Rottentomatoes.com

[Bartino]

i am losing faith in this once plentiful resource.haha i have found that pretty much every movie sucks according to this website. all in all it falls to people's personal opinions, but i noticed that my favorite movies, and i am not alone, have gotten terrible ratings on rottentomatoes. are there any other good movie review sites out there, because i havent been able to find any.

 

[Sqube]

Well... I don't know why you would blame rottentomatoes.com specifically; it's merely a compendium of movie reviews.

And critics are, almost without fail, full of ******. That's why they're critics, instead of the people who actually go out and make movies or whatever it is they're critiquing.

 

[tfinch2]

Yes I trust it.

All of the movies that get bad ratings deserve it. You just have bad taste.

 

[Bartino]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Yes I trust it.

All of the movies that get bad ratings deserve it. You just have bad taste.

hahaha, maybe so...but i beg to differ, and i bet a lot of people like the movies that have gotten sucky ratings

 

[compnovice]

There's a reason its called rotten tomatoes....

 

[newbiepcuser]

As much I trust ATOT's advice on cars, women, money, music, running people off the road when they are riding a bike, etc

 

[Aharami]

yes

 

[Ika]

Originally posted by: newbiepcuser
As much I trust ATOT's advice on cars, women, money, music, running people off the road when they are riding a bike, etc

that last one is good ATOT advice.

 

[Lord Zado]

Instead of looking at just the percent score it gets, why not actually read one or 2 reviews and decide for yourself if it's the type of movie you would want to see? I like reviewers that try to match the movie with it's intended audience. Even the worst movies have a certain demographic that want to watch them. For that reason, I like reading the reviews of the guys on IGN. Sure, they bash some movies I end up liking, but they at least attempt to say what kind of person will like the movie.

 

[BRObedoza]

not since they gave 28 Days Later a high rating. what a piece of crap.

 

[Spineshank]

Usually i disagree with the majority of people i talk to bout a movie. So if they liked it i know im not gonna and vice versa.

 

[Mo0o]

Yeah for the most part I agree with their reviews. Anything under 20% i dont watch unless its a major blockbuster

 

[dguy6789]

I find myself agreeing and disagreeing with their reviews equally. Some of their scores are right on and others are so far off that it is rediculous. If a movie seems interesting to me, I will go see it or rent it when it comes to DVD. Use reviews as a resource to help you decide, not as the entire deciding force. My opinion > some critic when deciding what I like.

 

[Jinru]

imo, IMDB.com > Rottentomatoes.com

 

[mindmaniac]

I don't they gave Biodome under a 10%

 

[mindmaniac]

Originally posted by: Jinru
imo, IMDB.com > Rottentomatoes.com

IMDB isn't a review site though

 

[Nocturnal]

Do any of you remember Anand's movie review website?

 

[BrokenVisage]

I think it's overrated as a movie review site, I stopped going there a year ago and just use IMDb and Yahoo movies now.

 

[chambersc]

Originally posted by: tfinch2
Yes I trust it.

All of the movies that get bad ratings deserve it. You just have bad taste.

truer words were never spoken

 

[torpid]

If a movie is over 90% I usually like it. Examples from 2005:

Wallace & Gromit
Good Night, and good luck
The squid and the whale
Duma
Capote
Kung Fu Hustle

If it's 80-89% it's a bit less accurate for my taste. Examples of good films over 80% from 2005:

Millions
Paradise Now
Broken Flowers
Cache
Junebug
Brokeback Mountain
Three Burials
Batman Begins
The Constant Gardener


Bad films over 80%:

Harry potter
How's Moving Castle
Ong-Bak
King Kong
Kiss Kiss Bang Bang
2046
Star Wars 3

If it's below 40% I usually dislike it, though not always. I probably like as many <40% movies as I do 50-80%. I find it more useful to look at the cream of the crop section and pick out a few reviewers I like and see what they say when the movie is below 90%

 

[iamaelephant]

Originally posted by: mindmaniac
I don't they gave Biodome under a 10%

OMFG I was about to say the exact same thing. Seriously.

 

[Minjin]

I'm amazed that you guys don't use MRQE.

Text

Find a few reviewers that you tend to agree with and read their reviews each week (or before going out to the movies). I generally agree with Ebert and Berardinelli.

Mark

 

[Mani]

Here's my problem with rotten tomatoes. Someone correct me if I'm wrong, but it appears to be a composite of binary reviews. So they set a minimum for what would qualify as "fresh" (1) vs. "rotten" (0) for each individual review. When in fact, most reviews are not so cut and dry. An example would be if say, the boston globe gives a movie the equivalent of a 6 or 7 out of 10, RT may qualify those scores as being a "fresh" review - so it is counted as a 1/1. While a review that's on the high side of bad, maybe a 5/10 would be counted as "rotten" and counted as a 0 in the final percentage rollup. So I notice this tends to skew movies that are ok-but-not-great one way or the other.

That said, if you're only looking to watch 90+%, grade A movies, it works great. Generally I find their very high (85+) and very low (15-) ratings are pretty accurate.

 

[torpid]

It is sort of binary, Mani, but they do tell you the average rating as well. The problem is, a lot of review sites, such as new york times, don't give an actual number, so even the tomato vs splat can be subjective at times. It is not really possible to equate a new york times review with a star rating, so that is why rotten tomatoes does not display the average rating with any prominence.

 

[wheresmybacon]

Originally posted by: newbiepcuser
As much I trust ATOT's advice on cars, women, money, music, running people off the road when they are riding a bike, etc

QFT