How does a 2/5 score for TLJ translate into a "fresh" review on RT?

How does a 2/5 score for TLJ translate into a "fresh" review on RT?

The tomato algorithm

raw_score + disney_bnus + sjw_bnus - wb_pnlty

/thread

There are tons of instances of this both rotten and fresh. No idea why.

See It's their algorithm. It's rigged to fit Disney's interests or else they'll face a potential boycott. Google Disney and LA Times for more info.

>people still believe this

critics put in their own choice independently.
that coley guy gave ladybird a rotten b-

Disney requested a low score to throw off conspiracies.

My god... i've never seen RT summed up so perfectly

Did the lone ranger have billions invested in marketing and merchandising riding on fresh reviews you stupid fucking slut?

Justice League did

Now remind the class when disney owned justice league retard

I'll remind the class that WB owns 30% of RT, yet apparently you're implying that only Disney has the capability to influence the scores.

Nah dipshit your logic is fucking shit

Just because Disney wanted to influence X doesnt mean WB is incapable of influencing X

Retarded logic cunt

My point is - if it's that easy to rig RT scores, why the fuck didn't WB do it on the most important movie of their cinematic universe?

Wait, why did they delay justice leagues score and reveal it on a show but not for other high profile movies?

because they knew it was gonna be shit

>If one company doesn't do it then that means no companies do it

Prove to me that Disney does it, user.

And seriously, if it was that easy, why the actual fuck would WB not want to help protect their 300 million dollar clusterfuck of a movie?

>WB owns 30% of RT
That means absolutely nothing, we have proof that it means nothing at all.

Do you have proof that Disney pays for good RT scores?

Oh sure. Let me just access my secret account on Rotten Tomatoes so I can show you all this proof.

While I'm doing that why don't you explain why a 2/5 on a Justice League review is a rotten tomato splat while a 2/5 on The Last Jedi is a fresh tomato?

Tonto Johnny Depp was a outrage that made them rate it low.

>Oh sure, let me get any proof.
Thanks for summing up all the "RT is corrupt" arguments, user.

>you need to own the horse track to fix a race

Justice league had a bunch of "This movie is a 4/5!" praises but with rotten icons.

When you purchase a franchise for $4 billion, there's no room for failure. Disney owned Pirates, so there's a clear difference, user.

You can literally see for yourself you retarded idiot.

Nice job ignoring the question. So tell us. Why is a 2/5 on Justice League a rotten tomato rating while a 2/5 on TLJ is a fresh tomato?

Good point

This is why I keep fucking saying not to look at the goddamn Tomatometer and look at the Avg. Rating, instead.

Literally every other 2/5 by that reviewer is also fresh

Lone Ranger wasn't going to lead to a big multi-film franchise like pirates or Marvel. Johnny Depp in red faced sealed it. They were more focused on Avengers.

Meanwhile, here's a 2.5/4 on TLJ that is rotten.

Maybe you should do a LITTLE more research than a single screenshot on Sup Forums and think for yourself you fucking nimwit.

i saw some caps on my indian friends twitter feed once so yeah

Let's keep this going! Here's a 2.5/4 on JL that's fresh.

Does that prove that WB rigged it?

This was the only actual logical answer in the thread and it went ignored

And Lone Ranger's losses were largely returned from the amount of capeshit Disney produces, so there you go

You guys know Rotten Tomatoes is owned by disney's competitors right? Warner Bros

By that logic, a 2/5 is a failing grade, therefore should be a rotten review.

Do critics themselves have an option to determine fresh or rotten? I've seen reviews that just had fresh or rotten, with no number score.

Yes.

Makes you wonder why Warner Bros is all for clean, non corrupt ratings, whereas Disney manipulates its ratings. If Warner were doing what Disney is doing, all of its DC Universe would be 93% too. I'm sure they're not influencing ratings based on the fact that they own RT and it would be a conflict of interest.

It's just like the White House atm. Trump runs it, but there's still Obama sympathizers.

Owning the site doesn't mean shit when you can't own the critics. Disney owns the critics, that's what matters.

Imagine being this much of an assblassted DCuck

It's not that simple, though. Clearly there's something about that reviewer, who's a top critic, that means 2/5=fresh. It looks like he's never given a 5/5, which is retarded, but that's how he does it. Therefore 4/5 is his top score, 3/4 is still pretty good, 2/5 is middling, and he reserves 1/5 and 0/5 for truly bad.

