MovieChat Forums > Captain Marvel (2019) Discussion > Rotten Tomatoes president: We didn't cha...

Rotten Tomatoes president: We didn't change site to protect Captain Marvel


I looked this up because of the controversy. Debunks some conspiracy theories, like Mr Mouse controlling RT.

https://www.cnet.com/news/rotten-tomatoes-president-we-didnt-change-site-to-protect-captain-marvel/
https://editorial.rottentomatoes.com/article/making-some-changes/

Going forward, users will no longer be able to comment on a film before it comes out. That's just one of numerous changes announced Monday in the first post in a new Rotten Tomatoes blog that will be regularly maintained with information about site updates.

"We are disabling the comment function prior to a movie's release date," the post reports. "Unfortunately, we have seen an uptick in non-constructive input, sometimes bordering on trolling, which we believe is a disservice to our general readership. We have decided that turning off this feature for now is the best course of action."

reply

Thanks dceu fans , because of your jealousy and hatred for marvel, us real movie fans lose out because of your edgelord ways

reply

Marvel dick riders like you are equally as guilty, maybe if you just ignored these dceu fans instead of constantly replying to their comments and picking fights with them they would have eventually faded away but no you had to keep pushing and pushing to get in the last word while at the same time feeding the trolls, giving them what they wanted....well you reap what you sow, and now you should accept responsibility for your actions instead of just blaming the DCEU fans.

reply

DCEU fans have taken away our free speech from RT, I cannot ignore that , horrid fan base , bitter and twisted

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Yeah well freedom of speech doesn't equal freedom from consequences

Well said!!!

That's like when people used to say that there were no freedom of speech in old Soviet Russia, which is a LIE. You had freedom of speech back then. You were free to say whatever you wanted. Of course, the consequence would be that you'd go straight-forward to some Gulag. But hey!, freedom of speech doesn't equal freedom from consequences! :-)

reply

Are you for real? Do you honestly think this would have happened had Captain Marvel been at a 90+% want-to-see rating? You honestly believe this shit? You think huge corporations are just beacons of truth? God damn, you people are just unreal.

Captain Marvel want-to-see hits 27% and it's still dropping, RT removes want-to-see... "it was a coincidence, derp!"

reply

Want To See is there. 20,000 and climbing.

Troll Babies are butt hurt! Start your own movie site so we can ignore you.

reply

No, it's not there. Not in any meaningful way whatsoever. It is now absolutely useless and tells us absolutely nothing about the general attitudes towards a film. It used to have a percentage, a core metric and feature of RT, and now of course it doesn't. And guess what, it also doesn't even allow you to say you don't want to see a film anymore. There is only the positive option.

Seems like you were quite butthurt about people expressing their opinions and saying they didn't want to see Captain Marvel, you along with all the other far-leftist freaks and people with their heads up Disney's ass. I guess I should also call you a "troll", because you don't agree with me, right?

People can disagree all day, but when you start to censor a certain side, or take away discussion because it doesn't line up with your agenda or a company's agenda, it becomes something else entirely. And you cowards cream yourselves over that kind of censorship. It's really sick.

By the way, you are by far one of the dumbest people I've encountered on Moviechat, I just want you to know that. Cheers, dumbass

reply

Satan2016 is not far left. He’s actually pretty conservative from what I’ve seen.

reply

You are just another dumb troll jumping on the anti-Larson bandwagon. The RT "interested" percentage became useless because of you people. Same with Imdb opening votes/rating before wide release.

reply

Yes, totally useless, because it doesn't match your personal fanboy opinions on the movie. Pathetic. And again, "troll" with you dipshits just means anyone who disagrees with you... which again, you cowards just can't abide. Truly, truly pathetic.

reply

True, it wasn't done to protect Captain Marvel, it was done to protect Captain Marvel, Star Wars 9, and every other big divisive blockbuster in the future.

reply

And who can blame them?
Groups of trolls banding together to vote against something they don't like is hardly representative of the real opinion of the site-goers. Other websites have tried similar things to even out troll votes and troll tendencies.

reply

Personally, I don't see the point of the 'Anticipation Scores', although it is a shame that RT felt compelled to delete the pre-release comments section, not least because I suspect that the vast majority of cinema-goers won't care what a bunch of semi-organised trolls, with mostly misogynist tendencies, say about Captain Marvel. It simply won't affect most ordinary cinemagoers', or indeed the majority of RT users', decision to see the film, much like the racist nonsense spewed prior to the release of Black Panther did nothing to dent that film's phenomenal BO.

