bbc.com
The Electric State": Netflix Hit Despite Scathing Reviews
Netflix's "The Electric State," a \$320 million sci-fi film starring Millie Bobby Brown and Chris Pratt, debuted at number one on the platform's most-watched list despite receiving extremely negative reviews from critics, raising questions about the relevance of critical opinion in the streaming era.
- What is the significance of "The Electric State's" success on Netflix despite overwhelmingly negative critical reviews?
- The Electric State," a Netflix film starring Millie Bobby Brown and Chris Pratt, has received overwhelmingly negative reviews from critics, with scores as low as 15% on Rotten Tomatoes. Despite this, the film debuted at number one on Netflix's most-watched list, suggesting that critical reception may be less relevant in the streaming era than previously thought. The film's budget is reportedly \$320 million.
- How does "The Electric State" fit into the broader trend of Netflix films that are popular with audiences but critically panned?
- The film's success on Netflix despite scathing reviews highlights a growing trend of star-studded, easily consumable films performing well on the platform, regardless of critical acclaim. This trend is partially attributed to the streaming environment, where viewers are more likely to watch films casually compared to a theatrical release. This is exemplified by comparisons to other Netflix hits with similarly low critical scores but high viewership numbers such as Red Notice.
- What are the long-term implications of "The Electric State's" financial performance for Netflix's content strategy and the future of film criticism in the streaming era?
- The financial success of "The Electric State" raises questions about Netflix's investment strategy and the evolving relationship between critical reception and audience engagement in the streaming landscape. The film's reported \$320 million budget, if accurate, underscores the high financial stakes involved in Netflix's original film productions, and its success could influence future investment decisions, potentially prioritizing audience appeal over critical acclaim.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The framing emphasizes the stark contrast between critical panning and audience viewership. The headline itself highlights negative reviews, while the article repeatedly uses strong negative quotes from critics before mentioning positive ones. This initial focus on negativity could sway reader perception, even if the article later presents counterpoints.
Language Bias
The article uses loaded language in describing the critical response, employing words like "acidic," "monstrosity," "idiotic," and "banal." While it quotes these terms, using less charged terms like "negative," "unfavorable," or "unoriginal" would maintain objectivity. The repetitive use of negative critic quotes reinforces this bias.
Bias by Omission
The review focuses heavily on critical reception, but omits detailed analysis of the plot, character development, or specific scenes that might explain the negative reviews. It mentions the source material's focus on consumerism and technology, but doesn't explore whether the film adequately addresses or deviates from these themes. The omission of a deeper examination of the film's artistic merits beyond broad strokes limits the analysis.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between critical acclaim and audience popularity, suggesting that negative reviews are irrelevant because the film is a streaming success. This ignores the possibility that a film can be popular without being critically well-regarded, while still having artistic or narrative flaws.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights the film "The Electric State" having a budget of \$320 million, which is criticized as wasteful spending, especially considering mixed critical reception and the prioritization of entertainment over artistic merit. This reflects unsustainable practices in the film industry, particularly concerning resource allocation and the potential environmental impact of high-budget productions. The focus on immediate entertainment value over long-term artistic or societal impact also speaks to irresponsible consumption patterns.