Ant-Man (2015): Rotten Tomatoes Watch/Predictions

[The Question]

It doesn't help that a lot of your posts feel like they're condescending other people and their opinions because they don't judge movies the same way your mind does. You come off like a film snob who's opinion matters more than the rest of the lot because you're looking for something deeper while they aren't.

It's funny that you have that reaction to a post where I am taking the position against immediately disregarding the opinions of others.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

You guys are just going to end up going round and round with him, maybe for days even. There are way more interesting topics than this.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

You guys are just going to end up going round and round with him, maybe for days even. There are way more interesting topics than this.

I know. It was something I felt I needed to get off my chest. I'm over it and moved on already.

As for the RT score, it's back up to 80% and likely won't go down below 78%. I'll say I'm happy that my prediction of 73% was proven wrong and the actual is higher.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

I'm pretty pleased that I was right in the poll for a change (for the time being, anyway) All shall love me and despair!

 

[SolarTiger]

Meh, I think you guys are being pretty unfair with The Question. He's being perfectly reasonable with his opinion on the movie and the reaction to it, its not like he's trolling looking to get a rise out of posters. Its just a section of posters here that look towards RT and other people to validate their opinion of the movie that dislike anyone that criticizes the movie.

BTW I saw it last weekend and enjoyed it, it was a bit formulaic with the plot and played it safe but it was funny, cute and charming to me. Loved Paul Rudd, Pena and Micheal Douglas. Even enjoyed the villain more than most of Marvel's efforts (Ronan, Malekith). Had a much better feeling walking out of this movie as compared to AoU, which straight up confused me with how messy it was.

 

[TheVision]

1) Peyton Reed directed Ant-Man 2) Its at 79-80% on Rotten Tomatoes.

These are the facts ladies and ants.

whatever people didnt like about it is fine, but the score for the movie says a lot, especially for ANT-MAN, its fn ANT-MAN, almost noone even knew about that character before this. Its awesome it did that well.

 

[JtheDreamer]

Meh, I think you guys are being pretty unfair with The Question. He's being perfectly reasonable with his opinion on the movie and the reaction to it, its not like he's trolling looking to get a rise out of posters. Its just a section of posters here that look towards RT and other people to validate their opinion of the movie that dislike anyone that criticizes the movie.

BTW I saw it last weekend and enjoyed it, it was a bit formulaic with the plot and played it safe but it was funny, cute and charming to me. Loved Paul Rudd, Pena and Micheal Douglas. Even enjoyed the villain more than most of Marvel's efforts (Ronan, Malekith). Had a much better feeling walking out of this movie as compared to AoU, which straight up confused me with how messy it was.

We didn't just cite RT. There's also Cinemascore and others. Let's call a spade a spade here, the movie has been received well by critics and audiences alike. The Question's method of analyzing the results/purpose is over-extravagant and unnecessary. Almost any film could have been "made better".

 

[Frodo]

I do think fans around the internet are being a bit overly defensive over the film. That said, I think its a fine film , and the more of these smaller properties hit it out of the park, the more likely studios will take the chance with other smaller comicbook properties.

 

[JtheDreamer]

I do think fans around the internet are being a bit overly defensive over the film.

Defensive in what way? This movie was being trashed by a very loud Edgar Wright fanboy contingent when he left. Considering the truncated transition timetable for Reed coming on, it's a nice accomplishment to be so well received overall.

 

[Frodo]

Defensive in what way? This movie was being trashed by a very loud Edgar Wright fanboy contingent when he left. Considering the truncated transition timetable for Reed coming on, it's a nice accomplishment to be so well received overall.

Defensive in acting like anyone who may think the film is meh, or even has flaws, is somehow trashing it or is an Edgar Wright fanboy. That is overly defensive, and i've seen alot of that , even towards those who may like it even though they have issues with it.

The vast majority I've heard about this film from fans has been positive . This is another case, like AOU, in which the overwhelming majority of fans and audiences like it, but because their are some who either don't like it or were underwhelmed , the film is somehow receiving a "massive amount" of hate.

 

[The Question]

Ummm we didn't just cite RT. There's also Cinemascore and others.

So? That just means that you've been using more than one film rating website to validate your enjoyment of the film and dismiss anyone who has critical opinions of it.

Let's call a spade a spade here, the movie has been received well by critics and audiences alike.

No one has said otherwise. What people have said is that the movie's reviews don't mean that now people who disagree with them are somehow being unreasonable for saying so.

The Question's method of analyzing the results/purpose is over-extravagant and completely unnecessary.

