rest of us don't get.
Just make good movies. I'll go to them.
I saw King Arthur and enjoyed it. It wasn't a Citizen Kane but it was a good popcorn movie.
I really don't trust many of the critics that Rotten Tomatoes bases its ratings on. And I'm always suspicious of a herd mentality in reviews.
Take last year's film "The Witch." Rotten Tomatoes said 91% of the critics liked it but only 56% of the audience did. I went. At the end of the movie there was a collect "huh" from the audience. It was not a good reaction. I went back and read some of the reviews and, honestly, wondered what planet the reviewers are living on.
Truly, the audiences and critics have a different set of interests. Audiences want to be entertained. Critics want some weird form of enlightenment.
But seriously, if Hollywood is worried, its real problem are critics who appeared cowed by invisible standards the rest of us don't get.
Just make good movies. I'll go to them.
10
Totally agree on King Arthur. I enjoyed it. I disregarded RT because I like Charlie Hunan and Guy Ritchie. But I do rely on the site. Fortunately for me I live right near a theater that shows stuff on thurs night for five bucks. So I just pop in on stuff that I think has promise because I like director and actor. Tarzan with Alexander Skaarsgard was another enjoyable one that got bad reviews...
1
Three things going on: 1-The Hollywood business model discourages creative and fresh movies. If they stumble on one and make millions of dollars, then they repeat that same formula ad nauseam. 2-Netflix, Amazon Prime and premier cable is the place to go for layered, interesting and fun stories. $7 a month for streaming is not even the cost of one movie. 3-Audience behavior at theaters is terrible. Talking, crackling wrappers, acting like they are in their living room and not a public space has made movie going miserable.
183
And assigned seating in theatres discourages me as well. It's like being shackled -- what if you want to move away from those inconsiderate people or it's just not the right seat?
1
Agree, but amazingly I have not has one complaint with audience noise in 15 years!
absolutely agree about audience behavior. love going out to the movies, and always will, but every time we go we have to say a little prayer that we're not next to annoying patrons. the current trend for reserved seating has made it worse too, not so many options to move if you dont like who is sitting next to you.
Will Hollywood attacking Rotten Tomatoes work? Probably not.
A couple years ago, people could go to Amazon reviews and get a fairly accurate cross-section of opinions on movies. Viral marketers have ruined that by submitting slews of obviously bought-and-paid-for reviews to the biggest stinkers out there. The result? People stopped going to Amazon reviews. If Hollywood really is successful in making Rotten Tomatoes more positive, people will just find another outlet for accurate ratings.
In general, Rotten Tomatoes is pretty fair and the underrated masterpieces just about balance out the overrated duds. What comes through in this piece is that what Hollywood marketers really object to is not unfair downgrades of artistic masterpieces, but their inability to control the narrative on the dogs.
A couple years ago, people could go to Amazon reviews and get a fairly accurate cross-section of opinions on movies. Viral marketers have ruined that by submitting slews of obviously bought-and-paid-for reviews to the biggest stinkers out there. The result? People stopped going to Amazon reviews. If Hollywood really is successful in making Rotten Tomatoes more positive, people will just find another outlet for accurate ratings.
In general, Rotten Tomatoes is pretty fair and the underrated masterpieces just about balance out the overrated duds. What comes through in this piece is that what Hollywood marketers really object to is not unfair downgrades of artistic masterpieces, but their inability to control the narrative on the dogs.
9
I'm not a fan of the review methodology which takes a ratio of critics who like it vs. critics who don't. I prefer Metacritic's method of weighting and averaging. However, all the movies panned by rotten tomatoes in this article were also panned by the critics.
What the studios are really upset with are informed consumers. It's like the old days of car buying when the dealer had all the information and the customer was just a sap to be plucked. Now, customers come into the lot with vehicle ratings, invoice prices, and price quotes from six other dealers. As a friend who was a former car salesman told me, "It's no longer any fun."
In the good old days, you judged a movie by its ads and stars. You didn't know if a movie was any good until after you bought the tickets. Now consumers find out if the movie is a stinker before they buy the tickets.
The solution for the studios is pretty straight forward: start making films that people actually want to see.
What the studios are really upset with are informed consumers. It's like the old days of car buying when the dealer had all the information and the customer was just a sap to be plucked. Now, customers come into the lot with vehicle ratings, invoice prices, and price quotes from six other dealers. As a friend who was a former car salesman told me, "It's no longer any fun."
In the good old days, you judged a movie by its ads and stars. You didn't know if a movie was any good until after you bought the tickets. Now consumers find out if the movie is a stinker before they buy the tickets.
The solution for the studios is pretty straight forward: start making films that people actually want to see.
5
Oh, and were the critics ever wrong about the film, The Space Between Us. The movie is about the teen who grows up on Mars and than travels to Earth to connect with his online girlfriend.
Only 17% of the critics like it. But what really irritated me was that some of the critics faulted the movie for its science. "They were communicating in real time -- that's impossible from Mars!" observed some. Seriously? It's a movie. About 56% of the audience liked it.
I thought it was one of year's better movie. It was creative, the story line was sweet and outcome was a surprise.
The critics missed the boat completely on this one. I don't really trust them.
Only 17% of the critics like it. But what really irritated me was that some of the critics faulted the movie for its science. "They were communicating in real time -- that's impossible from Mars!" observed some. Seriously? It's a movie. About 56% of the audience liked it.
I thought it was one of year's better movie. It was creative, the story line was sweet and outcome was a surprise.
The critics missed the boat completely on this one. I don't really trust them.
2
I am a movie fan, maybe because I grew up in Buenos Aires where you had art houses playing all the movies of mayor directors, one a day, in the order they were filmed. Rotten tomatoes is the go to place to get a sense of a movie because it has both professional opinions and also civilians' ratings. Instead of word of mouth or chasing reviews through several media, everything is there. I understand that it is very unsettling for the Studios because they would want us to ignore anything but the trailer when choosing what movies to see. Tough.
Or it could be the ridiculous prices for mindless sequels. My last movie night out cost more that dinner out.
More likely it is the extreme Alt-Left Social Justice Warrior politics of Hollywood and celebs that is out of touch with 75% of the ticket-buying public. But, sure, keep #Resisting reality.
1
Maybe Hollywood should get together and write a book about this experience, so they can whine and blame other people for their rotten movies. They could call it, "What Happened".
