So true. I've liked so many movies that got a super low rating at rotten tomatoes. IMDB is at least better because it's easy to give a rating there. And the fact that audience is both male and female. I've seen lots of women TRY to like movies but they can't because they have different tastes. There should be more movies for women which are judged by equal sexes. For a male as I am , it is hard to look at difficult realities of women. Most of the time we just ignore it and say maybe what they're showing is exaggerated and misguided. That's why men should only stick to judging male movies and leave criticizing movies about female characters to females.
She is right. We need more: More female garbage collectors! More female car mechanics. More women in mines! More women digging ditches and paving roads. More female drywallers to hoist 12-foot sheets to the ceiling of homes. More female loggers. And the list goes on ...
i would be interested to know how many women are reviewing films and are not used in rottentomatoes. Same thing for men. the problem might be that there are less women reviewing movies overall, meaning less are included in specific groups of reviews.
It's a matter of which came first, the egg or the chicken, I guess. If there aren't jobs for official women reviewers, then there will be fewer of them. Or are there fewer jobs for them because there are fewer female reviewers? That can be said of minority races & ethnicities, too. I HAVE noticed that when there's a strong female lead where character is non-traditional & not used as a sex object (any more than Hollywood uses any actor as a sex object), male reviewers pile on negatively, being sometimes crass, insulting about her appearance, insulting her acting skills. I'm a movie buff, so I think I recognize good acting when I see it. In many of those cases, the movie is awesome, the screenplay great, the acting superb. If it had been a male lead, ...well, you know.
Why is it a problem that women choose to review movies less then men? Should we force people to make different decisions in pursuit of equality? Or is it discrimination holding women back from reviewing films. If so, present the evidence instead of inferring it from inequality of outcome, which is a feature of any situation where there's freedom of choice.
@@chrisbennett76 the only problem comes if there are extra hardships and barriers faced by a minority group trying to participate. You don't need to force anybody, just understanding the factors that create the situation might help solve any problems.
Yet 95% of those reviewer, male or female are probably liberal. So does inclusivity include political allegiance? Or what about class? What about age? Or location? So basically what she's saying is I want more people who think like me, while using the veil of inclusivity. I love having multimillionaire's lecture me about equality.
Oh my god will you shut the fuck up?! Why do people like you have to throw around "liberal" and "special snowflake" and "SJW" under every fucking video? Okay so you want more conservative representation? What do you want all our movies to be about straight, white people? Oh wait, they already are. Look at how many minorities of ANY kind have won Oscar's, Emmy's, Tony's. Hollywood, unbeknownst to you clearly, is not pushing "liberal agenda". What do you want more movies about stopping abortion, halting LGBT rights, teaching abstinence? All she is asking for is equality between the sexes. So shut the fuck up and go crawl back under the pathetic rock you live under.
@@vonh7047 They throw those words around because they & their perspective are not represented whereas mainstream institutions promote their own values at the exclusion/marginalization (mostly by smears) of any contrary value system. You exhibit this when you smear a person asking for viewpoint diversity as being pro "straight, white people." Your foul-mouthed attacks are also indicative of the hostile viciousness common of individuals that are more about hurting political opponents than helping the downtrodden.
@@vonh7047 The "equality" Streep demands is one where outcomes are gerrymandered to produce equal outcomes, which necessitates sex-based discrimination. If there are 100 professional reviewers, gender equality requires firing/excluding people based on sex to achieve that equality. Add in other factors, you’ve enshrined a fully discriminatory system, which is why egalitarianism is evil. We should desire individual freedom to pursue goals without arbitrary factors determining entry.
@@vonh7047 You also act as if your own values are unquestionable by creating straw men such as presenting a pristine view of "equality" and "LGBT rights" failing to recognize the legitimate disputes over specific proposals and the differing view over rights. I believe in negative rights, and so I support your right to an abortion but the burden to get one is on you. You have no right to my tax money to pay for your own decisions nor do have the right to compel a doctor against his will to give an abortion. Progressives believe the opposite.
I know ppl in the business and they've always said Rotten Tomatoes was rigged, and in more ways than one. Not just male & female. Whoever brought up bridesmaids "compared to how many all male fims" , and that's just 1 example. Besides, studios throw in $$$ for their films.
