So it's agreed that Disney is bribing critics, right?

So it's agreed that Disney is bribing critics, right?

Other urls found in this thread:

ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/07/warner-bros-settles-ftc-charges-it-failed-adequately-disclose-it
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

UUUUUGHGHHHHGHHHHHHH CUM HARD FROM MY COCK WHILE I FUCK YOUUR MOOOOM

*farts on a shit thread*

Yes, it's way too fishy that every DC movie has a rotten score

Yeah sure if it makes you feel better about how your pleb trash isn't highly rated as the other pleb trash

but hey at least la la land and john wick 2 are out soon HAHAHA

looks like you're short one point, OP

Got any evidence like this?

ftc.gov/news-events/press-releases/2016/07/warner-bros-settles-ftc-charges-it-failed-adequately-disclose-it

Disney did nothing wrong

It's not really that. It's more like most Marvel movies deserve pretty much the same reviews, yet they all score with critics like they're Oscar contenders. I've enjoyed some of the Marvel movies and some of the DC movies too, but they're all pretty much your standard "blockbuster" shit, dumb fun with ridiculous plotting, bad dialogue, hammy performances, etc.

It's fun, but everyone knows it's crap, and it's just weird to watch critics jizz all over a movie like "Civil War" or "Ant-Man." I liked both movies well enough, but they're hardly any better than a DC movie or a Michael Bay movie or whatever, the types of films that usually score around 30-40%.

Disney killed this thread too, shhhhh

Bingo I agree fully. Marvel films are sterile as fuck and by my accounts are just shy of the 80+ scores they always get because of this.

There was no war in marvels civil war. It should have been called Marvel Civil argument.

...

No one is bribing anyone.

Critits are all fanboys who go the extra mile to rate, and review movies they like, and give shit ratings to movies they have an agenda against.

Its that fucking simple.


Rotten Tomatoes is shit because it allows anyone to submit reviews.

If they had dedicated reviewers then it wouldnt matter

These are false flags to give them deniability, of course

except they all suck

Nolan's Dark Knight trilogy was the pinnacle of capekino, and since then it's been absolute shit

>not mentioning Raimi's Spideykino
Uberpleb

This, and desu I'd put Bryan Singer's first two X-Men movies in the same canon

no, we agreed that mainstream critics are plebs, as well as 90% of the audiences.

>he thinks that only one multi-billion dollar media conglomerate can afford to throw a few scraps to bloggers and critics

Kill yourself fucking retard

keep sucking mickey's cock

Not red letter media Mike didn't like Civil War or doctor strange.

Also they don't see any Pixar or Dinsey movies. just marvel,star wars and maybe touchstone

But this guy on the other hand?

why the fuck would you waste the money bribing people that nobody watches?

Do you really think that they would waste the money on Mars needs Moms to false flag?

Marvel films definitely possess a sterility, but they're efficient and enjoyable blockbusters that can hardly be compared to the DC movies which feel like unfinished or defective products, tonally at odds with themselves.

Another major difference is that Marvel actors actually seem to want to be there, DC's state of affairs are so wooden or miserable that it's only enjoyable as schadenfreude. And I love DC comics.

27%

he has over million subs in counting and is well know.Red letter Media has over 400K and is only liked by nerds like us

Believe it or not, Critics give absolutely zero fucks about your fanboy company wars.

>literally no hard evidence to suggest this

Yeah definitely.

...

>redlettermedia, a mid-sized youtube channel with around 500k subscribers, is comparable to reddit, which has millions of users, which is comparable to rotten tomatoes, an aggregator of reviews owned by Warner Bros, which is comparable to marvel and disney, multi-billion dollar corporations that are competing with Warner Bros

>Rotten Tomatoes is shit because it allows anyone to submit reviews.
>
>If they had dedicated reviewers then it wouldnt matter

Quality b8 m8.

And just for those who still just don't get it: RT is an aggregator site. They don't have their own reviewers because that isn't what they're about. They take reviews from everywhere, and everyone, translate those reviewers' arbitrary scores into a basic x/10 and then hold a breakpoint at 6/10 for the Fresh/Rotten label.

You'd have to bribe all the critics on the internet, both the professional as well as amateur/blogger types, to influence such a system.

So when it comes to their own output Disney actually is bribing the critics by the simple method of bothering to make quality productions. WB/DC are even more simply explained by their just not giving a shit about quality and focusing purely on ticking boxes to scrape up as much cash as they can - and the reviewers are pretty much seeing that and scoring accordingly.