Rotten Tomatoes' SEE IT/SKIP IT - no longer just an aggregator? 0

[bane]

43 minutes ago, NewEnglandGothic said:

I think should be called "The Guilty Pleasure Thread."

Mine being "The 13th Warrior" currently at 30% me thinks.  

I really like that movie! 

[Bosco685]

15 hours ago, bane said:

I really like that movie! 

'The 13th Warrior' is still one of those movies not on general blu-ray that when it does come out I will be there.

[Bosco685]

16 hours ago, drotto said:

If the JL score leak is accurate, this new reveal thing is going to be bad for both RT and JL.  With  WB owning 30% it is going to look like they were intentionally hiding the score.  Regardless of what the initial intent was.

And yet WB did a Monday screening in select major cities - not a common practice the week of release - which could have blown up on its attempt to boost excitement for Justice League.

Movie-goers could have left that showing and gone right to Youtube or Twitter and trashed this film without revealing spoilers. Rotten Tomatoes score or not.

[Gatsby77]

25 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

And yet WB did a Monday screening in select major cities - not a common practice the week of release - which could have blown up on its attempt to boost excitement for Justice League.

Movie-goers could have left that showing and gone right to Youtube or Twitter and trashed this film without revealing spoilers. Rotten Tomatoes score or not.

I don't follow.

Isn't it obvious that it's the opposite?

Warner Bros. knew that Justice League would get trashed by critics, so they scheduled a last minute Monday night screening for fans nationwide to help counter that.

Get the diehard fanboys who will show up four days early to feel special with a sneak peek and gush about it on social media. That creates positive buzz among the faithful before the professional critics slam it hard Thursday/Friday.

The Friday announcement of Monday screenings screams last-minute damage control.

*Good* movies screen 4-6 weeks in advance.

Hell, a decade ago Juno screened nationwide nearly 10 weeks in advance.

This is the same studio that allowed reviews of Wonder Woman to post 13+ days in advance.

[Bosco685]

26 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

I don't follow.

Isn't it obvious that it's the opposite?

Warner Bros. knew that Justice League would get trashed by critics, so they scheduled a last minute Monday night screening for fans nationwide to help counter that.

Get the diehard fanboys who will show up four days early to feel special with a sneak peek and gush about it on social media. That creates positive buzz among the faithful before the professional critics slam it hard Thursday/Friday.

The Friday announcement of Monday screenings screams last-minute damage control.

*Good* movies screen 4-6 weeks in advance.

Hell, a decade ago Juno screened nationwide nearly 10 weeks in advance.

This is the same studio that allowed reviews of Wonder Woman to post 13+ days in advance.

It may be because you see things one way - I see them another.

Where you may be leaning towards WB planned with RT to delay the score release so it could do some damage control, I see it the opposite. Yes, WB probably had early feedback from critics having no issue giving them their opinion after a screening there would be negative coming. But even with that, WB went ahead and opened the screening early that Monday so people could see for themselves and form an opinion.

It just so happens many of the folks that saw this movie on Monday and rushed to share their opinions had more positives than negatives to share. Many said it was a flawed film, but fun and entertaining (the theme that was heard early on from the social media embargo lift).

 

[Straw-Man]

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 9:54 PM, jsilverjanet said:

I like the postman 

me too.

[jsilverjanet]

47 minutes ago, Straw-Man said:

me too.

Hey any movie that has about the future that has Tom Petty playing as himself is good in my book

[Bosco685]

4 minutes ago, jsilverjanet said:

Hey any movie that has about the future that has Tom Petty playing as himself is good in my book

Dang! I forgot all about that.

Now I need to go back and watch this again.

[Straw-Man]

21 minutes ago, jsilverjanet said:

Hey any movie that has about the future that has Tom Petty playing as himself is good in my book

while on the costner-misfire [critically] subject, i need to cop to a real fondness for waterworld, as well.

[jsilverjanet]

I love Costner. Tin Cup is one of my favorites 

[Straw-Man]

On November 16, 2017 at 3:05 PM, jsilverjanet said:

I love Costner. Tin Cup is one of my favorites 

"no, it's a spa."  i love it, too.  "nice par, david!"

[ComicConnoisseur]

I miss these guys and prefer them over Rotten Tomatoes.

[Bosco685]

Although they came to strongly dislike one another, I agree. Simple times.