6
I had to laugh at the photo of the Rotten Tomatoes staff in their viewing room, supposedly watching a film without bothering to close the shades or turn out the light. Definitely a score below 60.
Isn't this a classic case of 'don't blame the messenger' for bad news?
Here's my humble opinion: the vast majority of movies made in recent years just aren't very good. I recall the last "jurrasic Park' film was hyped and touted and turned out to be god-awful; anyone over 12 years old that thought that was a good film needed their head examined.
Yes, there are many forces at work that are dissipating potential movie audiences and yes, movie studios understand that mediocre movies sometimes make oodles of money. But a basic core value remains, make good films with good storylines and acting and directing and audiences will respond, and yes, Rotten Tomatoes will reject that quality. I think the site is a valuable asset that I know has 'saved' me from wasting my money ant time on
lousy films.
Here's my humble opinion: the vast majority of movies made in recent years just aren't very good. I recall the last "jurrasic Park' film was hyped and touted and turned out to be god-awful; anyone over 12 years old that thought that was a good film needed their head examined.
Yes, there are many forces at work that are dissipating potential movie audiences and yes, movie studios understand that mediocre movies sometimes make oodles of money. But a basic core value remains, make good films with good storylines and acting and directing and audiences will respond, and yes, Rotten Tomatoes will reject that quality. I think the site is a valuable asset that I know has 'saved' me from wasting my money ant time on
lousy films.
4
This has been the worst summer in memory for movies. Before you start blaming others...
3
"Most importantly, studios are panicking because moviegoing is no longer a habit for most Americans. Because of climbing prices and competition from other forms of entertainment, a trip to the multiplex has become a special event. In particular, more movie fans are ignoring low- and mid-budget films when they are in theaters: Ehh, let’s wait until they show up on Netflix."
I stopped going to the movies 5-7 years ago. Here's why:
Most of the movies weren't worth the price of admission.
The sound was deafening and I value my hearing.
There is too much sex, violence, and stupidity in most movies.
I'd rather spend my money and time on books or cleaning than sitting a seat smelling popcorn, hearing others eat, etc.
While it used to be a treat to see a movie now it's an expensive proposition with very little in the way of positive returns. If there were better movies out there and the prices were more reasonable I'm sure more people would go.
I stopped going to the movies 5-7 years ago. Here's why:
Most of the movies weren't worth the price of admission.
The sound was deafening and I value my hearing.
There is too much sex, violence, and stupidity in most movies.
I'd rather spend my money and time on books or cleaning than sitting a seat smelling popcorn, hearing others eat, etc.
While it used to be a treat to see a movie now it's an expensive proposition with very little in the way of positive returns. If there were better movies out there and the prices were more reasonable I'm sure more people would go.
6
NY Times reviews were useful and more detailed; format has changed so Critics Picks hard to match up with local theaters.
Next article ... "Terrible Restaurants Blame Yelp for Their Demise"
22
"Baywatch" didn't do well? Shocker. I'm sure it was the website's fault.
332
maybe the reason for the box office failure of most of those (pretty bad) sequels was all that website's fault too (as opposed to that of the studios)?
1
From the people that love to pay women 25% of what they pay a man, hire white people for minority rolls and keep producing sequels, prequels and endless rehashes, we now have to hear them complaining that people do not want to see their movies! A suggestion: grow up.
5
On the rare times I actually see a new movie in a theater, I must suffer through the endless previews of movies I don't want to see, all of which contain identical elements: car chases, explosions, crude sexual references, violence, guns, woman's breasts, and vulgarity.
How did teen age boys take control of Hollywood?
How did teen age boys take control of Hollywood?
18
Hahahaha Hollywood just made a film about emojis and they're blaming a website for bad ticket sales? Give me a break. I look forward to the day Netflix buries Hollywood.
8
Dear Rotten Tomatoes
I'm a 35 year-old production executive at a major studio. There is nowhere else a guy with a 60 IQ can make 300K a year. You are threatening the livelihood of myself and many others execs (some with IQs as high as 80).
Just tell us where you want the check sent and will do. Of course, made out to "cash".
Thank you.
I'm a 35 year-old production executive at a major studio. There is nowhere else a guy with a 60 IQ can make 300K a year. You are threatening the livelihood of myself and many others execs (some with IQs as high as 80).
Just tell us where you want the check sent and will do. Of course, made out to "cash".
Thank you.
10
Maybe people like myself who have been defamed by the liberal elites in Hollywood are protesting with their wallets. That is the elephant in the room. Bet me when Clint Eastwood's new movie comes out it will be a smash hit...
1
The New York Times panned Man Bites Dog plus Apocalypse Now. Swedish Film Board dismissed Blue Velvet as pornography. "Pays yer money and takes yer chances" is the best advice.
1
Gee, how do I apply for a job with these people? I have a whole closet full of plaid shirts. All of them authentic retro.
1
About 10 years ago a friend referred to "things blow up" movies. That says it all, and I still use that term. However, 10 years ago things blow up movies were a much smaller portion of what was released by the major studios than it is today. Now it seems like that is most of their output. When I sit through the endless previews nowadays, there are usually four or five of them, and they all look exactly alike - nothing but explosions and car crashes and natural disasters. I do not go to many of the superhero movies, but I did like "Wonder Woman" and "Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2." "Dunkirk" was excellent, and a real surprise during the summer release season. Otherwise, this was the most uninspired summer movie season in years (and it is not like the bar has been that high for quite a while, anyway).
1
The movie execs can't stand being held accountable for the crap they are producing/funding. You want better ratings for your movies? Fund and produce better movies. Pretty simple.
1
It's the same as with downloading music online. Instead of focusing on making a competitive product (e.g. Spotify) the music business tried to fight piracy and push CDs no one wanted.
Now the movie industry is trying to fight Rotten Tomatoes and have us watch crappy movies instead of focusing on delivering quality.
Now the movie industry is trying to fight Rotten Tomatoes and have us watch crappy movies instead of focusing on delivering quality.
By the time we decide on a film, we already know if it's worth seeing by either reading a review of it from the Newyorker, the Times, or other reliable critics. The movies made today seem to be for an audience of 12 year old boys. We also see previews before the main film and know exactly what to stay away from. Rotten Tomatoes, although we have never read it, is probably a very accurate indication of the quality of the movie, as in many pairs of eyes. Making better films would involve good script writing first and foremost, good actors and a little less of splash. It worked in the past, it should work now.