This just touches the surface - sites like RT and IMDb aren't accurate not least as they use a Gaussian curve which skews results - usually against the film. So they may discount 100 '10' scores on IMDb as they assume these are friends, yet they could still choose to accept 100 '1' scores. In addition, there is a 'bombing' unit which has a history and therefore qualifies within the top 1000 raters, yet can reduce the ratings score by 2 points within the space of an hour. The star rating you see is therefore not the 'mean' score and therefore not accurate. medium.freecodecamp.org/whose-reviews-should-you-trust-imdb-rotten-tomatoes-metacritic-or-fandango-7d1010c6cf19
Wow. That's shocking. I post audience reviews on RottenTomatoes. I noticed in that, and in IMDB, male reviewers invariably pile on negatively to movies where a female is the lead, or females are in the movie in a non-traditional female role (unless she's sexy & thus a sex object). But I hadn't noticed that there was a pattern of there being male reviewers, except to some extent. Women need to review more, and the sites need to ensure their official professional reviewers are balanced as to gender & race & ethnicity, to ensure all viewpoints.
Critic score on any critic site is mostly based on how much they were paid by the producing film company. User score more accurately reflects quality of movies.
One of the worst things about movies is that there are many many male roles in most films, but few female roles. I started noticing this some yrs ago. Pretend you are a female actress, then look at the movies released & see how many jobs there'd be to apply for. Then pretend you are a male actor & look at the same thing. Movie after movie have multiple good speaking roles for men/boys, but few for women/girls. Some movies are practically all male. Consider that there are MORE females in this country than males and you can see how biased the film industry is.
@@b.dangerfield6499 They do. All the time. Unfortunately, very few are good due to their tokenism in how they create the characters. Instead of being portrayed as women who demonstrate importance, they're portrayed as being important by the nature of being women.
It's not biased to cater to the preferences of the public. Hollywood cares about one thing: money. If women aren't getting good roles (a claim I dispute), it's because people aren't paying for it. And yeah, most people would rather see James Bond than Legally Blonde. To change that in a meaningful way, make better movies. Unfortunately, you don't. You make Atomic Blonde in which the lead is indistinguishable from a man (she even sleeps with women like most men do) or you tokenize women (Ghostbusters, Oceans 8). And when people call you on it, you shout sexism. Lastly, egalitarianism is evil. Let the chips fall where they may, and let me forewarn you: the outcome won't be equal. And thank god. Inequality of outcomes means people are still free to choose.
What is wrong with men reviewing movies. So now they should remove some male critics just because they might not give the right review. Ok let's assume 2/3 of them are gay. Now what should be the argument. Beacuse they are increased number of gay men, we should include lesbian or transgender male/female to. Just cut this crap. PLEASE
@@davidnigenda9867 What's completely wrong is to attribute certain views to men and women, which is sexist in and of itself. The only problem are wealthy, power white people like Meryl Streep pushing for a discriminatory system that wishes to gerrymander outcomes by creating bars to entry based on sex, race and other arbitrary factors. I thought we moved away from that in the 1960s. It seems the Baby Boomer generation has buyers remorse about anti-discrimination and want the old system back but with new winners and losers.
Why should we trust female critics more than male--especially when many are prone to be less objective, especially when it comes to viewing films through the prism of gender politics? I recall sending Seattle Times critic Moira McDonald an email after she slobbered over a "revisionist" version of the King Arthur myth, and I told her that I thought that John Boorman's Excalibur was the definitive film version of the tale, and she answered back that she had heard that it was "good," but had never actually seen it. This is like today's music critics who have never been exposed to traditional song structure or musicianship, declaring today's computerized, auto-tuned so-called music "great."
Okay but men and women have different perspectives, yes? So do you think it is even remotely fair for it to be 100 women vs 700 men? She never said we should trust women more, but you see it that way. Why?
@@vonh7047 Unless it can be shown that women are deliberately being kept from reviewing movies professionally, you haven't demonstrated an issue of "fairness." Unequal outcomes do not necessarily mean unfairness or discrimination. A third variable must be produced.
Look, I like Meryl Streep. I am a female and I believe Rotten Tomatoes is pretty accurate about movie reviews. Ms. Streep's movies lately have not been that great (though her performances have been good.) All I got out of this is that she doesn't think she appeals to men.
+Lily M. I am a fan of Meryl, and I too have used rotten tomatoes as an okay barometer of films. Maybe 55% of the time they hit it. That is a good number, all things considered. The other 45% they are so far off it is astonishing. I wonder if that can be attributed to the massive gender inequity of the reviewers panel.
+Lily M. Hi. I really don't know. Women are more empowered now than they ever were. Back about 25 to 30 years ago Meryl's movies were much better. She wasn't complaining about gender bias regarding critics then (that I know of.) This is just my opinion. She is giving the impression now that she is not very thick skinned to criticism. I swear I think it is bad scripts/writing.
So true. I've liked so many movies that got a super low rating at rotten tomatoes. IMDB is at least better because it's easy to give a rating there. And the fact that audience is both male and female. I've seen lots of women TRY to like movies but they can't because they have different tastes. There should be more movies for women which are judged by equal sexes. For a male as I am , it is hard to look at difficult realities of women. Most of the time we just ignore it and say maybe what they're showing is exaggerated and misguided. That's why men should only stick to judging male movies and leave criticizing movies about female characters to females.
