The Picture Thread vol. 16

[Mister Ed Horse of a Different Color Find all posts View Profile Close Mister Ed]

That's not how the percentage works, the meter is based off of whether the reviewer marked the movie as "good" or "rotten".

Is it the reviewer that makes that determination? Or does somebody else read the review and decide which applies? Because I've got to say there have been some times I read a review marked "fresh", and got the opposite impression from what the review contained.

I do agree, though, that such a binary rating system isn't particularly helpful. (Though in practical terms it probably makes it a LOT easier to apply it to a wide range of reviews that might all use different metrics, especially if it is somebody other than the original reviewer trying to interpret all those reviews into one rating system.)

[Hypo Lil' Leaguer Find all posts View Profile Close Hypo]

Pretty sure the reviewer gets to choose, Age of Ultron and Jurrassic World for example both have the same average rating (6.7) but JW has a lower percentage.

[Robinson Guardian Of The Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Robinson]

That's not how the percentage works, the meter is based off of whether the reviewer marked the movie as "good" or "rotten".

there should be some correlation between the 2 imo.

[Mister Ed Horse of a Different Color Find all posts View Profile Close Mister Ed]

there should be some correlation between the 2 imo.

Well, that would require abandoning their whole gimmick which is that everything is rated either "fresh" or "rotten". The percent isn't representative of the quality of the movie on a scale of 0-100, it is simply a measure of what percentage of reviewers thought the movie was "fresh".

Now granted, there is probably SOME kind of statistical correlation. If every single critic rates a movie "fresh", it seems likely that they were, on average, more positive about it than if a big chunk of them saw it as rotten, since the unanimity of positive viewpoint tends to argue against the movie being borderline crappy.

[Hypo Lil' Leaguer Find all posts View Profile Close Hypo]

there should be some correlation between the 2 imo.

I disagree, their entire thing is to give people a feel for a movie at a glance not an indepth rating, besides they do include the average review score as well. If you want something more fine grained use something like metacritic.

[Robinson Guardian Of The Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Robinson]

Imo if it's rating is 8.8/10 then it should say something like 88% fresh then. That's what I mean about a correlation.

When you see video game reviews and they say it's a 9/10 they don't say it's a perfect game.

[Mister Ed Horse of a Different Color Find all posts View Profile Close Mister Ed]

Imo if it's rating is 8.8/10 then it should say something like 88% fresh then. That's what I mean about a correlation.

That would be redundant. Why have the two different ratings if they have to be exactly the same? One says how MANY critics liked it, the other says how MUCH they liked it. The two ratings mean different things.

That said, I think how MUCH they liked it seems like a more useful metric than how MANY, so I'd perhaps rather that figure was the prominent one instead of being a tiny addition, but the "fresh vs. rotten" thing is the site's gimmick, so I suppose I can understand highlighting that metric.

[Hypo Lil' Leaguer Find all posts View Profile Close Hypo]

That would be redundant. Why have the two different ratings if they have to be exactly the same? One says how MANY critics liked it, the other says how MUCH they liked it. The two ratings mean different things.

Exactly.

[Robinson Guardian Of The Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Robinson]

I dunno like i said, I don't really care for RT. I think people put way too much stock in it.

[Mister Ed Horse of a Different Color Find all posts View Profile Close Mister Ed]

I dunno like i said, I don't really care for RT. I think people put way too much stock in it.

Rotten Tomatoes specifically, or review aggregation sites in general? Or just reviews in general? I certainly agree that it sometimes seems like people place too much importance on reviews...but that said, I'll keep looking at such sites, not so much for the aggregated scores as for easy access to a wide variety of actual reviews.

In an ideal world, I would just watch whatever movies I thought might be interesting, and pay no attention to reviews ahead of time. But in the world I live in, I have neither unlimited funds, nor unlimited time, and so I often feel obliged to look to reviews to help me decide in advance what the best use of those limited resources is.

Of course, that only applies to going to the theater. I'll happily check stuff out from the library on a whim, and who cares what other people thought of it? The only type of reviews I check on THAT stuff is content reviews so I can determine what age group I should offer to share it with.

[Jeff Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Jeff]

I dunno like i said, I don't really care for RT. I think people put way too much stock in it.

Seconded. Even if a movie is a complete failure and I want to see it, I don't really care what RT has to say about it. More often than not, I disagree with their ratings, anyways.

[Mister Ed Horse of a Different Color Find all posts View Profile Close Mister Ed]

But back on topic, here is a cute Puggle:

[Jeff Guardian of the Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Jeff]

But back on topic, here is a cute Puggle:

ANIMAL THREAD, ED.

ANIMAL THREAD!!!!!!!

[Mister Ed Horse of a Different Color Find all posts View Profile Close Mister Ed]

Yeah, yeah. It's a picture, too. (Besides, animal pictures are the first thing that popped into my head, and I wanted to atone for my part in derailing THIS thread. )

[Robinson Guardian Of The Universe Find all posts View Profile Close Robinson]

Rotten Tomatoes specifically, or review aggregation sites in general? Or just reviews in general? I certainly agree that it sometimes seems like people place too much importance on reviews...but that said, I'll keep looking at such sites, not so much for the aggregated scores as for easy access to a wide variety of actual reviews.

In an ideal world, I would just watch whatever movies I thought might be interesting, and pay no attention to reviews ahead of time. But in the world I live in, I have neither unlimited funds, nor unlimited time, and so I often feel obliged to look to reviews to help me decide in advance what the best use of those limited resources is.

Of course, that only applies to going to the theater. I'll happily check stuff out from the library on a whim, and who cares what other people thought of it? The only type of reviews I check on THAT stuff is content reviews so I can determine what age group I should offer to share it with.

more or less reviews in general.

I think they should have gone by the wayside long ago with those 2 guys that had the show.

Ill watch a movie if I get the vibe by the trailer that ill be entertained, not whether or not someone had an Oscar worthy performance.


Especially car movies, if its got a nice car chase and some good car porn, I don't care what kind of garbage plot it has. I watch it multiple times a day if I feel like it.