Considering he goes as low as zero, but never as high as five, it's still a 5-point scale, but you have to add one to each number.

So 2/5 is actually a 3/5 for a normal reviewer.

Who would've thought that there might be a little more context to this shit than a single screenshot?

>still no sources
Critics just like Disney's movies better for the most part user.

>Disney owns the critics

Makes sense if it starts at 0

If you're going to argue corruption, maybe don't choose a Warner Bros movie as your example.

Considering that they own Rotten Tomatoes.

>They get good ratings because they like it
You can't be this naive dude. Come on.

>still no sources
LA Times was literally proof of their strangle hold over the critics.

>still no proof
Keep it up user

>first Female lead in a capeshit for ages and all that other token feminism crap
>thinking the critics weren't going to trip over themselves to suck Gadot's spiritual kosher dick.

>93% Critic score
>57% Audience score
>Critics praise it on social media
>Audiences hate it on social media
Unless you're on Disney's payroll, why are you constantly oblivious to the deception?

I hate how RT records scores. A film with 99/100 5/5 and one 1/5 is less "fresh" than 100 3/5 ratings

And how'd that work out?

They probably lost tens of million at least because of such a shitty score, so it's pretty ballsy.

For there to be proof of WB's corruption, they would have to have Suicide Squad or BvS with 93% RT scores.

They settled and the LA Times shilled for Disney

The Last Jedi is the definitive proof that Disney shilling is indeed real

>thinking audience score matters
>thinking people on social media hate it

That's because it's not meant to be a movie rating. It's meant to be a percentage of people who liked it. No one has claimed it's a perfect system, but it's one way to do things.

SW holocron is an insider, you idiot. One that went to the premieres and shook Bob Iger's hand. Try harder.

This.
Tomatoes have been compromised since the first time they started putting their stickers on movies.

That's the person who posted it, not the person who voted 1500 times

The irony is that this movie is genuine kino and it got buried.

Reminder that normies are called normies because they have normie opinions, and no amount of audience score is going to change that

It doesn't matter. Followers follow the person they like. Why would they ever downvote something from a person they like? Think about it, user. What you're trying to do / who you're trying to defend is futile.

the people who follow him are going to be huge Star Wars nerds you dumb fuck. It's like if Mike Cernobitch put out a poll about Trump and it came back overwhelmingly positive of Trump and then saying that it's legit because he couldn't have voted thousands of times himself

Both Sup Forums and normies rate RotJ far too low. It is an excellent film and easily better than Empire.

>people on social media hate it

What's the difference between fresh and certified fresh? I've seen movies with near identical percentages and ratings, and yet one is certified and one isn't.

>Posting SJWs, who rate movies based on their agenda and whether or not their enemy (White males) like or hate it.
Dude, come on.

>more people that hate it on social media

>RT
>Rotten Tomatoes
>Russian Tabloid

Really rustles one's Roubles...

>all this social media hate

user, idk who the fuck they are - it's literally just the top of when I search #thelastjedi, and I'm not skipping any. This is unfiltered. They may be retarded sjws, but it's still what's on social media

>pic related

>hate hate hate

They do, but ROTJ is only just a hair below Empire.

>HATE

>ROTJ is bad because Ewoks
>PORGS ARE AMAZING OMG

the fuck is wrong with normies

>Woeful Woman
>92% | 89%

>HAAAAATE
Ok this one actually does have a couple people who hate it. Had to skip over some brands, but still no breaks from non-corporate posts

you got any extra pixels to spare bro

Disney greenlighted it but they realized it needs to be a sacrificial lamb when SJW's began to call for Depps head. Once they saw that they made the snap call to let the critics do their worst.

>SO MUCH HATE

On a laptop and I zoomed out so I didn't have to do like 50 caps. Anyway, this is the end of my adventure because I can't handle twitter anymore. I think it got the point across

>The Force Awakens is the definitive proof that Disney shilling is indeed real
fixed your typo

>everyone who doesn't like muh movie was a fan theorist!

why can't people just talk to you about how you felt about something without strawmanning?

The reviewers choose whether the review should be fresh or rotten themselves.

shhhhh don't use logic

>4/10
>good
What fucking reviewer thinks this way

read this you dunce

Wow he sounds like a huge faggot

well he reviews movies, so