But I'm not a fan of limiting speech (and yes, I appreciate this isn't a 'free speech' matter) unless it is clearly abusive, or turning a bunch of misogynist idiots into martyrs.

reply

I'm not a fan of limiting free speech either. But RT is a private platform. There's no freedom being taken away from you. Its also a private platform that is routinely attacked by troll campaigns. There's no way you can justify forcing RT to just lay back and accept the troll campaigns which also have the potential to hurt RT's integrity.

Any conservative should agree that RT should be allowed to run their business how they choose.

reply

Of course they should, although I should add that I am not a conservative (quite the contrary in fact).

Every business should have the right to organise itself as its owners feel fit, within the law. But I can still give an opinion as to whether I agree with that decision, as much as it may be their prerogative, just as I had an opinion regarding the IMDb's decision to discontinue its forums.

reply

Troll campaigns, such an easy slur to chuck about. You dislike the movie, your a troll, you dislike the female lead your a sexist, you dislike the black lead your a racist, it's tiresome and lazy. Rotten Tomatoes can do whatever they wish it's there website but in doing so opens up such resentment and arguments towards the access media. The poll on RT about interest in Captain Marvel was exactly that a poll. The anticpation score bottomed out at around 27%, thats bad, really bad, coincidence RT took it down, maybe maybe not. But what people can't hide is the comments that were left, they have been recorded by Youtubers including Nerdrotic and read out in videos. Not 1 commennt was sexist, racist or misogynistic but the media have already posted multiple articles saying toxic fans are trolling RT and review bombing the site and then again it gets taken down, coincendence again, maybe maybe not. You couldn't leave reviews by audience or critic before movie release so how were they review bombing the site, the anser is they were not. The media is lying to you because we now live in a society that can't criticize woman. Go watch the many videos regarding the subject by both men and woman and say if RT took it down because of anything else but to protect this mvoie and more like it.

reply

Troll campaigns, such an easy slur to chuck about. You dislike the movie, your a troll, you dislike the female lead your a sexist, you dislike the black lead your a racist, it's tiresome and lazy. Rotten Tomatoes can do whatever they wish it's there website but in doing so opens up such resentment and arguments towards the access media. The poll on RT about interest in Captain Marvel was exactly that a poll. The anticpation score bottomed out at around 27%, thats bad, really bad, coincidence RT took it down, maybe maybe not. But what people can't hide is the comments that were left, they have been recorded by Youtubers including Nerdrotic and read out in videos. Not 1 commennt was sexist, racist or misogynistic but the media have already posted multiple articles saying toxic fans are trolling RT and review bombing the site and then again it gets taken down, coincendence again, maybe maybe not.
YouTube Influencers are profiting by being both disingenuous and duplicitous. You've are both misinformed and are abetting bad actors for their profit.

As a subscriber to RT, I added an account years ago because I was a member of Flixster which bought them, I occasionally did vote Interested/Not Interested. So before this RT story became a huge story I was already viewing the comments left for a movie that had not been released, Captain Marvel. RT only showed some 20 pages of comments not the 20K to 30K that were out there. And yes a large number of the comments were just as RT described and NOT what the youtuber Nerdotic was stating as he didn't review them all. Since this Brie Larson/CM backlash has started the number of constant postings by Influencers on youtube has been an epidemic. They have been quick to pump out videos almost on an hourly basis because they get traffic because of the controversy and they keep fueling the controversy by creating ever more inflammatory videos.

They are making a killing over this. They have every reason to post constantly and to continue to manufacture and "Goose" the outrage because they benefit. If you go back and read what Brie said at NO time was she disrespectful to 40 year old white male reviewers. They can take the observation any way that they want to but they were not maligned, nor excluded nor disparaged in any way what so ever.

