STAR WARS : Episode VIII December 15, 2017 4 4

[Harley Troy]

34 minutes ago, Azkaban said:

this pretty much sums it up for me, couldn't have said it any better

He did forget the complete throw away of Capt. Phasma. That character had the potential to be great. In this new world of "Wonder Woman" they throw away a strong female, who ascended to the rank of Captain in a, one would think, male dominated world, and gets beaten by a deserter janitor? I honestly hated this movie.

[fantastic_four]

This is an example of the type of biased audience score I've been seeing for years on Metacritic:

http://www.metacritic.com/game/playstation-4/nba-2k18

That is a REALLY good game with an 80% critic rating and a 16% audience rating.  I don't disagree with what the audience people are complaining about with nickeling and diming users with microtransactions, but come ON, you don't even have to play the mode with the microtransactions, and I never do and LOVE the game.  The audience rating is insanely biased, and it's obvious the haters are far, far more motivated to post than the people who enjoy the game.

On Rotten Tomatoes we have 130K users posting as opposed to just 500 or so on that Metacritic review for one game on one platform, but it's representative of why I can't tell whether or not to trust Rotten Tomatoes audience ratings--I can't tell how skewed they are relative to the tens of millions of people who saw the film.

Edited December 21, 2017 by fantastic_four

[Gatsby77]

Latest from Scott Mendelson at Forbes:

In which he mocks the minority of nerds who hate the movie.

Gems like:

Quote

Rian Johnson, who has been given a stand-alone Star Wars trilogy to oversee once the current one wraps up, crafted a film that has earned overwhelmingly positive reviews. Including a 93% “fresh” and 8.1/10 critic ranking on Rotten Tomatoes. It also has an 86% score on Metacritic and a 7.9/10 user rating on IMDB.com. Oh, and the film received an A from Cinemascore and a 90 from comScore. My god, what will Lucasfilm do now?

The meat of his sarcastic diatribe is here:

Quote

 

I’m sure that the folks who flooded the Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic user polls with negative reviews were real people and not robots or spam programs. But there is a rather high number of folks who apparently created an account specifically to offer a poor review of the newest Star Wars movie and then deleted the account. James Emanuel Shapiro did the hard work over at Birth.Death.Movies detailing that, of 100 random negative user reviews from Rotten Tomatoes, 94% of them either had no account or were first-time users. Of 100 random negative Metacritic user reviews, 72% of them were new users.

Maybe they review-bombed as some kind of anti-SJW conspiracy (take a look at the downvotes on YouTube for the Ocean’s 8 trailer) or skewed revenge from DC fans over Justice League. Or maybe the segment of online fans who didn’t like the movie flooded the opt-in polling and thus created the impression of poor word-of-mouth. But every other measurement thus far (the reviews, the initial box office, the audience polling from folks who absolutely saw the movie, etc.) would indicate that folks loved or at least somewhat enjoyed The Last Jedi.

 

Interestingly, the Birth.Death.Movies article he cites does a deep dive into the negative audience outliers at Rotten Tomatoes and MetaCritic (compared to audience ratings at ComScore or Cinemascore or IMDB - which vets its users far more carefully because it sells that data to Pro subscribers).

In his random sample of 100 negative reviews at Rotten Tomatoes, the author found only 6% were prior users there, with 61% being new users (who signed up specifically to register their disapproval of The Last Jedia) and 33% having no profile anymore (meaning that they signed up to down-vote The Last Jedi and deleted their account).

 

[Bosco685]

8 minutes ago, Gatsby77 said:

In his random sample of 100 negative reviews at Rotten Tomatoes, the author found only 6% were prior users there, with 61% being new users (who signed up specifically to register their disapproval of The Last Jedia) and 33% having no profile anymore (meaning that they signed up to down-vote The Last Jedi and deleted their account).

If anything, this shows there were people so fired up they wanted to post their point of view on what they just saw. At least we know from the Rotten Tomatoes team it wasn't bots.

Quote

Rotten Tomatoes Denies 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' Low Audience Score Is Fake, Says 100% Authentic

Quote

In response to others taking credit for Star Wars: The Last Jedi's low audience score, Rotten Tomatoes has decided to set the record straight.