I dare Mr. "rotten" RAT-Ner to destroy the Rotten Tomatoes site. He should instead hire better writers and stop producing crap. Is teh writing in the wall for those corporate honchos that think we will go to watch any stupid movie
Here's a thought: make better movies! I'm not paying money at a theatre to watch crap like The Emoji Movie. Come on, that's just lazy.
2
Restaurants, cafes, bars, auto repair businesses have for years blamed Yelp for poor sales. But, many businesses discovered and thrived through online reviews.
I have benefited greatly by consumer & critics reviews. Most of my purchases come after reading reviews by people, thus better purchases.
I definitely have been helped by friends at RT. Avoided clunky movies, most, discovered gems.
Businesses, stop complaining and make good products. Your reviews will be great and you will sell more. Pretty simple, but you want to do it the sneaky way, bad products, attack critics.
I have benefited greatly by consumer & critics reviews. Most of my purchases come after reading reviews by people, thus better purchases.
I definitely have been helped by friends at RT. Avoided clunky movies, most, discovered gems.
Businesses, stop complaining and make good products. Your reviews will be great and you will sell more. Pretty simple, but you want to do it the sneaky way, bad products, attack critics.
7
Thanks for a hilarious piece! Much needed and appreciated!
Bless you!
Bless you!
4
The idea that movies are for teens and twenty-somethings is absurd. I'm in my mid-50s and I go to the movies regularly. I enjoyed "Wonder Woman," "Good Time," "Wind River," "Patti Cake$," "Lady Macbeth." I thought "Brigsby Bear" was interesting, and I was bored by "Home Again," which I saw a one of those advance screenings Wednesday. It was like canned ham.
In addition to reading the New York Times and its movie critics, I am well aware of Rotten Tomatoes and do look at it, but I select my movies based on theme, director, stars, and mood, etc. Rotten Tomatoes gives me a sense of the film, nothing more.
My suggestion is to have 4 categories for defining the critical reaction. Positive is the traditional ripe red tomato. Negative is the traditional splattered tomato.
In the middle are the new categories. Positive but with some minor critical caveats can be a tomato that's slightly ripe. Negative but leaning towards the middle is a tomato that's slightly green.
And, yes of course, the studios need to make better movies.
In addition to reading the New York Times and its movie critics, I am well aware of Rotten Tomatoes and do look at it, but I select my movies based on theme, director, stars, and mood, etc. Rotten Tomatoes gives me a sense of the film, nothing more.
My suggestion is to have 4 categories for defining the critical reaction. Positive is the traditional ripe red tomato. Negative is the traditional splattered tomato.
In the middle are the new categories. Positive but with some minor critical caveats can be a tomato that's slightly ripe. Negative but leaning towards the middle is a tomato that's slightly green.
And, yes of course, the studios need to make better movies.
3
For the most part, I find that my opinion of a movie correlates well with the score generated by rotten tomatoes, especially the 'Top Critics' score. As long as other users find scores generated by the site to be a reliable predictor of their opinion of a movie, it's going to continue to act in the way it presently does. My answer to the studios: if you don't like the scores you're getting, make better movies.
3
Theaters might increase their attendance by including optional captions for seniors, possibly viewed with special glasses. I wonder how many others, like me, have to wait until a film comes out in video, when we can use the captions at home.
It's good the the theaters use headphones, but they're limited in their effectiveness. I find they don't help at all.
It's good the the theaters use headphones, but they're limited in their effectiveness. I find they don't help at all.
1
It seems to me that they did get some of the movies wrong that I saw. Almost seems like there are political overtones to their ratings, which is sad. I think that the latest pirates movie was much better than rated. Probably one of the better movies of the franchise. It was totally lambasted by the critics. I went and saw and was very entertained.
I've used Rotten Tomatoes irregularly for many years. When I do go to the site, the combined scores have usually been much less useful to me than the collection of reviews from different perspectives all in one place. Frequently, after seeing what reviewers have actually written, I will avoid a highly-rated film or seek out one with a low rating.
2
I don't know anyone who takes Rotten Tomato reviews seriously. I think some of the movies were unfairly rated (Sci Fi movies seem to never review well), but for the most part, the "big budget movies" fell short (Wonder Woman was fantastic!). Many of the big budget movies have the same storyline, the same, one dimensional acting by repeat actors, padded runtimes, and tired out special effects. It's one of the many reasons why I skipped Spiderman and may watch it online or at someone's house. Of course, my distaste for Robert Downey Junior's Ironman had an effect on my decision making (see above comment regarding big budget movies and acting!)
Clear winners were movies that had (typically) lower budgets, had great acting, a great storyline (The Big Sick, for example), and were "surprise successes." Many were original stories.
Another issue is the cost. I know a lot of people who don't go out to see movies because it's too expensive. I feel ashamed when I convince a friend (who cant afford to see movies as frequently as I do) to go see a movie, only to walk out of the theater unsatisfied and bored (I'm looking at you, Transformers). Hollywood isn't releasing movies that make people want to spend the money. After a certain point, most of us are tired of seeing the same thing.
Clear winners were movies that had (typically) lower budgets, had great acting, a great storyline (The Big Sick, for example), and were "surprise successes." Many were original stories.
Another issue is the cost. I know a lot of people who don't go out to see movies because it's too expensive. I feel ashamed when I convince a friend (who cant afford to see movies as frequently as I do) to go see a movie, only to walk out of the theater unsatisfied and bored (I'm looking at you, Transformers). Hollywood isn't releasing movies that make people want to spend the money. After a certain point, most of us are tired of seeing the same thing.
2
Rotten Tomatoes is an aggregator and does not do reviews.
Wonder Woman had a 92% tomato score.
And - as suggested by the article - tens of millions of moviegoers including me - take RT seriously
Wonder Woman had a 92% tomato score.
And - as suggested by the article - tens of millions of moviegoers including me - take RT seriously
2
I think the studios have it backwards and are being short-sighted. Rotten Tomatoes is fueling a better-informed INTEREST in movies. The studios don't point out that on average the RT reviews -- you can always click to read the Full Review -- are thoughtful, well-written and invite readers to think about what they see. How is this bad for the long-term health of movies? Also, the studios crow about high RT scores, so they're being hypocritical in their attacks.