Some of those commenters where removed and RT said as much. Just because some video only showed a few pages did not mean that RT was lying. I read some of those early on and they had NOTHING to do with the movie and were directed at Brie Larson personally. That same trend is happening here and some posters are getting their posts deleted.

reply

Brie larsson deserves to be attacked. If she is going to attack white males, then she should be prepared for the retaliation. Frankly im not overly bothered about RT, just trying to make a seperate discusion. My hate is with the constant attack on white males because we dont like said actors particular work. Like i stated, woman your a sexist, black your a racist. Whatever happened to not liking something because you personally don't like it for no other reason than that you just dislike the movie. I can absolutely guarantee that when this movie is released and the numbers are lets say underpar (i know it will make money, im just using an example) the access media and all the shill reporters and critics will all the say the same thing "white male trolls hate woman". This movie will underperform because 1: Captain Marvel is a very poor charcater and basically Marvels Mary Sue and 2: Brie Larsson for not keeping her mouth shut. She doesn't want to be reviewed by white men or be told things by white men then i and many others don't want to be lectured too by a white chick.

reply

Of course you can give your opinion. Thats what we're all here for. But I'm sure you understand that if your opinion shows a hole in it then you might get asked to provide a deeper explanation for that opinion.

The way I see it RT only serves one purpose for its general audience. That is to give its audience accurate ratings by doing their due diligence of aggregating peoples' opinions. If the aggregate is skewed by troll campaigns then RT is not doing its due diligence and kinda loses its purpose.

Squabbling over free speech doesn't really apply here. What does apply is if RT limits free speech to modify its own aggregates. Then we have a real problem. But it is still not a free speech problem. It is a false aggregate problem. So anything RT does to maintain its aggregate is fine by me since thats what RT needs to be RT.

reply

Like I said, I don't particularly agree with the Anticipation Score. I don't understand why it existed to begin with.

But I'm not sure why pre-release comments were removed. These were individual opinions. I'm not sure how they could be construed as skewing anything.

And I've been careful about not making this a 'Free Speech' issue.

reply

A pre-release comment sounds the same as an anticipation score. A troll campaign can give inaccurate anticipation scores to make it look like anticipation is low when it really isn't. A troll campaign can also give inaccurate comments to make it look like the majority of opinions are negative when they really aren't.

It just seems to me like all of this stuff would better suit RT's purpose if it wasn't allowed until the actual product was released.

reply

These wankers will continue to badmouth a film they haven't seen, or have seen and would actually admit was good (if they were honest with themselves), once it is on release and they can finally discuss it on the forums.

reply

I mean its not like we don't have other platforms for that. MC being one of them. I imagine the negativity was a factor in why IMDB got rid of these things. Moviechat has the freedom of not being a scoring site so all wankers are welcome here :)

reply

But I'm not sure why pre-release comments were removed. These were individual opinions. I'm not sure how they could be construed as skewing anything.
The Pre-Release comments were just as RT described them, "Unfortunately, we have seen an uptick in non-constructive input, sometimes bordering on trolling, which we believe is a disservice to our general readership. We have decided that turning off this feature for now is the best course of action."

The rapid surge in "Not Interested" maybe not actively coordinated was too consistent with trolling in the large numbers in a short period of time. Additionally the activity did not meet the spirit of why the feature was there in the first place. RT was a pro-Movie website and not a forum for, venting against actors, movies and critics. The purpose of RT was to tangentially assist in SELLING tickets. My gawd it is owned by Fandango! The pre-Release information was less used to inform potential ticket buyers and more so to inform studios as to potential ticket sales.

When a movie is finally released the Interested/Not Interested disappeared. How would that help fans of the movie again?

RT's move to remove the comment section from Pre-Release movies has nothing to do with Speech suppression or censorship.


reply

But muh freedoms

reply

Yes, they are Free to be Willfully Ignorant, Free to be Stupid, Free to be Unlearned, Free to be Opinionated, Free to be Biased, Free to be Unwashed by Knowledge and there is NOTHING that the GUB-MENT could or should do about it.

They revel in their Freedom.

reply

Sorry, but when did those of us on the left go from being the biggest champions of freedom, to being the ones that sneer at it?

We're gradually becoming everything the right lambasts us for being: a bunch of anti-democratic, big government, pro-corporatist, nanny state elitists.

We need more Chomsky on the left, and less Stalin. Less support for mass conglomerates, and more support for the masses.

reply

The only time we lose freedom is when government chips away at the constitution and the bill of rights. The "but muh freedom" idiots are always complaining about private companies like twitter and youtube "de-platforming" because of ideology when in reality it has little to do with ideology and everything to do with private companies acting like private companies. What people need to understand is that if we restrict private companies the way the "but muh freedom" people want then we're actually losing freedom.

reply

But I don't really understand why some parts of the so-called left are more interested in defending Disney and other big corporations over the anonymous and powerless masses. It seems very paradoxical to me. It seems counterintuitive to who and what the left should be defending.

