Batman's Rotten Situation

There’s a new Batman movie. Not that one, and not that one either. Yeah, that’s the one: The Batman. Despite being hesitant to go to theatres because of Omicron, it definitely interests me. And with the reception being mostly positive, this is another winner for DCEU fans. Or, I’d say that…but there are people legitimately upset that it wasn’t unanimously-praised.

I’ve discussed this before, but it bears repeating: Rotten Tomatoes isn’t a review site. It doesn’t grade movies, and it doesn’t actively judge movies. It’s an aggregate site, meaning it gathers reviews from various sources, weighs their averages and uses that as the end “score”. Aside from a tagline, which is driven by consensus, it also has no input on the final tallies. So why do people keep forgetting that?

I’ll be honest, I used to not understand it myself. There was a time that I thought Rotten Tomatoes was out to get me. I’d groan at the scores movies received, even watching bad ones out of spite. It was petty, but I was petty back then. I was also a teenager.

Fast-forward to 2010, when I got into film seriously. I started only seeing movies that were well-received; after all, I was limited financially. This went on for many years, and though not everything I watched I liked, I felt an air of superiority for “agreeing with the RT score”. Essentially, I was petty for different reasons.

I mention this because people often take Rotten Tomatoes way too seriously. It’s hard not to, since many studios and promotional sites use them to market their movies. In a way, Rotten Tomatoes has, ironically, become a review site for people. Forget clicking on the individual reviews, the magical number’s what people care about.

That worries me. It worries me because it commodifies reviewing, and it worries me because it leads to one-upmanship. Most importantly, it worries me because it ignores the subjectivity of film criticism, instead turning the reviews into personal attacks if they disagree with you. It’s unhealthy.

Before anyone accuses me of shilling, no, I don’t always agree with an RT consensus. I don’t think Cars 2 is that bad, nor do I think Mad Max: Fury Road is anything special. And I for sure think a Star Wars movie’s always worth your time, quality be damned. But while I have my opinions, I know these aggregates weren’t decided by a hive-mind. Rather, they were the results of hundreds of individuals, many with degrees in film and journalism, looking at a movie, seeing what it offers and judging it as an end-product.

People forget how many movies critics see. Whereas the average person might watch a handful of films in a year, professional film critics watch dozens of them weekly for a living. What’s worse, many are garbage. When you’re watching that many movies, you both see recurring tropes and patterns and also become harder to impress. For that reason alone, a critic’s review should hold more weight.

This doesn’t mean a critic’s opinion matters more than the average person’s. Nor does that always “make them right”. Critics are human, and humans aren’t free of biases. In some cases, they might change their mind upon re-watch, especially with the added benefit of time. In that sense, a critic can “get it wrong”. But so can everyone else.

That’s why Rotten Tomatoes should be taken with a grain of salt. It shouldn’t be discounted, there’s usually a reason why a movie’s getting mass-praised or trashed, but it’s not a definitive proof of quality either. Movies aren’t only subjective experiences, they also age. And depending on societal trends, that can either strengthen or weaken them. It’s why it’s worthwhile re-watching classics.

As for The Batman? Its reception should surprise no one. There’ve been many Batman movies over the years, all varying qualitatively. But while I doubt any interpretation will outshine Christopher Nolan’s, especially given the impact he’s had, Batman’s not hard to make work as a character study. Additionally, the director, Matt Reeves, worked on Dawn of the Planet of the Apes and War for the Planet of the Apes. Considering those movies worked despite expectations, it’s obvious that he’d pull off a character like Batman.

At the same time, Batman’s one of the few superheroes overdone on film. And expectations are much higher for another film with him. Add in that Robert Pattinson’s take is new, and that The DCEU’s been struggling for almost a decade, and it’s no wonder that some reviewers were turned off. It doesn’t help that it’s been playing up its moodiness to excess.

So yes, its Rotten Tomatoes aggregate makes sense. Does you have to agree with it? Of course not! But it’s not the end of the world. Nor is it worth getting angry about. Because that’s childish, tiring and doesn’t reflect well.

Honestly, be grateful it wasn’t outright panned. The Batman went through production troubles for years, even switching out its lead. That it didn’t suffer the same fate as Netflix’s live-action remake of Cowboy Bebop is a miracle. Because movies are hard to make, especially on a good day!

Ultimately, this is why Rotten Tomatoes and the discourse surrounding it is so openly toxic. We have enough problems without people getting this mad over a film. (I should know, I watched Eternals!) Adding something as trivial as a Batman movie’s reception to the mix is, therefore, ludicrous. It also doesn’t reflect well on anyone.

Besides, enjoy the movie! It was well-received! Isn’t that enough? I think so! But what do I know?