Vicarious Fan
Member
if that were true the top shows would be long format, Instead you have 7 out of the top 10 not being long format.
How is your opinion bearing out exactly? Star Wars is doing extremely well on streaming.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
SPOILER: The Acolyte -- Disney+ Star Wars -- begins June 5, 2024
- Thread starter MisterPenguin
- Start date
How is your opinion bearing out exactly? Star Wars is doing extremely well on streaming.
Disney Irish
Premium Member
I don't disagree with you here, but this isn't a Star Wars issue or even a Disney issue, its industry wide (as we've discussed before). This has been going on for almost 2 decades now, so can't blame streaming fully on this either but it hasn't helped. It started back in the mid 00s with a writers strike, ever since then tv seasons have become shorter and shorter. I also partially blame younger generations shorter attention spans, but that is a different topic.
And for good or for bad, bad because I rather have a longer season, the industry isn't likely to change.
Why TV Show Seasons Are So Much Shorter Than They Used To Be
There's a reason for shorter TV seasons.
screenrant.com
I’m didn’t bother to look this up, but didn’t that old show on Netflix “Suits” just become a big thing?I don't disagree with you here, but this isn't a Star Wars issue or even a Disney issue, its industry wide (as we've discussed before). This has been going on for almost 2 decades now, so can't blame streaming fully on this either but it hasn't helped. It started back in the mid 00s with a writers strike, ever since then tv seasons have become shorter and shorter. I also partially blame younger generations shorter attention spans, but that is a different topic.
And for good or for bad, bad because I rather have a longer season, the industry isn't likely to change.
Why TV Show Seasons Are So Much Shorter Than They Used To Be
There's a reason for shorter TV seasons.
I think there are other examples similar to that.
I think Hollywood just doesn’t understand the audience.
People will watch long or short seasons.
The show itself has to be good, and Hollywood seems to struggle with that lately.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Suits is the prime example…but not the only one.
There is an Appeal to longer/older shows on streaming and that tracks…
The reality is tv was designed as an escape…the more time you gobble up, the more it fits that bill.
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
From internet:
Suits, in 2023, became the most-streamed TV series in the U.S., amassing 57.7 billion minutes of watch time, surpassing The Office, which held the previous record with 57.1 billion minutes in 2020 . The show consistently recorded over 3 billion minutes viewed per week for seven consecutive weeks, a milestone unprecedented in streaming history.
Suits becomes first ever show to cross huge audience milestone after Netflix revival
Legal drama reached its conclusion in 2019 but has been revived by a successful return to Netflix
www.independent.co.uk
'Suits' Beats Massive Show's Streaming Record
The legal drama previously starring Meghan Markle found a second life on Netflix.
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
Acolyte has received mixed reviews so far, with a 72% rating from top critics on Rotten Tomatoes, an average rating of 5.7/10 and 5.5/10 for the first two episodes on IMDb, and a substantial drop to 3.6/10 for the third episode. The Metacritic score stands at 67, which indicates generally favorable reviews but doesn’t represent high praise from professional critics.
This suggests that while critics find some merit in the show, audiences are less impressed, particularly with Episode 3.
Despite this, the series isn’t over, and the best episodes might still be ahead. If the upcoming episodes can deliver a higher quality and win back viewers, we might see an improvement in audience scores. The key metric to watch will be viewership numbers, as they will indicate whether the audience remains engaged despite the mixed initial reception.
Current Reception
1. Rotten Tomatoes
• Top Critics: 72% (21 Fresh, 8 Rotten), with an average rating of 6.4/10.
2. IMDb
• Episode 1: 5.7/10 (12,000 ratings)
• Episode 2: 5.5/10 (11,000 ratings)
• Episode 3: 3.6/10 (9,600 ratings)
3. Metacritic
• Metascore: 67/100 (32 critic reviews)
• User Score: 4.3/10 (1,090 user ratings)
This suggests that while critics find some merit in the show, audiences are less impressed, particularly with Episode 3.
Despite this, the series isn’t over, and the best episodes might still be ahead. If the upcoming episodes can deliver a higher quality and win back viewers, we might see an improvement in audience scores. The key metric to watch will be viewership numbers, as they will indicate whether the audience remains engaged despite the mixed initial reception.
