Hey Internet, Stop Being Naysayers For Films You Haven't Seen

If you're anyone who has followed movie news for the past year, you'll know about the backlash towards the all-female Ghostbusters backlash. I even recently wrote on Monday as to why this bugs me on a more personal level. However, it does feel like the film still needs some defending despite my lack of utter interest. The reviews have been chiming in over the past week, and most have been all over the spectrum. Some like it, some accept that it's not great. However, the general consensus is that it isn't the worst film in human's existence. However, there is one place where you'll be forgiven for counterattacking this point: IMDb. While it's a subsidiary of Twitter's incessantly vacuum of skepticism, the film has been swamped with extremely negative reviews. ScreenCrush recently wrote about it, and it's still a baffling case where I feel like I need to tell people one hard yet obvious thing: don't judge what you haven't seen.
A few months back, I wrote about the anti-critics phenomena surrounding Batman v. Superman. I almost felt writing this piece would in some regards be an obsolescent retread. However, the news that a movie is being spammed with terrible reviews when it's confident that majority of the users haven't seen it feels like its own problematic case, only made me feel the need to open up again. As the numbers show on IMDb, days before the films wide release, 57.7% have given it the lowest possible grade: 1 out of 10 stars, or 1564 individual users. Meanwhile, it is unsure how much the other numbers mean, but the 10 out of 10 stars group - with 1,000 less individual users - make up another 19.3% of votes. The other 23% lie somewhere in the middle.
Here's a news flash. I haven't seen Ghostbusters (2016). I probably won't until it's on HBO and I'm dazed one night around 9 PM. It's just a comedy that doesn't interest me. It's how I see most mainstream comedies, actually: whether male or female driven. Yet I cannot help but laugh at the passion surrounding a fan base that so desperately wants to see this film fail. Not because it looks bad, but because it somehow will ruin their childhood. There's even been viral videos discussing why they're boycotting the films on the grounds that it stars, as Bill Murray would say, someone who is "dickless." I have no emotional attachment to the first, yet I can accept that it won't ruin my childhood to see a remake that doesn't match up. It's the flaw of sequel culture anyways. Does Speed 2 ruin Speed? Nope. These are individual movies that exist to entertain. The good will sustain while the bad should drop away. Really. Watch good movies, people. Don't let a bad one ruin your life.
Of course, here's more numbers that suggest how far this nonsense has gone:
What I am about to say isn't so much a quest for people to be better critics so much as to ask for them to be better people. I admit that I am at times biased to dislike something before seeing it. I have said "This looks dumb." several times, including most recently with Swiss Army Man. However, I generally don't judge a product wholesale on more than the information given to general consumption. If the trailer doesn't do it for you, don't spend your life complaining about the trailer's inefficiency. I know that it's hard when it comes to Hollywood blockbusters because of how frequently those trailers play before movies. However, putting effort to seek out comments sections on YouTube (and giving overwhelming down votes there as well) and share how much it looks like garbage is an unproductive use of your time. In the case of IMDb, spamming the boards with negative reviews for a movie you haven't seen ruins the integrity of a website intended to share conversations about cinema based on users' opinions. Yes, there have been some biases in the other direction, too. However, swaying something pointlessly negative defeats the purpose of honest opinions. You don't want to see Ghostbusters? Fine. See something else.
It is bad enough that it exists on this level, but then it reaches its own ridiculous form of Holocaust Deniers when these types accuse critics of not giving an honest opinion. It's a bully tactic, and one that results in nothing. There's no gratification in saying that someone's opinion on a subjective product is wrong. They'll still think that way no matter what. You have wasted more time talking about something you hate than finding something you like. Considering that there's a fuss over its "Certified Fresh" status on Rotten Tomatoes, it only drives the point home that it's not ruining people's childhoods anymore. It's ruining the integrity of liking movies. In fact, it may even be damaging to those who want to just enjoy cinema in general but feel intimidated because they like something others don't. It may not be as bad as being Antisemitic or homophobic, but it is still attacking a person based on personal interests.

Scene from The Dark Knight Rises
The attack of fans on critics and films is nothing new. However, the past decade has been a pretty hostile time to like movies. People petitioned to have critic Armond White removed from Rotten Tomatoes for ruining Toy Story 3's 100% rating. In 2012, the fervor was even stronger for The Dark Knight Rises, and in some ways parallels the Ghostbusters incident, but for a film that audiences wanted to be amazing. Considering that there was talk a few months ago that had Twitter people complain that Batman v. Superman suffered because Marvel Studios paid off critics to give bad reviews, this somehow seems not so ridiculous. None of it was necessarily true despite Zack Snyder's latest having less than stellar reviews. However, The Dark Knight Rises had less than stellar reviews and got away with far worse pregame action.
In 2008, The Dark Knight was an unprecedented hit and made director Christopher Nolan one of modern cinema's most beloved mainstream directors. This continued with Inception - which got him a ton of Oscar nominations. However, The Dark Knight Rises didn't do so hot at first. Critics were split on the film in the weeks leading up to the film. When the embargo lifted, they published their somewhat negative, but not often scathing, reviews. Female critics were accused of not getting it (in more sexist language). However, the biggest problem came when those negative critics got something that nobody should get for thinking that a movie sucks: death threats.
Yes, death threats. All for a movie that the accusers likely didn't see. Considering that we're living in a time where Game of Thrones spoilers are sent to people's phones that annoy you as a legitimate punishment, the sense of gratification for fans seems obvious. Even in the comics world, people recently got mad that Captain America was a Nazi in one story. However, it didn't compare to the threats that sparked on Rotten Tomatoes, causing safety concerns. It was clearly unformed malice, as critic Eric D. Snider once found out when he published a fake review for the film with his intentions referenced in closing. Even his bold satire resulted in some backlash. While it got usurped quickly by the mass shooting in Aurora, Colorado on opening night, it reflected the sense that movie fans were in the middle of their most delusional period... and it was all their own fault.
Nobody wants a film to be bad. Trust me. I hope that Ghostbusters is good. Yet suddenly we're not allowed to have discourse over the quality of a film, let alone one that we haven't seen, without someone getting annoyed that it isn't what they want. Guess what, cinema is rarely what you want. It's the work of an artist (or sometimes producer) meant to tell their singular story. You have to accept that it'll be what it is, warts and all. What good did sending death threats to those who disliked The Dark Knight Rises do? Absolutely nothing. In the short four years since the release, many agree that it's on the weaker side of Nolan's work despite also sitting at #62 on IMDb's Top 250. There's an overwhelming desire for it to be great that voters made it great out of compensation. They may love it. They may hate it. Who knows. Was it worth suggesting murder for the opposition? No. That's not how things get done.
So while I'm thankful that Ghostbusters hasn't gotten quite to hostile levels, it's still sickening to see people intending harm over a film that they don't want to see. That's fine. You're allowed to like whatever you want. However don't go around ruining someone else's day with it. Critics like what critics like. People turn to IMDb to get an honest gauge of how popular a film is. If you later decide that it's a 1 star movie, then good for you. However, don't judge ahead of time that it's absolute garbage. Just accept that it's not for you - which a ton of cinema is - and move onto something else. It does wonders for your self-inflated ego's anxiety.

Comments