Captain Marvel [2019]

[yetgdhfgh]

Well the reviews are trickling in and it doesnt exactly sound like a stella movie.

The Guardian and the Independent both very, VERY left wing newspapers only gives it 3/5 stars.

I got a feeling this is gonna be another character that will have to get Russo'ed just like Captain America and to a lesser extent Thor.

Iam still (probably) gonna watch it mainly cause it will most likly somewhat entertain me but mainly cause you can bet the end stinger will lead into End Game and be extremely important.

[Shadowferal]

But why exactly is the movie getting any negative criticism at all?

[Pooti]

Redbox rental. The trailers are not pulling me in. I tend to not goto the theaters to see the heroes I do not already feel a connection to. I probably missed out on seeing Dr Strange in the theater, because I liked it much much more than I ever expected to. I would have missed out on the Thor Ragnarok theater experience had my son talked me into going. I think though, that I will not regret skipping the price of a ticket for this one, just like I made the right call for the Ant-man movies.

[Big Thanks]

They literally removed the option to do it for this movie.

Besides, why does no one understand that RT doesn't rate anything. It's just an aggregate score.

Maths =/= actual discussion and analysis on movies and why you may or may not like them.

Why would you hate a site for gathering up numbers?

I understand how the site works.
Well...i actually dont.
Do you know if they keep picking the same "reviewers" over and over again from a pool.....or is it random everytime?
I understand is not the site that gives the rating....its a pool of reviewers they pick.

[Dhrizzle]

The Skrulls were a pretty big deal, and as I recall early on, they were simply shapeshifters who could mimic form but not mutant powers. I think some genetic engineering shenanigans went on later that let them become able to either gain specific powers or copy them.

Wasn't there a "Ms Marvel is actually a skrull" storyline way back when? Anyone?

The Secret War storyline had a bunch of Super Skrulls in deep cover as quite a few heroes, Marvel may have been one of them. If I remember correctly there are some really iconic moments that were actually performed by Skrulls.

[Svifnymr]

Redbox rental. The trailers are not pulling me in. I tend to not goto the theaters to see the heroes I do not already feel a connection to. I probably missed out on seeing Dr Strange in the theater, because I liked it much much more than I ever expected to. I would have missed out on the Thor Ragnarok theater experience had my son talked me into going. I think though, that I will not regret skipping the price of a ticket for this one, just like I made the right call for the Ant-man movies.

I think one of the problems here too is that you won't be able to rent this one or see it out of theater before EndGame, I believe. So if there's anything important in it, it'll be spoilers or pirated for options.

[Pooti]

I think one of the problems here too is that you won't be able to rent this one or see it out of theater before EndGame, I believe. So if there's anything important in it, it'll be spoilers or pirated for options.

Meh. I guess I will look to the internet for anything that really matters. End credit scenes etc usually pop up pretty quickly once a film hits theaters.

[Pantupino]

Uh oh... 66% on metacritic and was at 70% a bit ago. Rottentomatoes putting it at 80% but we know their bias, even with two different reviews with the same score (2.5/4) has one given it a tomato and another a rotten one.

Not looking good to those who hyped this mediocre film.

[Shinzai]

I understand how the site works.
Well...i actually dont.
Do you know if they keep picking the same "reviewers" over and over again from a pool.....or is it random everytime?
I understand is not the site that gives the rating....its a pool of reviewers they pick.

If any of the registered critics do a review, it goes in. That's about it.

Uh oh... 66% on metacritic and was at 70% a bit ago. Rottentomatoes putting it at 80% but we know their bias, even with two different reviews with the same score (2.5/4) has one given it a tomato and another a rotten one.

Not looking good to those who hyped this mediocre film.

Shit like this is again, (I re-iterate as I do every so often with this nonsense) why most people shouldn't be allowed to look at stats.

Yes, it's 66% on Metacritic.

24 positive reviews.

11 mixed reviews.

1 negative review.

That means it's at least a good film, based on the reviews the critics assessed gave it.

[Big Thanks]

Here ya go.

https://www.vox.com/culture/2017/8/3...aggregate-mean

Thanks!
So is justifiable to "hate rotten tomatoes"
Because they trully pick the reviewers by hand.