It is necessary if you want to actually have a meaningful conversation about film. It's not necessary and is over-extravagant if your goal is to "prove" which movies are good and which movies are bad, which completely misses the point of art.

Art is, in my opinion, the ultimate exercise in empathy. You create a work that speaks to you, filtered through how you perceive other people and your surroundings, in the hope of making a connection between how you think and feel and how your audience thinks and feels and discovering something in the process. And discussing art is a part of that process. Discussions about art can devolve into arguments about who is the smartest and most learned about art, something I admit I've been guilty of sometimes, but that's not what it should be. It shouldn't be about figuring out what's good and what's bad in some binary worldview. It should be about saying "this is how the art made me feel. This is how it engaged me and moved me and entertained me," or "this is how it failed to engage me, failed to move me, and failed to entertain me." It's looking at those mechanics at play and saying "this is what makes art effective to me and to most people, and this is what makes art distant and meaningless from myself and most people." And the joy of that, the very best part, is finding where these opinions don't line up. "This is what makes this movie good," says one, "but I hated that part," says another. Or vice versa. What makes that great is that it is a window into how other people think and feel. It helps us flex our empathetic muscles. It also helps us practice self reflection. Looking at something we love that someone else hates, or vice versa, causes us to look into ourself and ask "why do I feel this way? Way about me is different from that person, and what about them is different from me, that leads us to these two radically different views of the same thing?" And through engage that, through discussing those differences, you stand the chance of learning something about other people and yourself, and growing because of it. Maybe your opinion will change, and maybe it won't. But either way, you're walk away with a greater understanding of who you are, and a strengthened ability to connect with alien points of view, as well as a deeper understanding of and appreciation for the thing you both love.

Experiencing and discussing art can be, and should be, the greatest exercise in human empathy. It should be about saying "I need to find out why that person thinks differently from me and what it reveals about both of us," not "I need to prove that person is wrong.

Saying "it has 80% on RT, thus it is proven to be good and everyone who disagrees is wrong" is reductive and does not in any way reflect the nature of art and people's interaction with it.

That's part of why I hate Rotten Tomatoes. It reduces this beautiful process of human understanding down to 6th grade math, and 6th grade math is terrible.

Almost any film could have been "made better".

Yes. And in the case of this film, some people feel that there was a very specific choice made on the part of the studio that, had they taken another route, the movie would have been made significantly better and would have been more to their liking.

And you know what? You don't have to agree with that. You're not obligated to think anything about any movie other than the opinions you already hold. That is fine.

But saying that other people are being unreasonable for suggesting that the makers of a movie you liked made a mistake and could have done better is just pointless and mean.

These forums have a habit of turning into echo chambers where everyone either loves a thing or hates a thing and everyone who has a different opinion is labeled a troll and run off, and that is a damn shame. It's indicative of a wider mentality in nerd culture.

These public spaces, be they forums, conventions, comic book stores, game shops, or what have you, are supposed to be for the fee and respectful exchange of ideas about a shared interest. We may not always agree, but in exchanging our opinions on why certain pieces of art move us and why others don't and what the mechanics at play are, both within the work and within ourselves and within the context where we view the work, then we all gain a deeper appreciation for and understanding of the thing we love.

But that doesn't happen. Instead, we get petty tribalism and a panicked need to have the things we liked validated and to have other opinions dismissed.

 

[Whiskey Tango]

If you have a punch bowl you can bet the internet will find someone to piss in it for you.

 

[Webfoot Hero]

^^^(The Question's post, not Whiskey Tango's) Could this be any more pretentious? This is exactly what I was talking about in feeling you posts reek of condescension because of how long-winded your posts can get and how overly judgmental they appear to be of those that don't get as deep as you.

 

[JtheDreamer]

If you have a punch bowl you can bet the internet will find someone to piss in it for you.

He just doesn't stop.

^^^(The Question's post, not Whiskey Tango's) Could this be any more pretentious? This is exactly what I was talking about in feeling you posts reek of condescension because of how long-winded your posts can get and how overly judgmental they appear to be of those that don't get as deep as you.

I mean he's allowed his opinion, but ya, that's how it reads.

 

[The Question]

^^^(The Question's post, not Whiskey Tango's) Could this be any more pretentious? This is exactly what I was talking about in feeling you posts reek of condescension because of how long-winded your posts can get and how overly judgmental they appear to be of those that don't get as deep as you.

Yes, because saying that it is wrong to be summarily dismissive of different opinions about art is what's condescending.

