X-Men Last Stand Director: "Rotten Tomatoes Is The Worst

>tfw no kelsey grammar best friend

File: 953.jpg (66KB, 953x572px) Image search: [Google]

66KB, 953x572px

>>80799376
>"Last Stand Director"
>not knowing who Brett Ratner is

i know he's jewish but he's pretty cool desu

>>80799376
Do people only hate him for that movie? He made kino like rush hour

>>80799376
First, it's Brett Ratner saying this. He's a shittier version of Michael Bay, ffs.

Second, the worst thing about today's movie culture is the overabundance of formulaic capeshit, part of which (the shittiest parts, in fact) is on his shoulders.

Third, nigga actually quoted the Juggernaut bitch meme in his X-Men movie. Who fucking cares what he has to say about anything. Go milk Rush Hour some more, you hack. I'm sure you can convince someone to give you the chance to make a shitty reboot no one wants.

>it takes a hack like Ratner to point this out

Yeesh

>“The worst thing that we have in today’s movie culture is Rotten Tomatoes. I think it’s the destruction of our business. I have such respect and admiration for film criticism. When I was growing up film criticism was a real art. And there was intellect that went into that. And you would read Pauline’s Kael’s reviews, or some others, and that doesn’t exist anymore. Now it’s about a number. A compounded number of how many positives vs. negatives. Now it’s about, ‘What’s your Rotten Tomatoes score?’ And that’s sad, because the Rotten Tomatoes score was so low on Batman v Superman I think it put a cloud over a movie that was incredibly successful.”

based Brett

he actually thinks anybody cares about his shit opinions as a hack director, sad

>>80799376
Rotten tomatoes "was" pretty accurate on picking out good/shitty movies, but over time it has shifted more towards mediocrity. They didn't really make too much of an effort to pick a wide array of reviewers for their metrics, and eventually ended up being a heavily left leaning review site.

If you make a leftist pandering movie, you'll get a 90%+ most of the time. Have some black people, some political message, or lgbtq, and you're looking at a movie that will be picked apart for its artistic/cinematic elements (even if they weren't there).

File: tucker.png (230KB, 1029x733px) Image search: [Google]

230KB, 1029x733px

>>80799435
It's for the better.

>>80799572
Still a better director than your favorite Marvel director.

>>80799376
Lol being this mad because all his movies have Rotten ratings.

>>80799591
>ironic

lmao that sass

>>80799376
Not totally wrong

>>80799376
He's right.

RT is full of SJW faggots and liberals also payed reviews.

File: bought reviews.jpg (211KB, 732x960px) Image search: [Google]

211KB, 732x960px

>there is nothing wrong with Rotten tomatoes
Said the paid Disney shills

>>80799598
that's the best praise you can come up with huh?

Rush hour trilogy > all of the dceu/mcu

>>80799528
I agree with this gentleman.

>>80799687
King Kong has a 78%, and Get Out is at 99%.

If I were too assign scores, King Kong would get 60-65%, while Get Out would be more at like 85-90%.

However, both movies appeal to leftists, due to slavery/racism themes, which magically bumps the shitty script of the first one, and poor moments of execution in the second one to higher levels.

File: bought reviewers.jpg (125KB, 758x876px) Image search: [Google]

125KB, 758x876px

Civil War had 90% on Rotten Tomatoes.

90%

Who remembers Civil War now? It played out like C-rate direct-to-dvd capeshit.

I'll take value in Brett Ratner's opinion whenever he finally manages to make a good movie

>>80799763
Anon. Get Out got top scores because racist people didn't go see it in the first place. So they couldn't review it.

>>80799802
Rush Hour 2 motherfucker do you remember it?

>>80799787
Apparently Logan was only a few percentage points better than Civil War. Let that sink in, when Logan (or even Spider-Man 2) was essentially The Dark Knight of MCU.

>>80799763
I don't think you know how Rotten Tomatoes works

>>80799787
I recently rewatched Civil War and it was a lot more boring than I thought after seeing it in theaters.

>>80799840
Fox X-MEN movies are bit part of Disney's MCU

>>80799787
>>80799763
>>80799687
90% is not a 9/10, look at the actual ratings you autists

>>80799891
Not part*

>shitty director complains about critics

Criticism of Rotten Tomatoes is valid but I'd rather hear it out of the mouth of a person that isn't Brett fucking Ratner.

>>80799687
>gone girl
>quote unquote good
imdb culture everyone

>>80799923
THIS IS EXACTLY WHY PEOPLE LIKE BRETT HATE ROTTEN TOMATOES BECAUSE IT'S A SHITTY WAY TO MEASURE A FILM YOU FUCKING IDIOT

>>80799687

All you had to do was Ghostbusters "Fresh".

