"I don't trust critics anymore."
*Turns on Angry Joe*
"I feel smarter and more informed already."
"I don't trust critics anymore."
*Turns on Angry Joe*
"I feel smarter and more informed already."
I don't think it's RT as much as the influx of "review drama" that Youtubers have obviously been able to make good money on as their influence is probably increasing over print media.
I mean, I'm not the only person to never read a review anymore yet actively seek Double Toasted, Gremlinproduction (cinemasnob), RLM, and even Angry Joe videos on 'just how bad is it' after 2016 thought us all to never trust reviews of movies ever again. Because with the editing DISASTERS that 2016 shat out, you'd be a fool to watch a movie blindly now. I mean, ID4-2. Ghostbusters, BvS, Suicide Squad... even if you like those movies, you can't make an argument about them having good editing in good faith of reasonable discussion. Because they don't have it.
Why did 2016 teach us to not trust reviews?
You're damn rightLet's be honest, the real problem was making a comedy called The House and not casting Hugh Laurie.
"I don't trust critics anymore."
*Turns on Angry Joe*
"I feel smarter and more informed already."
Why does AngryJoe get his own comment.
That's a pretty good question, too.
"I don't trust critics anymore."
*Turns on Angry Joe*
"I feel smarter and more informed already."
Why do you hurt yourself when you don't have to?
This is self-harm, Freeza.
LOL Freeza"I don't trust critics anymore."
*Turns on Angry Joe*
"I feel smarter and more informed already."
I should have said Mark Kermode, but that name wouldn't mean much to American readers of this site. And probably be 'too negative' for most as well because he's more of a classical European critic, meaning that he's not keen on 'shutting his brain off' and that crap.
I'll tell you this, citing Kermode is gonna get you more respect than Angry Joe, just a tip!Yeah, that was a bad example.
I included him for legacy reasons and the possibility that other readers might be more inclined to watch him. Aside from some video games and that one Battleship review (because nobody else watched it) I honestly haven't watched his videos in a long time.
I should have said Mark Kermode, but that name wouldn't mean much to American readers of this site. And probably be 'too negative' for most as well because he's more of a classical European critic, meaning that he's not keen on 'shutting his brain off' and that crap.
But I don't read many written reviews on new movies as it is, no. Incidently at best, and without a 'go to' place, like Roger Ebert's reviews were. Sorry man, but that is the honest truth of what reviews I interact with. And presuming other consumers to be similar, I would assume that most consumers are moving into youtube for reviews rather than written form.
What is this thread title
Yeah, that was a bad example.
I included him for legacy reasons and the possibility that other readers might be more inclined to watch him. Aside from some video games and that one Battleship review (because nobody else watched it) I honestly haven't watched his videos in a long time.
I should have said Mark Kermode, but that name wouldn't mean much to American readers of this site. And probably be 'too negative' for most as well because he's more of a classical European critic, meaning that he's not keen on 'shutting his brain off' and that crap.
But I don't read many written reviews on new movies as it is, no. Incidently at best, and without a 'go to' place, like Roger Ebert's reviews were. Sorry man, but that is the honest truth of what reviews I interact with. And presuming other consumers to be similar, I would assume that most consumers are moving into youtube for reviews rather than written form.
Why did 2016 teach us to not trust reviews?
inb4 Ghostbusters comments.
Anyway, I feel like it's hard to advocate for the notion that people are eschewing reading reviews (although they probably are) for shitty superficial typically trash-ass YouTube critics—the whole reason we're discussing the phenomenon is that Rotten Tomatoes' influence as a consumer tool is somehow still growing even more than it already had, and Rotten Tomatoes only aggregates written work, not video.
Basically, RT as a legitimate influence on filmgoing choices is, ultimately, a reinforcement that writing about film matters more than "HEY YOUTUBE" open-mouthers doing panel shows to talk about their misconceptions of the film industry.
Kermode has nothing on Jeremy Jahns
Yeah, that was a bad example.
I included him for legacy reasons and the possibility that other readers might be more inclined to watch him. Aside from some video games and that one Battleship review (because nobody else watched it) I honestly haven't watched his videos in a long time.
I should have said Mark Kermode, but that name wouldn't mean much to American readers of this site. And probably be 'too negative' for most as well because he's more of a classical European critic, meaning that he's not keen on 'shutting his brain off' and that crap.