 

For those unaware, there's a big disparity between The Last Jedi's critics score (currently 93%) and the audience score, which sits at 55%. There were some in the community who decided to take credit for manipulating that low score, but Rotten Tomatoes spokesperson (and Fandango vice president of communications) Dan Benson cleared the record up, saying that score is 100% authentic.

 

“We have several teams of security, network, and social database experts who constantly monitor reviews and ratings to ensure that they are genuine,” Benson told Forbes. “They haven’t seen anything unusual with The Last Jedi, except that there has been an uptick in the number of written user reviews submitted. Aside from that, everything is normal and we don’t see any unusual activity. We looked at The Last Jedi compared to other blockbusters and it has been consistent with those past films.”

 

Benson explained that The Last Jedi has a "comparable number of reviews to The Force Awakens" but can't nail down why there is such a chasm between the critical score and the audience score.

 

 

“I can’t explain why there’s such a disparity,” Benson said. “How we take this is that people are super passionate about this movie. On the positive side, our site is popular, and it has become an important platform for debate and discussion.”

 

What Benson can say though is that no Facebook group or slew of bots is the reason for the score, as that can be solely attributed to the fans and their reactions.

 

“We’ve been working around the clock to get the numbers right," Benson said. "Authenticity is very important to us. We have security teams, network teams, database teams who work so hard, it’s a little disheartening for them to see people make such [accusatory] claims without knowing the facts."

 

 

[jsilverjanet]

Yep nerdrage

[jsilverjanet]

It’s funny critics hated the original but fans loved it

maybe this movie is the critics type of Star Wars movie.

#criticsrage

[Bosco685]

3 minutes ago, jsilverjanet said:

It’s funny critics hated the original but fans loved it

maybe this movie is the critics type of Star Wars movie.

#criticsrage

It had humor points.

#WHEDONHUMOR

[Chip Cataldo]

[Rip]

The real reason for Porgs

http://comicbook.com/starwars/2017/12/21/star-wars-the-last-jedi-porgs-creation-design/

In the case of The Last Jedi and its popular porgs, the reason for their creation wasn't for the narrative or for merchandise, but as a cheap way to mask the hundreds of native birds that populated the island of Skellig Michael.

“(We) had gone to shoot this sequence on Skellig Michael, which is the real island location that stands in for Ahch-To, and that island is covered in puffins," designer Jake Lunt Davies told StarWars.com. “It’s a wildlife preserve and everywhere you look there are hundreds of birds dotted around the landscape."

The abundance of the birds caused the production team to improvise.

“You physically can’t get rid of them, and digitally removing them is an issue and a lot of work, so let’s just roll with it, play with it," Davies pointed out. "And so I think [writer/director Rian Johnson] thought, Well, that’s great, let’s have our own indigenous species.'"

[Antpark]

3 hours ago, Bosco685 said:

3 hours ago, Gatsby77 said:

In his random sample of 100 negative reviews at Rotten Tomatoes, the author found only 6% were prior users there, with 61% being new users (who signed up specifically to register their disapproval of The Last Jedia) and 33% having no profile anymore (meaning that they signed up to down-vote The Last Jedi and deleted their account).

If anything, this shows there were people so fired up they wanted to post their point of view on what they just saw. At least we know from the Rotten Tomatoes team it wasn't bots.

Quote

Rotten Tomatoes Denies 'Star Wars: The Last Jedi' Low Audience Score Is Fake, Says 100% Authentic

Quote

In response to others taking credit for Star Wars: The Last Jedi's low audience score, Rotten Tomatoes has decided to set the record straight.

 

For those unaware, there's a big disparity between The Last Jedi's critics score (currently 93%) and the audience score, which sits at 55%. There were some in the community who decided to take credit for manipulating that low score, but Rotten Tomatoes spokesperson (and Fandango vice president of communications) Dan Benson cleared the record up, saying that score is 100% authentic.

 

“We have several teams of security, network, and social database experts who constantly monitor reviews and ratings to ensure that they are genuine,” Benson told Forbes. “They haven’t seen anything unusual with The Last Jedi, except that there has been an uptick in the number of written user reviews submitted. Aside from that, everything is normal and we don’t see any unusual activity. We looked at The Last Jedi compared to other blockbusters and it has been consistent with those past films.”

 

Benson explained that The Last Jedi has a "comparable number of reviews to The Force Awakens" but can't nail down why there is such a chasm between the critical score and the audience score.

