Running Scared director proposes appeal of RT scores after 10 years

Last Updated on August 5, 2021

Have you ever had a change of heart over a film after some years have passed? A film you might've thought was sub-par ten years ago may have a totally different impact on you with some time away from it and some fresh perspective. It's not an uncommon occurrence and there have been examples of critics that have changed their tone on certain films years after their initial reviews. It's this very reason that RUNNING SCARED director, Wayne Kramer, is proposing a change on the review aggregation website Rotten Tomatoes that would allow critics to change their ratings on films.

Wayne Kramer posted a pretty lengthy Facebook post on the matter that speaks on the topic in great detail and it's a notion that most critics and moviegoers could possibly get behind. Here is what Kramer had to say:

"Here’s an idea for ROTTEN TOMATOES. Allow filmmakers to lodge an appeal over their RT score for a film that is over TEN YEARS-OLD and currently scores more than 6.5 on IMDB. It takes a decade (or longer!) to know the real impact of a film and I’m sure quite a few critics might reverse themselves after ten years. I’ve heard from several critics who feel they got it wrong on RUNNING SCARED and might consider it differently today. Unfortunately, their original score is still shackled to the film on RT – and every filmmaker knows that a RT “rotten” score is worn by a film (and the filmmaker) like a Scarlett Letter.

The Rotten Tomatoes score is visible on most streaming sites right next to the title of a film and I, personally, find it insulting. I’ve never been a fan of Rotten Tomatoes. I hold firmly that the site has contributed to the dumbing down of movie criticism – and ultimately movies themselves. When a film is judged like a gladiator in the ring with the emperor giving it a very black & white thumbs up or thumbs down, compounded by occasional critics’ herd mentality – which, trust me, is a real thing – then all the nuance involved in reviewing goes out the window.

SCARFACE gets an 81 on the Tomatometer today — but that’s a completely revisionist review. SCARFACE was trounced by critics upon its initial release in 1983. A film I regard as one of the finest crime/action films of all time, Tony Scott’s MAN ON FIRE (2004), is rated a paltry 34 percent on RT with a 7.7 on IMDB. HOW CAN THAT FUCKING BE POSSIBLE? MAN ON FIRE is a freakin’ masterpiece, up there with Michael Mann’s HEAT, and in no way deserving of a rotten score on RT. My own film, RUNNING SCARED – the most popular of my films and rated 7.4 on IMDB – rates rotten on RT with a 41 percent score. Antonine Fuqua’s underrated BROOKLYN’S FINEST (2009) is another candidate: 6.7 on IMDB and 44 percent on RT. I’ll add another undervalued Fuqua as well: TEARS OF THE SUN. 6.6 on IMDB, 33 percent on RT. I’m sure I can find many other examples — feel free to add them in the comments below.

I’m not joking. If anyone has access to the execs at Rotten Tomatoes, please forward them my proposal. I’m sure hundreds of filmmakers would sign on — as well as more than a few critics. It can be called ROTTEN TOMATOES ON APPEAL. Just like a misguided NC-17 rating might be changed to an R or an R to a PG-13 on appeal with the MPAA, I believe RT can – and should! – reevaluate certain films that have proven themselves with audiences after a decade of being scorned on RT."

From personal experience, I think what he's suggesting is perfectly appropriate. When I was in high school, I couldn't stand Baz Luhrmann's MOULIN ROUGE but as I got older, I began to see it as a true movie musical masterpiece. Another example I can cite is A..I.: ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE, a film I was disappointed with when I first saw it but now find myself fascinated with after recent viewings. Everything from maturity to changing tastes can impact how we view a film over time and if given the option to revisit and adjust a score accordingly, I think a few critics would take it. We can easily change our user ratings on IMDB if we so choose so critics should have the opportunity to do the same on Rotten Tomatoes if their opinions happen to change.

Do YOU think this change should be implemented on Rotten Tomatoes?