Review Objectivity is Elusive These Days

[Wifetheif]

Some of you have no doubt noticed that Rotten Tomatoes has dropped the audience score for the Star Wars themes show "The Acolyte." while leaving the eighty percent critics score. This is problematical for a number of reasons. While there is no doubt that there was a lot of review bombing of The Acolyte objective reviewers have concluded that the show is not very good. Some folks review bombed the show not necessarily because of the show itself but as a protest as it was produced and directed by Lesley Headland who was Harvey Weinstein's personal assistant and was involved up to her eyeballs in his sexual violation of multiple actresses. She should be a pariah, NOT put in charge of a family-friendly franchise like Star Wars! What all of this is evidence of is how the media creators are attempting and have succeeded in getting a strangle hold on reviews to diffuse criticism and to artificially pump up sales by astroturfing word of mouth for movies through chicanery. To get good reviews, media powerhouses have been sending gifts and swag to media influencers and reviewers, which is of course, nothing new. They have gotten a lot more aggressive about it. Even old reliable sources for objective reviews have been compromised. Here is a prime example https://www.kirkusreviews.com/book-reviews/ernest-cline/bridge-to-bat-city/ Note that the review does not comment on the quality of the prose or the story. The illustrator actually gets more praise than the author! Cline's book is horribly written with the word "suddenly" appearing THREE times in the span of TWO sentences! A sentence begins and ends with "suddenly," the word then appears in the very next sentence! It is a book for children about bats that claims that bats don't have rabies when bats are, in fact, the number one carrier of rabies in North America. What an irresponsible message to send.
All of this makes me happy for the unfiltered and honest reviews at this site. Sure sometimes the folks who reviews our stories engage in one bombing or get off on personal attacks, most of them leave comments that are constructive and can help us improve our writing. Imagine what L-com would look like if Laurel only allowed positive, upbeat reviews.

 

[intim8]

Reviews for a lot of things have become politicized, since the works themselves have become politicized
(and massively corporatized). People see agendas, pandering, and ulterior motives in so much entertainment now, and they're not always wrong. Both the producers and consumers are guilty of creating the environment.

Here, except for LW, which suffers some of the same problems, the work is not politicized. Yet.

 

[djrip]

It's like you gotta read everything yourself these days!

 

[AwkwardlySet]

While there is no doubt that there was a lot of review bombing of The Acolyte objective reviewers have concluded that the show is not very good. Some folks review bombed the show not necessarily because of the show itself but as a protest as it was produced and directed by Lesley Headland who was Harvey Weinstein's personal assistant and was involved up to her eyeballs in his sexual violation of multiple actresses. She should be a pariah, NOT put in charge of a family-friendly franchise like Star Wars!

I... really don't think that's why the show is getting such bad reviews.

 

[GlennJenko]

objective reviewers

Could you please explain what exactly an "objective review" is? Reviews are by nature subjective.

was Harvey Weinstein's personal assistant and was involved up to her eyeballs in his sexual violation of multiple actresses.

I've not seen any proof that she was involved in or even knew of what he was doing. The fact Disney hired her when they freaked out so much about something James Gunn had said over 10 years prior says to me she couldn't have been that involved given how big the Weinstein thing was. If you have information to the contrary, I'd honestly like to see it.

I... really don't think that's why the show is getting such bad reviews.

Yes, it's because they ruined everyone's favourite Jedi, Ki-Adi Mundi.

 

[Wifetheif]

Objective Reviewer i.e a reviewer for an independent media organization one not tied to Disney or the big media chains.
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-th...r career by,pleasant time at Miramax, however.
She signed some NDA's that have yet to be released and she claimed that she viewed him as "untouchable" that certainly sounds like she was keeping her eyes closed.
She was hired by Kathleen Kennedy rumor has it over the objections of the Disney brass. Kennedy argued that "the Acolyte" would be a big success and needed Hedland. The adult content of the most recent episode with implied male nudity and nude guy saying to a female character if she would like to touch his lightsaber - Apparently has the Disney brass climing the walls with rage and has alreadyu cost them a ton of Disney+ subscribers.