The left really needs to go back to populism and standing up for the poor and lower classes, and stand against corporations.

It's sad to see Democrats renege on their apparent opposition to Amazon building its headquarters in New York, and now bend over backwards to accommodate Bezos any which way they can. I had hoped that the popularity of proper leftists like Ocasio-Cortez and Sanders might signal a push-back against the corporate wing of the Democratic Party.

reply

Who brought up Disney? This thread is about RT. I made a post about Bezos myself noting that I wasn't a fan of his. Did you take that post to mean I defend billionaires? Your whole angle here seems weird.

reply

I wasn't specifically referring to anything you said. I was talking about the whole philosophy among some parts of the left these days in terms of standing up for corporations, and bear in mind that Captain Marvel, the film that spurred these changes at RT, is a Disney feature.

But to be fair to you, I do recall you criticising Bezos/Amazon recently, so, like I say, my criticisms aren't specifically aimed at you and they certainly don't wholly apply to you.

reply

From what I've seen the "defense" of Disney from the left is on the social side. That includes Disney firing James Gunn due to an alt-right flunky's personal war against twitter SJWs.

Perhaps you can be more specific about what it is that Disney is doing wrong that is being defended by the left. Because all I'm seeing are platitudes the likes of which I'd see from thrillhouse calling someone a corporate shill without saying anything else.

reply

Disney is taking so much offence over the trolls attacking its product on social media, when I suspect any impact these trolls have will be a drop in the ocean, as it was for Black Panther, the biggest hit of 2018. I'm confused as to why anyone who identifies with the political left would take Disney's side on the issue of censorship versus free expression.

Sony is another corporation some parts of the left seem to want to go to bat for, even after it was demonstrated that several YouTube comments legitimately criticising Ghostbusters 2016 had 'magically' disappeared from Sony's channel, whilst all the racist and misogynist bile attributable to genuine trolls, had been allowed to remain on their pages. It seems Sony were so afraid of reasonable criticism that it wanted to paint all the film's critics as being entirely dominated by racists and misogynists.

But the truth is this is all precisely why Bernie Sanders is so popular at the moment. Because he is not simply sticking up for identity politics and all the oh-so-woke corporations who pay lip-service to politically correct language and optics. He is speaking for the little people, of all races, genders, sexualities, cultures, and backgrounds. Not just the educated elite with their college degrees in the 'corporate art of speaking woke'.

reply

Again we're talking about private platforms. If trolling takes place against someone on social media such as twitter (a private platform) then that someone gets to complain to twitter. If twitter deems the troll breaches the TOS then the troll is removed. Twitter does this to accounts on both sides.

Milo Yiannopolous for example. He clearly violated twitter TOS with his fabricated Leslie Jones tweets (most people don't know about that and only know about his Ghostbusters review and think thats why he was banned).

The same goes for Youtube. It's not up to Sony who gets banned from Youtube. Granted I wish Youtube was more clear on their TOS but they have the right to remove trolls from their platform.

Alex Jones for example. Youtube had enough of Sandy Hook parents suing them for stupid shit Alex said.

People need to understand what exactly it is they are complaining about before getting so worked up over it. Private platforms have the right to moderate their platforms. They do the risk assessment all the time on which trolls to keep for the time being and which to delete but at the end of the day they are private companies within their rights.

And you won't find a bigger Bernie supporter than myself.

reply

Disney benefits from the trolls. I'm sure those few that trashed this movie will be vastly outnumbered by the people who will pay a ticket and see CM just because they've heard news about the attempted sabotage. Not to mention critics will be less harsh about the movie's flaws which means better ratings which means bigger audience equals more money for Disney.

reply

Freedom of speech isn't just a US law, it's a concept. Also, this idea that these are "troll" campaigns is totally bogus from the examples I've seen given. "Trolls" now equals anyone who disagrees with leftist philosophy and makes their opinion known.

Do you have any verifiable examples, or just baseless assertions from various slanted "news" sites? If you list some, I'd be glad to look into the statistics. The Last Jedi and Black Panther can be checked off the list immediately, and I'll explain why if necessary.

reply

You aren't paying attention. Whenever a major movie has an LA/NY premier, Imd b opens voting/reviews early. Fake 1* & 10* votes and reviews that don't describe the movie at all. Just check imdb this Monday!

reply

Just because someone doesn't want to see Captain Marvel doesn't mean they are a troll. This is getting hysterical. Some people don't want to see it, and some people were angry at Brie Larson's comments, and that made them not want to see the movie either, and guess what??? They're not trolls either.