>>80799840
Logan was the best movie released in the last 10 years

>Brett Ratner

He just copy other directors, including Rush Hour movies, even when they were fun.

Shit director, deserves nothing

>>80799847
Yes, it pools a bunch of reviewers saying which ones liked it vs. which ones didn't.

I was surprised by how many people liked both King Kong and Get Out, when compared to many other movies that had more reasonable percentages.

King Kong was supposed to be "fun," which was great and all, as long as "fun" includes a tolerable script, and chemistry between leads (neither of which happened). It was an extremely, extremely, poorly executed movie, and still managed to have more people liking it than I would have thought. Reason? King Kong is a metaphor for slavery, every time he did anything in my theater, black people were jumping out of their seats clapping. I'm glad they enjoyed it, but I thought it was the most overrated shit movie I've seen in a while.

Get Out was well done, but for 99% to have liked it, that's pretty fucking ridiculous. It was good, but for people not to see any flaws in the movie, or for that matter it making some shit points along with good ones... (Shoddy acting at points, heavy handedness in dialogue, etc.). I mean come on, I would still agree with like 85-95%, but fucking 99%? It's not fucking Lord of the Rings or something, its a movie about a bunch of racist white people doing racist white people shit. The premise helped cover up a lot of weaker/cornier moments, but they were there, they are always there.

>>80799988
Only for stupid, corn fed retards who fuck their cousins.

>>80799939
Read his actual quote, faggot.>>80799561
He has tons of respect for actual film criticism. Just not when it's devolved into a thumbs up/thumbs down system

He should be grateful, Rotten Tomatoes scores are generous. Sometimes they give a good score to a movie I think is crap, but it's very rare that a movie I really liked gets a score under 60%. A bad score damn near guarantees that the movie sucks.

Rotten Tomatoes isn't even close to the worst thing in movie culture. It trails far behind pederasty and the sexualisation of children.

>>80799988
unless you're not a fucking dumbass that doesn't know how math works, like Brett here

File: Amelie-0782.jpg (168KB, 830x800px) Image search: [Google]

168KB, 830x800px

Why are plebs pretending to care about film criticism now?

For years you iqlets called Brody and White pretentious and anyone that agreed with them hipsters. Has your taste film improved now or are you still the tasteless drones you were when you cried hipster and that fun should be allowed since film is supposed to be """entertainment"""

or is this another excuse to shitpost and stay away from developing better taste again?

>>80800041
Great film criticism died years ago. This is nothing new. Fag needs to stop crying and adapt if he wants to continue making his shitty lowest common denominator movies (which he will anyway, all he's doing is whining).

>>80799376
Having a problem with rt is having a problem with democracy
The only problem that could arise here ethically would be if people were submitting on more than one account
t. Someone actually in the industry

>>80800059
I think you accidentally typed "worst" when you meant to type "best"

>>80800189
>t. Someone actually in the industry
Yeah you must be real proud of the unnoticeable shlock you make.

File: considering.jpg (34KB, 288x394px) Image search: [Google]

34KB, 288x394px

What qualifies someone to review a movie?

File: 1480959347099.jpg (38KB, 571x540px) Image search: [Google]

38KB, 571x540px

>It's a "shitty director invokes Pauline Kael when their movie reviews poorly" episode

>>80799376
A broken clock is right twice a day

>>80800231
Welles in F for Fake addresses this question. "Experts" and critics only have to pass a short time of early litmus tests before they are more or less just accepted as experts and not questioned by their peers.

>>80800231
Make a litterboxed, imdb, mubi or sac account and you can do it yourself
if you're good on sac you can get festival releases to watch before they're out of circuit too

>>80800189
>Having a problem with rt is having a problem with democracy
>t. Someone actually in the industry
The industry is hiring 15 years olds now?

The kind of people who don't understand this are the kind of people who criticize RLM for loving or hating certain movies.

They think there are no layers to film criticism beyond just "it was good" or "it was bad".

>>80800317
>F for Fake
I've been meaning to watch this. Is it good?

>>80799561

He's completely right. Which is why each cinéaste should find a film critic they admire, if they are at all interested in reading reviews.

i agree

>movie rated 6/10
>still somehow have 95%+ score

File: CWd7khY.jpg (65KB, 431x450px) Image search: [Google]

65KB, 431x450px

>>80799979
>gone girl
>"ITS BAD GUIZE! ONLY IMDB LIKES IT"

>>80799404
fpbp exactly what I was thinking when I saw the thumbnail.