FORBES.COM: How Rotten Tomatoes Screwed Over 'Justice League'

Quote

Yes, there is going to be a lot of talk about what went wrong with the opening weekend reception of Justice League, and at least some of the blame lies with the poor reception of Man of Steel and Batman v Superman, as well as the lackluster reviews and the choice to make the film into some de-facto copy of The Avengers. But there is one odd factor that deserves a moment of discussion, and that is how Rotten Tomatoes, and the media in covering Rotten Tomatoes, black-flagged the WB release just before the release date.

 

It was a minor thing at the time, as the STX Entertainment release wasn’t exactly banking on critical raves. But as expected See It/Skip It picked Justice League as the big reveal for the Nov. 16. show and everyone lost their minds.

 

As expected, the internet was flooded with conspiracy theories, handwringing and outrage about the show withholding the reviews and Tomatometer from the site, with folks who should have known better arguing that Time Warner was somehow attempting to keep the film’s poor reviews from leaking out into the world. Never mind that Warner Bros./Time Warner Inc. let the social media embargo for Justice League drop a week before release, or that the review embargo fell on Wednesday, Nov. 16, at 12:50 am PST. Never mind that, after the review embargo dropped, folks could Google “Justice League, review” or what-have-you and find pretty much every review that made up the first wave of critical reactions.

 

To a world and to a reactionary media that now only views critical discourse through the lens of Rotten Tomatoes, and specifically through that fresh/rotten score, keeping Justice League off the website and treating the score as a big reveal was the same as hiding the film’s critical reaction from the public or not screening it for press at all. It was bad enough that the media treated this Rotten Tomatoes hide-and-seek as a genuine news story, but people who damn well should have known better acted like this was an unprecedented event, as if it hadn’t happened in two prior See It/Skip It episodes.

 

As a result, the last thing that many general audiences and would-be consumers read about the film, the main story in the lead up Zack Snyder and Joss Whedon’s $250 million+ comic book superhero movie’s opening day, was that the film’s reviews weren’t being made available on Rotten Tomatoes, with a common line being that Warner Bros. and/or Time Warner was essentially suppressing negative reviews (reviews that were available all over the web).

 

But a big chunk of the responsibility is with the media who peddled conspiracy theories and once again treated the Tomatometer (which is merely the percentage of participating critics who rate a given film a “positive” – or 6/10 rating) as a kind of movie critic Hogwarts sorting hat.

If you think about it, in reality a 30% shareholder doesn't get to tell a 70% shareholder what to do. That's why there is such a large variance in ownership to ensure there is limited control.

But we had folks falling in line with the same story: WB had 'told' Rotten Tomatoes it would withhold the final critic score before release.

[drotto]

52 minutes ago, Bosco685 said:

Although they came to strongly dislike one another, I agree. Simple times.

FORBES.COM: How Rotten Tomatoes Screwed Over 'Justice League'

If you think about it, in reality a 30% shareholder doesn't get to tell a 70% shareholder what to do. That's why there is such a large variance in ownership to ensure there is limited control.

But we had folks falling in line with the same story: WB had 'told' Rotten Tomatoes it would withhold the final critic score before release.

I agree this is exactly what happened. There is no way WB influenced what RT did.  RT did what they felt was best for the RT brand, and I would not be surprised if most at WB were completely oblivious to what they were doing. You know, with WB being very focused on how their big money picture was being rolled out and received, and what the box office was looking like.

 

RT is reveling in  how important they have become in the movie world.  You could argue that they should have been aware of what the optics of withholding the score and reviews were, and how their self promotion could potential hurt someone else's bottom line.  But regardless of financial stakes, their new show's success potentially effects their bottom line and that took precedence.  Lets see what people say when they withhold Star Wars.  I do not think RT is going to change their approach on this, but could see them doing it on the day the embargo lifts or possibly on Monday as opposed to last minute at midnight EST.

[chrisco37]

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 2:12 PM, revat said:

On ‎11‎/‎14‎/‎2017 at 2:09 PM, jsilverjanet said:

I knew it. I’ve always suspected that Disney used some of their power for influence.

Don't eff with the mouse.

[AnthonyTheAbyss]

Justice League...strike one.

Last Jedi...strike two.

 

Strictly talking "blockbusters" those are two very big recent misses between what critics think and what the audience thinks.  Keep it up and they'll have credibility issues.

 

***You can add Suicide Squad to that list also