Martin Scorsese Penned A Huffy Column About Rotten Tomatoes

Hollywood is going through a nasty crisis at the moment due to the ongoing ick fest that is Harvey Weinstein. So it’s great timing that the Hollywood Reporter got Martin Scorsese to use his leading voice as a prominent male director to pen a column about…Rotten Tomatoes and mother!?

Martin says Rotten Tomatoes is ruining Hollywood because it puts the already cutthroat box office race on steroids. Martin loved finishing school because it meant no more grades, but Rotten Tomatoes has made him feel like he’s right back in homeroom on a Monday morning when the teacher is walking right at you with a smarmy sneer and your spelling test from Friday in her paw:

“I’m talking about market research firms like Cinemascore, which started in the late ’70s, and online “aggregators” like Rotten Tomatoes, which have absolutely nothing to do with real film criticism. They rate a picture the way you’d rate a horse at the racetrack… They have everything to do with the movie business and absolutely nothing to do with either the creation or the intelligent viewing of film. The filmmaker is reduced to a content manufacturer and the viewer to an unadventurous consumer.”

Martin writes that he prefers movies to be about the art and not just about the megabucks a superhero movie can bring in because audiences in Muncie are flocking to the theater just like audiences in Manhattan. He says that Rotten Tomatoes may as well be called MeaniePants McGhee because it is hostile and encourages people to write asshole reviews of movies.

Which brings us to the umpteenth defense of the flop mother!. Martin defended it by saying that the fact that everyone left the theater going, “da FUQ did I just pay $20 to see?“, is all a part of its charm:

“Is it a picture that has to be explained? What about the experience of watching mother!? It was so tactile, so beautifully staged and acted — the subjective camera and the POV reverse angles, always in motion… The horror, the dark comedy, the biblical elements, the cautionary fable — they’re all there, but they’re elements in the total experience, which engulfs the characters and the viewers along with them. Only a true, passionate filmmaker could have made this picture, which I’m still experiencing weeks after I saw it.”

Martin said Rotten Tomatoes really limits a film from growing into a success. He hinted that if Rotten Tomatoes was around in the old days, former flop-to-classic films like The Wizard Of Oz and It’s A Wonderful Life would have stayed in the bargain bin.

Taking a peek at Martin’s Rotten Tomatoes page, he really shouldn’t have that much of a dog in this fight since most of his films are pretty freaking fresh…however, Shark Tale is sitting at a 35% rotten rating. Damn you, Rotten Tomatoes. If it weren’t for you, Shark Tale could have blossomed into the animated Citizen Kane!!!



  1. craigypants

    Well maybe if Hollywood stopped all the fucking remakes and re boots they might get better reviews. I don’t know why he is complaining he has made a fortune from his films.

  2. I agree. I loved mother! and I always use the critic’s score from rottentomatoes, not the mainstream audience’s score because 99% of the time I agree with it. I generally don’t like blockbuster movies, I like the artsy ones that make you think.

  3. Kiki_Zinnias

    Not to be too snarky but i saved you two hours of your life you can save for something better.

  4. If a film is out of Hollywood, I’m disinclined to even torrent it, much less blow an hour’s wage and several hours of my week to go see it in a cinema. On the other hand, too many rich kids are making “indie” films before they’ve really developed their vision and had enough mature experience to really have something to make films about than dramas about being young or documentaries about political issues or musicians (thereby guaranteering a sympathetic audience). A lot of “indie” films are as derivative or formulaic as H’wood films – the templates are just more befitting of the budgets. I’m not saying that a film can’t be any good unless it’s along the lines of David Lynch laboring on “Eraserhead” for seven years – it’s just a matter of standards rather than taste, on the part of the public. For most people, a film too “arty” or enigmatic is a waste of their money/time; for others, films that insult their intelligence while hitting them over the head with special effects and sound design is a waste of life.

  5. Drunken Sue-Ellen

    RT critics have given Ghostbusters(2016) 74% Fresh, which I think is accurate, viewed by a person who’s watched their fair share of Spielbergs and Sharknados. Critics have given Midnight Special 83%, which I contest. It deserves more. Wonder Woman’s 92% is mind boggling for someone who’s watched scifi, fantasy and superhero movies all her life. It wasn’t that good. I take solace in the fact that the RT critics have given Tom Hanks Halloween classic The Burbs a mesely 29 hits, with 48%. Clearly, they just don’t know which films are the real classics. 😉

  6. I agree

  7. I’m all for Scorsese putting his 2 cents in. He’s earned it.

    But just because something is disturbing enough to linger in your mind for weeks afterwards doesn’t mean it has artistic merit.

