15 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

there are good ways and bad ways.

I am pretty sure this has been said about every relevant movie, novel, painting, etc. at one time or another.

25 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

there are good ways and bad ways. If you cause a large section of your audience to give the middle figer to your production you have not accomplished your goal. That does not mean theater has not shaped things. It just means some ways work and others dont.

I’ve yet to see proof that a large portion of the audience gave the middle finger to the production. A loud portion? Definitely. Not so sure about large.

(“But Solo...” Yeah. A movie following a different storyline by a different team underperformed. The Middle Finger Theory would suggest that TRoS would have a similarly small box office take, but it didn’t. “But TRoS still made less than TLJ.” Yep. And RotJ made less than TESB, so I guess something about ESB “lectured” the audience and made them give it the middle finger?)

2 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

I’ve yet to see proof that a large portion of the audience gave the middle finger to the production. A loud portion? Definitely. Not so sure about large.

(“But Solo...” Yeah. A movie following a different storyline by a different team underperformed. The Middle Finger Theory would suggest that TRoS would have a similarly small box office take, but it didn’t. “But TRoS still made less than TLJ.” Yep. And RotJ made less than TESB, so I guess something about ESB “lectured” the audience and made them give it the middle finger?)

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_the_last_jedi

43% viewer score

Just now, MB -Fr- said:

https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/star_wars_the_last_jedi

43% viewer score

We covered RT this morning, the flaws in their process (that they admitted to), and the portion of the audience that stated their intent to game those flaws to influence a poor score. You must have missed it.

Or can you prove that 100% of the audience scored it on RT, and didn’t game its system?

(I can prove, for example, that 100% of the audience didn’t score it on RT. Because I’ve never scored anything on RT.)

Just now, Nytwyng said:

We covered RT this morning, the flaws in their process (that they admitted to), and the portion of the audience that stated their intent to game those flaws to influence a poor score. You must have missed it.

Or can you prove that 100% of the audience scored it on RT, and didn’t game its system?

(I can prove, for example, that 100% of the audience didn’t score it on RT. Because I’ve never scored anything on RT.)

the "russian bot theory" has since been debunked

and the VP of com at rottentomatoes has confirmed the audience score was genuine (it was at 55 at the time)

https://www.thewrap.com/rotten-tomatoes-verifies-55-low-audience-score-for-star-wars-the-last-jedi/

2 minutes ago, Nytwyng said:

We covered RT this morning, the flaws in their process (that they admitted to), and the portion of the audience that stated their intent to game those flaws to influence a poor score. You must have missed it.

Or can you prove that 100% of the audience scored it on RT, and didn’t game its system?

(I can prove, for example, that 100% of the audience didn’t score it on RT. Because I’ve never scored anything on RT.)

yeah... I find your logic on Rotten Tomatoes flawed.

2 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

the "russian bot theory" has since been debunked

and the VP of com at rottentomatoes has confirmed the audience score was genuine (it was at 55 at the time)

https://www.thewrap.com/rotten-tomatoes-verifies-55-low-audience-score-for-star-wars-the-last-jedi/

Who said anything about Russian bots? Not me. I’m talking about the loud guys on Twitter and YouTube who openly discussed gaming RT’s system, and did the same regarding Black Panther and Captain Marvel.

I notice, though, that you didn’t answer my question: can you verify what percentage of the audience actually scored it on RT?

1 minute ago, Nytwyng said:

Who said anything about Russian bots? Not me. I’m talking about the loud guys on Twitter and YouTube who openly discussed gaming RT’s system, and did the same regarding Black Panther and Captain Marvel.

I notice, though, that you didn’t answer my question: can you verify what percentage of the audience actually scored it on RT?

do you know the concept of sample? a sample is representative of the whole

ergo if roughly 50% of the sampled viewers disliked it, then by definition around 50% of the greater whole disliked it. that's statistics. there is no need for every viewer to review it

and as a frequent reader of r/movies, I can tell you I have absolutely no trouble believing that around 50% of the viewers disliked this movie

5 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

the "russian bot theory" has since been debunked

Nobody mentioned Russian bots.

The 53% is taken from an unrepresentative subsection of the audience.

Rotten Tomatoes is, at best, a good tool to measure how much the people who hate something hate that thing. It is a very poor tool to check to see how much the people who love somehting love that thing. Hate is always the louder voice.

2 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

do you know the concept of sample? a sample is representative of the whole

ergo if roughly 50% of the sampled viewers disliked it, then by definition around 50% of the greater whole disliked it. that's statistics. there is no need for every viewer to review it

and as a frequent reader of r/movies, I can tell you I have absolutely no trouble believing that around 50% of the viewers disliked this movie

Rotten Tomatoes doesn't sample viewers. That's not how it works.

