My Bloody Valentine 3D currently at 100% on the Rotten Tomato Meter

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

no way is rotten tomatoes the best review site on the web. they suck. nowhere should anyone have a say in a critic's review except for the critic themselves. but the problem with rotten tomatoes is that they review the reviews, chop them up into bite size morsels and score them. often times when they do this they are taking a review out of context and end up scoring it wrong. therefore it's very easy for a positive review to become rotten.

the scoring system flat out stinks. it's way too flawed. rotten tomatoes is basically the same thing as metacritic and that site is atrocious. it's nice that they group all the reviews together, but they should do that and nothing else. sadly they don't. also they get to decide what gets on the website and what doesn't. that hardly seems fair at all.

Guess I should start using IMDB...

[DetroitSportsFan]

Here's the end of one of the "rotten" reviews.

I am no fan of slasher films, and I came to this with no expectations - who needs another remake? - but it won me over in spite of myself. After nearly a week of sitting through five of the After Dark Horrorfest’s “8 Films to Die For,” MY BLOODY VALENTINE reminded me that gruesome horror can indeed yield a film that is not merely disgusting but actually enjoyably frightening.

http://cinefantastiqueonline.com/200...r-film-review/

Doesn't sound negative to me... yet is was recorded as "rotten".

[fighthefutureofhd]

exactly!! who in the hell decides these things? that's exactly what i'm talking about. it's what makes rotten tomatoes well, rotten.

[Crim122]

Maybe RT has a bias towards horror films lol.

[fighthefutureofhd]

did you see the six sentence review that was capsuled in 5 words on rottentomatoes?

[reallyagi]

I don't even think this movie was screened to critics.

After much deliberation (actually about half-a-second), I'll go see CHE instead.

VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by reallyagi

I don't even think this movie was screened to critics.

After much deliberation (actually about half-a-second), I'll go see CHE instead.

VIVA LA REVOLUCION!!!

Want...to see....SO ****ING BAD

[reallyagi]

Originally Posted by Crim122

Want...to see....SO ****ING BAD

It's -20 degrees here in Chicago, so I can't go out and see some bulls#!t movie, I have to make it worth my pain.

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by reallyagi

It's -20 degrees here in Chicago, so I can't go out and see some bulls#!t movie, I have to make it worth my pain.

Plus its long so you will get warmed up!

[ckent22]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

no way is rotten tomatoes the best review site on the web. they suck. nowhere should anyone have a say in a critic's review except for the critic themselves. but the problem with rotten tomatoes is that they review the reviews, chop them up into bite size morsels and score them. often times when they do this they are taking a review out of context and end up scoring it wrong. therefore it's very easy for a positive review to become rotten.

the scoring system flat out stinks. it's way too flawed. rotten tomatoes is basically the same thing as metacritic and that site is atrocious. it's nice that they group all the reviews together, but they should do that and nothing else. sadly they don't. also they get to decide what gets on the website and what doesn't. that hardly seems fair at all.

That's not entirely accurate. You need to do your research about RT. They feature some of the best critics in the world and some of the worst which offers the best of all worlds. In addition, they give you one of the most complete review databases where you can get the most well - rounded group of reviews available. RT is respected.

[Crim122]

Originally Posted by ckent22

That's not entirely accurate. You need to do your research about RT. They feature some of the best critics in the world and some of the worst which offers the best of all worlds. In addition, they give you one of the most complete review databases where you can get the most well - rounded group of reviews available. RT is respected.

+1

[fighthefutureofhd]

Originally Posted by ckent22

That's not entirely accurate. You need to do your research about RT. They feature some of the best critics in the world and some of the worst which offers the best of all worlds. In addition, they give you one of the most complete review databases where you can get the most well - rounded group of reviews available. RT is respected.

really? then why is a review of this movie that was positive end up being rotten? and explain how teletex with it's 6 sentence review can get on rottentomatoes? they may feature some of the best critics in the world, but they mess with the reviews when it comes time to score the movie. rottentomatoes in the end is the one who decides the score. when it should be the critics who decides the score. the critics aren't very respected on that site. and to put world-renowned critics on that site with hacks who don't even belong in the same sentence is just a spit in the face somewhat to the respected critics. if i was one of them i wouldn't be happy in the least. rottentomatoes is no better than metacritic and metracritic just plan doesn't cut it.

[Crim122]

the one review by teletext is not a big deal lol

[ckent22]

Originally Posted by fighthefutureofhd

really? then why is a review of this movie that was positive end up being rotten? and explain how teletex with it's 6 sentence review can get on rottentomatoes? they may feature some of the best critics in the world, but they mess with the reviews when it comes time to score the movie. rottentomatoes in the end is the one who decides the score. when it should be the critics who decides the score. the critics aren't very respected on that site. and to put world-renowned critics on that site with hacks who don't even belong in the same sentence is just a spit in the face somewhat to the respected critics. if i was one of them i wouldn't be happy in the least. rottentomatoes is no better than metacritic and metracritic just plan doesn't cut it.

Again, you need to do your research about RT. What would a review site with just nothing but the Top critics give you? Not everyone thinks like them and many disagree. To me it is important to incorporate not only what the top critics believe, but also get reviews similar to what the average joe thinks.

RT gives it a fresh rating depending on if it is a positive review from critics.

They don't score it. The critics do. And the way they do this is either from a positive or negative review. Therefore, it is out of RT's hands as to the final score.

Actually there are very well - respected critics on the site. They are noted by the Top Critic stamp under their names.

And I don't know about the other 2, but RT is one of the best.

You can do more research here, since you have been very misinformed:
http://www.rottentomatoes.com/help_d...hp#tomatometer

[fighthefutureofhd]

rotten tomatoes gives it a fresh rating based on what they think. not the reviewers or their positive reviews. how else can you explain a critic's positive review getting a negative rating on rotten tomaotes. i don't see how you can. rotten tomatoes twists reviews in the final rating based on whatever they deem. they take things way out of context. the same thing happens at metacritc. take a look and see. neither site should interfere with what the reviewer thinks, but they do it all the time. i personally don't want to know what joe blow thinks when i'm going to a site like rottentomatoes. that defeats the purpose of rotten tomotoes and the purpose of critics. armchair critics are not critics and do nothing for that site. and shouldn't be in the same group as roger ebert or peter travers.

[masoud90]

There was a screening for critics as far as I know (at least for Phoenix, Tucson, Albuquerque, Dallas, Las Vegas).