 

[Wifetheif]

Objective Reviewer i.e a reviewer for an independent media organization one not tied to Disney or the big media chains.
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-the-acolyte-leslye-headland-controversial/#:~:text=Headland began her career by,pleasant time at Miramax, however.
She signed some NDA's that have yet to be released and she claimed that she viewed him as "untouchable" that certainly sounds like she was keeping her eyes closed.
She was hired by Kathleen Kennedy rumor has it over the objections of the Disney brass. Kennedy argued that "the Acolyte" would be a big success and needed Hedland. The adult content of the most recent episode with implied male nudity and nude guy saying to a female character if she would like to touch his lightsaber - Apparently has the Disney brass climing the walls with rage and has already cost them a ton of Disney+ subscribers.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Objective Reviewer i.e a reviewer for an independent media organization one not tied to Disney or the big media chains.
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-the-acolyte-leslye-headland-controversial/#:~:text=Headland began her career by,pleasant time at Miramax, however.
She signed some NDA's that have yet to be released and she claimed that she viewed him as "untouchable" that certainly sounds like she was keeping her eyes closed.
She was hired by Kathleen Kennedy rumor has it over the objections of the Disney brass. Kennedy argued that "the Acolyte" would be a big success and needed Hedland. The adult content of the most recent episode with implied male nudity and nude guy saying to a female character if she would like to touch his lightsaber - Apparently has the Disney brass climing the walls with rage and has alreadyu cost them a ton of Disney+ subscribers.

There is that, but the truth is that the show is abysmally bad. The plot is moronic, and the acting ranges from decent to "are you fucking kidding me?" The show also breaks SW canon in the most ridiculous ways, and it once again inserts identity politics into Star Wars, forcefully and mindlessly.

The problem of course stems from those who are decision-makers like Kathleen Kennedy and Bob Iger, but I want to point out one more thing. The way they are picking showrunners for these big-budget shows completely baffles the mind. I would once again say that it's all about the image and identity politics. Let's take a quick look.

Star Wars: Acolyte

They hired Leslye Hedland. It baffles the mind. She literally has nothing to show for in her portfolio that would make her eligible to run the show of this budget and of this much fanbase. She only produced some smalltime stuff. Ridiculous.


The Lord of the Rings: Rings of Power

They hired Patrick Mckay and John Payne as showrunners. Jesus Christ. Just look at their portfolio. They are literally only listed as uncredited writers in Star Trek Beyond, which means they had a minor role there only. And you leave it to such two nobodies to run the show with such a huge budget, a show based on the most important and most influential Fantasy Book of all times? The fandom of The Lord of the Rings is fucking huge, I'd say rivaling that of Star Wars. And you put the show in the hands of these two guys who are not young at all yet no one ever heard of them? I mean, were they fucking high when they made this decision? It baffles the mind completely.


The Wheel of Time show:

They hired Rafe Judkins as showrunner of the show based on one of the most beloved Fantasy book series of all times. The budget is also very high and the fandom is quite big. And who is Rafe Judkins? The guy was a co-producer on a few shows and that's it. He is best known as the winner of The Survivor ( I think he was the winner in one season?)
And you leave it to such a person to run a show that's probably more complex than the previous two I mentioned as there are so many books, there are so many characters, there are so many POVs, so many different nations and nuances.

You can definitely see a pattern here, so those shows can hardly be better than what they are. The capabilities, talent, and experience of those showrunners are megaparsecs away from being able to competently run the shows of that size and complexity. Hollywood is self-destructing, rapidly.

​

 

[Britva415]

they ruined everyone's favourite Jedi, Ki-Adi Mundi

I watch the show and I don't know who that is.

I don't know them by name from any other Star Wars stuff I've seen, either.

If they're ruined, it's imperceptible to me.

 

[GlennJenko]

Objective Reviewer i.e a reviewer for an independent media organization one not tied to Disney or the big media chains.
https://screenrant.com/star-wars-the-acolyte-leslye-headland-controversial/#:~:text=Headland began her career by,pleasant time at Miramax, however.
She signed some NDA's that have yet to be released and she claimed that she viewed him as "untouchable" that certainly sounds like she was keeping her eyes closed.
She was hired by Kathleen Kennedy rumor has it over the objections of the Disney brass. Kennedy argued that "the Acolyte" would be a big success and needed Hedland. The adult content of the most recent episode with implied male nudity and nude guy saying to a female character if she would like to touch his lightsaber - Apparently has the Disney brass climing the walls with rage and has alreadyu cost them a ton of Disney+ subscribers.

Wow that is a whole bunch of hearsay.

And again, just because they're "independent" doesn't mean they're objective. Because, again, reviews are by nature subjective.

EDIT: Also funny you mention objectivity given your only source appears to be Screen Rant of all sites.

I watch the show and I don't know who that is.

I don't know them by name from any other Star Wars stuff I've seen, either.