232
This sounded familiar, so I found the article I first read on this back on August 2:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/studios-fight-back-withering-rotte...
Is this what journalism has become? Taking someone else's work and dressing it up with more words and cool graphics? Sad.
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/studios-fight-back-withering-rotte...
Is this what journalism has become? Taking someone else's work and dressing it up with more words and cool graphics? Sad.
Simple solution: read NYT movie reviews every Friday. Much more considered and intelligent than a "tomato."
2
The studios cynically put out garbage (products aimed at teenage boys, retreads, action-heavy special effects that weary after 10 minutes, product platforming), ticket prices soar, and then they complain when viewers notice. There are many options for disposable-income on entertainment products, and the studio movies are no longer competitive. It's their fault, not the fault of those who have noticed and decided to spend their time and money elsewhere
27
I don't understand. Movie and TV filming companies are out to make money, right? They see what works, or has worked and try to duplicate the success.
It might work - they might make money.
But does that philosophy work in the rest of the business world? Nope. Trademark and patent infringements kinda drag that sort of thing down.
Now we're talking originality. I submit that said movie and tv filming companies are going at it all wrong. The mistake is that they fling a good deal of their money at big, "blockbuster" films using that previously stated philosophy.
They need to begin aiming small. We're talking close to art house small. Screw the big budgets - there are a lot of good, underpaid actors out there. Heck there are even some good, overpaid actors who will work for a lot less for something they believe in.
Go small, Universal, Paramount, Fox, et. al., make better stuff. You might not make big money - at least at first. You will definitely lose less. In the end, you might even make more than you figured.
It might work - they might make money.
But does that philosophy work in the rest of the business world? Nope. Trademark and patent infringements kinda drag that sort of thing down.
Now we're talking originality. I submit that said movie and tv filming companies are going at it all wrong. The mistake is that they fling a good deal of their money at big, "blockbuster" films using that previously stated philosophy.
They need to begin aiming small. We're talking close to art house small. Screw the big budgets - there are a lot of good, underpaid actors out there. Heck there are even some good, overpaid actors who will work for a lot less for something they believe in.
Go small, Universal, Paramount, Fox, et. al., make better stuff. You might not make big money - at least at first. You will definitely lose less. In the end, you might even make more than you figured.
2
How about making better movies?
57
I do use Rotten Tomatoes' score, but also read the actual reviews of critics who I have learned to trust over time. But the fact is that the movie going experience itself is not really worth the price of admission anymore, what with increased talking, kicking of the seats, cellphone use, and a verbal confrontation between a couple of people two rows behind me not that long ago that almost devolved into a fist fight. It is not Netflix that the studios are competing against; it's my nice, quiet home studio!
44
The great majority of big money studio financed 'films' are not films. They are also not tapes. They are images captured using solid state microchips and stored on digital media. This nitpicky nuance is important, because the industry still tries to sell the old product of a 'film' created from a script written by a 'writer'. Today's 'films' are 'written' by marketing and demographic committees, not writers with a single voice. They are not stories, but loose amalgamations of scenes driven not by 'story' but by market value. Today's films should not be called 'films' not simply because they don't use the medium of film, but because they are simply 'entertainment products' that try to leverage the old feature length narrative film format. They are written by committee, why not be reviewed by committee? Both methods are gray, smushy, noncommittal, vague, and derivative. But who cares? That's what sells. Most of the time anyway.
45
Make better movies! And stop whining when crappy movies get crappy ratings. It is simple.
49
One thing RT is doing is showing the expanding difference between what the elite "critics" love and what the movie-going public wants to see. Current example is the Emoji Movie which has a RT rotten rating of 8% but is a box office smash.
Hollywood blaming RT is like Hillary blaming the Russians. They make a lot of bad movies. And a few good ones.
Hollywood blaming RT is like Hillary blaming the Russians. They make a lot of bad movies. And a few good ones.
6
"The movie going public" that is supporting the emoji movie is a valid demographic--small children stuck in the heat over Labor Day weekend, either with parents or grandparents who just want a few hours of air conditioning, but the rating doesn't suggest that critics are "elite".
It suggests they are adults reviewing the movie as adults and for different purposes than the moviegoers are actually watching it (that purpose being, holy hell we have got to get these kids out of this house right now or I will lose my mind).
It suggests they are adults reviewing the movie as adults and for different purposes than the moviegoers are actually watching it (that purpose being, holy hell we have got to get these kids out of this house right now or I will lose my mind).
The Emoji Movie had a favorable exit poll rating of 26% at last count - hardly what I would call a disconnect from what the critics said.
5
I've been using Rotten Tomatoes since the 90s. I found that their aggregate score is very accurate. If they say a movie is terrible, it almost certainly is.
The solution for movie studios who are afraid of a bad score is - shockingly - make better movies! A great tomatometer score will catapult a great but obscure title into public consciousness and make plenty of money. We aren't asking for big-budget extravaganzas. We just want quality writing, acting, and cinematography. That isn't expensive. In this Information Age, you can't simply hire some big names, throw money at CGI effects, and expect theaters to be packed.
The solution for movie studios who are afraid of a bad score is - shockingly - make better movies! A great tomatometer score will catapult a great but obscure title into public consciousness and make plenty of money. We aren't asking for big-budget extravaganzas. We just want quality writing, acting, and cinematography. That isn't expensive. In this Information Age, you can't simply hire some big names, throw money at CGI effects, and expect theaters to be packed.
93
I use Rotten Tomatoes, but truth is there's little reason to see movies in theaters. There's so much great television to enjoy it's not a big deal to wait to screen a movie on my 67" home theatre, where people know how to behave.
A spectacle like WW is worth a trip to the theatre, but I'll only see it in one like Violet Crown that offers advance seat assignments and other great amenities. If studios really think Rotten Tomatoes is the problem, they're more out of touch than I thought.
A spectacle like WW is worth a trip to the theatre, but I'll only see it in one like Violet Crown that offers advance seat assignments and other great amenities. If studios really think Rotten Tomatoes is the problem, they're more out of touch than I thought.
3
Simple solution, less than 60: Drop the prices on those movies. Why should we pay $14 to see the "Emoji Movie," which was by my brother's description as a captive audience member dragged in chains by a 6-year old, "a pure excretion of everything bad about the world?" It might be worth it for $7. No, it won't make $200 million at the box office, but once you get told that your product is so bad as to cause nausea, get what you can, while you can.