2 minutes ago, micheldebruyn said:

The 53% is taken from an unrepresentative subsection of the audience.

no it's not, as mentioned the VP confirmed the audience score is genuine

1 minute ago, micheldebruyn said:

Rotten Tomatoes doesn't sample viewers. That's not how it works.

it's not a scientific sample but given that it is based on 200k reviews, it is a representative sample of the viewers. Same as public surveys are

I find that your answers that people didn't dislike in mass TLJ because the sources mentioned don't count pretty unconvincing

No, sorry, but you can't just use that as an excuse to prove your point.

There is no actual possible way to verify what 50% of the audience felt - not in this case, because there's no actual possible way to talk to half of the total number of people who saw the movie in the world. And 200k is not a representative sample of viewers, at all. It's barely a representative sample of viewers in places like NYC, London, Tokyo, or wherever else.

It's also why political polls are stupid as ****, because they only really use people who are willing to actually be polled. Half of those things that say X% are like... 200 people were talked to. And usually its primarily older folks who respond. It never gives real, useful data aside from helping with maybe predictions and articles. Exit polls, slightly more, but again that's still wishy-washy. Anyway, not the point to go into that shitshow.

This isn't science - it's all opinion, subjective things based on feeling. It's like saying using this forum alone is proof of some larger thing amidst "Star Wars fans" - we're such a small subset of a subset, it's hardly applicable.

Reddit and RT are not good sources for this discussion. Most of the general movie going populace uses neither of them. If you want to use a source that's more legitimate, we look at CinemaScore - as I mentioned before - which polls people after the actual movie itself. And, TLJ has an "A" CinemaScore, the highest rated SW movie, alongside TFA and RO.

So, what's your reasoning for the "A" score, hm?

8 minutes ago, MB -Fr- said:

no it's not, as mentioned the VP confirmed the audience score is genuine

I'm sure it is. It's just not representative of the entire audience.

Quote

it's not a scientific sample but given that it is based on 200k reviews, it is a representative sample of the viewers. Same as public surveys are

I find that your answers that people didn't dislike in mass TLJ because the sources mentioned don't count pretty unconvincing

See, your problem here is that you start from the faulty assumption that Rotten Tomatoes represents a neutral sample of the audience. It doesn't. The internet selects for dislikes and outrage.

Anybody can go to Rotten Tomatoes, but the truth is, especially if there is even a slight controversy surrounding a piece of media, that the people who go to Rotten Tomatoes are not the people that like something. People who hate something seem much more inclined to go online and share their displeasure with the world than people who like something.

Rotten Tomatoes is at best useful for its review scores, assuming you know that everybody giving a film 7/10 results in a 100% score.

Edit: if you really want to know what the complete audience things about The Last Jedi, you would need to hire a good polling organisation and have them go nuts. You can't find out what the audience thinks unles you ask the entire audience (or a representative section of it). You can't just set up a site where anybody who may or may not have actualy seen the film can go to to tell you if they liked it.

58 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

there are good ways and bad ways. If you cause a large section of your audience to give the middle figer to your production you have not accomplished your goal. That does not mean theater has not shaped things. It just means some ways work and others dont.

As stated previously: " You may not like the lecture, but there's always a lecture ." That's okay. Tastes are subjective. You don't have to justify a subjective opinion. You do not, however, get to present subjective statements as empirical without someone calling you out on it.

I'm done now.

On 3/8/2020 at 10:49 AM, copperbell said:

Someone's making up excuses I see.

Luke had a short bout of training in ANH then another short bout in ESB followed by some extended training in ROTJ that required he face Vader again.

Instead of killing him he managed to turn him back to the light a feat neither Obi-Wan nor Yoda thought possible.

Rey until TROS had a barely short bout of training with insane array of force skills that could only be the result of her being raised on Jakku by a Jedi survivor similar in skill to Ahsoka.

Instead they let an idiot crap all over the franchise before JJ apparently tried to finish the trilogy with an entirely new trilogy shoved into a single movie.

Rey's "sudden" ability to use the Force so effectively in the latter part of TFA was already explained as being the result of Kylo's attempt to draw information from her mind. By connecting himself to her, mind to mind, he opened a two-way connection, that allowed her to read his mind , and thus draw upon his knowledge of how to use the Force. We see this connection play out, ans we see her tap into his thoughts on screen in the movie itself when she says, "You're afraid... that you'll never be as strong as Darth Vader."

3 minutes ago, Tramp Graphics said:

Rey's "sudden" ability to use the Force so effectively in the latter part of TFA was already explained as being the result of Kylo's attempt to draw information from her mind. By connecting himself to her, mind to mind, he opened a two-way connection, that allowed her to read his mind , and thus draw upon his knowledge of how to use the Force. We see this connection play out, ans we see her tap into his thoughts on screen in the movie itself when she says, "You're afraid... that you'll never be as strong as Darth Vader."

yeah I dont buy that explanation...and that explanation is not in the movie.

Now the She is a Palpatine and a Dyad of the Force is more satisfactory...but feels tacked on...

5 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

yeah I dont buy that explanation...and that explanation is not in the movie.

Now the She is a Palpatine and a Dyad of the Force is more satisfactory...but feels tacked on...

Yes, it is, just not in so many words. The movie shows that when Kylo Ren tapped into her mind, she also taped into his, and was able to read his thoughts just as he was attempting to read hers. This is proven by the quoted statement above. The novelization delves further into it, and explains it further in more detail, but that is the benefit of text, vs film. The medium of text in a novel allows for more detailed description of the inner workings of peoples' thoughts and feelings , that are impossible to show visually in a movie. Regardless, it is shown on screen that she was reading his mind just as he was attempting to read hers. They had a two-way connection . It is explicitly shown in the film.

https://mashable.com/2017/12/20/last-jedi-poll/?europe=true

This is what happens when an actual (scientific) poll is conducted on audience opinion, by polling actual moviegoers once per person after they have sceen the film.

8 minutes ago, DanteRotterdam said:

https://mashable.com/2017/12/20/last-jedi-poll/?europe=true

This is what happens when an actual (scientific) poll is conducted on audience opinion, by polling actual moviegoers once per person after they have sceen the film.

Tracks with CinemaScore, so yeah.

7 minutes ago, StarkJunior said:

Tracks with CinemaScore, so yeah.

And who did they survey? how did they choose who to survey. because that has a huge effect on your poll results.

3 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

And who did they survey? how did they choose who to survey. because that has a huge effect on your poll results.

"CinemaScore® is the industry leader in measuring movie appeal among theatre audiences. Since 1978, CinemaScore has been polling moviegoers at major movie releases on opening night to collect demographic information and calculate a distinctive CinemaScore grade."

The CinemaScore and PostTrak are both the industry standards - they don't look at RT or Metacritic. And TLJ has basically an "A" on PostTrak, as well.

1 minute ago, Daeglan said:

And who did they survey? how did they choose who to survey. because that has a huge effect on your poll results.

People leaving the movie after having seem it. I am pretty sure you feel anonymous, unverified people on a website are a better Barometer?

1 minute ago, StarkJunior said:

"CinemaScore® is the industry leader in measuring movie appeal among theatre audiences. Since 1978, CinemaScore has been polling moviegoers at major movie releases on opening night to collect demographic information and calculate a distinctive CinemaScore grade."

The CinemaScore and PostTrak are both the industry standards - they don't look at RT or Metacritic. And TLJ has basically an "A" on PostTrak, as well.

yeah but who do they survey. I notice they don't actually how they pick who and where to poll. and that can have a huge effect. If you poll in hollywood you will get one result and you will get a different result if you poll in Oklahoma city. I suspect Rotten tomatoes gets a larger more diverse sampling than cinama score. But I also suspect that is why hollywood likes the numbers more.

3 minutes ago, DanteRotterdam said:

People leaving the movie after having seem it. I am pretty sure you feel anonymous, unverified people on a website are a better Barometer?

But from where. what theaters? how do they choose. is it a random sampling across every city or is it like the New York times best seller list which is done by stuffing specific book stores.

I feel a hidden methodology is a piss poor methodology that is ripe for manipulating.

4 minutes ago, Daeglan said:

yeah but who do they survey. I notice they don't actually how they pick who and where to poll. and that can have a huge effect. If you poll in hollywood you will get one result and you will get a different result if you poll in Oklahoma city. I suspect Rotten tomatoes gets a larger more diverse sampling than cinama score. But I also suspect that is why hollywood likes the numbers more.

All across North America in about 25 cities. They estimate about a 65% response rate and 6% margin of error, and it asks about age, gender, a grade for the film (A, B, C, D or F), whether they would rent or buy the film on DVD or Blu-ray, and why they chose the film.

PostTrak does the top 20 markets in the US and Canada. PostTrak considers demographic make-up, opinions about the film, impression of the film's marketing, when tickets were purchased, and plans to buy or rent the film on home media.