Rotten Tomatoes Validity discussion (1 Viewer)

[Fred Bang]

Hi,

I did a search on the subject, but didn't find anything on it, si here it goes:

I've been wondering about this ROttenTomatoes "Fresh or Rotten" black or white review.

WHat I mean is, which movie would you consider to be better:

A- A movie with 100% positive reviews that consider the movie above average, but not oustanding.

B- 50% of positive review that consider the movie outstanding, while the other 50 consider it below average.

Just look at movies that have polarize audiences like Attack of the CLones, or A.I., and you'll know what I mean.

What do you think?

 

[Patrick Sun]

I think one should find critics with tastes in film that mirrors their own taste in film if they are to rely on them for choosing films to plunk down hard earned money to go see.

To blindly follow a good rating by Rotten Tomatoes is to allow the masses spend your money for you. I've been burned by some films that got good ratings, but simply didn't appeal to me.

 

[Fred Bang]

What I do is follow the positive review to discover movies I wouldn't have watch otherwise, but ignore the negative reviews of a movie and make my own opinion.

 

[Lou Sytsma]

Rotten Tomatoes reflects the rating of professional critics not the general public.

All Rotten Tomatoes shows is how the various movies stack against one another as far as the critics go. You have to view their ratings within that context.

How you determine which movies you like or dislike should not be swayed by their ratings.

Use RT as a barometer. Your own opinion and the consensus of your friends and family have more validity than what the critics say.

 

[Alex Spindler]

Well, I think RT successfully differentiates between the professional critic and the internet critic, who is closer to the average movie-going public.

What RT does right is allow a link to the review as well as a signature quote from the review. All it takes to get the general gist of a film is to wade through the quotes to find out if it is a 100% average vs 50% spectacular film. To go by the raw percentages is not a good idea.

Personally, I find it invaluable. I can easily click on a review to decide for myself if the review was a Fresh one or Rotten one for myself, as well as getting an good summation of the general opinion of the film.

 

[ChrisMatson]

Exactly. I just take the overall score to be a barometer reading. I have liked several movies that have received "Rotten" reviews (A.I. and Episode II come to mind) but for the most part, 40% or worse is usually a bad movie. Likewise, if 80% or more of the reviews are positive, I usually like the film.

 

[Kwang Suh]

I just like the fact that it's a huge list of reviews. Saves me time.

 

[Edwin Pereyra]

WHat I mean is, which movie would you consider to be better:
A- A movie with 100% positive reviews that consider the movie above average, but not oustanding.
B- 50% of positive review that consider the movie outstanding, while the other 50 consider it below average.

You want me to make a black and white choice? It's not that clear cut. You have to find out for yourself whether you'll like a film or not. For the most part, I go with the Cream of the Crop, which tends to work for me better.
~Edwin

 

[Terrell]

RT is good from the standpoint of having a lot of reviews. As for their tomatometer, I haven't figured that out. There's no consistency. If they used the same reviews for each film, on the tomatometer, then I'd give it more credibility. But they don't post some reviews for some films, that they do for others.

But it is a good place to find reviews.

 

[Matt Stone]

Yah...I agree to an extent.
But I do, mainly, what someone else already mentioned...use good ratings to see films I otherwise woulnd't have, and ignore the negatives for the most part. Usually if a film is around the 50% mark it won't be awful. The awful movies are reserved for the proud and the few below 10%

 

[Seth Paxton]

Rotten Tomatoes is NOT a critic, it is a tool for research.

Common sense tells us that few "great" films are going to have across the board appeal, so 100% rated films usually are lingering in the "safe" area of quality. Not excelling to the very bounds of the art, but satisfying everyone.

Although I have found several films to be pretty strong in the 85-95% range. But many of the life changing films linger in the 65-75% range.

However, when a film falls into the 40 and below area, look out.

Also, always read at least the blurbs to get a general TONE of why the ups or downs for a film.

With those things in mind I have found the site to be very good for gauging what a film will offer me.

 

[Aaron D]

Exactly. I just take the overall score to be a barometer reading. I have liked several movies that have received "Rotten" reviews (A.I. and Episode II come to mind) but for the most part, 40% or worse is usually a bad movie. Likewise, if 80% or more of the reviews are positive, I usually like the film.

This is how I've used the site and it seems to pan out for me personally. Of course, some movies I think deserve a higher rating don't get one, but that's why they're critics!

Another benefit I take advantage of is the reviews of smaller-release and independent movies that I otherwise wouldn't know anything about. They provide a short synopsis of the film and actors- something invaluable when looking at the line up at the indie theaters in town!

In fact, this is how I "discovered" Requiem for a Dream!

 

[Jonathan Burk]

For the sake of discussion, here are the 25 films that have received "100%" good reviews. I haven't seen all of them, but now I'm anxious to try out the ones I've missed.

Title No. of Reviews
1. 100% Toy Story 2 103
2. 100% The Taste of Others 57
3. 100% Beatles, The - A Hard Day's Night 43
4. 100% The Sweet Hereafter 39
5. 100% Gods and Monsters 35
6. 100% Rear Window 33
7. 100% Scratch 30
8. 100% The Godfather 29
9. 100% Vertigo 29
10. 100% Amadeus 27
11. 100% The Wizard of Oz 27
12. 100% Winslow Boy, The 26
13. 100% Down from the Mountain 26
14. 100% Gone with the Wind 25
15. 100% Apocalypse Now 24
16. 100% Sense and Sensibility 24
17. 100% E.T. The Extra-Terrestrial 22
18. 100% Taxi Driver 22
19. 100% Toy Story 22
20. 100% This Is Spinal Tap 21
21. 100% Sound & Fury 21
22. 100% The Third Man 20
23. 100% Pulp Fiction 20
24. 100% Supercop 20
25. 100% Not One Less

And 0%...

Species 2
Night at the Roxbury, A
Knock Off
Wrongfully Accused
Dead Man on Campus

(there were others)

I personally don't have any problem believing these stats. And doesn't it go without saying that a film that recieves a 50% would have some people that agree with the critics who like it, and some who agree with the critics that hated it?

 

[Terrell]

You're kidding! Are you serious? Those movies really received 0%? WOW! Species 2 should get a great review based on her nudity alone.

 

[Chris Harvey]

A problem I have with RT is occasionally they'll rate a review "rotten" that I consider "fresh" or vice versa. There's a fair number of reviews that are in the gray area of interpretation as to whether they're positive or negative.
RT is a helpful link to ROUGHLY gauge what the critics are saying, and it's a nice place to get a whole bunch of reviews at once. However, I prefer the Movie Review Query Engine, which simply lists as many reviews as it can find, often without mentioning whether they are positive or negative (some reviews have a number or grade rating).

 

[Ted Lee]

i usually check rt before i go see a movie. the site is useful to get a "vibe" on how a movie is, but that's about it. i wouldn't base my decision solely on what the site offers.

a perfect example is the current release of 'insomnia' - rt (when i last checked) had a 94% fresh rating with something like 80 reviews...i found the movie average at best.

so, it's useful up to a point, but i wouldn't rely on it's ratings 100%.