If they're ruined, it's imperceptible to me.

Apologies if it wasn't clear, I was making a joke.

Ki-Adi Mundi was in one scene in episode 4 of Acolyte on Coruscant and certain people lost their minds on how it "broke canon" (it didn't) because he's in the prequel films. They were suddenly acting like they'd always loved him even though he has about three lines in the prequels and his main impact on the fandom is a meme line he says.

 

[NoTalentHack]

Everything has always been political. Choosing to "not take sides" is, in itself, political. Choosing to make a show 90% straight white men was always political; it's just that the politics were of the kind that catered to the people holding the most power.

"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

We can argue that The Acolyte was or wasn't good; I haven't seen it, and I don't particularly care. I didn't like Captain Marvel, despite a longstanding affection for the character, because I recognized it as a fairly mid-tier Marvel movie; I loved Captain America, even though it was also a fairly mid-tier Marvel movie. Everyone should be able to have their particular mid-tier but still "fuck yeah!" filmgoing experience.

Reviews have never been objective, but people liked to pretend that they were for a whole host of reasons. The guys review bombing The Marvels, The Acolyte, etc. also endlessly praised terrible fucking movies that were about straight white guys, because those weren't "political" to them. But they were; they always were.

Choosing to not have a Black Widow movie until after she was dead was political (look up Ike Perlmutter and the influence he wielded to great ill at Marvel if you doubt that). Choosing to have out gay characters in major roles in Star Trek: Discovery was political; choosing to have a woman instead of a man play Riker's love interest in TNG's "The Outcast" thirty years before was, too (Frakes argued the character should be played by a man for greater impact but the studio overrode him).

Yeah, there have been shitty showrunner decisions (both decisions by showrunners and decisions about who to put in charge of shows) on shows that angered a particular segment of aggrieved white dudes. So what? There have been shitty decisions that doomed shows all over the place, but when they were ones that weren't "woke" (whatever the fuck that means this week), those guys didn't say shit. "Iron Man 2 sucked, but that's just because they rushed it into production." "Thor: The Dark World sucked, but it was just a misfire." "The prequel trilogy sucked, but that was just Lucas getting too much power."

Now that it's not straight white dudes fucking things up, though? Or it is straight white dudes fucking things up while featuring a diverse cast? Woke! It's woke and identity politics and Hollywood corruption and and and.

 

[Yarglenurp]

I can say all I get out of this is that a lot of people are way too tied to particular media franchises as part of their personal identity.

There are literally tons of good movies, shows, music, etc. There is more of it being made each month. If someone is blowing a franchise, just… ignore it. You don’t own it. If it was hyper-successful, it just goes into a corporate bonus for the CEO. And you get the benefit of giving him a media blowjob for the “good” he’s doing for your beloved franchise.

If something sucks, stop watching it. It really is that simple. None of this shit is real. You’re acting like Jedi are real. Jedi aren’t real. Sauron is not real. The Wheel of Time is not real. Even if you loved the new ones, they’ll just remake them again in another 20 years or so.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Everything has always been political. Choosing to "not take sides" is, in itself, political. Choosing to make a show 90% straight white men was always political; it's just that the politics were of the kind that catered to the people holding the most power.

"When you're accustomed to privilege, equality feels like oppression."

We can argue that The Acolyte was or wasn't good; I haven't seen it, and I don't particularly care. I didn't like Captain Marvel, despite a longstanding affection for the character, because I recognized it as a fairly mid-tier Marvel movie; I loved Captain America, even though it was also a fairly mid-tier Marvel movie. Everyone should be able to have their particular mid-tier but still "fuck yeah!" filmgoing experience.

Reviews have never been objective, but people liked to pretend that they were for a whole host of reasons. The guys review bombing The Marvels, The Acolyte, etc. also endlessly praised terrible fucking movies that were about straight white guys, because those weren't "political" to them. But they were; they always were.

Choosing to not have a Black Widow movie until after she was dead was political (look up Ike Perlmutter and the influence he wielded to great ill at Marvel if you doubt that). Choosing to have out gay characters in major roles in Star Trek: Discovery was political; choosing to have a woman instead of a man play Riker's love interest in TNG's "The Outcast" thirty years before was, too (Frakes argued the character should be played by a man for greater impact but the studio overrode him).