You are an idiot. I was on the edge about that, but you really won that status with your last sentence.
She is right. We need more: More female garbage collectors! More female car mechanics. More women in mines! More women digging ditches and paving roads. More female drywallers to hoist 12-foot sheets to the ceiling of homes. More female loggers. And the list goes on ...
i would be interested to know how many women are reviewing films and are not used in rottentomatoes. Same thing for men. the problem might be that there are less women reviewing movies overall, meaning less are included in specific groups of reviews.
It's a matter of which came first, the egg or the chicken, I guess. If there aren't jobs for official women reviewers, then there will be fewer of them. Or are there fewer jobs for them because there are fewer female reviewers? That can be said of minority races & ethnicities, too. I HAVE noticed that when there's a strong female lead where character is non-traditional & not used as a sex object (any more than Hollywood uses any actor as a sex object), male reviewers pile on negatively, being sometimes crass, insulting about her appearance, insulting her acting skills. I'm a movie buff, so I think I recognize good acting when I see it. In many of those cases, the movie is awesome, the screenplay great, the acting superb. If it had been a male lead, ...well, you know.
Why is it a problem that women choose to review movies less then men? Should we force people to make different decisions in pursuit of equality? Or is it discrimination holding women back from reviewing films. If so, present the evidence instead of inferring it from inequality of outcome, which is a feature of any situation where there's freedom of choice.
@@chrisbennett76 the only problem comes if there are extra hardships and barriers faced by a minority group trying to participate. You don't need to force anybody, just understanding the factors that create the situation might help solve any problems.
Yet 95% of those reviewer, male or female are probably liberal. So does inclusivity include political allegiance? Or what about class? What about age? Or location? So basically what she's saying is I want more people who think like me, while using the veil of inclusivity. I love having multimillionaire's lecture me about equality.
Oh my god will you shut the fuck up?! Why do people like you have to throw around "liberal" and "special snowflake" and "SJW" under every fucking video? Okay so you want more conservative representation? What do you want all our movies to be about straight, white people? Oh wait, they already are. Look at how many minorities of ANY kind have won Oscar's, Emmy's, Tony's. Hollywood, unbeknownst to you clearly, is not pushing "liberal agenda". What do you want more movies about stopping abortion, halting LGBT rights, teaching abstinence? All she is asking for is equality between the sexes. So shut the fuck up and go crawl back under the pathetic rock you live under.
@@vonh7047 and what about short people.. they have a very different view point from tall people! And that is measurable!
@@vonh7047 They throw those words around because they & their perspective are not represented whereas mainstream institutions promote their own values at the exclusion/marginalization (mostly by smears) of any contrary value system. You exhibit this when you smear a person asking for viewpoint diversity as being pro "straight, white people." Your foul-mouthed attacks are also indicative of the hostile viciousness common of individuals that are more about hurting political opponents than helping the downtrodden.
@@vonh7047 The "equality" Streep demands is one where outcomes are gerrymandered to produce equal outcomes, which necessitates sex-based discrimination. If there are 100 professional reviewers, gender equality requires firing/excluding people based on sex to achieve that equality. Add in other factors, you’ve enshrined a fully discriminatory system, which is why egalitarianism is evil. We should desire individual freedom to pursue goals without arbitrary factors determining entry.
@@vonh7047 You also act as if your own values are unquestionable by creating straw men such as presenting a pristine view of "equality" and "LGBT rights" failing to recognize the legitimate disputes over specific proposals and the differing view over rights. I believe in negative rights, and so I support your right to an abortion but the burden to get one is on you. You have no right to my tax money to pay for your own decisions nor do have the right to compel a doctor against his will to give an abortion. Progressives believe the opposite.
I know ppl in the business and they've always said Rotten Tomatoes was rigged, and in more ways than one. Not just male & female. Whoever brought up bridesmaids "compared to how many all male fims" , and that's just 1 example. Besides, studios throw in $$$ for their films.
This just touches the surface - sites like RT and IMDb aren't accurate not least as they use a Gaussian curve which skews results - usually against the film. So they may discount 100 '10' scores on IMDb as they assume these are friends, yet they could still choose to accept 100 '1' scores. In addition, there is a 'bombing' unit which has a history and therefore qualifies within the top 1000 raters, yet can reduce the ratings score by 2 points within the space of an hour. The star rating you see is therefore not the 'mean' score and therefore not accurate. medium.freecodecamp.org/whose-reviews-should-you-trust-imdb-rotten-tomatoes-metacritic-or-fandango-7d1010c6cf19
Wow. That's shocking. I post audience reviews on RottenTomatoes. I noticed in that, and in IMDB, male reviewers invariably pile on negatively to movies where a female is the lead, or females are in the movie in a non-traditional female role (unless she's sexy & thus a sex object). But I hadn't noticed that there was a pattern of there being male reviewers, except to some extent. Women need to review more, and the sites need to ensure their official professional reviewers are balanced as to gender & race & ethnicity, to ensure all viewpoints.