Ratner is acting rather wounded for a guy who gets huge box office takes for the dreck he makes. Just take the money you crying baby.

>>80800355
I like it. It's a film essay about hoaxes, fakery and the production of art. There's nothing quite like it.

>>80800337
What if I'd never seen any other movie before? Would my review still be valid?

>>80800427
Probably. The democratization of review culture means that everyone has an opinion, all of them are valid and fuck you if you don't agree.

>>80800427
You'd still be able to review the only film you've seen

>>80800424
Guess I'll give it a go.

File: Screenshot_2016-05-09-07-16-19-1-1.png (281KB, 713x743px) Image search: [Google]

281KB, 713x743px

Ratner is a really bad jewish director but he isn't wrong.

>>80800455
What if someone had watched every movie ever, and I had watched none. Would our reviews still be equal?

>>80800392
>CRITICIZE CURRENT MOVIE JOURNALISM IS WRONG
>IF YOU DO IT YOU ARE A CRYING BABY

>>80800013
Logan is the most overrated movie released in the last 10 years.

>>80800517
In the modern review culture, yes absolutely. If you have enough of a personality to put yourself over you can be just a complete movie retard and get by.

>>80800546
No shit this board is full of plebs

>>80799572
>thinks anybody cares about his shit opinions

Sounds like he's /ourguy/

>>80800614
Well yeah one of the main reasons is because of plebs like you that came here after baneposting.
https://letterboxd.com/azkaban/films/ratings/by/rating/
I mean just look at your fucking ratings

>>80800013
It's just a competently made western with an old superhero in the main role vs. an aging gunslinger. Settle down.

>>80800604
So by extrapolation someone who has no knowledge of the sciences can produce a review of a scientific paper of equal worth to a professor of that science

>>80799817
niggers and leftists are the most racist people though

File: marvel doesn't bribe at all.jpg (166KB, 737x635px) Image search: [Google]

166KB, 737x635px

Disney has completely hijacked RT.

File: Kale_Pauline_02.jpg (96KB, 955x768px) Image search: [Google]

96KB, 955x768px

>>80800235

>>80800756
Then why does Nocturnal IMDB sensibilities have the highest rating?

>>80799598
That's not even true. They get pretty decent directors, but force them to make everything look bland so the movies have a consistent style. Brett Ratner has never made a great movie. Kenneth Branagh has.

>>80800809
>Kenneth Branagh has
This is true. His movie version of Hamlet is kino.

>>80799561
BASED
A
S
E
D

>>80800809
So has Taika Waititi.

>>80799840
Neither Logan nor Spider-Man 2 are part of the MCU.

>>80800614
Watch The Neon Demon for the 50th time, faggot.

>>80799687
Critics are retards BATB is the best disney movie in a long time

>>80800959
Neon demon sucks faggot

>>80801059
Stick to Marvel

File: 1479988943168.png (305KB, 715x401px) Image search: [Google]

305KB, 715x401px

>>80800025

>>80800347
>Bringing up Reddit Letter Media at all
Faggot

>>80800029
>Flawless
>Flaws
Except the Tomatometer doesn't measure quality but - how many critics liked it -.
The actual score is below, you bumbling idiot.

He's 100% unequivocally correct

Rotten Tomatoes quoting plebs are fucking braindead retards

Has he even done anything worth hating? People says he's like some michael bay type director but the only thing I ever see nerds hate on is his x men

File: 4444797-Businessman-Holding-Gun-To-Head-Stock-Photo.jpg (108KB, 1300x866px) Image search: [Google]

108KB, 1300x866px

>people ITT actually defending RT

File: BvS.jpg (10KB, 303x166px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 303x166px

>>80799561
>And that’s sad, because the Rotten Tomatoes score was so low on Batman v Superman I think it put a cloud over a movie that was incredibly successful.
BvS's influence continues on, forcing everyone to reevaluate aspects of the movie industry previously accepted and taken for granted. Truly a movie ahead of it's time and one of the few works that can be unironically classified as "kino."

>>80801291
>expecting /tv/ not to be contrarian

File: bretty.jpg (49KB, 863x557px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 863x557px

>>80801261
Rush Hour 1 & 2 are the only good things he's done as a director

File: vlcsnap-2015-03-15-19h14m03s117.png (2MB, 1920x800px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 1920x800px

The biggest issue with Rotten Tomatoes is that it promotes mediocrity and discourages risk taking

Take film A. Film A is loved by 50% of critics to high heavens, but the other 50% mildly dislike it. This puts Film A on a pretty poor RT score.

