|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 26, 2017 1:49:45 GMT
It means 99% of people who watched it and put in a critical rating liked it. It only means that if people "like" movies they give 6/10 to. When you give a movie 6/10, does it mean you like it or that you think it is okay?  It means you rated it more than half, which means you liked it. If you don't like a movie, I doubt you'd give it a positive score. By the way, I'm not the one who made this rule up. As per RT, any score 6/10 or higher is considered good. Which means 99% considered the movie good. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 1:57:25 GMT
It only means that if people "like" movies they give 6/10 to. When you give a movie 6/10, does it mean you like it or that you think it is okay? It means you rated it more than half, which means you liked it. If you don't like a movie, I doubt you'd give it a positive score. By the way, I'm not the one who made this rule up. As per RT, any score 6/10 or higher is considered good. Which means 99% considered the movie good. You might give 6/10 to movies you like, I certainly don't. 6/10 is okay/watchable to me. Give me some movies you rate 6/10. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 2:31:26 GMT
So a movie that has AT LEAST 6/10 is considered good. How many blockbuster movies do you watch with an average RT rating of 6/10 that you think are "good"? For a crowd pleaser like Ragnarok, an average rating of 6/10 would be a massive kick in the gonads. RT have chosen to use that definition because it suits them.  Regardless of why they chose it, that's the definition. Hee hee hee... |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 26, 2017 2:36:06 GMT
It means you rated it more than half, which means you liked it. If you don't like a movie, I doubt you'd give it a positive score. By the way, I'm not the one who made this rule up. As per RT, any score 6/10 or higher is considered good. Which means 99% considered the movie good. You might give 6/10 to movies you like, I certainly don't. 6/10 is okay/watchable to me. Give me some movies you rate 6/10. How I rate movies and how you rate movies has got nothing to do with this. What matters is how the critics rated it and how RT's scoring system works. And the way it works is that a movie that you consider positive gets a fresh score and ones that you don't like get a rotten score. 99% of those people rated it fresh which meant they liked it, otherwise they would have rated it rotten. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 2:40:36 GMT
You might give 6/10 to movies you like, I certainly don't. 6/10 is okay/watchable to me. Give me some movies you rate 6/10. How I rate movies and how you rate movies has got nothing to do with this. What matters is how the critics rated it and how RT's scoring system works. And the way it works is that a movie that you consider positive gets a fresh score and ones that you don't like get a rotten score. 99% of those people rated it fresh which meant they liked it, otherwise they would have rated it rotten. And all the rest of it is degrees of freshness and rottenness. 💀 Hee hee hee... |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 26, 2017 2:53:19 GMT
How I rate movies and how you rate movies has got nothing to do with this. What matters is how the critics rated it and how RT's scoring system works. And the way it works is that a movie that you consider positive gets a fresh score and ones that you don't like get a rotten score. 99% of those people rated it fresh which meant they liked it, otherwise they would have rated it rotten. And all the rest of it is degrees of freshness and rottenness. 💀 Hee hee hee... If we want to get into how much they liked or didn't like the movie, then we get into the average score. The 99% number has got nothing to do with the "degree" of how much they liked or disliked the movie. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 2:55:10 GMT
And all the rest of it is degrees of freshness and rottenness. 💀 Hee hee hee... If we want to get into how much they liked or didn't like the movie, then we get into the average score. The 99% number has got nothing to do with the "degree" of how much they liked or disliked the movie. Exactly. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 3:05:19 GMT
You might give 6/10 to movies you like, I certainly don't. 6/10 is okay/watchable to me. Give me some movies you rate 6/10. How I rate movies and how you rate movies has got nothing to do with this. What matters is how the critics rated it and how RT's scoring system works. And the way it works is that a movie that you consider positive gets a fresh score and ones that you don't like get a rotten score. 99% of those people rated it fresh which meant they liked it, otherwise they would have rated it rotten. RT collates movie critic reviews and imposes their own definition of what rating signifies good upon those reviews. It doesn't necessarily follow that everyone agrees with that.  |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 26, 2017 3:56:42 GMT
