The Great "Rotten Tomatoes" debate

[ALP]

I use it on movies that I have no hype for prior or movies that I am iffy about. Like Black Swan for example. I would never have watched that movie if it was 20% on RT. It got great scores and great reviews so I watched it. That is an example for a movie that I was not hype for prior. Movies that I am iffy about like Fast Five help me decide whether or not to see it in theaters.

With movie tickets and gas costing as much as they do today, you bet I listen to critics a lot of the time. For movies that I am hyped for like Captain America or Harry Potter...I could care less what critics say because I am going to see it anyways. I don't have many of those movies each year...usually less than 10.

Same here. Usually I think the tomato meter is right on. But there are exceptions. Pirates 4 is rather rotten but I loved it. I wasn't paying attention to the meter for that film though, I was always looking forward to Pirates 4.

I always go there for movies I am iffy on. Transformers 3 for example, looks mediocre to me. I'm not very excited for it and if it has a 20% on RT like the second movie, there's no way in hell I'd pay to see it. Only way I'll see Transformers 3 is if it has a fresh score simply because I'm not really looking forward to it in the first place. But a fresh score would at least ease my feelings of going into an awful movie.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Have only seen I Am Number Four, had high hopes for Sucker Punch but when I saw the % on RT I thought..."awww I wanted it to be really good. But I'll still see it."

I Am Number Four was....interesting, certainly a poor movie, I wouldn't flat out say it was awful, concept wise it was decent, did have some very bad acting and corny moments, but had potential and I've seen worse.

Although I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Then again I saw the ratings and thought, well this isn't going to be very good and it actually turned out better than I thought. So RT to me can actually help remove any false hope I have and bring down my expectations which might actually help me enjoy the movie more.

My problem with Number four was the problematic concept, and the fact that Alex Pettyfer isn't that good an actor.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Same here. Usually I think the tomato meter is right on. But there are exceptions. Pirates 4 is rather rotten but I loved it. I wasn't paying attention to the meter for that film though, I was always looking forward to Pirates 4.

I always go there for movies I am iffy on. Transformers 3 for example, looks mediocre to me. I'm not very excited for it and if it has a 20% on RT like the second movie, there's no way in hell I'd pay to see it. Only way I'll see Transformers 3 is if it has a fresh score simply because I'm not really looking forward to it in the first place. But a fresh score would at least ease my feelings of going into an awful movie.

This. I saw Transformers 2 despite knowing the RT score and after watching T2 that's the moment in which I started looking more at RT.

I still saw The Last Airbender though and RT was right. I now will punch M Night in the face if I ever see him.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

This. I saw Transformers 2 despite knowing the RT score and after watching T2 that's the moment in which I started looking more at RT.

I still saw The Last Airbender though and RT was right. I now will punch M Night in the face if I ever see him.

See now that I didn't think was all that bad, not a good movie by any means, but knowing they only gave it a 8 or 7 I wasn't expecting much. So it actually turned out okay.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

My problem with Number four was the problematic concept, and the fact that Alex Pettyfer isn't that good an actor.

Hmm..I think the concept itself was decent, but the execution was poor.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

Maybe, though I saw the concept as a problem so no doubt I saw the execution also being a problem.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

Same here. Usually I think the tomato meter is right on. But there are exceptions. Pirates 4 is rather rotten but I loved it. I wasn't paying attention to the meter for that film though, I was always looking forward to Pirates 4.

I always go there for movies I am iffy on. Transformers 3 for example, looks mediocre to me. I'm not very excited for it and if it has a 20% on RT like the second movie, there's no way in hell I'd pay to see it. Only way I'll see Transformers 3 is if it has a fresh score simply because I'm not really looking forward to it in the first place. But a fresh score would at least ease my feelings of going into an awful movie.

I'm with you on both of those. Pirates is a series that I am quite the fan of, and as long as they don't stray too far from the formula and it features Johnny Depp as Jack Sparrow, then I'm there. It is like James Bond where even during the worst of the Roger Moore years, I found it very entertaining.

I never did see Transformers 2 because not only of the bad score, but because the reviews themselves constantly referred to things I hated in the first film but were only expanded upon in the sequel. That was enough for me to skip it. I will only see Transformers 3 if the reviews indicate a substantial improvement.

 

[Kahran Ramsus]

I should also add that I wouldn't be seeing X-Men: First Class without Rotten Tomatoes. Like Transformers, the X-Men series was on life support in terms of quality and so I was very hesitant about going. Bad reviews would have been a no go. Instead it is getting overwhelmingly praised by critics, and now I am very much looking forward to it.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

I wasn't interested in X-Men first class at all, but then saw a trailer finally and I am going TODAY!!!!

 

[ALP]

I should also add that I wouldn't be seeing X-Men: First Class without Rotten Tomatoes. Like Transformers, the X-Men series was on life support in terms of quality and so I was very hesitant about going. Bad reviews would have been a no go. Instead it is getting overwhelmingly praised by critics, and now I am very much looking forward to it.

100% agreed. I wish I had listened to the critics when it came to Wolverine. A waste of money and time

If fan and critic reaction to First Class was bad I might have skipped it in theaters but it's almos all positive so I can't wait to see it(later today).

