I know I know, Matt Patt. Cringe aside, I was very surprised he would make a video on this subject, so I gave it a watch and thought his take was interesting.
tl,dw: movie critics like movies that take risks and attempt to push the boundaries, while audiences like movies that are fun and nostalgic. The movie industry profits from this dynamic because it creates an us-versus-them dichotomy between audiences and critics, making audiences easier to market to.
This isn't exactly new news. The old Simpsons episode where Homer got hired on as a food critic is a loosely decent example of this. Critics care little of substance and quality in the work so much as they want to see "newness" that goes outside the box.
This used to at least hold some meaning in the past, but it's been quickly displaced by political pushing intrigue. And anything that's fun and not pushing the woke agenda is immediately shot down as "Fascist, racist propaganda".
The part about critics liking newness is pretty obvious, but it's the rest that intrigued me. specifically how the reviewers actually want critics in audiences to not get along, so as to create a tribalist rivalry and thus make marketing easier, because all you need to do to appeal to the audience is appeal to their opposition to the critics.