‘Changeling’: Rotten tomato or a new classic?

November 28, 10:27 AMAtlanta Movies ExaminerRyan McNally

Previous Next

2 comments Print Email RSS Subscribe

Subscribe

Get alerts when there is a new article from the Atlanta Movies Examiner. Read Examiner.com's terms of use.

Email Address   Include other special offers from Examiner.com Terms of Use

In researching my weekend movie reports, I’ve noticed something interesting. Changeling, the latest Clint Eastwood film, currently has a 57 tomatometer rating at Rotten Tomatoes (meaning 57 percent of critics gave it a positive review) and an 8.1 Internet Movie Database user rating (essentially meaning IMDB users have rated the film an average of 8.1 on a 1-10 scale).

What’s the significance? A film that’s been certified “rotten” (less than 60 on the tomatometer scale) on Rotten Tomatoes has NEVER scored 8.0 or higher among IMDB users, as far as I can tell. The two films which came closest, ironically, were both directed by Guy Ritchie: Snatch (2000), which has tallied an 8.1 on IMDB and scored a 71 on Rotten Tomatoes, and Lock, Stock and Two Smoking Barrels, which also had a 71 tomatometer rating and scored just slightly lower on IMDB (8.0). But both were still comfortably above the 60-percent bar that separates the “fresh” from the “rotten” at Rotten Tomatoes?

Why the disparity between audiences and critics? Have audiences fallen for a mediocre film? Or are critics experiencing Eastwood fatigue after three of Clint’s last four films (Mystic River, Million Dollar Baby and Letters For Iwo Jima) were nominated for Best Picture, and therefore judging Clint’s film too harshly? Maybe there’s another reason? And how will the Academy weigh in when Oscar ballots are tabulated?

It's worth noting that the film's Metacritic score (another measure of critical response) is 62, a better tally than the tomatometer rating and more significant than the 5-point differential would suggest (RT scores tend to skew higher, Metacritic lower). On the flip side, among Entertainment Weekly readers the film scored a B+, which is very good but not as impressive as the IMDB user rating.

Still, the fact remains that no film has ever had this kind of Rotten Tomatoes/IMDB split. Got an opinion on what's driving this disparity? Share your thoughts…