My concern about the RT sale is that there may be a different slant given to which quotes are taken from the reviews and how rotten / fresh ratings are assigned on borderline reviews. I anticipate that it will maintain some level of usefulness even if these changes take place, and you’re right — it will just require more careful consumption. And yes, it is definitely not the best source out there to get a sense of more specialized / limited release films. — MM
> On Apr 4, 2016, at 11:37 AM, Jessica Rosner <maddux2...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I would not be too concerned about the RT sale as RT is basically a site that > gathers reviews and gives an overall ranking BUT I would advice folks not to > merely look at the rating number but to read the reviews and develop a sense > of critics you trust. I had a bitter experience with RT on a very good doc > which got raves in New Your Times, LA Times, Chicago Tribune, Variety and a > few other papers ( small release) but for some bizarre reason the ONLY review > RT "counted" was a negative one from Seattle and I literally could not get it > fixed which was insane ( Film also got a gave from EMRO). Basically I think > RT is really good source for theatrical films with significant release but > can be problematic on small films and does not even cover a lot of > educational films librarians are interested in. Obviously EMRO is a good > source for non theatrical docs. > > Jessica > > On Mon, Apr 4, 2016 at 11:14 AM, Meghann Matwichuk <mtw...@udel.edu > <mailto:mtw...@udel.edu>> wrote: > I’m looking forward to seeing the responses to this question. I generally > rely on a combination of review sites (including Rotten Tomatoes and > Metacritic), but am always interested in hearing about other sources. > > I’m especially concerned about Rotten Tomatoes going forward, given this > recent announcement (RT having been bought by Fandango): > > http://variety.com/2016/digital/news/fandango-rotten-tomatoes-flixster-1201708444/ > > <http://variety.com/2016/digital/news/fandango-rotten-tomatoes-flixster-1201708444/> > > Granted, RT was owned by Warner Bros. before (and Metacritic is owned by > CBS), but the Fandango buy-out seems more likely to change RT's reliability > given the across-the-board conflict of interest present. > > -- > Meghann Matwichuk, M.S. > Associate Librarian > Interim Head, Multimedia Collections and Services Department > Morris Library, University of Delaware > 181 S. College Ave. > Newark, DE 19717 > (302) 831-1475 <tel:%28302%29%20831-1475> > http://library.udel.edu/filmandvideo <http://library.udel.edu/filmandvideo> > http://library.udel.edu/multimedia <http://library.udel.edu/multimedia> >> On Apr 4, 2016, at 10:52 AM, Anna Simon <ajs...@georgetown.edu >> <mailto:ajs...@georgetown.edu>> wrote: >> >> I LOVE Video Librarian, but our subscription was cut (long story) and I'm >> not comfortable just relying on Rotten Tomatoes for sourcing acquisitions to >> our film collection. Does anyone have good open-source sourcing tools they >> use for collection development? Until I get my subscription re-installed, I >> need some help! >> >> >> Anna Simon >> Collection, Research & Instruction Librarian >> Art, Film, and Museum Studies >> 202-687-7467 <tel:202-687-7467> >> ajs...@georgetown.edu <mailto:ajs...@georgetown.edu> >> Ars Hoya: GU Art Blog <https://blogs.commons.georgetown.edu/ajs299/> >> >> >> Georgetown University >> Lauinger Library >> 37th & O Sts. NW >> Washington, DC 20057 >> VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues >> relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, >> preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and >> related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective >> working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication >> between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and >> distributors. > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors. > > > VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues > relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, > preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and > related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective > working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication > between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and > distributors.
VIDEOLIB is intended to encourage the broad and lively discussion of issues relating to the selection, evaluation, acquisition,bibliographic control, preservation, and use of current and evolving video formats in libraries and related institutions. It is hoped that the list will serve as an effective working tool for video librarians, as well as a channel of communication between libraries,educational institutions, and video producers and distributors.
