Whether it deserves to be or not, Rotten Tomatoes is kind of the ultimate gage of a movie’s critical success, as the site has become the authority on compiling critics’ reviews of films giving them a “Fresh” or “Rotten” rating. Over 60% positive reviews is Fresh, under is Rotten.
Personally, I used the site all the time when judging how worthwhile a movie is. My answer to my own question is yes, I do trust the site, as way, way more often than not, I’ve found myself agreeing with what the consensus is among its critics.
If a movie has under a ten percent, you’ll probably not even be able to sit through it. Anything over 90 is a must see and a possible Oscar contender.
When do we disagree? There are many times, but I think the praise/hate metric can be a bit skewed. I liked The Muppets, but is it really worth a 98%, which would make it seem like it’s almost a perfect film? No, not at all, and that’s where the rating system can be a bit skewed. It’s an enjoyable film, but if every critic gave it 3/5 stars, that would give it a 100% on RT, even when it seems like it should be a 60%. That’s where a site like Metacritic comes in which gives weight to those numbers, and it can be a more accurate picture of how good a film really is.
What’s your biggest opinion difference about a film that was rated highly or poorly on Rotten Tomatoes? And how much do you trust the site overall?