176
Great idea! A night out at the movies, or even a matinee, has become out of reach, or prudent budgeting for many even middle class families. I'm a grandmother of seven and formerly didn't think twice about an outing to a movie, an easy thing for older folks to do with youngsters. Now the cost of a movie and snacks averages $22 per person...add that up and you'll see why movies are few and far between for most of us...and I am fairly well to do. I just don't throw money away!
1
Great idea Thomas. How about including a "Spandex Discount"--any feature with a superhero/heroine in tights requires distributor to pay for your ticket, pop corn, and barf bag.
1
smart idea.
Hollywood makes a big anti-gun movie, it bombs. Gore makes a climate change movie, and shows pointing out its flaws get better sales. Hollywood pushes a gay, LGBT, climate change movie that highlights Trump's an idiot, that Texas sucks, illegal aliens are awesome, the terrorist isn't a Islamic nut but a rogue US plot, and if you don't want to pay more taxes you're unpatriotic, etc., etc., etc., then are surprised people don't buy it.
People like movies where the US is the good guy, the good guy wins, the good guy's buddy Doesn't die, he gets the girl, and despite being a motivation for John Wick, the dog gets to live too. But they don't want to make what we want to see, they want to tell the stories they want to tell and "educate" Americans about how bad they are. Even if everything Holllywood believed were true, how stupid are they to complain that Americans aren't buying what they want to sell?
People like movies where the US is the good guy, the good guy wins, the good guy's buddy Doesn't die, he gets the girl, and despite being a motivation for John Wick, the dog gets to live too. But they don't want to make what we want to see, they want to tell the stories they want to tell and "educate" Americans about how bad they are. Even if everything Holllywood believed were true, how stupid are they to complain that Americans aren't buying what they want to sell?
3
Or Hollywood could make better movies with better scripts..
2
Typically I don't read any reviews, and almost never Rotten Tomatoes at any time, until I have seen the movie. Anything I see needs to appeal to me on the merits of its story and/or cast. In Manhattan I have seen almost every movie which appeals to me--an irritatingly small number, which includes foreign movies too.
And, btw, I recently paid $16.99 for a senior ticket to The Big Sick, a pleasant and charming movie . With regular seats $19.99, almost $40 for a couple, plus drinks, etc., (and I especially resent having to listen to popcorn being eaten all around me for the first half hour too) not a huge incentive to take what is still a gamble on any movie, regardless of its review.
And, btw, I recently paid $16.99 for a senior ticket to The Big Sick, a pleasant and charming movie . With regular seats $19.99, almost $40 for a couple, plus drinks, etc., (and I especially resent having to listen to popcorn being eaten all around me for the first half hour too) not a huge incentive to take what is still a gamble on any movie, regardless of its review.
2
It's obvious that most movies are not worth watching, but I think a hidden message here is that many Americans, particularly in flyover or red states, are also tired of Hollywood "stars" spouting political opinions. We don't care what you think.
1
Movies this Summer were terrible. I am really sorry, because I am a huge movie fan. Expectations in April were hopeful, but went unfulfilled all Summer. When it comes to most things "expectations" are the most important thing. When I go to the movies I expect to have a good time. Nothing in the theaters seemed like "fun."
Most of the movie reviews I read are useless in that they try to set my expectations in relationship to the reviewers bias. Bond movies are poor to bad. La La Land was wonderful. I love Bond movies. La La Land was strictly third rate.
Reviews and reviewers can be interesting, but never definitive. This Summer's movies were just not worth the money, even of pay-per-view.
Most of the movie reviews I read are useless in that they try to set my expectations in relationship to the reviewers bias. Bond movies are poor to bad. La La Land was wonderful. I love Bond movies. La La Land was strictly third rate.
Reviews and reviewers can be interesting, but never definitive. This Summer's movies were just not worth the money, even of pay-per-view.
2
There can be little doubt that many critically acclaimed films with very high Tomatometer ratings have been helped economically by the site. Just look at the disparity between customer ratings and Tomatometer scores for films like Birdman. Half of the viewing public hated it and those same people likely only went because of the hype of the Oscar nom combined with the high Tomatometer rating. Ditto La La Land. Likewise other movies with limited marketing budgets, such as Get Out, were aided and made box office hits in large part due to the Tomatometer. The other side of the coin is that the viewing public is helped by the Tomatometer and it has spared me of many a wasted hour that would otherwise have been spent watching well marketed Hollywood garbage, for which I had all too often been a sucker.
The movie moguls cited in this article sound like buggy whip manufacturers demanding that newspapers be silenced because they praised the Model T. Social media has proven to be a double-edged sword for the movie industry --- it allows efficient marketing of films but also facilitates real-time criticism. As others have observed, the dubious quality of many movies is not Rotten Tomatoes' fault; RT is just a convenient scapegoat.
6
I don't look at Rotten Tomatoes. Indeed, I never thought of it until this article appeared. So Rotten Tomatoes has little to do with my opinion of movies. Having said that, I want to point out how disappointed I've been with the fluff that has come from Hollywood. Something Part 3, or Superhero Part 5, or Car Crash part 12, isn't exactly a series of cinematic creativity. Special effects have become long on blowing stuff up, and short on being effective tools to tell a story. Frankly, blowing stuff up for the sake of going "Ooo" and "Ahhh" only works on the Fourth of July. It all gets, dare I say it? Boring. Hollywood needs to stop this quest for the dollar and the first weekend, and get back to stories. Get back to characters. Get back to people who look normal and who live challenging normal lives. (Real people often sweat, have messed up hair, and their clothing gets dirty. We don't see that in most films.) Give us stories where people have trouble finding their car keys (in Hollywood movies, nobody seems to use car keys. The cars just work.) Stories where people can't see underwater (everybody in Hollywood movies sees clearly underwater. And they can hold their breath forever.) and stories where people have normal kitchens (everybody in Hollywood movies have wonderful kitchens and big houses.) In other words stop trying to dazzle us with razzmatazz. Pull us in with plots, characters, and something we can relate to in our lives.
