Yes, yes, well done, critics. Well done, critics.
HOWEVER
D
C
>>70966321
>>70966321
A lot of people don't take critics seriously after this. So it was actually a good thing
>>70966685
This + Warcraft getting instantly destroyed and then Civil War getting Mavels usual instant 85% + made people realize Rotten Tomatoes is a piece of shit
>>70966321
>Yes, yes, well done, critics. Well done, critics.
>HOWEVER
WHAT IS THIS MEME
>>70966685
keep telling yourself that
Audience Score was 66% who liked the film.
If we were to convert that into a letter grade, it would be a solid D.
>>70966685
I became disillusioned the first time I actually read the reviews, a 0 star rating on a classic film because the "plot was too hard (for me) to understand"
>>70966770
>>70966685
>taking critics seriously before this
When I saw Assassination of Jesse James score I knew not to trust them, when I saw Fury Road's score I knew better.
http://www.cinemablend.com/news/Batman-V-Superman-Shares-Same-CinemaScore-Two-Comic-Book-Misfires-121147.html
Audiences hated it too
>>70966920
>Score of B
>Audiences hated it
>>70967014
That's the grade when they hate it
>>70967014
>same score as Catwoman and Green Lantern
How are those regarded today, anon?
>>70966685
Only an idiot trusts aggregate sites, regardless of the score some dumb capeshit movie gets. You find a few critics that have similar taste to yourself and trust them, it's not rocket science.
>>70967034
No it's not, it goes from A+ to an F.
The Nice Guys got a B- and X Men apocalypse got an A-, just sayin
>>70967089
The newest TMNT got an A-, how is that regarded today anon?
>>70967095
I trust aggregates, but I chose to be a statician as my profession.
A movie having 27% like BvS doesn't mean you'd go and see it, and then if I asked you to score it from 1 to 100 you'd say "27". It means there's a 27% chance you'll have a favorable impression of it (as in, you overall thought the good outweighed the bad). Saying "it was OK" isn't favorable because you're actively telling me you can't decide which way to lean. If I pin a 27% chance to like it using my data, and you DO like it, you're an outlier. If I asked 100 people if they liked it, at a 27% chance for each, and 99 out of 100 liked it, then that 27% would be scrapped. But that's not the case.
>>70967177
Better than BvS, evidently
>>70966685
Now ask yourself why RT was forced so hard here in place IMDB or some other shit.
>>70967332
And I guess BvS is better than Drive, Drive has a C-
>>70967357
It dropped from a 9.8 on IMDB to a 7/10 after release.
Oh, and it had 7.2 last week. It's STILL dropping.
>>70966685
>A lot of /tv/ doesn't take critics seriously after this
fixed
>>70967411it is
>>70967411
It is, though. Drive was awful Oscar bait.
Has contrarianism gone too far?
>>70967533
Spotted the Refnfag
>>70966735
>Warcraft getting instantly destroyed
>made people realize Rotten Tomatoes is a piece of shit
>Holy shit, a shit movie based on a game is getting rotten reviews!
Said no normie ever.
>>70966609
But the whale already won.
>>70967411
AND A REAL HERO
HOWEVER CAPEKINO MOTHER FUCKER
>>70968892
no
>>70966321
>>70967098
To Be Fair the title "The Nice Guys" is a very misleading title. None of the guys in that movie were nice at all!
>>70967411
Disneyshills getting rekted again
>>70966767
who fucking knows