Take Film B. Pretty much all reviewers agree it's very mediocre and standard and predictable. So they give it a 6/10. Rotten Tomatoes translates this mediocre film into a 90% score.

That means the system promotes the safe and mediocre of the risk-takers. And such a system is DANGEROUS. Simple as that. When we have systems that basically discourage risks, then something is very bad and needs to be fought.

>>80801481
this, a fresh rating should be a fucking 8/10 at least

File: marvel quips bot.png (333KB, 1736x811px) Image search: [Google]

333KB, 1736x811px

>>80801291
>expecting different from Disney shill HQ

>>80799952
This. I'm tempted to defend RT just so im not on the same side of the fence as that hack.

>>80801481
>Maria Valverde
She was wasted so much in Exodus.

>>80799528

All this is true but it dosen't make what he said about RT wrong.

>>80800189
>having a problem with democracy
Bruh, the tyranny of the masses IS a problem with democracy. The same mouthbreathing retards that watch capeshit are the same mouthbreathing retards electing public officials.
Like Churchill said, democracy is fucked, but its only merit is that we don't have a better system in place.

>>80800355
Its breddy gud.

>>80801084
I don't watch it faglord

File: shillary has fallen.jpg (97KB, 722x472px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 722x472px

Who the hell are these reviews that RT factors in? I swear 80% of them are just political bloggers. RT sucks because most of the reviewers are literal who bloggers.

>>80799561
Death of Superman was the end of permanent comic book deaths. Batman v. Superman was the end of critics having clout. It's beautiful.

File: 1484966127595.jpg (505KB, 1171x1658px) Image search: [Google]

505KB, 1171x1658px

>>80799561
Men are still good.

>>80801822
>Death of Superman was the end of permanent comic book deaths.
You have no idea what you're talking about.

>>80801820
>>80799787
>ChristyLemire
>Top critic
Who?

He produced The Revenant, he's alright.

>>80801378

>ARGGG I'M GONNA KILL YOU FOR VAGUE, CONVOLUTED REASONS AND TO SAVE THE WORLD EVEN THOUGH YOU LITERALLY HAVE SAVED THE WORLD ON NUMEROUS OCCASIONS
>wait, our moms have the same name? ARGGG DEALING WITH MOM FEELINGS MADE ME CRAZY LET'S BE BEST FRIENDS NOW

10/10 pure kino

File: image.png (783KB, 1688x751px) Image search: [Google]

783KB, 1688x751px

reminder

File: 1461240819980.png (37KB, 1127x685px) Image search: [Google]

37KB, 1127x685px

>>80799979
>quote unquote good
>""good

>>80805446
>people saying being irreverent is a good thing
This is the reason people hated BvS. Snyder cared too much about the characters, unlike Marvel where they make fun of NERDS for liking comic books unironically.

>>80799825
Not at all. Entirely forgettable

>>80805588
If anything, he didn't care enough about the characters. Superman has so little development in both movies that I never gave a shit about him. Batman was better, but still poorly written.

He's right though
It's taken film criticism to the logical extreme and reduced every movie to a Good/Bad rating, and on top of that the formula they use overwhelmingly favors big budget blockbusters and capeshit

>>80799874
That's almost every Marvel movie though
A little while ago I tried reaching Avengers 1 and I had to stop myself from falling the fuck asleep

Something no one does but you can read the reviews, instead of just looking at the number.

A lot of 'rottens' are C+. Also even a lot of Rotten reviews point out things the movie did good.


But I know no one actually reads reviews anymore so.

>>80806767
Well that's the problem. Why read reviews when you got a big flashing number in red saying how good it is? There's no point in reading reviews when that exists.

>>80806767
>>80806815
Even worse all these retarded popular youtube reviewers where it looks like they read the imdb synopsis because their critique of a movie is as barebones as possible.

>>80799376
He's right but he's also a terrible director and hasn't made a single good movie

Hasn't Rotten Tomatoes been around since the fucking 90's? Why all of the sudden is it now so relevant over the past couple of years

>>80800809
kenneth brannagh has made absolutely -0- good films. How dare you post such an obvious untruth you disgusting embryo.

File: 1485439927132.jpg (85KB, 900x675px) Image search: [Google]

85KB, 900x675px

>yfw it's just another BvS Defense Squad thread

who gives a shit what this retard has to say

File: IMG_0071.jpg (331KB, 1398x2592px) Image search: [Google]

331KB, 1398x2592px

>>80799787
>using Vibranium in a review just to signal that you are such a nerd xD
Wasn't NPR at one point a trusted news source? Trumps cuts on public arts can't come soon enough

>>80807037
How dare you lie about Henry V and Hamlet.