How I rate movies and how you rate movies has got nothing to do with this. What matters is how the critics rated it and how RT's scoring system works. And the way it works is that a movie that you consider positive gets a fresh score and ones that you don't like get a rotten score. 99% of those people rated it fresh which meant they liked it, otherwise they would have rated it rotten. RT collates movie critic reviews and imposes their own definition of what rating signifies good upon those reviews. It doesn't necessarily follow that everyone agrees with that. Each critic rates a movie, whether out of 5 or out of 10 or some other deviation. Bottom line, if the score is positive, it's fresh. If it's negative, it's rotten. If a critic likes a movie, they give it a positive score. If they don't, they give it a negative score. It's really all that simple. The 99% number shows that 99% of these critics gave the movie a positive score, meaning they liked the movie. If you don't like it then make your website with your own rating system, but don't try impose your own opinions on RT's rating system just because you don't like it. If you want to get an idea of how much the critics liked or didn't like the movie then go look at the average score. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 4:27:19 GMT
RT collates movie critic reviews and imposes their own definition of what rating signifies good upon those reviews. It doesn't necessarily follow that everyone agrees with that. Each critic rates a movie, whether out of 5 or out of 10 or some other deviation. Bottom line, if the score is positive, it's fresh. If it's negative, it's rotten. If a critic likes a movie, they give it a positive score. If they don't, they give it a negative score. It's really all that simple. The 99% number shows that 99% of these critics gave the movie a positive score, meaning they liked the movie. If you don't like it then make your website with your own rating system, but don't try impose your own opinions on RT's rating system just because you don't like it. If you want to get an idea of how much the critics liked or didn't like the movie then go look at the average score. Dude, if I was a movie critic who had his reviews used by RT and I gave Wonder Woman 6/10, it wouldn't mean I think the movie is good. Why do you choose to assume that no movie reviewer in the world is like me in that regard? |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 4:29:23 GMT
Each critic rates a movie, whether out of 5 or out of 10 or some other deviation. Bottom line, if the score is positive, it's fresh. If it's negative, it's rotten. If a critic likes a movie, they give it a positive score. If they don't, they give it a negative score. It's really all that simple. The 99% number shows that 99% of these critics gave the movie a positive score, meaning they liked the movie. If you don't like it then make your website with your own rating system, but don't try impose your own opinions on RT's rating system just because you don't like it. If you want to get an idea of how much the critics liked or didn't like the movie then go look at the average score. Dude, if I was a movie critic who had his reviews used by RT and I gave Wonder Woman 6/10, it wouldn't mean I think the movie is good. Why do you choose to assume that no movie reviewer in the world is like me in that regard? Six on my scale would be good. The least possible degree of good but still good. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 4:39:55 GMT
Dude, if I was a movie critic who had his reviews used by RT and I gave Wonder Woman 6/10, it wouldn't mean I think the movie is good. Why do you choose to assume that no movie reviewer in the world is like me in that regard? Six on my scale would be good. The least possible degree of good but still good. Okay, everyone is different. RT has imposed it's own definition of "good" on reviews written by independent critics. A number of those critics won't think anything below a 7 is "good." Nobody can categorically state that because a movie critic has rated a film 3/5 they must think it is good cause red tomato. That's fxxking absurd!  |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 4:43:51 GMT
Six on my scale would be good. The least possible degree of good but still good. Okay, everyone is different. RT has imposed it's own definition of "good" on reviews written by independent critics. A number of those critics won't think anything below a 7 is "good." Nobody can categorically state that because a movie critic has rated a film 3/5 they must think it is good cause red tomato. That's fxxking absurd!Conversely, no one can categorically state that because a movie critic has rated a film a 3/5 they must think it's mediocre or bad cause red tomato. To quote a wise man who lived long ago, "That's fxxking absurd!" |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 26, 2017 4:47:43 GMT
Each critic rates a movie, whether out of 5 or out of 10 or some other deviation. Bottom line, if the score is positive, it's fresh. If it's negative, it's rotten. If a critic likes a movie, they give it a positive score. If they don't, they give it a negative score. It's really all that simple. The 99% number shows that 99% of these critics gave the movie a positive score, meaning they liked the movie. If you don't like it then make your website with your own rating system, but don't try impose your own opinions on RT's rating system just because you don't like it. If you want to get an idea of how much the critics liked or didn't like the movie then go look at the average score. Dude, if I was a movie critic who had his reviews used by RT and I gave Wonder Woman 6/10, it wouldn't mean I think the movie is good. Why do you choose to assume that no movie reviewer in the world is like me in that regard? Because you're not a critic. And if you truly believe that a 6/10 score from a critic means they didn't like the film but felt it was only meh, then go ahead and find 1 review from those critics that rated Thor Ragnarok as 6/10 but made it clear in their written review that they didn't like the movie. Go on, get some proof. Because your opinion on movies mean squat since you're not one of those critical reviewers on RT. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 4:50:22 GMT
Dude, if I was a movie critic who had his reviews used by RT and I gave Wonder Woman 6/10, it wouldn't mean I think the movie is good. Why do you choose to assume that no movie reviewer in the world is like me in that regard? Because you're not a critic. And if you truly believe that a 6/10 score from a critic means they didn't like the film but felt it was only meh, then go ahead and find 1 review from those critics that rated Thor Ragnarok as 6/10 but made it clear in their written review that they didn't like the movie. Go on, get some proof. Because your opinion on movies mean squat since you're not one of those critical reviewers on RT. Golly, this is very damaging for you @eattheeloi . I'll help you do the homework and see if I can find one. Skaathar , you're quite merciless - we won't forget this. Hee hee hee... |
|
|
|
Post by harpospoke on Oct 26, 2017 4:52:36 GMT
I don't think anyone thinks that do they? No. But making a huge fuss over the figure does beg the question - Why make such a big deal over a fairly meaningless statistic? There are no such things as "meaningful statistics" in art. None of it means anything. The RT score is however "useful". It can tell me the percentage of people who watched a movie and liked it. That gives me at least something to go on when deciding whether or not to watch a movie. If 99% of a group of people like a movie, that's pretty good odds that I will like it too. Thus the purpose of movie reviews...to help me decide if I should watch a movie. After that point none of it matters. I see the movie and judge it for myself. That "average score" thing is completely worthless. There is no real purpose to that. I decide how much I like a movie. That will rarely match up with the average on RT. If I lined up a list of movies in order of their "average score" there is almost no chance it would match my personal ratings of that list of movies. That would be true of anyone....so that's meaningless. There will never be a time when we need something to tell us how much we like a movie. The only thing I see "average score" used for is a penis measuring contest by people who apparently need their opinion on art validated by an unseen group of critics. Pretty worthless stuff. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Oct 26, 2017 4:54:49 GMT
Okay, everyone is different. RT has imposed it's own definition of "good" on reviews written by independent critics. A number of those critics won't think anything below a 7 is "good." Nobody can categorically state that because a movie critic has rated a film 3/5 they must think it is good cause red tomato. That's fxxking absurd!Conversely, no one can categorically state that because a movie critic has rated a film a 3/5 they must think it's mediocre or bad cause red tomato. To quote a wise man who lived long ago, "That's fxxking absurd!" I agree. Where have I said any different? |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 4:57:01 GMT
Dude, if I was a movie critic who had his reviews used by RT and I gave Wonder Woman 6/10, it wouldn't mean I think the movie is good. Why do you choose to assume that no movie reviewer in the world is like me in that regard? Because you're not a critic. And if you truly believe that a 6/10 score from a critic means they didn't like the film but felt it was only meh, then go ahead and find 1 review from those critics that rated Thor Ragnarok as 6/10 but made it clear in their written review that they didn't like the movie. Go on, get some proof. Because your opinion on movies mean squat since you're not one of those critical reviewers on RT. How about this one from the Herald Sun (AU). Surely this person, 3/5, only thought the film was okay. Sadly, I can't read the article myself because I think it contains spoilers. There, honor is satisfied. www.heraldsun.com.au/entertainment/movies/review-chris-hemsworths-gamble-to-find-the-lighter-side-of-superhero-thor-pays-off-in-ragnarok/news-story/7d45210a959917268d57463ef0577531 |
|
|
|
Post by Skaathar on Oct 26, 2017 5:03:27 GMT
I don't know man, nothing in that review really screams "It was just ok". I mean, sure the reviewer didn't think it was perfect, but with a title like "Chris Hemsworth’s gamble to find the lighter side of superhero Thor pays off in Ragnarok", that's still a pretty positive review and nothing that felt like it was just "meh". The only real criticism the reviewer had was that the villains were so-so. Everything else she had to say was good. |
|
|
|
Post by Lord Death Man on Oct 26, 2017 5:09:08 GMT
I don't know man, nothing in that review really screams "It was just ok". I mean, sure the reviewer didn't think it was perfect, but with a title like "Chris Hemsworth’s gamble to find the lighter side of superhero Thor pays off in Ragnarok", that's still a pretty positive review and nothing that felt like it was just "meh". The only real criticism the reviewer had was that the villains were so-so. Everything else he had to say was good. Seems like you've thwarted @eattheeloi 's attempt to discredit Thor Ragnarok as a middling movie despite its current 99% approval rating amongst critics on Rotten Tomatoes. His only chance now is to reply with a link to an article where the movie was rated 3/5 and the reviewer expressed only lukewarm sentiments towards the film. Rats! Hee hee hee... |
|