The opinions of about 3,000 critics — a.k.a. the “Approved Tomatometer Critics” who have met a series of criteria set by Rotten Tomatoes — are included in the site’s scores, though not every critic reviews every film, so any given score is more typically derived from a few hundred critics, or even less. The scores don’t include just anyone who calls themselves a critic or has a movie blog; Rotten Tomatoes only aggregates critics who have been regularly publishing movie reviews with a reasonably widely read outlet for at least two years, and those critics must be “active,” meaning they've published at least one review in the last year. The site also deems a subset of critics to be “top critics” and calculates a separate score that only includes them.

- - - Updated - - -

If any of the registered critics do a review, it goes in. That's about it.

Its handpicked by rotten tomatoes. (the pool of 3000 reviewers i mean)

[Dhrizzle]

Looks like this one is the first "bad" Marvel movie.

I thought that was Thor 2 or whichever Iron Man sequel people disliked.

[Pantupino]

I thought that was Thor 2 or whichever Iron Man sequel people disliked.

the third one

[Dhrizzle]

As with all movies on RT, you should wait for the audience score. That's usually more telling.

Rotten Tomatoes had negative user reviews for Captain Marvel before it even released which is why they took pre-release reviews off the site.

[Risale]

Only audience scores matter, cuz they do it for free n it's how most really feel

Agreed, yes there will be trolls but in general the average will balance it all out.
Critics in general can kiss my ass as they are so out of touch with what normal people like they just write stuff and expect to get paid and for some reason publishers let them get away with it.

Some examples (1st number are critics, 2nd are the punters like you and I):
Bohemian Rhapsody 61% vs 87%
Glass 37% vs 74%
The upside 40% vs 85%
Alita 60% vs 94%
The Favourite 93% vs 66%

[Shinzai]

Thanks!
So is justifiable to "hate rotten tomatoes"
Because they trully pick the reviewers by hand.



- - - Updated - - -



Its handpicked by rotten tomatoes. (the pool of 3000 reviewers i mean)

It's not handpicked. You literally just posted how it's chosen.

[Big Thanks]

It's not handpicked. You literally just posted how it's chosen.

My english is bad...what does this mean then?

"The opinions of about 3,000 critics — a.k.a. the “Approved Tomatometer Critics” who have met a series of criteria set by Rotten Tomatoes"

[Big Thanks]

Tbf, I posted how it’s chosen. Buddy just ignored it and pushed through with the trolling.

Im so sorry if my english is bad...i never troll in this site

[Shinzai]

My english is bad...what does this mean then?

"The opinions of about 3,000 critics — a.k.a. the “Approved Tomatometer Critics” who have met a series of criteria set by Rotten Tomatoes"

They're people with a record for posting reviews. You have to have at least 2 years of visible reviewing as a background and you have to post legitimate reviews fairly consistently.

It stops people registering as a critic with no proof that they have experience as a reviewer.

It might not be a perfect system, but you can at least look up any of the "Approved Tomatometer Critics" and see their history as a reviewer.

[Big Thanks]

Criteria isn’t the same as hand picked. It’s a set of standards to qualify as a professional critic. Anyone who meets them counts.

If you don’t understand a word, look it up.

WTF!

Is it "PICKED" by rotten tomatoes or not?
Are you "sweet talking" me?

[Big Thanks]

They're people with a record for posting reviews. You have to have at least 2 years of visible reviewing as a background and you have to post legitimate reviews fairly consistently.

It stops people registering as a critic with no proof that they have experience as a reviewer.

It might not be a perfect system, but you can at least look up any of the "Approved Tomatometer Critics" and see their history as a reviewer.

So what i said was not false.
The pool of 3000 is "picked" (i said handpicked, techincalities and whatnot) by them.

Sorry to waste your time and thanks for the discussion
I dont want people to hate me here...but they already do because im really unnoying...

- - - Updated - - -

Proof you’re dwelling under a bridge.

Dude, not cool.
Im completely alone and without friends....you are my only friends