Inspired by the linked XKCD. Using 60% instead of 50% because that’s an easy filter to apply on rottentomatoes.
I’ll go first: I think “Sherlock Holmes: A game of Shadows” was awesome, from the plot to the characters ,and especially how they used screen-play to highlight how Sherlocks head works in these absurd ways.
Dude, Where’s My Car, 17%/47%. I haven’t seen it since it was in the theatre, but I remember thinking it was a good disengage-your-brain comedy that got some chuckles and had a plot that was weird enough to be a joke on it’s own. What were people expecting, with a title like that?
How are cult classics like that scored so low by audience score? Critiques I can understand cause being elitist is like their whole schtick. But audiences at least have self selection to filter to people who like the idea in the first place.
Incidentally, I always felt that films need two kinds of ratings. One for people who view the movie as “their kind of movie” and one for people who don’t. Because it’s completely meaningless to me if, say, my grandma doesn’t like the new Marvel movie. That’s not her thing. I wanna know what people who like other Marvel movies think!
Yeah I guess rotten tomatoes is going the way of imdb. For a while both were really reliable but then seemed to hit a critical mass of people who either just want to complain about everything, or on the other hand can’t look beyond their adoration of certain celebrities or ideas to see the flaws in something. It’s time for a new movie rating site that won’t attract the lowest common denominator for a few years yet.
You can look for specific reviewers who tend to like the same kinds of movies as you, then see what they think. Or, look at the reviews instead of the score. I tend to look at an average review, a positive review and a negative review, to see if I care about any of the bad parts they bring up.
and then?