    I’m looking at you Japan. And ISIS.

  8. targetconfusion

    2017 is systematically destroying all the respect I had for a lot of people in Hollywood.

  9. Mitt Zombie

    Needs more Stones!

  10. Mitt Zombie

    It is getting hard to come up with new ideas, most everything you can think of has been done already. But they don’t seem to be trying that hard, comic book movies are just lazy mostly.

  11. WinterOwl22

    I do that for films and even music. If I can’t get into an album I purchased, I read good reviews to help me get into it.

    With mother! i read all the spoilers (here and In Wikipedia) I went in with an open mind and knowing full well that I might hate it (like a do Black Swan) but really enjoyed it.

  12. I pretty much use it all the time. Consider it is based on percentage of scores from audience and critics. Once you weed out the data to your preferences, it is spot on.

  13. Berry Melon
    Rotten Tomatoes has been around since 1998 and they’ve been throwing rotten tomatoes at a ton of films, since then. What can you do – freedom of speech. Personally I don’t read reviews, I just look at the trailer and if I think it is going to be crap I give the film a pass.

  14. elisabett a

    Scorsese, Weinstein & Aronofsky all signed the petition for Polanski. They’re all cut from the same cloth.

  15. I really don’t understand this blame rotten tomatoes thing. All the site does is show what percentage of critics liked a movie. It doesn’t judge if they loved it or just found it pretty good. mother! actually has 68% positive reviews, 2/3rds of critics recommend it. The rotten tomatoes audience score is 48% and the CinemaScore(been around since the 70s) is an F. If anything rotten tomatoes is saying critics liked the movie more than audiences, but it was more popular among rotten tomatoes users than general theater audiences.

  16. violetpills

    The subpar quality of modern cinema has nothing to do with rotten tomatoes. Perhaps, to raise the bar Hollywood should consider not making a hundred superhero movies per month? But then of course how will they afford all those houses in Malibu.

  17. It has a favorable rating on rotten tomatoes though. It’s fresh.

  18. I’m not sure who he is trying to reach? He’s a serious director who reads serious film criticism. Most people aren’t. The biggest problem with mother! is that they marketed it as a mainstream film when it is an arthouse film, full stop.

    Also, someone let Marty know that his time has passed. The young audiences of today don’t care about NYC in the 70s or the Rolling Stones.

  19. Midwestocean

    Bottom line no one wants to pay twenty bucks to see a film they won’t enjoy in the cinema. I get there are a lot more opinions flapping out there in the wind than in the 70s but a lot of movies from that era make me feel uncomfortable as a woman (female characters without any agency raped and abused) yet at the time they were considered great films by predominantly white male film reviewers. Times change and with more people given a form to express their opinions – opinion are going to be expressed. If mother! is worth anything it will find its audience. Along with more opinions the bargain bins of yesterday don’t truly exist.

  20. FunkAnarchy84 Ⓐ

    I mean he defended Polanski. I think any man who defends Polanski has skeletons in their closet.

  21. FunkAnarchy84 Ⓐ

    I remember when downloads were “killing it”. Now it’s streaming lol they need to quit. Things have CHANGED.

  22. Lmao right!? It’s too damn expensive to go to the theatres these days. I don’t have an extra hundo to drop to watch Spider-Man cry about god knows what.

    I do love me some thinky think DA films though. They are quite unforgettable, at the very least. But I really like weird, so it works for me lol.

  23. He certainly has a point. I was hesitant to see mother! because of the bad reviews but was glad I did in the end.

  24. Page Six is reporting David O Asshole and some other asshole directors hosted a screening at the SoHo house last night. Darren and his scarf got to listen to Jared Leto call him a genius. So yeah, he’s campaigning hard and showing his true asshole self in these tweets.

    he’s a tool. I hope the academy and th foreign press ignore his opus to his fragile artist mind and misogynistic ways.

  25. DA is definitely not for everyone but you must admit once you see one of his pictures you will never forget it. I too watch on the high seas. Otherwise I would never get to see any movie.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *