Red Mosquito

bada wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:In exchange for early access to a game we were working on, most print publications and European magazines agreed to give us a score of at least 85% (85% being a very important number as many contracts stipulate bonuses if their metacritic score is at least 85%). One day the boss blurted it out to me like it was no big deal but I was kinda shocked by it.

I doubt the newspaper critics are that dirty, but it wouldn't surprise me if the magazine and online sites are.

stip wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:In exchange for early access to a game we were working on, most print publications and European magazines agreed to give us a score of at least 85% (85% being a very important number as many contracts stipulate bonuses if their metacritic score is at least 85%). One day the boss blurted it out to me like it was no big deal but I was kinda shocked by it.

I doubt the newspaper critics are that dirty, but it wouldn't surprise me if the magazine and online sites are.

Early access to a game is pretty low key as far as bribes go. I'm not sure what a film co. would be able to offer to influence an aggregator site

BurtReynolds wrote:we should really have an art criticism thread.

-White's writing can be interesting, but he's utterly useless to me as a film critic.
-He's an essayist masquerading as a film critic.
-He uses movies as an excuse to rant about whatever in society is irking him that day, arbitrarily taking minor (or nonexistent) aspects of a movie, expanding its importance, and then ranting about it or celebrating it.
-Whether he's contrarian by nature or choice, he's definitely contrarian.

-RT's qualifications are suspect.
-Nearly all RT critics are writers. That alone is an inherent bias and problem.
-I don't think most professional newspaper film critics are hired for their special insight into movies. Its all writing ability, entertainment value. And how would the editor that hires said critic have the necessary experience to judge any other way?
-Hot takes and snark get work, not brilliant analysis of movies.
-Most of us (not LV) would tend to agree with the general consensus of RT on any given film, but its hardly a reliable measure to go by. Too many factors involved. Too much leeway.
-it's fun to check out and compare with different critics though.

-I just realized art critics have a lot more value to me after the fact (as entertainment) than as a reliable gauge of a movie's quality beforehand.

stip wrote:

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

stip wrote:It's very difficult to read what I've seen of white (maybe this is only his event film reviews) and not imagine that he is at least subconsciously motivated on part by a desire to repudiate whatever the popular opinion happens to be, so as to demonstrate his own superiority by standing apart from it.


That is not to say one can only like BVS for those reasons. Obviously that's nonsense. And clearly this guy is into snyders aesthetic, but that isn't what seems to be motivating his review.

White has been writing art/cultural criticism for decades. His ideology and what he values in art are distinct and coherent. Always have been. I don't think it's at all surprising that a gay black Christian conservative has a radically different viewpoint than other film critics, who tend to be white liberals. He is naturally positioned differently, not deliberately.

Fair point, but his reviews feel like they are picking fights no one else has asked for, or are pre-written so that the film will match the point he already wanted to make (burt's observation about his value as an essayist as opposed to a critic), which gives him a distinctly contrarian feel, even if it is something be layered over a coherent viewpoint

LoathedVermin72 wrote:

stip wrote:What's better?

I suppose if you are too busy to see all the movies you want, it seems reasonable if you find one or a few critics who you trust and relate to. But I guess aggregators are fine if you have no taste

BurtReynolds wrote:

stip wrote:

BurtReynolds wrote:In exchange for early access to a game we were working on, most print publications and European magazines agreed to give us a score of at least 85% (85% being a very important number as many contracts stipulate bonuses if their metacritic score is at least 85%). One day the boss blurted it out to me like it was no big deal but I was kinda shocked by it.

I doubt the newspaper critics are that dirty, but it wouldn't surprise me if the magazine and online sites are.

Early access to a game is pretty low key as far as bribes go. I'm not sure what a film co. would be able to offer to influence an aggregator site

Advertising spots would be a big one, but who knows. Rotten Tomatoes is probably more legit than Metacritic in any case.

EJ wrote:this thread would be a lot more interesting if Dime was obsessed with this movie

LoathedVermin72 wrote:I'm about to go see this, guys

bada wrote:I haven't been on the site in years but I'm pretty sure Harry Knowles was often accused of giving good reviews in exchange of access and stuff.