Star Wars: The Acolyte

[Disney Irish]

Of course the reviewer said that.

If it turns out that the general audience can give a better idea of the quality of show or movie than a critic, then we don’t need critics at all.

If I go to RT enough times and find the audience score aligns much closer to my view than the critic score, it won’t take me long to just ignore the critics altogether.

In my half century+ time on this planet I learned a LONG time ago that critics (nor the general public for that matter) don't represent my tastes and views. Its why I never put any stock in any reviews overall.

As I said in this thread and others, I like what I like and dislike what I don't. No review or opinion of someone else is going to sway that.

But that still doesn't answer the question, was any of that tied to Disney?

 

[Disney Irish]

If I go to RT enough times and find the audience score aligns much closer to my view than the critic score, it won’t take me long to just ignore the critics altogether.

We call that confirmation bias.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Well it could have been you for all I know.

Point is these fake reviews appeared over multiple social media platforms following the same format.

So it was an organized campaign by someone.

Here is a sample:

Wow, they got caught alright. Those are textbook bot accounts and posts. I suspect that many firms do this. Still, it's too bad to see large firms transparently engage in this behavior. Bots lower the quality of the discourse online and skew perceptions. It's manipulative. While Disney clearly contracted with someone to do this, this is still blatantly against the X terms of service. Disney has all sorts of official PR and media channels to reach the public. This is neither necessary or tasteful.

 

[Disney Irish]

Wow, they got caught alright. Those are textbook bot accounts and posts. I suspect that many firms do this. Still, it's too bad to see large firms transparently engage in this behavior. Bots lower the quality of the discourse online and skew perceptions. It's manipulative. While Disney clearly contracted with someone to do this, this is still blatantly against the X terms of service. Disney has all sorts of official PR and media channels to reach the public. This is neither necessary or tasteful.

Can you please point to any proof that Disney was actually involved, whether contracting out to someone else or doing it internally? Just because you have a certain belief of something doesn't make it true.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Can you please point to any proof that Disney was actually involved, whether contracting out to someone else or doing it internally? Just because you have a certain belief of something doesn't make it true.

Because bots cost money. Who bought the bots? A concerned citizen?

 

[Disney Irish]

Because bots cost money. Who bought the bots? A concerned citizen?

Ok, so then there is a paper trail. Does it lead to Disney? Can someone please provide that? Because right now its a lot of accusations being thrown around without any shred of evidence that Disney was involved, in both this and RT scores. If they were involved then yeah lets go after them for being bad actors here. But if they aren't involved then why throw mud?

 

[Jedijax719]

29% audience rating is just stupid. No other way to describe it. Either it's massive review bombing or testament to the fact that if something SW isn't absolutely considered perfect, it gets blasted by fans. It actually reads that SW really does not have any hope for recovery whatsoever.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Ok, so then there is a paper trail. Does it lead to Disney? Can someone please provide that? Because right now its a lot of accusations being thrown around without any shred of evidence that Disney was involved, in both this and RT scores. If they were involved then yeah lets go after them for being bad actors here. But if they aren't involved then why throw mud?

Because bots cost money. Who spends money to defend Disney's interests?

 

[Disney Irish]

Because bots cost money. Who spends money to defend Disney's interests?

Bots like this cost pennies on the dollar, its not a huge investment. For as low as something like $5 you can get a simple review bot like these to add hundreds of posts to any social media site. And not only that its an obvious bot review bomb. So anyone could have done it, from someone that wanted to defend the project to someone who wanted to frame Disney and make the project look even worse.

If Disney was going to invest in such a practice I would think they would make a larger investment to ensure 1. it wasn't obvious and 2. to get better reviews overall. Disney spends Millions on PR every year, this would be too cheap even for them.

 

[Jedijax719]

What are people here actually accusing Disney of doing?

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Bots like this cost pennies on the dollar, its not a huge investment. For as low as something like $5 you can get a simple review bot like these to add hundreds of posts to any social media site. And not only that its an obvious bot review bomb. So anyone could have done it, from someone that wanted to defend the project to someone who wanted to frame Disney and make the project look even worse.

If Disney was going to invest in such a practice I would think they would make a larger investment to ensure 1. it wasn't obvious and 2. to get better reviews overall. Disney spends Millions on PR every year, this would be too cheap even for them.

I'm going to stick with Occam's razor. The one who has something to gain and the resources to do it is the one who did it. Or maybe "Pinkie Pie" is the one who bought the bots in order to get clout.

 

[Disney Irish]

I'm going to stick with Occam's razor. The one who has something to gain and the resources to do it is the one who did it. Or maybe "Pinkie Pie" is the one who bought the bots in order to get clout.

You keep using "resources" like this costs some huge amount of money, it doesn't.

Also I wouldn't put it passed some rando on the internet with an axe to grind to do something like this to get clout and their "15 mins".

 

[Trauma]

29% audience rating is just stupid. No other way to describe it. Either it's massive review bombing or testament to the fact that if something SW isn't absolutely considered perfect, it gets blasted by fans. It actually reads that SW really does not have any hope for recovery whatsoever.

It has hope. Just needs an extended break with complete house cleaning at Lucasfilm.

Basically something that will probably have to wait until Iger is gone.

 

[Trauma]

I think Meta Critic is a little more balanced. About an average of 5 between critic and users.

That’s right about where I would put it. Completely average and largely unnecessary.

 

[CinematicFusion]

And? Were any of those a Disney film or shows? I'd really like to know. As I understand it that PR firm is used exclusively by Indie studios not the mainstream studios like Disney.

Also this is something that a bunch of us have been saying for YEARS now, don't trust the RT scores.

And I think this sums this up based on what one reviewer interviewed said in one of those articles.....

"Audiences are dumber."

Let the audience decide what they feel about Acolyte, it’s not a big deal.
The audience is going to tell you how good or bad a show is.

 

[Disstevefan1]

 

[CinematicFusion]

In my half century+ time on this planet I learned a LONG time ago that critics (nor the general public for that matter) don't represent my tastes and views. Its why I never put any stock in any reviews overall.

As I said in this thread and others, I like what I like and dislike what I don't. No review or opinion of someone else is going to sway that.

But that still doesn't answer the question, was any of that tied to Disney?

Critics’ opinions don’t matter as much; let “The Acolyte” play out and see how the audience reacts. Word of mouth will be the true indicator of its success. Shows like “Fallout” and “Three-Body Problem” have been well-received, and “Suits” experienced a resurgence on Netflix due to positive word of mouth.

My wife watched 15 minutes of “The Acolyte” before switching back to “Suits,” To be fair, none of the women in my family are big Star Wars fans. They’re all about Hugh Jackman and are eagerly awaiting his return as Wolverine. Men want to be him, and women are attracted to him—he’s an A-list actor. Perhaps “The Acolyte” lacks a similar charismatic male lead that appeals to women.

 

[CinematicFusion]

29% audience rating is just stupid. No other way to describe it. Either it's massive review bombing or testament to the fact that if something SW isn't absolutely considered perfect, it gets blasted by fans. It actually reads that SW really does not have any hope for recovery whatsoever.

It doesn’t matter anymore… you like it. That’s all that matters.

 

[CinematicFusion]

Well it could have been you for all I know.

Point is these fake reviews appeared over multiple social media platforms following the same format.

So it was an organized campaign by someone.

Here is a sample:

Might be on to something but I’m sure every media company hires an agency to help promote their products. Disney no exception.

1. Repetitive Phrasing: A lot of the tweets say things like “Tiana’s Bayou Adventure looks magical,” almost word-for-word. Doesn’t feel random.
2. Consistent Emoji Use: The same patterns and combinations of emojis keep showing up, which you don’t usually see in genuine, individual reviews.
3. Time Frame: All these tweets were posted within a few hours of each other (7 to 12 hours ago). That’s a pretty tight window for organic posts.
4. Lack of Personalization: Real reviews often have unique personal touches or experiences, but these tweets seem pretty generic and repetitive.

 

[Disney Irish]

Let the audience decide what they feel about Acolyte, it’s not a big deal.
The audience is going to tell you how good or bad a show is.

The point is that the article you posted had nothing to do with Disney. So it wasn't really relevant other than to say don't trust RT scores, which I'm very much in agreement.

And I also agree the audience will decide whether something is good or bad. However too many here when trying to defend their position put too much credence into RT scores and other "online" metrics, that as pointed out can be manipulated by bad actors. So the long and short of it, stop relying so much on scores from online rating sites.

Critics’ opinions don’t matter as much; let “The Acolyte” play out and see how the audience reacts.

Lol, we have no choice in the matter but to let it play out.

Word of mouth will be the true indicator of its success. Shows like “Fallout” and “Three-Body Problem” have been well-received, and “Suits” experienced a resurgence on Netflix due to positive word of mouth.

My wife watched 15 minutes of “The Acolyte” before switching back to “Suits,” which is actually quite good and popular among our friends. To be fair, none of the women in my family are big Star Wars fans. They’re all about Hugh Jackman and are eagerly awaiting his return as Wolverine. Men want to be him, and women are attracted to him—he’s an A-list actor. Perhaps “The Acolyte” lacks a similar charismatic male lead that appeals to women.

Anecdotal sentiment aside, the show is only 2 episodes in, there is a long way to go.