The word "troll" as it relates to the internet has been completely useless for a long time now.

If someone feels differently than you on the internet, now you just call them a "troll". That should become the definition.

Troll: someone who disagrees with my opinion on the internet.

I personally love all this stuff. I find it hysterical, and as usual, with anything regarding politics, I have a blast picking out all the generalizations used.

reply

Nobody's saying someone is a troll, a sexist, or a misogynist just because he or she doesn't want to see this movie. However the vast majority of people voting on RT were there for all the wrong reasons. I don't see why there even was a possibility to leave a comment, whether you'll click "interested" or "not interested" is an expression of your interest enough.

reply

Well, they didn't want to see the movie... which was literally what they were expressing and the entire point of that section. And instead of just "not interested" without any explanation, a comment... allows a reason to be expressed for the choice.

"Wrong reasons"

reply

Well yeah, trashing a movie because the lead is more liberal than some people, that is "wrong reasons".

reply

"Wrong reasons" is subjective. And in my opinion people should be able to bash or praise a movie as much as they'd like, and for whatever reason they see fit.

Unless the site doesn't care about free speech. Yes, I'm aware it is their site and they have the right to shut down any speech they don't like, which is what they've done.

They're all trolls, everyone who clicked the "don't want to see" button...just read all the "non-biased" articles written about it all over the web. I love the headlines: "TROLLS Try to Sabotage Captain America!!!". No generalizations in those headlines. Haha.

reply

For trashing movies for whatever reason you see fit you have other sites, this one included. A line should be drawn somewhere and I'm glad RT resolved the situation this way, for CM and other movies that will follow - I'm sure those snowflakes will soon find another movie to bash.

reply

So you agree with the "no negative reviews or comments" policy?

Only nice thoughts need apply?

I don't want to visit, follow, or partake in a site that doesn't allow all opinions.

Enjoy RT, happy fairy tale land where no negative opinions will exist. I've lost all respect for RT. Much like IMDb, I've deleted my account and will never visit the site again.

I was annoyed by Brie Lawson's comments, but I have no ill will towards her and I have no issues with Captain Marvel. I'll probably rent it at some point. My issue is with sites banning commenting because a thought is "negative", saying because they don't want to see a movie or are bashing it they are "trolls", an annoying term that is so overused at this point that it just needs to go away. It means absolutely nothing at this point.

Oh well...

reply

How can anyone review a movie without even seeing it?

reply

That's impossible.

So why take a fake review before the movie is released seriously? Ignore it. The movie isn't out yet.

reply

So you agree with the "no reviews" policy?

reply

they are connected to fandango a ticket seller site, they want positive buzz for dizney films, after opening weekend they don't care, that tells it all

reply

The fun part of the "Disney controls RT" conspiracy theory is...it's not only easily disproved....what it DOES prove works against the DCEU stans.


On the Rottentomatoes site, if you navigate to the Privacy policy it takes you to Fandango.com and then under "Our Owners", this is what you see:

"When the Services receive or collect information, that information is being received and collected, and will be owned, by Fandango and each of "Fandango's Owners" (i.e., each company that has an ownership interest in Fandango). While Fandango's use, handling, disclosure and practices with respect to that information will be governed by this Privacy Policy, each Fandango Owner's use, handling, disclosure and practices with respect to that information will be governed by that Fandango Owner's privacy policy. Fandango's Owners are currently NBC/Universal and Warner Bros. If you want to learn more about the privacy practices of NBC/Universal and Warner Bros., we encourage you to review their policies (linked below):"

Not only does Disney NOT own Rottentomatoes, but Warner Brothers (the owners of the DCEU) DO! So, all those people complaining about Rottentomatoes ruining DC movies have only the parent company to blame if there was a lick of credence to that at all.

reply

A likely story.

Of course the change was made due to this movie.

reply

I have no doubt that this Captain Marvel was the reason for RT score removal. Whether Disney had anything to do with it has to be seen. The low RT score doesn’t benefit anyone including Disney, Fandango, the theaters themselves. I seriously doubt RT would have removed the scores had Captain Marvel had been like 96 or something respectable.

reply

It happened with Black Panther and most movies with feminist leads like Amy Schumer. I saw it years ago on Imdb boards.

reply

Yeah I remember the Amy Schumer one in Netflix.

reply

[deleted]

Bingo.

reply