Current Reception
1. Rotten Tomatoes
• Top Critics: 72% (21 Fresh, 8 Rotten), with an average rating of 6.4/10.
2. IMDb
• Episode 1: 5.7/10 (12,000 ratings)
• Episode 2: 5.5/10 (11,000 ratings)
• Episode 3: 3.6/10 (9,600 ratings)
3. Metacritic
• Metascore: 67/100 (32 critic reviews)
• User Score: 4.3/10 (1,090 user ratings)
The phenomenon of older series suddenly become streaming chart toppers has more to do with the nature of streaming being *video on demand*.
It used to be with linear TV/cable, that over the 8 or more seasons of Friends or The Big Bang Theory or Suits or whatever, if you like the show, you had to make sure you tuned in on Thursdays at 9 PM (or whatever time it was showing). And, of course, some episodes get missed and it's a huge hassle to find it to watch it (buying the DVD [or VHS!] of past seasons). Or, there was a hidden gem on some night you weren't available and so you missed out on the series completely.
Then comes streaming. You can now binge all the seasons of The Office, 911, Suits, etc... And so people do. And that propels those shows to the top of the streaming chart, especially when they're counting minutes watched.
Not to mention that streaming allows for people to record scenes and make them into TikToks and YT Shorts, which only generates more interest. Once all the Suits clips get into your algorithm, you get fed a steady diet of all the "oh, snap!" moments and it spurs you to start watching and then bingeing the series.
Friends and The Office and Suits have all played out the audience that was bingeing them and they no long top the charts.
This is why it was wise of Nielsen to separate out "acquired" shows from new shows and movies.
It used to be with linear TV/cable, that over the 8 or more seasons of Friends or The Big Bang Theory or Suits or whatever, if you like the show, you had to make sure you tuned in on Thursdays at 9 PM (or whatever time it was showing). And, of course, some episodes get missed and it's a huge hassle to find it to watch it (buying the DVD [or VHS!] of past seasons). Or, there was a hidden gem on some night you weren't available and so you missed out on the series completely.
Then comes streaming. You can now binge all the seasons of The Office, 911, Suits, etc... And so people do. And that propels those shows to the top of the streaming chart, especially when they're counting minutes watched.
Not to mention that streaming allows for people to record scenes and make them into TikToks and YT Shorts, which only generates more interest. Once all the Suits clips get into your algorithm, you get fed a steady diet of all the "oh, snap!" moments and it spurs you to start watching and then bingeing the series.
Friends and The Office and Suits have all played out the audience that was bingeing them and they no long top the charts.
This is why it was wise of Nielsen to separate out "acquired" shows from new shows and movies.
Why are we using "top critics" now when for years we never did?
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
I don’t understand why you wouldn’t want to use the best critics of the bunch to review a show.
“Top critics provide a more informed, balanced, and reliable assessment of a show’s quality. Their professional expertise, adherence to critical standards, and contextual analysis make their reviews a trustworthy source for evaluating film and television content.”
Top critics of Inside out 2 are giving that show 90%.
Why not use them?
Because we haven't in the past.
Until people who didn't like a movie and wanted reasons to make it look bad decided to switch to "Top Critics" in order to tout a lower score.
Not that the Tomatometer is a good indicator of critic's opinions. Instead, you look at their scores, and not whether that score was high enough to qualify as a 'recommend.'
In the cap you posted, it's the "7.3" which is important. (Which I normalize on a 100 point scale, so, a 73 out of 100.) A 73 is a good score.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
…reminder: they still have 5 episodes to make something substantial out of this.
We’re just parsing. The truth is gonna start to leak out over the next few weeks
We’re just parsing. The truth is gonna start to leak out over the next few weeks
Disney Irish
Premium Member
And maybe it is that Hollywood is missing the mark, which shows this isn't some unique Disney phenomenon. The article I provided goes into it but because of the nature of Hollywood less risks are willing to be taken, which is why they are only willing to spend a certain amount of "bandwidth" on new content, hence the short seasons. And even then when shows don't catch on right away they cancel them when in the old days they'd give them a couple seasons. I've had many shows over the years that I was interested in that were immediately cancelled because there wasn't a huge enough audience watching it. Its a complaint I've seen many times on various sites I view about shows being cancelled too early. Unfortunately with the recent strikes I don't see long seasons coming back in a major way anytime soon, if ever.
Anyways we'll have to see what the remaining 5 episodes brings with this show. Hopefully they find a way to land the ship as it were by the end.
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
My personal opinion and you guys can agree or disagree…
Using top critics isn’t about switching metrics to make a show look bad; it’s about finding a balanced and fair evaluation. The Tomatometer can be a useful tool, but it’s important to look at the detailed reviews and scores to get the full picture. In the case of Acolyte, using top critic’s scores helps align with the fair fan reviews on IMDB and reduces the influence of potential shills and review bombers. This way, we can see that the show has received mixed reviews, with a top critics’ score of 72%, IMDb ratings around 5.7/10 and 5.5/10 for the first two episodes, and a Metacritic score of 67. This method provides a more accurate reflection of both critic and audience opinions.
CinematicFusion
Well-Known Member
Agree
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
The best thing for an individual is to find that one single reviewer you like and follow them.
These aggregate reviews serve a purpose, but people seem to be giving them more and more weight than they should.
It's also important to see where potential review bombing is taking place. When half the audience reviews are 1 out of 10 I call BS, because it's extremely rare for any show or movie to be that egregiously bad. It's just people overly punishing a show they didn't love.
Casper Gutman
Well-Known Member
Yup. My critic used to be Ebert. I often disagreed, but he was almost always insightful.
There’s a cutesy-poo game being played here - critics on these boards claim the hysterical, hateful voices should be ignored as entirely irrelevant and then turn around and try to give credibility to the manipulated, bombed RT viewer score. They switch between these positions as necessary.
On another note… everyone realizes that Disney Star Wars is nowhere near as bluntly political as the PT, right? To cite a few examples, those movies directly quoted Bush (resulting in the stupidest line in the series as a retort: “Only a Sith deals in absolutes”), had a villain named Newt Gunray, and altered the very nature of the force (midichlorians) based on Lucas’s shifting politics. It’s a great example of how outrage has almost nothing to do with the content of a film but is largely manufactured by loud people seeking to benefit.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
Ebert was great.
He made a great point once that the job of a reviewer is to describe a movie in such a way that the reader can determine if it's something they would like. The final letter grade or raised appendage is secondary to that factor.
Take something like the Michael Bay Transformers movies. Most reviewers won't give those a high score in terms of artistic merit. What a reviewer can do is explain that the movies contain two plus hours of CGI robots fighting each other, the effects are convincing, the acting is tolerable, etc. Based on that I can tell if I'd enjoy the movie, regardless of whether they ranked it A+ or C-.
A bunch of angry nerds giving 1 out of 10 ratings to the Acolyte says very little in terms of whether or not I should watch.
erasure fan1
Well-Known Member
Oh I'd say, "I bet I can eat more spice creams than you" is just as bad. It's definitely more cringe.
You realize it goes both ways right? The marvels was an absolute trainwreck yet somehow it was 82% positive. Why wasn't that review bombed? Face it, both sides use the scores to try and further the narrative they want to tell. I hear a lot of, the shows really good, its got a critics score of 93%! In this day and age you can't rely on any reviews, critics or audience.
If this show was being well received by audiences, it wouldn't be at 17%. I won't deny, there's some review bombing in that score. But if general audiences were engaged, you'd expect to see something like 55/60% with said bombing. So my question is, where are all the positive reviews? I just don't see a lot of people defending the show. Maybe they will show up when the show ends, time will tell.
MoonRakerSCM
Well-Known Member
Beware the "cutesy-poo" lol. Tell us, are the RT review bombers in the room with us right now?
Unverified audience scores are useless… positive or negative… unless they can find away to verify the scores it is pointless… they should throw away the entire audience review system for television
I only check the verified for theatrical movies… not sure what The Marvels is good or bad, but verified should be accurate as at least you can have confidence that the audience actually watched the movie