>>80799376
He's right

>>80800000

>>80806688
I can stomach dr. strange at home.
That's really the only one besides Winter Soldier.

>>80799687
>7.6/10
>8/10
Gone Girl was slightly more divisive. It got three more negative reviews, but the people who liked it liked it more.

>>80807037
Yeah, you're a fucking retard. His Shakespearean adaptations are as good as any ever put on film, maybe even the absolute best.

>>80799763
>60-65

Too high.

File: understanding_art.png (876KB, 1253x694px) Image search: [Google]

876KB, 1253x694px

>>80799561
>And there was intellect that went into that
How so?

Capeshit producers are more like cattle herders than film makers. None of the people involved in making these movies has at no point in their lives said "My dream is to make movies about heroes and baddies clad in latex duking it out for 90 minutes."

>>80807208
>>80807714
t. only seen one Shakespeare film

try again embryo

Rotten Tomatoes could work if they added some more filters.

So like now, you can choose only 'top critics,' I'd love a button to choose male/female critics, critics under and over a certain age, etc..

Then as a 25 year old man, you could set filters to 'top critics only, male only, age 20-40 only' and get a better idea of if you will like a movie or not.

Then maybe have user accounts where you could save a 'block list' so like if there's a reviewer I know I never agree with, I could block him and his score wouldn't be included in the rating.

>>80808085
I'd settle for blocking female reviews.

>>80807807
I just listed 2, dumb ass.

>>80799561
B A S E D
R
E
T
T

>>80800189

RT is mob rule not democracy.

File: contemplating suicide.jpg (141KB, 543x405px) Image search: [Google]

141KB, 543x405px

>>80805446
>hehs to haaaaaas to lols
>top critic

RATNER IS /OURGUY/

>>80799376
>Zack Snyder's twin brother
Fuck him.

>>80799561
>BvS fan
/OURGUY/

>>80801481
Well said.

File: 1482676063856.jpg (16KB, 403x378px) Image search: [Google]

16KB, 403x378px

You reditors are really fucking stupid, now you are calling Bret Ratner based because he defended BvS.
A new low for you faggots, you deserve shit.

>>80800756

Nocturnal Animals isn't that good though. Michael Shannon was the only redeeming part

>>80801539
Holy mother of jesus christ

>>80801378
How does a movie achieve this level of CULTURAL RELEVANCE?

t. not Ridley Scott

>more people from the industry calling out on Disney's corruption
Good.
http://www.express.co.uk/entertainment/films/627639/Quentin-Tarantino-Star-Wars-The-Force-Awakens-Hateful-Eight

>>80809179
Why does he wear the mask?

>>80801481
Mediocrity sells. Mediocre people open their wallets to mediocre movies and mediocre people are the majority.

We should be happy with whatever little risk taking the industry does because demographics won't change and money rules everything.

>>80809179
Jake didnt do well?

>>80809176
shit skins are huge plebs, but rush hour 1 & 2 are great

>>80801378
>BvS's influence continues on, forcing everyone to reevaluate aspects of the movie industry previously accepted and taken for granted.

You got that right, BvS with some luck will influence current and upcoming directors to not be shitty like Zack Snyder and Bret Ratner.

>>80809389
>Mediocrity sells
Doesn't mean you have to give it critical acclaim.

>>80799376
I'm sick of hearing about that website too.

X-Men Last Stand still sucked.

>>80809488
Didn't work for marlel lmao

its true but brett ratner is a fucking hack

hes shit
a broken clock is right twice a day etc etc

>>80809669
>Didn't work for marlel lmao
You mean Di$n€¥, they need to be stopped, Di$n€¥ is an evil corporation that turns people against each other in order to make maximum profit.

File: 1489682259225.gif (3MB, 500x375px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 500x375px

We are breaking the conditioning

File: Screenshot (72).png (589KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

589KB, 1920x1080px

>Disney doesn't pay shills

>>80799561

The reason it had such a low score was because BvS is absolute fucking garbage, and one of the worst capeshit to date.

>>80799522

Red Dragon is pretty good.

Mostly he seems like a studio stooge. He makes fluffy bullshit. He was a major yes-man to fox on x-men, and the only thing he stood up against was killing cyclops between movies and demanded if he had to kill cyclops to do it in the movie.

Studios tend to be pretty divided about rotten tomatoes, so of course he shits on it

>>80799522
He has experience dealing with high budget movies with little to no waste so when they need someone to take control of a overpriced movie no one else wants to handle they call him.

>>80799435
Why would you want to know who Brett Ratner is? He's never made a good movie.