henke on 26/4/2017 at 15:27

---

Only if you're one of those egomaniacal types who thinks the IMDb score should reflect what you think the film deserves, rather than it being an average of what all the users thinks it deserves.

Suiew1 on 9/5/2017 at 20:23

---

Cardia lots of thanks for the rotten tomatoes (frankly, I never knew about that site) as i was always checking only on Imdb. but you well explained it and, as you, I also have more trust in critiques than in audience... thank you and thanks everyone else for explaing it all!

SD on 10/5/2017 at 15:02

---

Well of course, my opinion is worth more than the opinion of most people, many of whom are dribbling idiots :)

Thor on 11/5/2017 at 05:41

---

In hindsight a massive waste of my sleep-deprived morning, but I hope someone reads this at least.

Here's my muscle-memory on how to look at imdb scores (the little I've seen of rottentomatoes scores gave me the impression that it's a culture of arrogant, not very intelligent edgy people, but I have much too little data to say this harsh statement seriously). It's quite a generalized mess but it's what you asked for. There could easily be overlap in many of the "categories" here:

Watching a movie between a 9-10 means you probably can't go wrong there (unless it's super old and was really mostly just good for its time). I haven't seen too many of them, but every one of them was well done and brought something new to the table (in my eyes anyway. I haven't seen all of the movies before 1970 that are for vintage snobs, that those movies probably took cues from). Shawshank Redemption is one example. It's not even close to being my favorite, but it was still worth my time.
A series between 9-10 is probably good if the subject mattter interests you (and in some cases, even if it doesn't).

A movie between 8-9 is probably worth your time if the topic interests you and maybe you like the actors or something.
I've seen too many series between 8-9 that are derivative, uninspired junk, following safe patterns but evidently most people like it, so it follows those patterns well at least. At the same time there is a lot of truly worthwhile stuff in this range, but usually that is comedy-centric or comedy involving (Black Books, Deadwood, Silicon Valley).

Movies between 6-8 might have tried something new and are often the most interesting movies to actually watch and experience, but since they're rated lower it means that it didn't follow all the standard hollywood patterns to the point-percision of an atom (or whatever metaphor you'd like). It might also mean that it wasn't so easy to enjoy, but more rewarding to experience instead. Think of it as eating rice + meat (enjoy it a little less at first, but you feel fulfillment and like you've even done something valuable) instead of ice cream + burger (gets you in the moment, forget about it immidiately after). Three prime examples of this are Warcraft (wasn't a character drama but a battle movie, which most people don't like; did things that hadn't been done before) and Cloud Atlas (do I even need to say why? Go watch it) and The Guest (just a great watch overall, but again - it wasn't a standardized format that everyone can chew as easily as they would a nice sweet warm pizza). So in many ways, this is where the hidden gems of the movies are to be found.
They might also just be what you'd expect - a decently fun movie in the moment, but less polish and nothing to really write home about.

A series between 6-8 I'm not sure I've even watched. If it's a comedy it might be decent though. From the little I have seen of some though they seemed pretty ehhhhh... - shit.

Movies below a 6 are either really blatant uninspired garbage (that doesn't even appeal to any intelligent sense of humor) or something really specific that not that many people are capable of enjoying (including a specific sense of humor). It's like one of those obscure foods that only specific cultures in the world have the stomach to eat. There is probably some specific value to some of them, but it's unclear as to what it is for the outsiders. I've watched a movie that I forgot the name of that was rated with a 4, because it was a lone man's journey through a desert, didn't follow the film rules at all. It had no beginning, no middle or end, really. It was like a fragment of a specific person's identity at a difficult point in his life, and what he thought, felt and what was his philosophy either throughout it or after. I didn't particularily enjoy it or remember it much after that, but I can see how it can be a valuable, maybe inspirational filmpiece for someone.

Do series below a 6 even exist? Besides our lord and savior - the bold and the beautiful - ofcourse.


By the way, I a few weeks ago watched a movie called Wild Tales. Only a 8,1 on imdb, but I consider it to be probably the best movie I've ever watched. It's a foreign movie and it does 6 stories throughout it. It doesn't linger on any for too long, but each story manages to be more deep, interesting and absolutely hilarious at the same time, than most (if not all) of what I've seen from america. I speculate, that it's the format and the lack of lingering on each each character (and maybe the fact that it's indeed foreign) that dragged the score down. They didn't completely drive it home what each person was like. They were more subtle about it and it felt closer to real life (while depicting absolutely absurd events in the actual movie, which was just beautiful).

Thor on 11/5/2017 at 08:23

---

*the first few paragraphs apply to the "critics" part of rottentomatoes*

The trend right there alone, without knowing any of the movies, is that they're all extreemly opinionated scores. In IMDB nothing gets a 10 (or 9,8) and almost nothing gets anything above 9,5. In rotten tomatoes it seems that anything that that crowd will deem worthy will have no less than a 90% and anything that at least most of that crowd will find unappealing will not get anything above 40%. Case and point: Warcraft. I liked it - it was a solid movie, did everything it set out to do very well and made by fans for fans, but they gave it a 28% overall? What - are they only accepting of certain types of movies for which they give 9 or 10 and for all other movies they give a 1 or 2? At least that's the impression I'm getting. But again, I haven't looked at them that much, kinda should research, but at the same time that place seems like such a waste of time from all the signs I've seen.

It does at least make a case that those might be interesting movies to check out and I might, though I doubt I will give them the same scores, simply because the chance of them actually being that good are just extreemly low.

So overall, if your taste aligns with theirs, it's probably a solid source to find your favorite movies. If your taste is more varied/nuanced or whatever (if you're me, basically), then it's a random mess of useless data until you know what exact kind of movies are appreciated. And even then you can only sort of trust the really high scores.


*looks around the site a little more thoroughly*
Better Call Saul - 9,8... are you sure guys? I mean, it's a pretty good series especially if you're into it, but didn't you mean it's more like an 8,5 or so? Ok, the audience gave it a 9,3, which is a little more coherent
Supernatural - a 10? (although some other subsources there gave it 9,something). Well, I haven't seen the latest season or seasons, but if hey - how something like that got 12 seasons is beyond me to begin with.
Passengers - 31%. I guess it was kind of a disappointment, but isn't it more of a 6,5 or something? Well, the audience gave it a 63% at least, so I guess it's just the critics then.
Warcraft - oh, the audience gave it a stunning 71%. Jeez, that is way more reasonable and the difference in score is incredible. I think I get the picture now.

So... I wonder what it takes to be a "critic" on rottentomatoes. Because it looks to be largely comprised of people in their 20s and 30s that went to film school and as a result think they know exactly what is and isn't a good film. I dunno. Any input from you guys? And which scores do you look at?