“Rotten Tomatoes is trying to control movies,” criticizes Coppola, and Scorsese gets angry, calling it “insulting” | THE RIVER

When you see a movie that interests you, how do you decide whether to watch it or not, and whether to go to the theater or not? Is it reviews on social media or Rotten Tomatoes scores?

Master director of “The Godfather” series and “Apocalypse Now” (1979)francis ford coppolaRotten Tomatoes quantifies the reviews of critics and audiences and divides them into two categories, “Fresh'' and “Rotten'', and films are ranked on a seven-point scale from “A+'' to “F'' based on exit polls at movie theaters. He has harshly criticized CinemaScore, which evaluates movies.

In an interview with CinePOP, Coppola was asked, “How do you feel about a film's success being determined by its Rotten Tomatoes score?”“Scoring systems like Rotten Tomatoes and CinemaScore are trying to control movies.”I answered.

“Movies are art and should not be controlled. But[the scoring system]treats movies like sports.In sports games, teams win and lose, and this has an aspect that controls fan behavior. The modern film industry is also trying to control how people go to the movies. Because people don't want to waste money. ”

However, Coppola says, “Real art comes with risks. You can't make art without taking risks, because you're diving into the unknown.'' “This is at odds with the system that currently works.The movie industry doesn't want to take risks and wants movies to be like Coca-Cola. So that people can keep buying the same things over and over again”.

Art, which should not originally be quantifiable, has somehow been quantified, and the behavior of the audience is being controlled. This comment echoes a 2017 essay written by fellow master director Martin Scorsese. Scorsese writes that after the 1980s, after box office receipts came to dominate discussion about movies, film criticism began to break down, as opening box office receipts became “a sport for bloodthirsty audiences.”

“Market research companies like CinemaScore and online 'aggregators' like Rotten Tomatoes have nothing to do with real film criticism. Although it evaluates movies and has something to do with the movie business, it has nothing to do with the creation or intellectual appreciation of movies.

By reducing filmmakers to content makers and audiences to lazy consumers, research companies and “aggregators” create conditions unfit for serious filmmakers. The name Rotten Tomatoes is also insulting. As film criticism by people who are knowledgeable and passionate about film history disappears, the voices of hasty judgment become louder and louder, and it seems like moviegoers and filmmakers are being rejected, negated, and sometimes severely attacked. is. ”

Film director and screenwriter Paul Schrader also bluntly declared that in 2023, “The (scoring) system is broken and audiences are stupid.'' “The average person doesn't read reviews as much as they used to, and studios have made Rotten Tomatoes into a game. When I read reviews of my own movies, I find that even where the writer thought it was my fault, I didn't. To me, that's a good critique, but it counts as a negative review on Rotten Tomatoes.”

Now that box office revenues and scoring systems have power, both productions and criticism have been simplified, and audiences are controlled by these simplified ratings and numbers. However, Coppola, Scorsese, and Schrader say that there are parts of movies and art that cannot be salvaged by such “simplification'' or that are contradictory.

In the end, this may be the question, “Why do we watch movies?” When we decide whether to watch a movie based on its Rotten Tomatoes score, what are we entrusting to others and handing over to an unknown system?

Source: CinePOP, The Hollywood Reporter, Vulture