Have an idea for a story? Let us know! Contact: Elliot Chan, Opinions Editor ™ opinions@theotherpress.ca To be reviewed » Are crowd-sourced reviews still effective? Elliot Chan Opinions Editor ‘we, S opinions@theotherpress.ca he recent South Park episode “Youre Not Yelping” shone a light on the power of public opinion. Review sites such as Yelp, Zomato, and Rotten Tomatoes have given regular everyday folks like you and me the power to vote up or down virtually anything. This type of social governance seems to be democracy at its finest, since everyone who has a voice is encouraged to use it. But are we really getting honest reviews or are we—as pseudo-experts— trying to sway people away from their own authentic experience with our biased perceptions? Ultimately, all reviews are biased. It doesn’t matter if you are getting them from Roger : the review is a product of : the person’s life, thoughts, : and opinions. This is great, : because freedom of speech is : wonderful. But not everyone is : posting reviews. In fact, only an : incredibly small percentage of : people actually create content : on review sites. Journalist : Susan Kuchinskas informed : us of an interesting statistic, : known as the “1/9/go Rule.” The : rule states that only one per : cent of people write reviews. : Nine per cent of people will : drop in on those reviews and : rate them. The go per cent are : solely readers, swayed by those : reviews by the one per cent. I’m opinionated, but I’m : not a reviewer. I have never : written a review on Yelp, or any : other site that encourages me : to. Why should I? I don’t believe : people should do or not do Ebert ther; dless, : . ini ert or your mother; regardless : anything based on my opinion : and experience. Don’t listen to : what I say, because what I’ll say : is go watch Jack and Jill starring : Adam Sandler and come to : your own opinion on whether : it’s good or not. Don’t simply : look at the ratings on IMDB. : com and automatically write it : off. Make your own discovery, : not just an easy conclusion : via crowd-sourced reviews. They say professional : reviewers are dying out, and I : believe that makes sense—not : because reviews don’t have some ! : substance though. Quality ones : are introspective commentary : on pieces of art or experiences. : It’s—in its own way—literary. : However, consumers don’t want : introspection. Consumers want : yay or nay: should I go here, : or should I keep searching? The Internet influences : so many of our spending : decisions. I say we should turn ( A rotten rating system Lesson learned (¥ The conservation conversation And more! : that off for a bit and come to : our own conclusions. Let’s not : listen to that one per cent for : a little while and see what we : can discover on our own. It’s a : risk, sure, but I know we have : clear judgement, capable of : distinguishing between good : and bad. I encourage you, the : next time you are scrolling on your smartphone looking for a x4 ra G a G ~ 3 ° vn g ° & od 3 G wn Gq vo vo a Oo vn : place to eat, ignore the star : ratings and reviews, and just : give a restaurant a chance. How : can you know what is good when : you are constantly avoiding bad? This returns us to the : ultimate question: are crowd- : sourced reviews still effective? I : don’t know, but they’re probably : as effective as this article. All-female cast is a lazy gimmick » Why the ‘Ghostbusters’ remake may as well just be called ‘Bridesmaids 2’ Alex Stanton Staff Writer hen I think of the current climate of over-the-top political correctness in North America, I don’t sit there at my computer and roll my eyes every time someone gets hurt because of something mean or “triggering” said on the Internet. Sure, I'll snort a laugh once in a while reading about sheltered millennials in academia having nervous breakdowns at the mere mention of ideas they dislike. along and made me realize, more than anything, how sad it is that even adults—and not just those millennial kids—use progressive buzzwords and accuse people of bigotry for no other reason than to shut down legitimate dialogue about something they disagree with. For those of you who haven't seen a raunchy, R-rated chick flick since 2008, Feig is Hollywood’s apparent go- to-guy for said genre, having directed the wildly successful films Bridesmaids, The Heat, and Spy—all of which feature comedian Melissa McCarthy. Far from finished in the business of chick flicks, 2016 will once again have McCarthy : and Kristen Wiig co-starring : ina film written and directed ; by Feig called Ghostbusters. As big of a film fan as : Tmay be, I still can’t quite : put my finger on what it is : about rebooting decades-old : franchises that appeals so much : to contemporary filmmakers. : I get that show business is : still a business, and nothing : gets the lowest common : denominator paying for movie : tickets quite like familiarity, : but it still stinks of writer’s : block and stagnant creativity. But a man named Paul Feig came : Feig, mistakenly believing : that a change this drastic was : necessary or creative, decided : to cast four women in the roles : of the four Ghostbusters. In the : wake of what I consider to be : pretty reasonable criticisms, : Feig accused his detractors : of spouting, in his words, : “vile, misogynist shit.” If we're speaking purely technically, then perhaps : Feig has a point; there were : probably quite a few rude, : anonymous kids on Twitter : who went overboard, likely : resulting in them saying downright sexist things. Some : of them probably even said : “This movie sucks because it’s : all women and women suck,” : which is the picture painted : by Feig when describing the : criticism. Unfortunately, that’s : the Internet, and nothing turns : people into wanton assholes : more than an anonymous, : worldwide soap box. I can’t blame the man for : defending his art, but there are : plenty of legitimate reasons as : to why people are pissed about : this. Is a Ghostbusters remake : even necessary? If so, why? The : 1984 version was a smash hit : in part because of its immense originality. Considering the : director, the fact that the cast : is all-female for no apparent : reason strikes me as jarring : and gimmicky to the point : where I’m inclined to call it : anti-feminist. There should be : more original films about well- : rounded female characters, : instead of shoehorning them : into old roles under the : guide of progressiveness. Feig is a talented enough : filmmaker. I enjoyed the hell Photo by Hopper Stone via Sony Pictures A : out of both Bridesmaids and The : Heat, and, like everyone else, : I think McCarthy is shit-your- : drawers hilarious in just about : every role she plays. I can only : imagine what could come out : of another Feig/McCarthy/Wiig project in which the script isn’t : recycled from three decades ago. : Now that I’ve finally established : myself as a loose fan of his : work, I'll go ahead and establish : that I’m going to skip out on : Feig’s take on Ghostbusters.