Rotten: Film Criticism By the Numbers
What would you give yourself out of 10?
It has been deemed increasingly vulgar to assign a numerical rating to one’s appearance. These shallow metrics objectify the individual and leave little room for nuance of subjectivity.
Of course, this obligatory system of rating an individual is based on received wisdom, or lack thereof; a general consensus that says what’s hot and what’s not.
We higher primates love hierarchy. Our brains are also predisposed to laziness. Perhaps this is why we seek to abridge our discourse, essentially reducing the matter at hand to good or bad.
But how much can, what amounts to a simple yay or nay, really communicate?
Roger Ebert had his thumbs up or thumbs down rating. Little White Lies magazine has a system based on ‘anticipation’, ‘enjoyment’ and ‘in retrospect’ that my primitive brain still doesn’t quite comprehend.
Whether it’s the above alternatives, or a score out of 5 or 10, it’s clear that this system is reductive
Sure, it helps the public make quick decisions, under the illusion of being somewhat informed, as to how they spend their time. After all, the insane array of ‘content’ out there means being a discerning viewer is a must. But how much can, what amounts to a simple yay or nay, really communicate?
Let’s not beat around the bush - this article is almost entirely aimed at Rotten Tomatoes, the online film and TV aggregate site that just won't go away.
If a film garners over 60% positive critical feedback, it’s deemed ‘fresh’, complete with a badge of honour in the form of a voluptuous red tomato. What does a piece of media get if its aggregate score falls below this number? A rotten tomato, of course!
The name derives from the throwing of vegetables at something we don’t like, say, a washed-up filmmaker locked in a set of medieval stocks. This is similar to Pitchfork Media, the music review site, which doesn’t rely on an aggregate score, but whose name invokes an angry mob brandishing farming equipment while chasing down someone surely deserving of their ire.
Speaking of this misdirected ‘passion’, audiences sure do like to get hectic over scores they don’t like. Remember when fans of The Dark Knight sent death threats to critics who reviewed their beloved work of art negatively?
It seems to me that, much like dedicated football hooligans, we’re all looking for ways to blow off steam. Getting behind a largely inconsequential cause, in the vein of sports fandom or film fanaticism, lets us vent what upsets us deep down inside through a bit of tribalism.
So films are something of a straw man, perhaps; an easy target substituting something else entirely.
In order to achieve a positive score on the tomato metre, a film must get a 3 out of 5, or a 6 out of 10. This strikes me as a pretty low standard to base your evening’s entertainment on. To drive the point home, many of the critics deemed worthy to contribute to this most definitive of scores could barely be described as ‘film critics’ in the now faintly remembered true sense of the word. Former YouTube fanboys (and it is almost exclusively the boys) are elevated to esteemed movie experts with an equal stake in the praise or condemnation of a film or TV show.
The user can, however, view the reviews of ‘top critics’ only - critics from major publications and well regarded magazines. There’s also a ‘user score’, which is interesting, as this figure often deviates strongly from the ‘professional’ verdict.
Former YouTube fanboys (and it is almost exclusively the boys) are elevated to esteemed movie experts with an equal stake in the praise or condemnation of a film or TV show.
Is there a solution?
There may be. You could simply take a chance on a film, relying on your own reaction, and formulate your own opinions. Or you could identify a critic or critics that you find particularly compelling and go with their suggestions.
Ultimately, whatever stimulates original thought is the way to go. A simple yes or no won’t suffice. Too many opinions are simply the parroting of other voices. It’s causing a mass case of arrested development, when it comes to taste.
But that’s the trouble with opinions, I guess. Everyone is wrong about everything, just about all the time.