 

[Vincanws]

So? That just means that you've been using more than one film rating website to validate your enjoyment of the film and dismiss anyone who has critical opinions of it.

I agree that using these things as a basis to criticise people who do or don't like the movie is wrong and childish.

 

[The Question]

I agree that using these things as a basis to criticise people who do or don't like the movie is wrong and childish.

I agree completely. It works both ways. Regardless of the movie or the rating, I think RT is basically useless on its best days and hot garbage on most others.

 

[JtheDreamer]

I agree completely. It works both ways. Regardless of the movie or the rating, I think RT is basically useless on its best days and hot garbage on most others.

And that's your opinion. You've not demonstrated why yours should matter more than anyone else's. Calling it useless and hot garbage is insulting to those who use it as a measuring stick, which fits the image of condescension you've been establishing. Who's insulting who now? Regardless, other sources were cited but you want to fixate on RT.

Clearly you're the argumentative type and at this point it's not even about the movie anymore. You just want to dissect the argumentation of others line by line, especially anything relating to the majority. You're that guy. Awaiting your long, exhausting response.

 

[Vincanws]

I agree completely. It works both ways. Regardless of the movie or the rating, I think RT is basically useless on its best days and hot garbage on most others.

That's fine too, it's your opinion. I can respect that.
I wouldn't personally be comfortable with that. It's like another way of saying not to pay attention to reviews on websites (i.e. lots of them), and sort of go in blind and make up your own mind. Which is a romantic concept I'd like to subscribe to, but wouldn't be realistic for me personally.

 

[Ragnaroknroll]

Hey so what do you guys think about that 80% RT score... oh... guess I'll come back later...

 

[The Question]

And that's your opinion. You've not demonstrated why yours should matter more than anyone else's. Calling it useless and hot garbage means you're insulting those who use it as a measuring stick (which fits the image of condescension you're establishing), so in essence now you're the one insulting people. Regardless, other sources were cited but you want to fixate on RT.

1: I keep saying RT because it's the most popular one and because they're basically all the same.

2: I have explained, in great detail, why I think Rotten Tomatoes is a bad measuring stick. I have demonstrated that to the absolute best of my ability.

3: I do apologize for being too harsh in my language. I do want to ask, though: Why are you so bothered by the condescension of someone saying that the measuring stick you use for discussing a work is a bad one, and yet have no problem with dismissing people who dislike a movie that is well liked in these forums as a troll?

And I'm establishing an image of condescension because I'm saying that we should be having a more nuanced and respectful discussion of differing viewpoints instead of using a flawed metric of public approval to "prove" that someone who dislikes or feels ambivalent towards a movie is wrong?

Awaiting your long, exhausting response. Clearly you're the argumentative type and that's what you come here for. It's not even about the movie at this point. You just want to dissect the argumentation of others line by line.

1: You don't know anything about me.

2: If you don't like talking to me, why do you keep talking to me?

 

[JtheDreamer]

Hey so what do you guys think about that 80% RT score... oh... guess I'll come back later...

Rotten Tomato is the devil. It poisons minds. REPENT!!!!!!

 

[seriesofdreams]

Hey so what do you guys think about that 80% RT score... oh... guess I'll come back later...

It's great. I'm still staring at it. This movie is obviously going to settle in the 79%-80ish% range. What's the point of the thread. It has become nothing but a whine-fest now.

 

[The Question]

That's fine too, it's your opinion. I can respect that.
I wouldn't personally be comfortable with that. It's like another way of saying not to pay attention to reviews on websites (i.e. lots of them), and sort of go in blind and make up your own mind. Which is a romantic concept I'd like to subscribe to, but wouldn't be realistic for me personally.

I think you should absolutely pay attention to reviews on websites. I think that you should find as many reviews as possible from differing voices, before but especially after you see a movie, to get a feel for the differing perspectives on it. Reviews are great, because they have the capacity for deeper and more nuanced opinions. They don't tell you how everyone in the world feels about the movie, but neither does RT or other sites like it. What they can do, however, which RT can't, is give you multiple opinions about a film that actually get into the nitty gritty of why the film did or did not work for the person who wrote it. I love a good film review. Although, as I alluded too, I actually prefer to read reviews after I see a film.

 

[Vincanws]

I think you should absolutely pay attention to reviews on websites. I think that you should find as many reviews as possible from differing voices,

Ok well fair enough, that sounds like your dislike of RT or similar is not about the actual reviews submitted by the various sites then, which is cool. I guess more the fact that people don't bother reading the reviews and just look at the main headline, whatever it may be.. 80%, or whatever. I think I understand ..