Yeah, there have been shitty showrunner decisions (both decisions by showrunners and decisions about who to put in charge of shows) on shows that angered a particular segment of aggrieved white dudes. So what? There have been shitty decisions that doomed shows all over the place, but when they were ones that weren't "woke" (whatever the fuck that means this week), those guys didn't say shit. "Iron Man 2 sucked, but that's just because they rushed it into production." "Thor: The Dark World sucked, but it was just a misfire." "The prequel trilogy sucked, but that was just Lucas getting too much power."

Now that it's not straight white dudes fucking things up, though? Or it is straight white dudes fucking things up while featuring a diverse cast? Woke! It's woke and identity politics and Hollywood corruption and and and.

Not sure to whom you are replying here. I never mentioned reviews because they tend to be biased even with the best of intentions. I believe I know whose reviews you were referring to and I mostly agree. Those guys are biased in their reviews, not so much in criticizing these objectively crap shows, but because they don't give the same scrutiny to some macho movies and similar crap. I found Top Gun Maverick and the last John Wick terrible too. So my post was only about my own opinion.
When you write about these identity politics in movies, you are straying a bit into whataboutism. "Yes this is political bullshit but there was some of that even before." I don't think that's a good argument.

I am not sure how clear I was in my previous post so I'll try to do better. I am certainly not criticizing diversity in movies. I am criticizing when the reason for hiring a clearly incompetent showrunner is that person's activism. So you hire them knowing you can brag about how you support diversity. All of these shows were terribly written and managed. That's a sad truth.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

I can say all I get out of this is that a lot of people are way too tied to particular media franchises as part of their personal identity.

There are literally tons of good movies, shows, music, etc. There is more of it being made each month. If someone is blowing a franchise, just… ignore it. You don’t own it. If it was hyper-successful, it just goes into a corporate bonus for the CEO. And you get the benefit of giving him a media blowjob for the “good” he’s doing for your beloved franchise.

If something sucks, stop watching it. It really is that simple. None of this shit is real. You’re acting like Jedi are real. Jedi aren’t real. Sauron is not real. The Wheel of Time is not real. Even if you loved the new ones, they’ll just remake them again in another 20 years or so.

That's a silly argument.
We love art, we consume art, we care about art. We get annoyed when that art is being misused. None of these franchises are that important to me, and no, I wouldn't call them truly a part of my identity. But they do matter. If no one reacted to anything, well, I'd say that the world would get away with far more crap. And even today it gets away with too much crap. I sure hope you are not one of those guys who is telling people not to complain or protest about the actions of their government. Just wait for the next government to be elected, eh? Or just move.
This is a forum. We discuss things here. We are supposed to discuss things here in a civilized and reasonable way and I believe we are doing that now.

I also disagree about tons of good movies and shows being made. I haven't seen anything good in years. Maybe that's just a matter of taste. But here, we also often engage in discussing the quality of art and entertainment based on some more objective parameters. We try to at least.

 

[OffNSFW]

Ki-Adi Mundi is the dude in the Phantom Menace with the really tall head. I know all of you saw it 12 times, even the ones who hated it. Especially the ones who hated it.

Anyway, I'm a big fan of simply removing audience review score functionality from places like Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, etc. altogether. There is no reliable use for them whatsoever, and they're a magnet for the world's saddest, most obsessive people.

In fact, most of the Internet would benefit greatly by going back to having zero input from The People. Uh, Literotica being a notable exception.

...My recent story is linked below. Read, rate, and comment!

 

[AwkwardlySet]

Anyway, I'm a big fan of simply removing audience review score functionality from places like Rotten Tomatoes, IMDB, etc. altogether. There is no reliable use for them whatsoever, and they're a magnet for the world's saddest, most obsessive people.

In fact, most of the Internet would benefit greatly by going back to having zero input from The People.

That's an interesting idea. But I believe that the same should be done with the reviews coming from the critics, especially now when we know that many of them are being paid by the studios to give positive reviews to their movies and shows. Big money is at stake here. Movie companies invest hundreds of millions into their projects these days and they certainly won't let some silly thing like impartial criticism tank their movie and make them lose hundreds of millions.

 

[Yarglenurp]

I also disagree about tons of good movies and shows being made. I haven't seen anything good in years. Maybe that's just a matter of taste. But here, we also often engage in discussing the quality of art and entertainment based on some more objective parameters. We try to at least.

That’s not good. It means you’ve gotten old… stuck-in-your-ways old. That’s the second-worst kind of old.

 

[AwkwardlySet]

That’s not good. It means you’ve gotten old… stuck-in-your-ways old. That’s the second-worst kind of old.

