[OC] MCU vs. DCU in Rotten TomatoesSubmitted by theotheredmund t3_11rpst9 in dataisbeautiful
Brewe t1_jca5g2g wrote
Reply to comment by ruidh in [OC] MCU vs. DCU in Rotten Tomatoes by theotheredmund
To be fair to all the racists (not that they deserve it), the 95% critic score is also race motivated. It is really good, but there were one too many mistakes and bad decisions for it to be above a 90%.
(bracing for heavy downvoting from both sides)
Lakeside_Tigger t1_jcbxvt7 wrote
That’s not how RT works. 90% just means 90% of critics gave the movie a positive review, not that it scored a 9/10.
If 90% of critics give it a 6/10 it still gets a 90% RT score.
If a movie have 100% of critics score it 5/10 the movie gets a 0% for having all negative reviews.
Bennito_bh t1_jcdlvbe wrote
Sounds like a preposterously bad system
MVRKHNTR t1_jcdw7i5 wrote
What? How?
Bennito_bh t1_jce145u wrote
My man, if rounding to the nearest hundred in a metric where 100 is the maximum score doesn’t already sound terrible to you, I won’t be able to explain it.
MVRKHNTR t1_jce1l5j wrote
I have no idea what it is you're trying to say.
BelovedOmegaMan t1_jcegh10 wrote
None of us do either. I'm sure they'll make some excuse about it.
BelovedOmegaMan t1_jcegfrc wrote
You don't understand how percentages work and are embarrassing yourself publicly about it. I would suggest asking one of your teachers to explain this to you.
Bennito_bh t1_jcfnme7 wrote
For RT critics there is no difference between 9 critics scoring 100 and 1 scoring 49, and 9 critics scoring 51 with 1 scoring 49.
So fuck off. The system’s terrible.
MVRKHNTR t1_jcfp6z8 wrote
RT only tells you what percentage of critics gave a positive review, not how good something is. This is like having your height measured and complaining about how that number didn't tell you your weight.
Bennito_bh t1_jcfq5h7 wrote
Telling what % of critics gave positive review is worse under every metric than simply averaging the scores my man. Outliers count for more under their system.
It asks critics: “Tell me with a score of 0 or 1, how good was this movie?”
MVRKHNTR t1_jcfrqfn wrote
It's worse in your opinion because you're trying to figure out how good something is and that's not what it's for. It's there to tell you how likely you are to enjoy something and it's much better for that.
Bennito_bh t1_jcft16p wrote
It’s categorically worse. Instead of doing both, it’a poorly attempting and failing to do one.
For RT critics there is no difference between 9 critics scoring 100 and 1 scoring 49, and 9 critics scoring 51 with 1 scoring 49.
You are not equally likely to enjoy both of these films.
MVRKHNTR t1_jcfxdap wrote
Rotten Tomatoes isn't actually automated like that. Critics mark their reviews as positive or negative.
So in both of your examples, 9/10 people said "Yeah, I liked this" so you have a 9/10 chance of liking it.
Suspicious-Feeling-1 t1_jcdzohc wrote
It depends on what you're using ratings for. A binary of good movie / bad movie works great if you are trying to pick a movie with the highest probability of being something you would enjoy. If you want a movie to totally blow you away, an IMDB score or a tally of awards won might be more useful.
ruidh t1_jca7ac5 wrote
I'm not going to down vote you but I profoundly disagree.
SyriseUnseen t1_jcbhtxq wrote
I thought Black Panther was a cool movie, but 9,6/10 is an insanely high score. It's pretty damn close to perfect.
It really depends on what people perceive a 9.0 to be. Personally, Id rank very few movies as a 9 or more, as they'd need to be visually pleasing and fantastically written. Others might say a 9.0 is a good movie with no obvious flaws, so a 9.6 could absolutely be justified.
Lakeside_Tigger t1_jcco9y7 wrote
96% on RT just means 96% of critics gave the movie a positive review, not that it scored a 9.6/10.
If 96% of critics give it a 6/10 it still gets a 96% RT score.
If a movie has a 100% of critics score it 5/10 the movie gets a 0% for having all negative reviews.
doktarr t1_jccr9c8 wrote
Be that as it may, Black Panther sports an 88 on Metacritic, which does weight by review score. This makes it far and away the highest rated Marvel movie of all time.
For my part I wouldn't put it there. I thought it was a good movie, but the interesting themes of the movie were muddled by some odd blind spots. I'd easily put Logan, GotG, and Thor Ragnarok above it.
kintsugionmymind t1_jccrolu wrote
Don't you go using numbers and making sense, it doesn't fit their narrative
BelovedOmegaMan t1_jceglhp wrote
Whose narrative?
kintsugionmymind t1_jcgpkgs wrote
Anyone saying "a 95% critic score is race motivated"
Corintio22 t1_jcd56zg wrote
100% is not perfect. The way RT work, 100% might mean that 2,000 out of 2,000 film critics gave the movie a 6 out of 10 (therefore a positive review).
RT is bad to assess how good or bad a movie is; but good to assess how much of a consensus there is on if a movie is generally good or bad.
BelovedOmegaMan t1_jcegjms wrote
What films would you say deserve a score of 9.6 or higher?
SyriseUnseen t1_jcehcxj wrote
None. Schindlers Liste would probably beat out my list at 9.2 or something, though I doubt Id still think so if I watched it more than once.
Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments