Was there a great debate when newspapers were first introduced because headlines offered over-simplified accounts of stories detailed more fully in the actual articles? That would be akin to so many folks being up in arms over the Tomatometer. It’s not meant to tell the full story, but give readers a glimpse at what the story—the story here consisting of a wide range of critical opinion on a given movie—is about. It won’t tell the full story, and I think this is obvious to anyone who consults the site. Scrolling through the review excerpts will not provide the full story either. Not even reading every single review listed will provide a reader with a complete picture of what a movie is “about.” But each step along this path takes them a bit deeper.
What the score ends up doing is deliberately and consciously reducing something to an oversimplified version of itself. A number rating forces a reviewer to focus their opinion on a movie to its basest level. Sometimes this means they’re forced out of their comfort zone and have to decide whether they “like” or “dislike” a movie which contradicts their evaluative philosophy. And that’s fair. But for someone who likes to get a general sense of where someone is coming from before they delve into their longwinded explanations of themselves and their processes, I find this incredibly useful. Cut to the chase.
So the scores are like a kind of shorthand, and I’m fairly confident they’re understood as such. People who want to engage on an entirely superficial level with this stuff will find a way to do it no matter what. Like so many other examples on the internet, these sites provide people with specific information and it’s up to them what they choose to do with it, which includes placing it in the proper context. Heaven forbid you should be asked to do anything yourself.
Continue reading on the next page…