But I don't read many written reviews on new movies as it is, no. Incidently at best, and without a 'go to' place, like Roger Ebert's reviews were. Sorry man, but that is the honest truth of what reviews I interact with. And presuming other consumers to be similar, I would assume that most consumers are moving into youtube for reviews rather than written form.
Only a few of us ever see the light.
I really think it is a horrible title. First time I heard it I swore it was a comedy for kids.What was that about Baby Driver bombing cause of the title?
Why did 2016 teach us to not trust reviews?
It looks like All Eyez on Me will top out with a 1.75x opening weekend multiplier.
It's a memorable title and if you are older than 20 then the reference to a famous Simon and Garfunkel song is cute.I really think it is a horrible title. First time I heard it I swore it was a comedy for kids.
Following up on this, I think it's interesting to look at the calendar grosses for 2017 compared to last yearIt's funny because last year at this point, we had only four non-sequels (and one sorta sequel, depending how you want to classify BvS) pass 100M, and, out of those, only one wholly original film (Zootopia). This year, we've had three sorta sequels/sorta originals, four additional non-sequels, and out of those four, two were wholly original ideas (I'm counting the Boss Baby here because it's based off an obscure book).
Financially, original ideas are clearly doing better this year.
[U]2017[/U]
1 Beauty and the Beast $503,861,542
2 Guardians of the Galaxy Vol. 2 $383,273,975
3 Wonder Woman $346,644,475
4 Logan $226,269,952
5 The Fate of the Furious $225,429,900
6 The LEGO Batman Movie $175,750,384
7 Get Out $175,484,140
8 The Boss Baby $173,540,805
9 Kong: Skull Island $168,052,812
10 Hidden Figures $167,359,816
11 Pirates of the Caribbean 4 $165,466,587
12 Split $138,141,585
13 Rogue One: A Star Wars Story $123,941,474
14 Cars 3 $120,714,099
15 La La Land $120,121,532
16 Sing $117,475,050
17 Fifty Shades Darker $114,434,010
18 Transformers 5 $102,103,351
19 John Wick: Chapter Two $92,029,184
20 Power Rangers (2017) $85,364,450
[U]2016[/U]
1 Captain America: Civil War $405,171,192
2 Deadpool $363,070,709
3 The Jungle Book (2016) $359,268,367
4 Finding Dory $358,889,536
5 Zootopia $340,667,809
6 Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice $330,360,194
7 Star Wars: The Force Awakens $284,694,956
8 The Revenant $182,765,375
9 X-Men: Apocalypse $153,203,049
10 Kung Fu Panda 3 $143,477,613
11 The Angry Birds Movie $105,585,560
12 The Conjuring 2 $94,074,309
13 Ride Along 2 $91,221,830
14 Central Intelligence $87,799,805
15 Daddy's Home $85,672,859
16 Teenage Mutant Ninja Turtles 2 $79,268,036
17 Alice Through the Looking Glass $75,549,153
18 10 Cloverfield Lane $72,082,998
19 Independence Day: Resurgence $67,006,100
20 The Divergent Series: Allegiant $66,184,051
This is pretty much impossible.Seems like RT score is becoming more and more influential regarding BO; Homecoming is crossing the billion for sure.
Uh yeah I would say most people under 30 haven't listened to Simon and Garfunkel. Their most famous song is now "The Sound of Silence."It's a memorable title and if you are older than 20 then the reference to a famous Simon and Garfunkel song is cute.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeqUUNHwAl8
Only a few of us ever see the light.
I should've become a YouTube critic.
It's a memorable title and if you are older than 20 then the reference to a famous Simon and Garfunkel song is cute.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eeqUUNHwAl8
Wow.It looks like All Eyez on Me will top out with a 1.75x opening weekend multiplier.
Edit: Also, Book of Henry will finish with a domestic take that is less than 1% of Jurassic World.
Yep.I doubt Marvel is sweating that Wonder Woman is doing so well. I bet they're pretty stoked. They'll push Captain Marvel even harder now.
I'm just that obscure thenI think the title is fine, but Baby Driver is an obscure S&G song from nearly 50 years ago. It doesnt even make it into their compilation albums. Let's not act like it's just Gen Z missing that reference.
Good! You're not missing much.I don't know any of those YouTube reviewers mentioned.
WW got a shot at $800? Its at $707 right now, so I'd think its at least feasible? That said though Spidey hits next week which will probably impact it pretty hard so maybe not
Do we know how long it's theatrical run is? Would be an important factor.
I am sure that with each week it loses screens.