Quote:
Originally Posted by Locke
I agree. How much money a movie makes seems like such a flawed metric to determine the quality of a film.
If you go see a movie and it sucks they still keep your money and add it to their Box Office tally.
But at the same time its become abundantly clear that Critic's reviews arent worth all that much either.
Its somewhat interesting that despite the Big Business of Entertainment and Film the 'Movie Critic' is going to become a dying breed simply because they poisoned their own credibility.
If Critics cant be trusted to not be swayed by studios or that someone with a more credible reputation gives reviews on Youtube for free then whats the point of the Professional Movie Critic?
So because of this people grasp at other means of trying to determine the quality of a movie that seems less arbitrary. Albeit, 'Box Office Gross' is an easy one its just as flawed a metric as any other.
Are there advanced Stats to empirically and objectively rate the quality of a film so that I can know whether its statistically good or not regardless of whether it sucks?
We could call it the 'Gulutzan-O'-Meter.'
|
http://www.cracked.com/pictofacts-12...ly-successful/
There's a whole bunch of movies on that list that most people found poor, yet made tons of money, especially in China.
Plus, there's a lot of movies that don't do well at the box office but find love afterward because they are legitimately good movies.
The only reason I pay attention to box office is to see how busy the theater is likely to be.