Contrary to popular belief, movie critics are not conspiring against the “Joker” » LIVE THE LIFE WITHOUT FEAR


If you thought the Todd Phillips speech Joker was boring before the movie came out – from baseless threats of mass shootings in movie theaters to the director claiming he was kicked out of comedy by the “woke” – you ain’t seen nothing yet.

After the film’s actual release on Friday, a bizarre conspiracy theory began to emerge: that movie critics, either out of left-leaning political bias, affinity for Marvel over DC, and/or anger Joker director Todd Phillips had criticized “woke” critics of his comedy style, actively seeking to undermine the film.

The proof? Joker received overwhelmingly positive reviews when it premiered in early September at the Venice Film Festival, where it received the Golden Lion. The reviews that arrived this week, when the film opened in the United States, were still positive but more mixed, bringing the film Rotten Tomatoes Reviews Score up about 70% from Friday night. That meant its score was still positive and in the ‘Certified Fresh’ category, but it occasionally dropped throughout the day on Friday as more reviews poured in. Others claimed the critics were responsible for spreading rumors of “incel violence” to Joker projections with the active intention of harming the film.


Needless to say, this is all ridiculous and baseless, just bad faith and victimization idiocy. It is built, more than anything else, on deliberate and ignorant misunderstandings of how film criticism, film festivals, entertainment media, and Rotten Tomatoes work.

On the one hand, a film receiving rave reviews at a film festival and then more lukewarm reviews once it hits general release is something that happens. all the timestarting with just about every “Sundance hit” of the past 15 years.

While I agree that the fears of incel violence were somewhat irresponsible, it wasn’t the critics, for the most part, that drove them. It was the most widespread entertainment medium (and even the federal government) who pushed this idea out there more than the critics.

There are a lot of reviews

“Reviews” and “media” aren’t a monolith, and one group of critics who like a movie and another group who don’t like it isn’t hypocrisy – it’s disagreement, and critics movies are sometimes at odds with each other. Critics don’t meet after screenings to forge a party line; more often they argue and leave the theater still disagreeing.

And these two Guardian reviews, which are so different before and after Phillips’ comments? Maybe it’s because they were written by two different critics, one at the film festival and the other at the time of release.

Critics don’t meet after screenings to forge a party line; more often they argue…

Rotten Tomatoes reviews score for Joker has changed since the film premiered in Venice and Toronto, for the simple reason that only a few dozen critics rated the film at festivals. Since the film screened for critics across the country and beyond the week of its release, that number has now grown to nearly 400. What was a small sample is now much larger.

Why was there a sudden influx of reviews on October 3 and 4? Probably because that’s when the movie was released, and so most of the reviews came in.

What critics don’t think about:

And no, the critics are not motivated by any particular esoteric motivation that you think they are motivated by. As a film critic, belonging to two groups of film critics and friends with many other film critics, allow me to provide an exhaustive but only partial list of things that almost no critic I know cares the least about. of the world. , or takes into consideration, when drafting its opinion:

– Which company owns the studio releasing the film

– The place of the film in the feuds between fans of Marvel vs DCEU

– The current or future Rotten Tomatoes critics score of the film

– Whether or not a film is “certified fresh”

– If our opinion reflects the audience score

See also

– Whether the film’s expected box office performance could “justify” or “contradict” our review’s conclusion

– What the director of the film could have said in a recent interview that we may or may not have read

– The possibility that our review will serve to “destroy” or “cancel” a film or its director

These are all things that fanboys care a lot more about than critics. And perhaps most laughable of all is that most of the vitriol about this happened before the film was released, when the majority of those who start online fights on Jokeralmost certainly hadn’t seen the movie yet.

A thought experiment

But let’s assume for a moment that all the conspiracy theories were true and that the entire film criticism profession, for some reason, aligned against JokerTodd Phillips and the DC Cinematic Universe, with the active intent of hurting them.

My question is, why would you care?

…at the same time, they demand validation from those same reviews all the time and become unreasonably angry when they don’t receive it.

All of this could be true, and Joker would still exist as a movie. It would still be in theaters right now, no one would stop you from seeing it or enjoying it, and it would still likely become a big hit at the box office. It wouldn’t “ruin” the movie for you. As is often the case with controversial entertainment these days, it was not “canceled”, it was only criticized.

People who do these kinds of arguments, on the one hand, despise criticism and regard it as irrelevant and irrelevant. But at the same time, they demand validation from those same reviews all the time and get unreasonably angry when they don’t get it.

still fresh

In the end, what is most ridiculous of all is that aAfter all this, Joker was consistently reviewed positively by the majority of critics. As of this writing, it’s 70% on Rotten Tomatoes, not 7%.

But I would ask this of the critical conspirators who are Joker stans: What Rotten Tomatoes review score would be good enough? Should it be 90? 95? Or is no dissent tolerated at all?


Comments are closed.