72
Early commenters here have hit the proverbial nail on the cinematic head - For the most part, Hollywood is simply unoriginal these days, overly reliant on comic book adaptations or reboot after remake after resurrection of previous movies. As to the primary topic of the story, Rotten Tomatoes, I love the site. You get a wide variety of critical opinions - not just those of reviewers from the New York Times, LA Times, et al (quick shout out to Manohla Dargis) - but from throughout the United States. The Associated Press, Washington Post, Detroit, Portland, Miami, Austin, Variety, Entertainment Weekly. Quick reads of 10 to 12 of these reviewers will invariably show whether a film is a must-see, worth a peek, or is a pathetic stinker. I've yet to be misled. Godspeed Rotten Tomatoes. (And who, indeed, would ever want to act alongside Vin Diesel? I'll never forgive Steven Spielberg for foisting him upon us.)
16
A good movie coming out of Hollywood is a rarity these days. You don't need rotten tomatoes to tell you this. You can come to this conclusion just by using your brain.
9
It's true that there are issues with RottenTomatoes - it doesn't account for critical nuance with its fresh-or-rotten binary system (Metacritic gives each review a score out of 100, though with this comes its own problems). I'm skeptical that weighing a New York Times critic and a low-level blogger is inherently a bad thing, unless you believe that higher-paid journalists are inherently "right" more often than others.
Obviously, Hollywood needs to look inward. RottenTomatoes is here to stay. Digital streaming is here to stay. They enjoyed a monopoly on film entertainment for the better part of a century, now they have to compete, and that means putting out competitive products. Hard to feel sympathy for execs bemoaning that in the past, they would have been able to push a pile of dreck like Baywatch on audiences who wouldn't have known any better.
Obviously, Hollywood needs to look inward. RottenTomatoes is here to stay. Digital streaming is here to stay. They enjoyed a monopoly on film entertainment for the better part of a century, now they have to compete, and that means putting out competitive products. Hard to feel sympathy for execs bemoaning that in the past, they would have been able to push a pile of dreck like Baywatch on audiences who wouldn't have known any better.
4
Hang on, shouldn't Hollywood be at the front of the line supporting first amendment rights? Critics have a right to be heard too.
5
No one is suggesting anyone else be denied their freedom of speech.
Interesting article! I'm seriously interested in film and read individual reviews on RT before deciding whether to see a film. Consider one of Brett Ratner's from 2007 - Rush Hour 3. The title would turn me off already, but there are fans.
Wiki says Budget $140M with Box Office $258M. Made money.
RT 18% Fresh but Audience 63% liked it. There are fans! One critic liked Jackie Chan. So do I. That means something.
BUT among top critics, 19% fresh - pretty close to the overall score, and the 36 top critics includes major newspapers over the country. Washington Post and Philadelphia Inquirer voted fresh.
CONCLUSION: Critics have always been around, and the internet makes their voices stronger. This film shows that there could be a point to making a separate evaluation for "unsophisticated but entertaining films." Critics might say that you would like RH 3 if you liked Rush Hour 2, but still rate the film rotten - whereas a separate "Popsey Funsey" rating might be worth including.
Wiki says Budget $140M with Box Office $258M. Made money.
RT 18% Fresh but Audience 63% liked it. There are fans! One critic liked Jackie Chan. So do I. That means something.
BUT among top critics, 19% fresh - pretty close to the overall score, and the 36 top critics includes major newspapers over the country. Washington Post and Philadelphia Inquirer voted fresh.
CONCLUSION: Critics have always been around, and the internet makes their voices stronger. This film shows that there could be a point to making a separate evaluation for "unsophisticated but entertaining films." Critics might say that you would like RH 3 if you liked Rush Hour 2, but still rate the film rotten - whereas a separate "Popsey Funsey" rating might be worth including.
1
Movies are especially awful and those who create them are greedy schlockmeisters. The role of the consumer is to out bad movies and to save our peers from the expenditure of hours (and cash) we are never getting back. Bravo Los Tomates Podridos!
Ha ha ha, stinky movies get bad word-of-mouth and attendance drops. Horrors! I know, let's pass a law like one of those that prohibits dissing broccoli- prohibit bad mouthing bad stuff! Or we could just go along with getting rid of the open internet, like congress wants, and corporations could make sure we never see the tomatometer.
None of the tomato people are wearing suits. And that really infuriates The Suits who, of course, rule the world. It's simply 'unsuitable' for such as these to challenge The Suits!
Hollywood simply deserves this. Really, who has the time or extra money to go to a movie theatre anymore? Remember the death of the drive-ins? Physical theatres are next to becoming extinct. The entire old studio system is collapsing.
With newer technology today just about anyone can make a film.
With newer technology today just about anyone can make a film.
3
I didn't see any info in the article that identified a movie that was good and got a Rotten rating. Hollywood needs to make better movies if it wants better ratings and ticket sales. And, btw, the comic book franchises are in the same state as Westerns were in the late 1950s: overdone, indistinguishable, and just about played out.
2
Maybe the studios will have to just admit that their recent movies have been terrible. I love the movies, but have hardly gone this summer. There haven't been too many that have interested me. And, yes, I use Rotten Tomatoes all the time.
20
As so many have said, why not make better movies?
I mean, I love explosions and spaceships and car chases, but that can't carry a film all by itself.
I mean, I love explosions and spaceships and car chases, but that can't carry a film all by itself.
11
This was a good read. I personally love the site and I think it is a great tool to have. Honestly, it is hard enough to make a living in New York with prices being through the roof. I try to maximize every last penny of my disposable income so my wife and I can have some fun as well. Couple that with the idea of allocating time to see a movie while being a full time parent of a 2 year old. Sorry Hollywood but I'm not going to waste a precious opportunity and hard earned cash on your garbage. Reviews matter.
1
The key with Rotten Tomatoes is to know how to use it. I do not find the fan votes to be persuasive unless there are a large number of votes and the overall evaluation is 50 or less; I prefer the critics. Even with critics, there are certain standalone critics, such as those with the NYT, that I find present an evaluation that reflects my personal evaluation of a movie once viewed. God I miss Siskel and Ebert. Also, movies are expensive these days, which is nuts. So, even if the eval by RT is bad, I still may add it to my Netflix & Amazon lists for future viewing. Then if it is a true turkey, I do not mind (I usually know if a movie is going to be good within the first 10-20 minutes) AND I have not spent $50+ for date and I to waste hours with trash.
