 |
| Image by Freepik |
If you’ve been following Trust the Dice for any length of
time, you know how much we tend to roll our eyes at Rotten Tomatoes.
Particularly, the critic scores.
For our reviews, we include ratings from
Rotten Tomatoes,
IMDb, and
Metacritic. Over the years, we’ve noticed things about the various
websites. IMDb, for instance, seems to lean more toward what audiences think of
the films – without concern for critics. Metacritic is often the most critical,
even giving widely loved films lower scores. Then there’s Rotten Tomatoes.
One of the things we love about Rotten Tomatoes is that it
separates the reviews in an easy to digest way: you have the critic score on
one hand and the audience score on the other. With one glance you’re able to
see what each group thinks. It’s almost impossible to not catch on to the little
trends in various genres and sub-genres. Turn-your-brain-off films usually get poor
reviews from critics, but audiences love them. While Oscar bait often thrills
the critics but gets lower scores from audiences. There are exceptions, but
there are a great many movies where the difference between audience and critic
score can be calculated by just glancing over the IMDb page.
That kind of thing is to be expected, though. Critics and
audiences are viewing the same thing from two vastly different perspectives.
They’re looking for different things. What bothers me is when I open Rotten
Tomatoes, glance through the reviews and wind up wondering if the critics even
watched the same movie I did.
Opinions will differ. That’s a given. But when Vulture revealed
that some critics were being paid for certain reviews, or at least paid to hide
their bad ones, I was not shocked.
In the
Sept. 6, 2023, article by Lane Brown,
it was reported that
Bunker 15, a publicity company, allegedly bought good
reviews from critics for
Ophelia (2018). It originally had a rotten score
of 46% and, after allegedly paying $50 per review, Bunker 15 was able to get it
up to a fresh 62%.
It’s not ethical to accept a monetary reward for a specific kind of review but there are always going to be bad apples. In every profession. Plenty
of critics are paid for reviews, yes, but whether it’s a good one is supposed
to rely solely on the experience.
Still, those bad apples can skew a score very easily.
That’s not to say that I think Rotten Tomatoes is useless.
I’ve never relied on just one score through Rotten Tomatoes.
When I look at their page, I’m very rarely just trying to see the critic score.
In fact, I’m not even just trying to see the audience score. Audiences can wind
up judging a film on things that have nothing to the movie. I saw one bad review
where they slammed the film just because the lead actor’s brother had done
something bad. It had nothing to do with the actual actor.
The important thing to look at when you’re utilizing Rotten
Tomatoes is the spread. The difference between the critic and audience score
will tell you everything you need to know. It doesn’t matter if some of the
critics have been paid off, or if some of the audiences are review-bombing.
That spread will tell you if something wonky is going on.
Go into it knowing what you want out of a film, as well.
Audiences tend to prioritize fun, while critics prioritize technique. Taking the
average of the two scores will help you balance both, but if your priorities lean
one way or the other, that’s something to take into account too, and it’s why
Rotten Tomatoes is still useful. Even with the bad apples.
Regardless of what directors, producers, or anyone else
says.
Wages are low. Movie tickets are expensive. Streaming
subscriptions are expensive. Cable is expensive. Sites that give us insight on
whether we’ll like a film are important. They can keep us from spending a dumb
amount of money on a film that isn’t for us.
Unfortunately, people who rate things unethically can force
viewers away from risky indie pictures. That’s why many audiences lean toward
the fun, turn-your-brain-off flicks. It’s not because “audiences are dumber,”
as suggested by Paul Schrader, writer of
Taxi Driver (1976),
Raging
Bull (1980), and other iconic films. It’s because audiences know exactly
what their money is buying with those films. They know that it’ll be a somewhat
hollow experience, but that they’re going to leave the theater smiling.
Joy is in short supply these days. People need to get it
wherever they can. It’s unfortunate that it means they miss some great indie
films because some companies are intent on gaming the system.
Writers/directors pointing the finger at people consuming
their work is a joke.
Audiences are not the problem. Companies are. Audiences
are just using the tools they have, to try to lighten their load.
I’ll continue rolling my eyes at some of the scores on
Rotten Tomatoes. I’ll still complain about them in my reviews.
That said, I’ll also still utilize the site and post the scores on each one I write.
Even when I disagree with the scores, I can’t deny that Rotten Tomatoes is a useful
tool, when you use it carefully.
We hope that you have the opportunity to judge each movie on
its own merit. If you don’t, don’t let anyone sway you. Watch what you like,
what you can afford, and what you are emotionally open to. Entertainment is for
everyone.
