Film Junk Podcast Episode #740: Terminator: Dark Fate


0:00 – Intro
6:25 – Review: Terminator: Dark Fate
42:25 – Hot Topic: Movie Review Payola
1:07:55 – Other Stuff We Watched: Miss Americana, Star Trek: Picard, 6 Underground. Knock Knock, No Blade of Grass, Demon Seed, The Ultimate Warrior, What Did Jack Do?, Portrait of a Lady On Fire, The Two Popes, Missing Link, The Souvenir
1:56:15 – Outro
2:02:10 – Spoiler Discussion: Terminator: Dark Fate

» Download the MP3 (130 MB)
» View the show notes
» Rate us on iTunes!

Subscribe to the podcast feed:
RSS iTunes

Donate via Paypal: Support Us on Patreon!

Support on Patreon:

  • stevens1

    There’s a huge amount of critics – even those approved by RT – who don’t get paid for writing their reviews. I’d say the majority who are approved probably are not full-time paid journalists. I’m an RT-approved critic but have never heard of anyone being paid to write something positive.

    The weird thing is the amount of concern shown by studios towards reviews. Critics do not affect the success or failure of films at all. Never have, never will. There are countless examples of when a film has been torn down critically and it still does extremely well at the box office. At a lot of screenings they offer you an alcoholic drink to obviously influence your perception of the film, instead of watching it sober. Plus the odd giveaway or two to sweeten you up to.

    Essentially, critics are just marketing tools. Regardless of whether or not the review is good or bad it promotes the film for ‘free’. That’s all PR agencies care about.

    The majority of sites/writers accepted by RT have to meet a certain criteria in terms of audience reach – which a lot of small blogs aren’t able to do. I don’t doubt there are some dodgy critics out there, because there is corruption in all walks of life, but nowhere near enough to significantly influence an RT score.

  • Dinobot2

    Lol we just reviewing movies three months late now?

  • LordAwesome

    Birds of Prey, which honest to God looks like one of the worst high budget movies ever made, has a 90% rating on RT.

    So either it has one of the worst marketing campaigns of all time and all the gold has been hidden from the audience and all the awful moments from the trailers and clips have been replaced in the actual movie or critics are full of shit.

  • This was announced as a Dumpster Dive if I’m not mistaken. In addition to nothing of interest being released this week.

  • I always understood it that as long as a movie gets a pass it is regarded “fresh” on RT in which case a 90% rating would merely mean that 9 out of 10 critics gave the movie a pass without saying that it actually is that great.

  • If What Did Jack Do? doesn’t win Best Content in the Junkies this year I’ll eat a banana.

  • Ben Bueno

    Haven’t seen it and don’t plan to, but if you look at the average rating, it actually has a 7. The Rotten Tomato score is misleading, not that it should matter anyway…

  • pcch7

    I kinda wanna petition Sean to change his name to Sean Luc Dwyer

  • Lori Cerny

    Eric D Snider ( & has talked for years about going to movie festivals, film embargoes, and the way studios market their films to hide negativity.

  • Sean

    Yeah even though we’ve talked about this before, it is worth repeating. It’s so easy to forget that RT is just the number of critics that gave it a pass.

  • LordAwesome

    Suicide Squad:

    Birds of Prey:


    Does anyone think BOP looks better than SS? It looks even worse!

    This is deeply suspicious. I can’t wait to hear Frank’s take on this one.

  • stevens1

    No one is going to market their product in a negative light but ultimately a negative critical reaction doesn’t impact on people deciding on whether or not to see a film.

  • Jake

    I honestly don’t understand why Frank, or any lover of film for that matter, checks rotten tomatoes. Not meant to be taken as a dig towards Frank. But he likes movies, knows directors and actors and can look at a log line to know if it’s something he’s interested in. Who cares what that number says on RT.

  • Jake

    According to imdb it was first released in 2017. Let the debate begin…

  • I dunno Sean. “Written and directed by David Ayer doing his best bad James Gunn impression, and then with forced reshoots” already looked worst than most things. BoP could suck, but in this case I’ll go with the devil I *don’t* know.

  • Reed Farrington

    I always find it interesting to know what other people think about a movie. I would never let someone else’s opinion change whether or not I would see a film though. It might influence me to watch something that I had no interest in before.

  • stevens1

    Classic Frank. If it can be used in an attempt to prove some crackpot theory then its relevant – if not, then it might as well not exist.

  • Well yes, that’s true. But it also gives you the critics’ average score… which has a little more value.

    For example, Birds of Prey is sitting at 84% right now, but looking closer, it has an average critics score of 6.85/10… so I feel like that’s more valuable information.

    Or not because who cares what all critics think as a whole. I look at my friends on LetterBoxd reactions a lot closer than I do a bunch of strangers from various news papers.

  • I couldn’t care less about the DC Universe right now… but the latest trailer for BOP has me intrigued. It looks like Baz Luhrman and Harmony Corrine got together to make a comic book movie about a team of women. I’m interested.

  • Beat_C

    may i quote reed? “[…] directed by lana wilson, who i don’t know how she got selected to be the director other than being female”. then he goes on to say: “i read on wikipedia that she did two award-winning documentaries previously to this one.” a true WTF moment, even for reed standards.

  • I cannot sit idly by while Frank chastises Jay for accidentally logging Dark Fate as a rewatch when he still has not acknowledged doing the same thing with that Maradona doc. Still hasn’t been amended, and he calls himself an officer of the law.

  • Beat_C

    i guess you’re joking when you write “chastises” …

  • Just a tad bit.

  • gibson8

    Frank made a very strong argument for reading less well known sites since they usually get no perks or incentives apart from free screening or screeners which the guys have got for years. I write for in Scotland which is a an Arts website covering music, comedy, books, films and theatre. all on a voluntary basis. This is the future. Very few reviewers get paid in the way the boys seemed to think.

  • gibson8

    Did Gerry not know that Lana transitioned?

  • gibson8

    Stevens1- He is such a dick.

  • gibson8

    Sean- you meant ‘puff piece’ not ‘fluff piece’. I usually forgive the On Cinemaness of filmjunk but after the third and fourth time it was too irritating. That Terminator cast list reading was also an echo of butchered surnames from filmjunk gone by. Never change Sean. Your appalling enunciation has truly stood the test of time.