Well, I am in my early forties so I don't really consider myself old. But I understand what you mean. It could be that I am stuck in the past when it comes to movies and TV shows. But it could also be that there actually is a significant drop in quality as many other people claim. Maybe it's both. Still, that is why it's good to discuss and share your thoughts with others. By hearing other people and then comparing the opinions, one can nuance their own position better and maybe see some new angles. It's a process.

 

[Yarglenurp]

Well, I am in my early forties so I don't really consider myself old. But I understand what you mean. It could be that I am stuck in the past when it comes to movies and TV shows. But it could also be that there actually is a significant drop in quality as many other people claim. Maybe it's both. Still, that is why it's good to discuss and share your thoughts with others. By hearing other people and then comparing the opinions, one can nuance their own position better and maybe see some new angles. It's a process.

It’s about being open to life and new ideas or new ways of doing things. thousands upon thousands of years of media and art, and only recently things have started sucking? Ridiculous. Nostalgia is a cancer that rots away the foundations of joy.

I am willing to believe that your existing media no longer excites you. But isn’t that more an issue of where you’re looking and how you’re looking at things, instead of the totality of the things themselves?

 

[AwkwardlySet]

It’s about being open to life and new ideas or new ways of doing things. thousands upon thousands of years of media and art, and only recently things have started sucking? Ridiculous. Nostalgia is a cancer that rots away the foundations of joy.

I am willing to believe that your existing media no longer excites you. But isn’t that more an issue of where you’re looking and how you’re looking at things, instead of the totality of the things themselves?

Things have always sucked in one way or the other, it's just that today it gets far more obvious. This isn't nostalgia talking, there are objective parameters pointing towards a severe drop in the quality of writing in movies. We often discuss it here. And it should always be discussed. The "Don't stop to think or to analyze a product, just get excited about the next product" approach that you are kinda advertising here never worked for me and I don't think it has ever been helpful to human society.
I mean, I understand that it's easier, maybe even better, individually speaking, to just enjoy what you can and not spend your time analyzing and criticizing but as I said, I could never do that, as much as I envy those who could. Yeah, I admit I envy them; it's easier to live like that. I also envy truly religious people for the same reason.

 

[djrip]

Does nostalgia blind us to how good things are now? Or to how bad they were then? I think maybe the latter--it was always this way, but we couldn't see that as clearly when we were 20.

But Disney star wars isn't as good as GL SW. That's just a product of pushing out two dozen properties in a couple of years and having no consistent vision in the writing from one film in a supposed trilogy to the next.

Nostalgia makes the old films seem better than they were, yes. They were cheesy in ways nostalgia leads us to overlook. But they were a creator's genuine vision, not random shit thrown at the wall hoping for some to stick. So, now stuff sucks in different ways?

 

[ElectricBlue]

Nostalgia makes the old films seem better than they were, yes. They were cheesy in ways nostalgia leads us to overlook. But they were a creator's genuine vision, not random shit thrown at the wall hoping for some to stick. So, now stuff sucks in different ways?

I think part of the "problem" is the sheer volume of content these days. I have a hunch that the actual number of good movies is about the same as it ever was, but as a percentage of the whole, that number is much smaller. There's so much more dross these days, it all overflows.

 

[Yarglenurp]

Part of the big issue is that the “good writing” was never part of the big productions in storytelling. What was so well-written about Jurassic Park or Terminator 2? The big summer blockbusters of the old era had writing just as bad or worse.

The movies with good writing still exist. You’re just not going to find them coming from the same places that pump out Marvel movies or other big franchise movies.

The Martian was good. Blade Runner 2049 was good. 1917 was good. Dune 2 was good. I could go on, but the point is that good still exists, and it will keep existing.

 

[Britva415]

Things have always sucked in one way or the other

Things sucked a lot harder when I was young, and we had to walk 17 miles to school, uphill both ways, in the snow, with no shoes. Kids today have "sucking" on easy mode!

 

[mildlyaroused]

The audience score for The Acolyte has not been intentionally removed or altered. That's just false. It was gone for about 1 hour then it was back. This has happened to other shows/movies in the past on the site. If you want to argue that Rotten Tomatoes removed it then put it back after backlash, you can do that. But I don't believe it.

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/tv/star_wars_the_acolyte

https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulta...rs-fall-for-fake-rotten-tomatoes-controversy/

This isn't to say that you guys should stop your wider discussion about reviews, critics and censorship, or whatnot. I'm just sayin'...

By the way, I also haven't seen the show and probably won't ever do so.