Oh and be glad you didn't see Transformers 2. It's like Uwe Boll with a $150 Million budget.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

100% agreed. I wish I had listened to the critics when it came to Wolverine. A waste of money and time

If fan and critic reaction to First Stand was bad I might have skipped it in theaters but it's almos all positive so I can't wait to see it(later today).

Oh and be glad you didn't see Transformers 2. It's like Uwe Boll with a $150 Million budget.

Wait, first class or last stand?

 

[ALP]

LMAO! Sorry I typed that out wrong. I meant the new First Class I'm looking forward to. That dreaded Last Stand was in my mind. Damn all these subtitles lol

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Eh, First Last Stand Class United.

 

[Prison Mike]

I think RT is great. I use it when I'm on the fence about seeing a movie. I don't use it for all the movies (I'll see the superhero movies whether they have good or bad reviews).

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

Wrong Thread.

 

[matrix_ghost]

It depends on the movie ...at least for me.
I'll watch the movies that i've been following regardless of the ratings , however i'll use the RT meter for flicks which i don't follow but seem interesting.


Although i'll have to admit that lately i've been upgrading the ratings of several movie that i hated and had bad reviews based on the RT meter.
THey're showing TF ROTF , IM2 and CLash of the TItans on cable here in holland and while i was disasppointed with them when i saw the movie in cinemas , i found to to be enjoyable now.

 

[Warhammer]

To all of the Rotten Tomatoes purists, the site isn't accurate at all and this is why:

The means that certify a movie as "fresh" are too absolute. Let's say FILM A is released and it ends up being a front runner for Best Picture at the Oscars. Let's say that 20 critics made up the reviewers of the film. Let's say that 16 of those 20 critics thought the movie was either one of the best films of the year or among the greatest films they've seen in the past decade while the other 4 thought the film was either flat out bad, had sub-par directing, or was pretentious. That means that the movie got a 80% rating.

Now let's say there was another film that opened around the same time. Let's say FILM B was a November blockbuster that was a fantasy film. Those same 20 critics review this film. Let's say that 18 of those critics say gave the film favorable reviews. Half of the 18 thought the film was a visually stunning and entertaining film but the story wasn't exactly cerebral. The other half of those 18 say the film was an effective film that was a great use of 2 hours. The other 2 critics absolutely hated the film. That means the film got a 90% rating.

FILM B is better than FILM A? Come on now.

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

What? You mean Rotten Tomatoes doesn't know everything!? I've been lied to!

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

To all of the Rotten Tomatoes purists, the site isn't accurate at all and this is why:

The means that certify a movie as "fresh" are too absolute. Let's say FILM A is released and it ends up being a front runner for Best Picture at the Oscars. Let's say that 20 critics made up the reviewers of the film. Let's say that 16 of those 20 critics thought the movie was either one of the best films of the year or among the greatest films they've seen in the past decade while the other 4 thought the film was either flat out bad, had sub-par directing, or was pretentious. That means that the movie got a 80% rating.

Now let's say there was another film that opened around the same time. Let's say FILM B was a November blockbuster that was a fantasy film. Those same 20 critics review this film. Let's say that 18 of those critics say gave the film favorable reviews. Half of the 18 thought the film was a visually stunning and entertaining film but the story wasn't exactly cerebral. The other half of those 18 say the film was an effective film that was a great use of 2 hours. The other 2 critics absolutely hated the film. That means the film got a 90% rating.

FILM B is better than FILM A? Come on now.

I would think people would know that already by the average rating that appears under the % number.

 

[BlackLantern]

I think RT is total horse****.....its contributes to the herd think of the American moviegoer

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

herd think?

 

[BlackLantern]

yes....herdthink

your average moviegoer doesn't want to admit to liking a movie that is considered "bad" or even spend money to go see it...they go see what tv/internet tells them they should see so they can chat about it at work or at the gym or with their idiot friends

 

[BAH HUMBBUG!]

yes....herdthink

your average moviegoer doesn't want to admit to liking a movie that is considered "bad" or even spend money to go see it...they go see what tv/internet tells them they should see so they can chat about it at work or at the gym or with their idiot friends

I don't know if I would say average, but I know what you mean. Personally I liked Jumper, I didn't think it was great but fun enough where as RT gave it a 17%. Hardly. Same with TLAB, I think they gave it a 7%, not even close.

Wasn't great but again I enjoyed it enough. But again I do know what you mean. Where as I thought Predators was okay at best, and they gave it a 60%, I thought it was more in the 40% range.

And Battle Los Angeles, I think 30% something I actually liked it a lot.

But I think RT for the most part, is a decent gauge.

 

[Mrs. Sawyer]

yes....herdthink

your average moviegoer doesn't want to admit to liking a movie that is considered "bad" or even spend money to go see it...they go see what tv/internet tells them they should see so they can chat about it at work or at the gym or with their idiot friends

That certainly does make sense.

 

[jmc]

Here's a question I'd like to know, if a film is being ripped to shreads on RT, why waste your money on it?