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. munchl+Nc3[view] [source] 2023-09-07 20:09:25
>>ernest+d93
These days IMDb user reviews are the most reliable source. It’s easy to scan a few dozen to see what most people think and discard outliers if you want. The wisdom of crowds is unmatched.
◧◩◪
3. gniv+XP4[view] [source] 2023-09-08 08:47:26
>>munchl+Nc3
I thought this too until I saw how even popular shows can be manipulated.

The TV show "King the Land" is a Korean drama that aired on cable in Korea this summer and was released at the same time on Netflix worldwide. It was very popular in Korea [1] and many Asian countries. But if you look at IMDB [2] it has a 4.2 rating, with 116 thousand votes of 1/10. Similar Korean shows typically have ratings in the 7-9 range. The reason for the low rating is a controversy over a minor character in the show. I don't know how this mass voting was organized, but it seems to have worked in affecting the IMDB score (and similarly on RT).

[1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/King_the_Land#Viewership

[2] https://www.imdb.com/title/tt26693803/

[go to top]