Who the hell cares what the critics think? I’m more interested in what the audience think … and there no restrictions there!
Critic score on any critic site is mostly based on how much they were paid by the producing film company. User score more accurately reflects quality of movies.
So if men and women are not the same, and they like different things… what if women don’t like being film cretics as much as men? 🤷🏻♂️
One of the worst things about movies is that there are many many male roles in most films, but few female roles. I started noticing this some yrs ago. Pretend you are a female actress, then look at the movies released & see how many jobs there'd be to apply for. Then pretend you are a male actor & look at the same thing. Movie after movie have multiple good speaking roles for men/boys, but few for women/girls. Some movies are practically all male. Consider that there are MORE females in this country than males and you can see how biased the film industry is.
So why don’t women just make their own movies with female leads?
@@b.dangerfield6499 They do. All the time. Unfortunately, very few are good due to their tokenism in how they create the characters. Instead of being portrayed as women who demonstrate importance, they're portrayed as being important by the nature of being women.
It's not biased to cater to the preferences of the public. Hollywood cares about one thing: money. If women aren't getting good roles (a claim I dispute), it's because people aren't paying for it. And yeah, most people would rather see James Bond than Legally Blonde. To change that in a meaningful way, make better movies. Unfortunately, you don't. You make Atomic Blonde in which the lead is indistinguishable from a man (she even sleeps with women like most men do) or you tokenize women (Ghostbusters, Oceans 8). And when people call you on it, you shout sexism. Lastly, egalitarianism is evil. Let the chips fall where they may, and let me forewarn you: the outcome won't be equal. And thank god. Inequality of outcomes means people are still free to choose.
What is wrong with men reviewing movies. So now they should remove some male critics just because they might not give the right review. Ok let's assume 2/3 of them are gay. Now what should be the argument. Beacuse they are increased number of gay men, we should include lesbian or transgender male/female to. Just cut this crap. PLEASE
It is completely wrong. But if you can't see that, maybe you're also a part of the problem.
@@davidnigenda9867 What's completely wrong is to attribute certain views to men and women, which is sexist in and of itself. The only problem are wealthy, power white people like Meryl Streep pushing for a discriminatory system that wishes to gerrymander outcomes by creating bars to entry based on sex, race and other arbitrary factors. I thought we moved away from that in the 1960s. It seems the Baby Boomer generation has buyers remorse about anti-discrimination and want the old system back but with new winners and losers.
Why should we trust female critics more than male--especially when many are prone to be less objective, especially when it comes to viewing films through the prism of gender politics? I recall sending Seattle Times critic Moira McDonald an email after she slobbered over a "revisionist" version of the King Arthur myth, and I told her that I thought that John Boorman's Excalibur was the definitive film version of the tale, and she answered back that she had heard that it was "good," but had never actually seen it. This is like today's music critics who have never been exposed to traditional song structure or musicianship, declaring today's computerized, auto-tuned so-called music "great."
Okay but men and women have different perspectives, yes? So do you think it is even remotely fair for it to be 100 women vs 700 men? She never said we should trust women more, but you see it that way. Why?
@@vonh7047 Unless it can be shown that women are deliberately being kept from reviewing movies professionally, you haven't demonstrated an issue of "fairness." Unequal outcomes do not necessarily mean unfairness or discrimination. A third variable must be produced.
Look, I like Meryl Streep. I am a female and I believe Rotten Tomatoes is pretty accurate about movie reviews. Ms. Streep's movies lately have not been that great (though her performances have been good.) All I got out of this is that she doesn't think she appeals to men.
+Lily M. I am a fan of Meryl, and I too have used rotten tomatoes as an okay barometer of films. Maybe 55% of the time they hit it. That is a good number, all things considered. The other 45% they are so far off it is astonishing. I wonder if that can be attributed to the massive gender inequity of the reviewers panel.
Le Kre
+Lily M. Hi. I really don't know. Women are more empowered now than they ever were. Back about 25 to 30 years ago Meryl's movies were much better. She wasn't complaining about gender bias regarding critics then (that I know of.) This is just my opinion. She is giving the impression now that she is not very thick skinned to criticism. I swear I think it is bad scripts/writing.