 

 

“I can’t explain why there’s such a disparity,” Benson said. “How we take this is that people are super passionate about this movie. On the positive side, our site is popular, and it has become an important platform for debate and discussion.”

 

What Benson can say though is that no Facebook group or slew of bots is the reason for the score, as that can be solely attributed to the fans and their reactions.

 

“We’ve been working around the clock to get the numbers right," Benson said. "Authenticity is very important to us. We have security teams, network teams, database teams who work so hard, it’s a little disheartening for them to see people make such [accusatory] claims without knowing the facts."

 

 

Take this with a grain of salt. It's doubtful anyone there is reviewing the reviews and the only thing they're likely to be monitoring for are spam/junk posts. 

Consider, if you will, their account creation process . . . .

voila

 

It doesn't have to be "bots" in order to tank the rating.
"Hell hath no fury like a disgruntled fanboy."
They could easily create fake accounts to post "legitimate" bad reviews, bot or not.

[jsilverjanet]

Facebook nerdrage even better

[Chip Cataldo]

Hectorage!

[jsilverjanet]

15 minutes ago, Chip Cataldo said:

Hectorage!

Usually only during rush hour 

[Mickey7]

It had a few moments that were enjoyable, but overall a disapointment.  The Finn & Rose storyline went nowhere. They failed their loooong mission ... but it didn't matter. I needed some kind of backstory, even a little, of the First Order or Snoke.  But nothing.   The movie was too long and disjointed, and I think it could easily have been edited down 20 minutes.                      I actually kind of liked the Force projection of Luke part ... but then he dies the next scene.  .                What is the consensus on why Luke died?  Did he give himself to the force?  Was it the strain of projecting himself? 

[comix4fun]

8 minutes ago, Mickey7 said:

It had a few moments that were enjoyable, but overall a disapointment.  The Finn & Rose storyline went nowhere. They failed their loooong mission ... but it didn't matter. I needed some kind of backstory, even a little, of the First Order or Snoke.  But nothing.   The movie was too long and disjointed, and I think it could easily have been edited down 20 minutes.                      I actually kind of liked the Force projection of Luke part ... but then he dies the next scene.  .                What is the consensus on why Luke died?  Did he give himself to the force?  Was it the strain of projecting himself? 

The look on his face as he faced the twin setting suns, paralleling his famous scene from the original Star Wars, was one of being at peace and perhaps some kind of redemption.

But I'm probably giving Rian Johnson too much credit and he'll probably say "Luke was tuckered out". 

Edited December 22, 2017 by comix4fun

[CAHokie]

If you are an old balding nerdrage fan boy for not liking the movie then are you a koolaid drinking homer who likes whatever is served to them if you do like it? No, of course not.

Both sides have brought up excellent points and I learned a few things I missed but really it’s all opinion based so there will be no winner.

Correction: With the money Disney is going to make they are clearly the winner....for now.

[Azkaban]

When he was thru force projecting himself and after brushing off his shoulder and telling Kylo he would see him around he fell off the rock and had a scared look on his face probably the same look I had on my face when I was sitting watching this awful scene  then he got back on the rock and had his final moment 

[comix4fun]

#whathappenedtolukesrobothand?

[The Shoveler]

It had some interesting ideas & visuals.  But a lot of stuff that was boring, stupid and/or just didn't make sense.  I was ready for the credits about an hour before this thing ended.  If you're going to do a 2.5 hour movie centered around a slow-speed, nearly-stationary spaceship chase, then you need to pay some extra attention to pacing.

Here's a few comments that hopefully aren't too repetitious with what others have already said:

