• IWW4@lemmy.zip
    0·
    4 days ago

    It is comical that everyone bitches about RT sores.

    Those have more authenticity than IMDB scores. IMDB scores are worthless.

    • Calirath@sh.itjust.works
      01·
      3 days ago

      I disagree as I find RT’s “tomatometer” to be completely askew in reference to my personal rating while IMDb to be (more) aligned, in this way I find IMDb to be more “authentic.”

      Of course, this is coming from a simple watcher who does not gush at each Foley sound, sway at the perfect Dutch angle, groan at another sepia filter; one without aspirations to be yet another critic so my opinion is entirely just that.

        • Calirath@sh.itjust.works
          1·
          2 days ago

          I’m not following how you came to this conclusion, but to give you the benefit of the doubt, I pulled up ‘Superman’ (2025) on both IMDb and RT as it’s the one in most recent memory - and mine also. This is the result:

          IMDb RT
          Critics 68% 83%
          Audience 71% 90%

          From my recollection, ‘Superman’ was serviceable fare and my personal rating is closest to IMDb’s critics than any other. My first reaction upon seeing the large disparity between mine and RT’s ratings (both) isn’t that they’re full of bots bombarding RT with perfect scores, but perhaps the people on RT simply has a preference to superhero movies.

          I may very well be missing something as you seem more intimate with the working on both sites and would appreciate any insight you can provide.

  • Blaze (he/him)@piefed.zipEnglish
    0·
    5 days ago

    The 2025 was refreshing for sure. 7.1 seems adequate. Funny to see it’s the exact same note as Man of Steel, as the two movies are completely different.