Warning: My Blu-ray organizing spree led me to question modern review aggregators.

I mean, I was alphabetizing my collection and idk, maybe it's just me but I started comparing old printed reviews to current Rotten Tomatoes scores. It's frustrating how nuanced criticism gets flattened into a percentage, you know? I kind of miss when critics had more space to elaborate. Does anyone else feel like aggregated scores miss the point?

3 comments

3 Comments

jessica_robinson2310d ago

Ugh, yes! I totally fell down that rabbit hole last year with my horror collection. I dug out these old Fangoria magazines and their reviews were these whole little essays, then I'd look up the same movie on RT and it's just a number. Idk, that percentage tells you nothing about why something works or doesn't. Maybe it's just me but I'll take one person's detailed take over a aggregated score any day.

richard_cooper9d ago

My brain checks RT before reading, @jessica_robinson23.

dakotajones9d ago

Absolutely (and I mean absolutely). When you read a review in Fangoria, don't you get a sense of the reviewer's passion, like that deep dive into the practical effects in 'The Thing'? RT just says 92% fresh, but that doesn't tell you why the body horror works or how the tension builds. I remember reading a long-form piece on 'Suspiria' (the original, obviously) that analyzed the color palette and soundtrack, things a score could never convey. Those essays make you appreciate the craft, not just judge if it's 'good' or 'bad'. It's like comparing a recipe to a taste test result, you know? One gives you the ingredients and process, the other just a thumbs up.