zlacker

[return to "The Decomposition of Rotten Tomatoes"]
1. ernest+d93[view] [source] 2023-09-07 19:52:08
>>tortil+(OP)
Rotten tomatoes is actually very useful if you know the magic formula:

* If tomatometer & audience score are within 5% of each other, you can trust the ratings to give you a decent indiciation of movie quality.

* If tomatometer is more than 15%+ higher than audience score, it means it's an artsy fartsy movie that critics like and movies don't.

* If audience score is 15%+ higher than tomatometer, it's a fun movie even if it's not oscar worthy. (https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/old_school is a perfect example)

◧◩
2. pauldd+8d3[view] [source] 2023-09-07 20:10:44
>>ernest+d93
Okay, let's give that a whirl

---

The Last Jedi

Tomatometer 91% Audience 41%: Artsy Fartsy

[Really?]

---

The Greatest Showman

Tomatometer 56% Audience 86%: Fun, not oscar worthy

[Won Oscar for Best Original Song]

---

EDIT: Truthfully, it was the release of these two films (both Dec 2017) that caused the Tomatormeter and I to part ways. Simply indefensible, IMO.

◧◩◪
3. 0x457+Ze3[view] [source] 2023-09-07 20:22:01
>>pauldd+8d3
TLJ was review bombed (movie sucked tho). Critics gave a good score out of fear imo. It's just an outlier for that rule.

Oscar worthy - best picture, best actor, etc. Best original song isn't a top tier category. That year also had weak competition.

The Greatest Showman was nominated in a single category, and it lost to Coco. I don't know where you got that it won. Coco got nominated in two categories, one of which was important, and won both. Coco also within 3% difference on rotten tomatoes.

◧◩◪◨
4. pauldd+w94[view] [source] 2023-09-08 02:32:22
>>0x457+Ze3
I'm sorry, you are correct. Nominated not won
[go to top]