|
|
Post by Popeye Doyle on Jan 14, 2019 18:44:36 GMT
That's disappointing. I loved Unbreakable but haven't seen Split yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 14, 2019 18:58:53 GMT
Split is decent. As for Rotten Tomatoes, it doesn't matter. It's not even in theaters here yet. The only thing that's disappointing about 38% is that people buy that stuff. Some movies have gotten 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, which as far as I'm concerned should be impossible. Whatever algorithm the website has in place clearly allows it, but that's a red flag as far as I'm concerned. Just as ridiculous as getting 100%.
|
|
|
|
Post by Marv on Jan 14, 2019 19:09:52 GMT
I liked unbreakable and split. I’m optimistic about glass.
|
|
|
|
Post by politicidal on Jan 14, 2019 19:14:16 GMT
Split's good.
|
|
|
|
Post by Fox in the Snow on Jan 14, 2019 22:02:57 GMT
I'm probably going to give it a chance because I've seen Unbreakable and Split, but I'm keeping my expectations relatively low.
|
|
|
|
Post by lowtacks86 on Jan 14, 2019 22:07:07 GMT
An M. Night Shamalan movie being poorly recieved? I'm shocked.
|
|
|
|
Post by James on Jan 14, 2019 22:10:07 GMT
An M. Night Shamalan movie being poorly recieved? I'm shocked. There hasn’t been a poorly received film of his since After Earth, I believe. After that, The Visit and Split came and were both praised. |
|
|
|
Post by James on Jan 14, 2019 22:11:21 GMT
Pains me to see this.
Also, you should see Split.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 20:10:39 GMT
38% on Rotten Tomatoes, yet 7.8 on IMDb.
The plot thickens.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Jan 17, 2019 20:13:40 GMT
38% on Rotten Tomatoes, yet 7.8 on IMDb.
The plot thickens.
I doubt most of the people who voted on IMDb have seen the movie yet.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 21:17:17 GMT
38% on Rotten Tomatoes, yet 7.8 on IMDb.
The plot thickens.
I doubt most of the people who voted on IMDb have seen the movie yet. Why?
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Jan 17, 2019 21:49:50 GMT
I doubt most of the people who voted on IMDb have seen the movie yet. Why? Most movies on IMDb start with a high rating due to the fanboys giving 10/10 before seeing the movie. Out of the 960 who gave it 10/10 I doubt many have seen it just like I doubt most of the 115 who gave it 1/10 have seen it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 17, 2019 22:02:33 GMT
Most movies on IMDb start with a high rating due to the fanboys giving 10/10 before seeing the movie. Out of the 960 who gave it 10/10 I doubt many has seen it just like I doubt most of the 115 who gave it 1/10 has seen it. Makes sense to me. That's a weird mindset though, being a fanboy enough to rate a movie they haven't seen.
|
|
|
|
Post by Nicko's Nose on Jan 17, 2019 22:05:19 GMT
Most movies on IMDb start with a high rating due to the fanboys giving 10/10 before seeing the movie. Out of the 960 who gave it 10/10 I doubt many has seen it just like I doubt most of the 115 who gave it 1/10 has seen it. Makes sense to me. That's a weird mindset though, being a fanboy enough to rate a movie they haven't seen. Unfortunately very common on the Internet.
|
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Jan 20, 2019 13:31:06 GMT
Some movies have gotten 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, which as far as I'm concerned should be impossible. Whatever algorithm the website has in place clearly allows it, but that's a red flag as far as I'm concerned. Just as ridiculous as getting 100%. Why? |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2019 17:00:55 GMT
Some movies have gotten 0% on Rotten Tomatoes, which as far as I'm concerned should be impossible. Whatever algorithm the website has in place clearly allows it, but that's a red flag as far as I'm concerned. Just as ridiculous as getting 100%. Why? Because it's subjective. Scores like 0 or 100% belong on math quizzes, tit for tat answers. A 0% score for a movie tells me nothing about it. It reads more like a joke. I've seen a lot of terrible movies, but not a zero. Even the worst movie imaginable would score higher than that for merely existing. It just seems impossible that a movie could score 0%. Literally anything is higher than 0%. Likewise with 100%. Even a nearly flawless or outright flawlessly done movie is subject to opinion about it's subject matter. |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Jan 20, 2019 17:40:53 GMT
Because it's subjective. Scores like 0 or 100% belong on math quizzes, tit for tat answers. A 0% score for a movie tells me nothing about it. It reads more like a joke. I've seen a lot of terrible movies, but not a zero. Even the worst movie imaginable would score higher than that for merely existing. It just seems impossible that a movie could score 0%. Literally anything is higher than 0%. Likewise with 100%. Even a nearly flawless or outright flawlessly done movie is subject to opinion about it's subject matter. The whole point of having an evaluating system is that there will always be movies that will deserve each number. Giving a movie a higher score than it deserves for merely existing is like a participation trophy. Sure, those exist too, but they don't mean anything. Also, you should pay attention to the average score rather than the TomatoMeter, which is the percentage of positive (as in 6/10 or more) reviews a movie got. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2019 17:45:39 GMT
Because it's subjective. Scores like 0 or 100% belong on math quizzes, tit for tat answers. A 0% score for a movie tells me nothing about it. It reads more like a joke. I've seen a lot of terrible movies, but not a zero. Even the worst movie imaginable would score higher than that for merely existing. It just seems impossible that a movie could score 0%. Literally anything is higher than 0%. Likewise with 100%. Even a nearly flawless or outright flawlessly done movie is subject to opinion about it's subject matter. The whole point of having an evaluating system is that there will always be movies that will deserve each number. Giving a movie a higher score than it deserves for merely existing is like a participation trophy. Sure, those exist too, but they don't mean anything. Also, you should pay attention to the average score rather than the TomatoMeter, which is the percentage of positive (as in 6/10 or more) reviews a movie got. They do mean something if they're factored into the average. If someone rates something a 0 or 100, motivations can range from anywhere to petty to participation trophy, but they still drag down or raise the average, don't they? |
|
|
|
Post by Vits on Jan 20, 2019 17:48:14 GMT
They do mean something if they're factored into the average. If someone rates something a 0 or 100, motivations can range from anywhere to petty to participation trophy, but they still drag down or raise the average, don't they? My point is that if the critic gives a good arguement on why they chose the rating they chose (even if it's a O or 100), it's fine. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 20, 2019 17:49:57 GMT
They do mean something if they're factored into the average. If someone rates something a 0 or 100, motivations can range from anywhere to petty to participation trophy, but they still drag down or raise the average, don't they? My point is that if the critic gives a good arguement on why they chose the rating they chose (even if it's a O or 100), it's fine. True, but if they're going with one of those numbers, it better be the best damn explanation I've ever heard. |
|