1
My nine year old would attend every Pixar, Disney, or superhero flick Hollywood chooses to throw at her, if she could. Sorry, studio bosses, she doesn't write the film reviews. Her attendance depends wholly on my largess. Thanks to ticket and confection prices, were talking twice a year at best. As for my wife and me, tell me what Hollywood has produced over the past 20 yrs that would motivate us to attend a screening and she'd $100, the cost when you factor-in babysitting?
8
most people I know ignore the critics reviews and stick to the user score. what do the people think. typically the users scores are spot on. if the movie rates poorly it's not because of rotten tomatoes it's because of the movie. typical conversation - "hey, have you seen the trailer for xyz? what is the tomato score?" Movies are ridiculously priced and only good movies rate going to the theater. What the movie makers are mad about is that less people go to bad movies and the news gets out sooner. without Rotten Tomatoes more people have to pay to see a bad movie and they make money. in Summay - make better movies. when the only good parts of the movie can be seen in a two minute trailer you may have a kersplat on your hands.
User scores are biased. They are from people who've self-selected to see the movie and therefore are predisposed to like it. What I like about RT is that it provides links to reviews. I read a few by critics I generally trust and also take a look at a smattering of negative ones to see whether they're critiquing things that matter to me or just being curmudgeons. :-)
1
This reminds me of the comment by Karen Katz at Neiman Marcus when she said that the blogosphere was destroying their business. Let's face it...the times they are a changing!
2
LOL! These Liberals in Hollywood are just like their counterparts in DC. Instead of blaming Rotten Tomatoes...how about coming to terms with the fact that there hasn't been an original idea in Hollywood for 15 years. ALL we get are remakes, rehashes, retellings, modernizations...etc.
Maybe write a NEW script about a story that hasn't been made into a film (at least once) already!
Maybe write a NEW script about a story that hasn't been made into a film (at least once) already!
4
Congratulations! You have managed to do it. What? Take a subject that has absolutely nothing to do with politics and inject politics into it. A bushel full of rotten tomatoes to you.
I enjoy movies and sports to get away from politics. I enjoy drinking to getaway from people who try to turn everything into a partisan political diatribe.
I enjoy movies and sports to get away from politics. I enjoy drinking to getaway from people who try to turn everything into a partisan political diatribe.
3
This is astonishing.
Hollywood has proven to be more interested in bankrolling "Batman vs. Superman No. 17: Return of the Son of Whatever" than in creating actual dramas about actual people and their life experiences.
When the latter is created, like the recent hit "The Big Sick," there is an insane bidding war. And then customers actually show up.
So what is Hollywood's response? To complain about the rating sites that allow its customers actually tell one another that "Baywatch" is what it is -- a 20+ year-old television franchise (which wasn't even taken seriously at the time) taken in name only (because who needs a story? Just get a "name brand" and add steroids and boob jobs!) and then thrown up on the screen with attractive people and no script.
This would be akin to a restaurant burning its food, then complaining about the restaurant reviewers rather than actually setting foot in the kitchen and taking a taste.
Hollywood has proven to be more interested in bankrolling "Batman vs. Superman No. 17: Return of the Son of Whatever" than in creating actual dramas about actual people and their life experiences.
When the latter is created, like the recent hit "The Big Sick," there is an insane bidding war. And then customers actually show up.
So what is Hollywood's response? To complain about the rating sites that allow its customers actually tell one another that "Baywatch" is what it is -- a 20+ year-old television franchise (which wasn't even taken seriously at the time) taken in name only (because who needs a story? Just get a "name brand" and add steroids and boob jobs!) and then thrown up on the screen with attractive people and no script.
This would be akin to a restaurant burning its food, then complaining about the restaurant reviewers rather than actually setting foot in the kitchen and taking a taste.
124
Further to Batman and others (like Superman). They stopped being enjoyable when these characters became dark. Superman with Christopher Reeve and more comic book veneer was much better. Emoji movies. Please. Try taking a novel by China Mieville, such as Perdido Street Station and putting that in the theatre. Lastly, the only theatre I will see a movie at it the Alamo Drafthouse. Their strict shut and watch the movie policy is great.
1
I hate Corporate Hollywood's whining and crying that audiences don't want to see Ch's really rotten tomatoes. Ch's lack of ethnic and gender diversity makes CH rotten to the core. Keep it up Rotten Tomatoes. Maybe RT should add an extra page called, Really Rotten Tomatoes.
1
So more of the same then. Powerful moneyed interests want to shut down 'unwelcome' opinions. A very dangerous undemocratic trend we see in everything these days. Look at how many groups are blamed for Hillary's loss by the same media who ARE to blame for Trumps success (he got 70% all the other got to share 30%) so we get every one else to blame because powerful wealthy folks don't like criticism and see it as sabotage even as they sabotage OUR rights, OUR privacy, and OUR democracy (apparently the DNC is a private not a public organization and it is NOT for the voters to decide if THEY want someone to run (Elizabeth Warren told NOT to run agreed) but naughty overly democratic Sanders did not do as told by the Oligarchs but decided he would do as we always have done and let Democratic Primary voters decide.
If we don't accept the McCarthyist 'Russia is the only evil', 'we did nothing wrong in the ME, not Libya, not Syria, not Iraq, not Yemen, etc and poor Hillary was sabotaged by truths from Wikileaks.
If she ran a lousy campaign lets blame everyone else and lie about it. But we are 'losing control of the narrative' say the powers that be who now prefer the Chinese approach to political embarrassment; lie, deny and accuse others without evidence.
It is the same here. How dare these nobodies be allowed to derail the brilliance of crap put out by Hollywood. Al Gore called it 'inconvenient truths' which apparently in this age of Oligarchs is more dangerous than 'good' lies!
If we don't accept the McCarthyist 'Russia is the only evil', 'we did nothing wrong in the ME, not Libya, not Syria, not Iraq, not Yemen, etc and poor Hillary was sabotaged by truths from Wikileaks.
If she ran a lousy campaign lets blame everyone else and lie about it. But we are 'losing control of the narrative' say the powers that be who now prefer the Chinese approach to political embarrassment; lie, deny and accuse others without evidence.
It is the same here. How dare these nobodies be allowed to derail the brilliance of crap put out by Hollywood. Al Gore called it 'inconvenient truths' which apparently in this age of Oligarchs is more dangerous than 'good' lies!
