Comics Creators

Movie News and Trailers - Hollywood Hype


I can’t help but think there is a problem with the ‘settlement’ model. As with Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly many women have actually complained and taken legal action. They’ve settled with gagging clauses, you can’t blame them because they obviously fear their careers are dead and earning power gone.

Maybe it’s time the non-disclosure option was removed. It means the wealthy offender can basically escape with no real consequences if they are filthy rich.


I certainly hope this is a turning point and not something that falls away after a brief media circus around Weinstein. It’s important that people like Terry Crews and Rob Schneider are coming forward since they aren’t the typical faces of sexual harassment. I kind of hope Corey Feldman will start naming names, because he’s been screaming about the culture of sexual abuse in Hollywood for the better part of 2 decades now (if not longer).

Not that Hollywood (or the broader entertainment industry) ever really helps itself since it still works with and celebrates films by guys like Polanski, Woody Allen, and Michael Jackson. And look I’ve enjoyed and still enjoy older works from all of those individuals, but I don’t idolize them the way Hollywood and the music industry do.

This is definitely not even close to an isolated incident. Neither in scope or in the victims demographics (though I suspect women and children get the worst of it). It really is one of the worst kept secrets out there and Hollywood needs to step up and fix it. And they needed to fixed it decades ago.






I was wondering about this:


I really enjoyed Beyond, and I’d like to see another film with that crew. But not the one that was announced. Bringing Chris Hemsworth back just feels like a bit of a cheap stunt.
And it felt like Kirk moved past his daddy issues, so bringing him back would be a bit of a waste of time.


New petition on

Can you help me out by signing this petition?






I’m not going to lie. Parts of that made me laugh.

Does that make me a bad person?


Nah, I think it could be okay at first.
But around halfway through the trailer it gives up and goes for lame style jokes/gags.



Scorsese dropping some truth bombs on the bullshit that is rating movies by their box office and review aggregator scores.


To be honest I still think it is more of the same with a different front end.

I don’t think Rotten Tomatoes has much influence at all. It’s a chicken and egg thing, they are not driving reviews, just collating them and for as long as I have been following the movie business it is rare films with shitty reviews make a lot of money. It just used to be people followed Ebert or the NYT or Barry Norman or whatever.

All the aggregators have ever done for me is driven me to see films that have has fantastic scores but I wasn’t that convinced by.


I find the box office thing far more annoying than the review aggregators myself, but there’s a huge difference between saying Mark Kermode/Roger Ebert/Pauline Kael liked or disliked a movie, and that it’s got a 79% score on RT. If a big name reviewer likes a movie, and you’re familiar with their tastes, it’s a good guideline to the quality of the movie. Or to look at it from the other side, if a DVD cover has a 4-star review on it, but it’s from the Sun, you know that movie isn’t going to be an intellectual powerhouse.


To be fair, there are kind of two different metrics. It’s always been rare that a film was a critical darling, Oscar contender and a box office success. It’s generally one or the other. This dynamic existed long before Rotten Tomatoes.


I agree it isn’t the same but I’m not sure if it is fundamentally worse.

My reasoning comes from discussions in the 80s and films were completely ruined at the box office in the US specifically by reviews from a couple of influential papers. The same consensus didn’t really happen in the UK at the time and titles like Inner Space, Heaven’s Gate, Ishtar or Howard the Duck actually did okay rather than be destroyed as they were in the US.

The ideal with a single reviewer, or maybe a couple of big influential ones, is people get used to their tastes and make an informed judgement but I’m not sure that has ever applied to most punters, they look at the headline and the stars and there you go.


Oh yeah, and I don’t think anyone’s claiming that’s the case. Scorsese uses mother! as his example because it’s a challenging art piece that’s gotten a very low score from Cinemascore and relatively low scores on Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, and this is used as evidence that the film is bad, or a failure. An aggregator is a useful tool, but it shouldn’t be any more than that.

But again, I have far more of a problem with people deciding a movie’s quality by its box office, which is why I posted the article in the first place.