zlacker

>>tortil+(OP)
To me, RT turning to shit is just Goodhart's Law in action - "when a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure"

Originally, RT was more or less a 'good faith' measurement of the general sentiment\quality of a film, but it is so easily manipulated it was inevitable that it would become meaningless.

>>smiley+hX2
Which became more and more obvious with the plethora of examples today of disconnected Audience and Critic scores.

While they definitely measure on different metrics, the goal of a critic is supposed to be to measure films worth watching (even if only for a subset of the total audience). When 95% of critics tell you to see a movie that only 10% of people enjoy, something's broken.

>>deaddo+263
> When 95% of critics tell you to see a movie that only 10% of people enjoy, something's broken.

Well... expectations shift between a movie ticket and a bucket of popcorn for 10€ or the same for 30€.

Cinema has gone really damn expensive, and loaded with ads to boot - but movie critics don't get that crap experience, they get exclusive previews. It's literally a different world.

My GF adds other points: while the audience as a general loves "typical plot" movies, critics who have to see 20 movies based on the same formula a year will be sick of it.

>>mschus+Sd3
There are 7 possible plots according to Shakespeare or 1 according to Marvel. I believe 2^7 is therefore 127 possible movies or books - assuming there is one with every single plot element and including porn with zero plot :-)

Clearly though their is more to a movie or book than just the plot.