Lol we tell you what to think

Lol we tell you what to think.

Lol we reflect what others think and give our informed opinion. - fixed it for ya, OP.

>never having used rt before

>assblasted DCuck

except "informed" opinion = jew opinion

>anyone who dislikes RT is a capeshitfag engaged in console wars
I miss 2015 Sup Forums.

...

It's an agregator. There's nothing to dislike about it unless you're a fag who's upset that their favorite toy commercial got a low %.

Thanks for proving his point, dipshit.

Link us to your mighty blog, Enlightened One.

It really does feel as if rotten tomatoes has the final say on what makes a movie "good" nowadays

I never cared about rotten tomatoes and don't pretend to now.

Thanks for taking the time to post in the thread and give us your valuable opinion

Thanks for defending the site that's completely molded the general audience into moronic sheep.

They always were 'moronic sheep' and will continue being. RT is merely a site

I will still use RT as a barometer but google news produces less biased and more diverse reviews. Professional critics tend to articulate better

This. Look at what passes for discourse on RT. Credibility lost.

Well, ideally, people wouldn't simply look at the big numbers on RT site or read the snippets. But, Sup Forums is a great example that this is one of those things that should happen but don't. It's so hard to click a hyperlink or read more than two lines, you know.

>reading reviews before even watching something yourself
It's like wanting never to be able to enjoy anything.

...

Pleb tomatoes.

I miss 2008 Sup Forums.

If that's some reference to a superhero movie, the last superhero movie I tried to watch was the first Thor movie. I couldn't bring myself to watch any more after that.

You weren't here in 2008

I actually was, I was here for the L O S T threads.

Sure thing

Retard pleb shit

That image just shows that you're a juvenile retard. And as always that RT is an aggregator.

go fuck yourself

it's an agregator of jew opinion and therefore better avoided

Is it just one mentally ill person doing this? It's seriously shitting up this board

Anal devastation!

due to the scoring system, RT is harder to understand. Even though I love Life Aquatic or Fear and Loathing, I can see how people might dislike them. Same way I think it is hard not to like Furious 7, just because it is an easy, enjoyable movie. It's not GOAT, and people might not care about it, but except for the hardcore arthouse guys, no one will actively dislike it, giving it a ridiculously high score at first glance. Which does boil down to a pretty average 6.7/10 when looking at the average score.

RT benefits movies that don't do anything wrong more than movies that do something right. If you know how to interpret it, it's a useful score in that regard.

what does that even mean?

Are you kidding me?!

No, seriously. What does 'jew opinion' mean?

I like to think they are a few paid shills, although you may be right

>Movie 1
>all reviews 5.9
>0%, absolutely ROTTEN, worst movie of the decade

>Movie 2
>all reviews 6.0
>100% FRESH, manna from the jewish Hollywood gods

why don't they just replace the tomato score with the average review score?

Because that would make it harder to manipulate the viewing public.

>2015
Any time Pre baneposting is the only acceptable answer, pre dark knight if we are being serious.

Really, if you are too stupid to read statistics, that's on you.

>capeshit
I lost all faith in that site when I saw End of Days had a 11% rotten rating. It has plot holes but it's still a good movie.

I found furious 7 to be really boring. Enough to dislike it, maybe a 3/10

Pretty sure it's just the one autistic phone poster doing the evansposting/DCuck shit.

...

>Kingdom of Heaven
Pretty sure that's because the theatrical release was pure dogshit and that's what it's rated off of; the director's cut is pure kino. Also, people seem to really fucking hate Orlando Bloom for whatever reason.

According to RT, 9 of 50 people see it the same way as you do. The others had fun with it, without thinking it is a masterpiece or anything.

>They don't know the difference between the rating and the Tomatometer

RT is reliable if you consider the scores to reflect reception, not the movies' actual quality. Nobody who contributes to RT has the time to sit down and think about movies - or worse, they don't know how - so the thing being measured is the initial emotional reaction ("Do I like it?", as opposed to "Is it good?"). What this means is that 'rotten' movies are guaranteed to be interesting, while the top scorers will inevitably be bland and disposable. Basically, anything that scores under 90 is probably worth watching.

>DCucks actually believe this

Why is he always so happy, I wish I could be a little bit like that.

And effay as fuck