Critics: What is the Deal?

1.7K

So the reason I am making this article for a set off is because a article from the account named @TheFliteCast with over 2,000 followers. They just recently made an article named; ‘Why DCEU Fans believe in a MCU conspiracy’ (http://www.theflitecast.com/blogdc/2017/2/13/heres-why-dceu-fans-believe-in-an-mcu-conspiracy). I pretty much want to analyse this article as well as add my own detail and give you a final answer.

The first problem we can see here with this article is that how they believe that every film is intentionally made so no MCU film is rated ‘rotten’ and they use Thor the Dark World as a example.

The thing is that although many people think Thor The Dark World is a very dull film that doesn’t interest many, it isn’t like this film had a convulated plot or a bad script, at least it had an average script and plot, average on Rotten Tomatoes is approximately 60%-70%. The point is here that they are trying to insert their own opinion about Thor The Dark World to use it as evidence of some sort of bias when it’s clear that Thor The Dark World was praised for valid reasons. 

Even fans like Thor The Dark World and give it as positive rating, it has a higher rating on both Rotten Tomatoes and Letterboxd for Batman V Superman, showing us that this film is given some praise by critics for not being a mess of a film and at least trying at being average.
Now for this, the writer is right and wrong. On one hand, this person does own Rotten Tomatoes and as a position of high power in the journalism industry so I can understand how people can see this as a large underlying bias, however at the time of Batman V Superman, Matt and his fellow Rotten Tomatoes co-workers were still mostly working under Warner Bros and even saw Batman V Superman for free! As you see, the critics on Rotten Tomatoes were not influenced by Matt (in my opinion at least) because if Matt really did that, Warner Bros would easily find out and forefeit all remaining hands it has left in the company.

Just to finish off this point, he adds that he really likes Tokyo Drift so from the logic of the ‘bias’ that Matt must have, Tokyo Drift must have a high score, correct?

Nope it is given the same fair treatement as any other film on Rotten Tomatoes and although Matt liking it, the score still sits at a disappointing 37%.
Now we move on to how critics have been constantly mentioning Batman V Superman in their reviews, and I have 2 points to clear this up:
1) Firstly, one reason that critics mention Batman V Superman a lot is a point that I will mention again later in this article but it is how since there was such an uproar when both Batman V Superman and Suicide Squad released to negative press, articles for these films increased at a fast pace, thus increasing a critics pay. So you can now see how Batman V Superman and the rest of the DCEU being loved by these ‘shills’ so much that journalists can take advantage of that and make these ‘shills triggered’ and will therefore generate more viewership from the controversy. Overall it is a cycle of journalists saying something about the DCEU, ‘shills’ overreacting and thus journalists generate more viewership as a result.

2) Can we keep in mind that the latest adaption of a cinematic Batman was in The LEGO Batman Movie, many critics compare them to tell us how this Batman is different and how if it excexutes its Batman better or worse. Can I add that I haven’t seen one review compare it to Suicide Squad for the simple reason that it is compared to Batman V Superman due to it basically being the latest Batman film.

You are right but I’ve heard of places that price film tickets at $25 per head and if they have saw these DCEU films and disliked them, to make sure there is still trust in families seeing a DC Film, they need to resprent that divide in difference.
Now, saying this is the most reliable piece of evidence to there being a bias is utter bullshit.
This is because, like I’ve said, talking about the DCEU and it’s problems generates overreaction from DCEU ‘shills’ thus creating more views, it’s a vicious cycle of these fans playing themselves but that’s not to say that Marvel doesn’t have its own share of media controversy. For example, this article from Total Film calls out Marvel for its Marvel Formula (http://buff.ly/2lkrl2m) and this did generate some overreaction also, we just have to learn that if we are going to overreact like this, if anything, we are just supporting this article to get more views.

And the issue is that, for most Batman V Superman and Suicide Squad were not the best films ever, so when people hear that they are directorial or script issues about a DCEU film, it makes them worried for it just to be an endless cycle of Suicide Squad’s and Batman V Superman’s.
Now, moving on to claims about critics being bias, I collected screenshots from multiple sources and will link some at the end to check out yourself: 

This is what should not be tolerated, accusing critics of not liking DC and sending them death threats for just doing their job is plain wrong. This is a contributing factor in Rotten Tomatoes not being bias as if it was, it has already suffered abuse from fanboys like how what happened to this writer from BirthMoviesDeath and her friend.
When a review website has to turn off comments because people cannot respect a opinion, there is a clear issue. It shows how critics would not risk being bias because they would face all of this backlash and death threats just for voicing their opinion.

This critic even states how she sometimes doesn’t like the algorithm of how Rotten Tomatoes works, it also shows that it isn’t Rotten Tomatoes responsibility for what happens, the critics decide the rating so you cannot blame Rotten Tomatoes for a bias, if anyone, you blame the actual critic.
From this article, this critic states how certain highly professional critics (John Campea level-high) can be likely paid by their publication author (not Rotten Tomatoes, their publication, for example; Variety, Heroic Hollywood etc). This journalist even goes to say that if anyone actually thinks that Marvel pays off critics are actual ‘loons’ and that Warner Bros invited them all to a free special screening,  but that there is normally never a bias made for a film and if anything, would just be for against a film.

Then Screenrant points out how Max Landis claims that he’s heard critics have been paid off to write good reviews, firstly this shows that no one pays anyone to write bad reviews. But then, the critics responded in uproar because Landis was basically trashing their reputation with no knowledge, thus Landis did back down from this statement. This shows how personal critics are about their opinion and saying they are bias like this, is an insult to their profession.
As well as that, this extract of the article points out that attempting to hand out bribes and being a massive company (for example; Disney) could cause them to be exposed and could ruin the critic profession aswell as the company itself that did the bribing.

To end off, I have nothing against The Flite Cast, they seem like nice guys but their article, although nicely detailed and structured was heavily flawed.

I’m willing to answer any questions about this on my main account (@CinematicBanter)

And also here is an nice 15 page essay on critics and how they influence certain things in film; http://scholar.google.co.uk/scholar_url?url=https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Subimal_Chatterjee/publication/237401649_How_Critical_Are_Critical_Reviews_The_Box_Office_Effects_of_Film_Critics_Star_Power_and_Budgets/links/00463532087e50dcdd000000.pdf&hl=en&sa=X&scisig=AAGBfm0kfvu2Hzmx7IOkbBqm9ps-2jcUAw&nossl=1&oi=scholarr&ved=0ahUKEwj2hu2x3ZXSAhUBIsAKHU5xBQYQgAMIHCgBMAA
And to leave this article off, I will leave it to the man himself, James Gunn to give his thoughts on this:

– @CinematicBanter/ Editor-In-Chief of DiscussingFilm