• If you decide to kill your sister and best friend's Force-child in his sleep, you'd better be sure.  Especially if you previously were willing to die to defend your mass-murderer father, who capstoned his blood-soaked career by blowing-up an entire inhabited planet, because you thought he could be redeemed.  And if you're going to get indecisive while standing above the child with your loaded weapon (or crackling laser sword), at least stick around to help the parents deal with the considerable emotional fallout that is likely to ensue.  To do any less would be somewhat irresponsible.  Especially if your behavior contributes to the child following in the footsteps of grandpa.  Someone who had previously risked his life on multiple occasions on behalf of others would know that.
• If you're in the line of succession for a major military operation, you really should've already been visible within the unit so that key subordinate officers know who you are.  Also, you should dress appropriately for the position of leading a military campaign.  You shouldn't look like you just walked in from the set of a completely different movie.  Lastly, your subordinates should know enough about the strategy and implementation plans so that they understand how their sacrifices contribute to the overall objective.  Communicate, communicate, communicate!  Vice Admiral Eveningown should've spent less time celebrating the Hunger Games and more time being visible before assuming command.  Dameron was taking orders from and interacting VFR-direct with General Leia, so Vice Admiral Eveningown should've at least been present at a few of those mission briefs, de-briefs and staff meetings.  Speaking of Dameron...
• We know just about as much about Dameron's background as we do about Snokenwolf (Steppensnoke?).  At this point, the First Order's most effective military leader against the rebellion is Dameron who has efficiently wiped out mucho rebel fighters, space gravity-bombers* and also initiated a (seemingly justifiable) mutiny within the rebellion.  Between him & Vice Admiral Eveningown, who needs General Huxleberry?

* I bet they got a good deal when they bought all those space gravity-bombs.  Seemed like they would have got more bang for their buck by spending that money on space missiles and laser cannons instead.

• A Star Wars subplot about a grieving Rebel maintenance worker and a defector Imperial janitor sabotaging the Empire's plans against the rebels should've been amazing.  Instead, every scene with Rose & Finn just fell flat.  Maybe because it was all so disconnected from the main plot.  If their quest had more of a human connection, maybe it would have resonated with more immediacy and relevance.  Instead of rescuing space horses, they could have rescued child laborers from sweatshops where they made licensed theme-park merchandise.  It's hard to believe that Finn used to be promoted as a co-lead for this latest series...
• As many have already mentioned, Finn's superfluous sidebar quest for a MacGuffin-person is one big area where they could tighten the overall pacing of the film.  Chewie is so underutilized and could have just been left out entirely.  Or, why not have the casually tossed lightsaber activate while it tumbles down the mountain and inadvertently zap Chewie?  More slapstick hysterics!
• The Red Room.  Too much red.  Flat red walls, red costumes and red weapons.  The screen was so over-saturated with flat blood red that these scenes were nearly unwatchable for me.  This set needs some scaffolding, utility pipes, paneling, machinery topped with IG-88 craniums, and a smokey mist to add some depth.  I kept expecting a crew of Imperial troops to rush into the frame with end tables, a potted plant, an easel to display big charts with the quarterly metrics, install a dry-erase board to a wall, etc.  "Welcome, Kylo!  They haven't finished decorating my new office, but I just couldn't wait to move in.  Don't mind the workers.  And sorry about all the smokey mist...the evaporator is malfunctioning.  I just contacted a new troop in Maintenance...She'll be here shortly with a janitor and a plucky service droid.  Now, on to business..."
• The CGI generally looked good to great, but with some glaring stumbles:  CGI Snokenwolf had some typical flatness.  The crystal wolves were very artificial, seemed like they were an afterthought.  Unconvincing CGI in the Monte Carlo horse chase too.
• Infinity Rey in the dark-side dream sequence could've made for a nice Busby Berkeley-style dance number.
• The tone of the original trilogy's Empire Strikes Back was dark, with the rebels on the run while fighting a losing retreat and suffering tragic losses.  But there was also grand adventure, charming romance and moments of effective humor, personal growth, and discovery.  And the rebel leadership weren't portrayed as a horde of unlikable incompetents.

It's interesting that after the director & producer made deliberately provocative decisions about much-beloved characters, that now they're blaming the fans' understandably negative reaction on bots.  Anything but themselves.    I accepted TFA as a tolerable, functional first chapter of a new trilogy.  I genuinely liked Rogue One.  But the escalating messaging of "just shut up, give us your money, and vigorously like whatever we give you" is getting ridiculous.  If your ideas are good, then you can win me over.  But don't be the Empire and think that I owe you my allegiance and servitude.  I'm very quickly losing interest in any of the upcoming SW and MCU flicks or any other hollywood production.  There's plenty of other things I can do with my time while they Wienstein each other.

 

Edited December 22, 2017 by The Shoveler
Bloated rambling movie, meet bloated rambling comment

[Andahaion]

Saw it last night. I was shocked that walking out of the theatre crossed my mind. Absolute disbelief that I could have this reaction. All the other issues aside my main point of contention is with Luke, for most of the aforementioned reasons.