2
To the article writer: Why no mention of even more powerful Metacritic website anywhere? Its been around longer and carries the same criticisms from movie industry types as RT does. The article's omission when the two sites literally. do. the. same. thing.
"In an absurdist plot twist, Rotten Tomatoes is owned by film companies."
Which means if movie studies REALLY found that RT was hurting their $$ bottom lines year after year, they would shut the website down. That they have not is revealing.
"In an absurdist plot twist, Rotten Tomatoes is owned by film companies."
Which means if movie studies REALLY found that RT was hurting their $$ bottom lines year after year, they would shut the website down. That they have not is revealing.
6
Check the Alexa score. Metacritic is ranked 731 in America and 1300th in the world; Rotten Tomatoes is 161 in the the States and 403 in the world. They are not equals.
That said, this is still an astonishing scapegoat for a movie industry that just simply sucks.
That said, this is still an astonishing scapegoat for a movie industry that just simply sucks.
I just checked Alexa and MC is 1400 versus RT's 400 worldwide. But my point was not that the sites are "equal" in popularity (I never said that). My point is that the site that is NOT owned by movie companies (MC) is curiously not mentioned in this article. The lack of mention is odd. MC is far from obscure and is the granddaddy of score aggregation websites. My hunch is that this article is basically spin.
Rotten Tomatoes is not responsible for studios' woes. High ticket prices are however. Compared to the monthly cost of a subscription to any of the streaming services: Netflix, Amazon Prime, Hulu, HBOnow, seeing a movie at a theater is just not competitive for a family of four. What Rotten Tomatoes is doing however is creating a "winner take all" market where the better-reviewed films earn the highest shares of ticket sales.
2
Blaming Rotten Tomatoes is a ridiculous response to the obvious truth that we consume film and entertainment differently than in decades past. No matter what the studios do, people aren't going to flock to the theaters to see summer blockbusters like they used to.
8
I've been using Metacritic for probably 15 years now, as I think their grading system is more accurate. Or at least it aligns with my own subjective ratings better than the simple RT percentage.
14
It's a much better web site, it's grading system is far superior, yet RT has become the industry standard. Like Beta and VHS.
1
Middle-aged woman and longtime film fan here. When deciding whether I want to see a film, I'm not so much interested in an aggregate of reviews as I am in finding a critic or two with whom I tend to agree, and seeing what that person has to say. Still have the last Leonard Maltin guide, in which I look up older movies. Although Leonard and I depart on a few important points (Only two and a half stars for 'Princess Bride', Leonard? C'mon!) Consequently I don't find Rotten Tomatoes very useful.
2
The real issue is Hollywood's reluctance to make anything original these days. Every movie is either a remake of an old classic, a comic book super hero flick, or a sequel to a movie that does not deserve a sequel.
Produce something worth seeing!!!
Produce something worth seeing!!!
315
Couldn't agree more, but creating something original in any medium is very difficult. If originality were valued in our time - it isn't; novelty is, marginally - then maybe only a few movies a month would be released, if that. Same goes for music and books.
Fortunately there is an audience, relatively small, that still seeks out originality. It's rare they can find it in the mainstream, but if they look hard enough it's to be found elsewhere.
Fortunately there is an audience, relatively small, that still seeks out originality. It's rare they can find it in the mainstream, but if they look hard enough it's to be found elsewhere.
1
There are good movies being made, but it's like the music industry. The big labels and studios create disposable hits, while the music and films that stand the test of time are being created by small production outfits.
1
In studios' furious efforts to combat Rotten Tomatoes, why is "making better movies" not among the options? If having an aggregate opinion from critics that now include women and minorities is hurting the profitability of your films, maybe it's time to actually respond to market forces and change your approach to filmmaking. What a concept!
238
The last movie I saw in a theater was "Birdman" with Michael Keaton. It seems that all Hollywood makes is movies about comic book characters, remakes and nonsense like "The Fate of the Furious." I'd rather watch Turner Classic Movies.
76
Like Yelp, there some unfair reviews on Rotten Tomatoes. However, when movie goers and critics overwhelming pan a movie, the consensus is accurate.
Movies are expensive and consumer have alternatives. Welcome to capitalism Hollywood. Produce a good movie and people will go and see it.
Movies are expensive and consumer have alternatives. Welcome to capitalism Hollywood. Produce a good movie and people will go and see it.
105
As a former restaurant worker, I can attest to this. Everyone in every restaurant complains about Yelp, but it works. They'll groan about how stupid the reviewers are and about particularly bad complains, and I'll say, yeah, sure, but we have a 4.5 on 1500 reviews and theres a line out the door. So whats the problem?
1
Dear Hollywood,
Make better movies.
Chris
Make better movies.
Chris
716
All the good movies have already been made
3
My friend and I go to the movies all the time- have a weekly date . BUT, in the summer the movies are aimed at those who only like shoot 'em ups or space /science fiction. Adults like a "story" whether it be murder mysteries , gangsters or great love stories! Look at the returns of this type movie- sell outs!
Only reason to look forward to winter is better movies.
Only reason to look forward to winter is better movies.
1
Most of the movies were bad, movies in the theater are too loud (both the soundtrack and the audience), and ticket prices and snacks are too high. Why should I pay more to see in a theater when I can buy the movie at home, control the sound level of the sound track and not deal with people talking. I can pause if I want to and can watch it again if its good. Plus, if I want popcorn and a coke, its less than a dollar rather than more than $5.
155
3d and Imax were the last 2 attempts to answer your question. Both helped draw audiences for awhile. Movie execs are still hunting for a draw that will stick.
Can't disagree with you mikeindc. BUT: Not much diversity in the staff. Wonder what that's about?
1
Sure, that's one data point, but I also did a fairly thorough statistical analysis of a full year's RT data. The best marker of a film's quality* is the RT Average Score from ALL critics -- better than the Tomatometer, better than the score from "Top Critics," better than Metacritic (which attempts to do the same experts-only thing).
* I looked at every film released in 2011 (of which I saw 170) and did correlations to IMDB scores, critics' top 10 list mentions (I'm the data assistant for criticstop10.net), Netflix predictions for me, and my own grades.
I'm one of the Hollywood Reporter's "hand-picked media influentials" (translation: free subscription for a whole mess of most helpful online reviews) and a slightly famous number cruncher. And I've seen The Prestige 10 times and could write 10,000 words on it.