zlacker

>>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)

>>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.

>>pauldd+8d3
It sorta fits for TLJ. It's a movie with interesting ideas that break the mold vs the previous movie. I can see how critics might find it more interesting. Compared to TFA it's interesting to think about.

But it sucks from the point of view of watching something enjoyable, and especially so if you were looking for a straight follow-up of TFA.

>>dale_g+yf3
I'll always take an interesting failure over a boring success. I thought that TLJ was incredibly uneven, but I wanted a sequel to that far more than a sequel to TFA.

>>Pxtl+9H3
I think it depends how much you care about the source material. If you genuinely love and cherish it, it's hard to want to take risks, even those that might result in a better movie. There was probably some of that going on with the prequels.

If you care less about it, then you'll surely want to try new things, and if it doesn't work out, no big deal.