Comic Battle >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
In Reply To
Would be Watcher

Location: Canada
Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
Subj: Re: Just a question about a thing you said...
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 at 03:27:31 pm CST (Viewed 186 times)
Reply Subj: Just a question about a thing you said...
Posted: Mon Feb 12, 2018 at 10:47:18 am CST (Viewed 151 times)

    How does an average rating do that? If the average is made of positive and negative review that do not account for any intensity, the resulting average won't either. If 100% of the critics barely gave the minimum for a positive review, the average will be 100% positive regardless of all of them being on the positive margin as oppose to exploding the roof.

Let me try to be more clear. Rotten Tomatoes supplies 2 scores, the Tomatometer, which looks only at whether the critic liked or disliked the movie overall. The Tomatometer does not indicate passion level. Then there is a second score, which I will now capitalize to differentiate it - the Average Rating which is composed of an average of how critics mathematically rated the film if they did. So a 3 star movie out of 4 stars gets a rating of 7.5 (out of 10). A 4 star movie out of 5 stars gets a rating of 8 (out of 10). You can translate letter grades proportionally as well for those who do letter grades. So an A+ would score a 10. So with the Tomatometer, 90% of critics might like a mildly good movie and it score a 7.1 on the Average Rating or you might have a more divisive movie that some critics really love. That Tomatometer might be 80% but the Average Rating is a 8.2. What I did was calculate an average rating between the Tomatometer and the Average Rating. So my usage of the term "average rating" might be confusing because I'm referring to two different things with the term.

    I'm also wondering why you left out the audience score. It should matter a lot too (maybe even more than the critics since you have a N that is astronomically higher than the N of the critics).

I used the IMDB audience score instead of the Rotten Tomatoes audience score. IMDB has a higher level of audience participation than Rotten Tomatoes.

    Also, when you read the argumentation of many critics as to why a movie was good or bad, you realize they haven't always a lot of intelligent and objective things to say about any given movie to justify their score. For example, that Superman doesn't smile or is shown snapping a neck is a legitimate reason to dislike a movie (specially for us fans), but a very poor one to judge the quality of a movie.

Your example seems much more like a fan criticism than a film critic criticism. I've never read a professional film critic who didn't like a movie because a character smiled or not.

How to make an entrance:
Posted with Mozilla 11.0 on Windows 7
Alvaro's Comicboards powered by On Topic™ © 2003-2022 Powermad Software
All the content of these boards Copyright © 1996-2022 by Comicboards/TVShowboards. Software Copyright © 2003-2022 Powermad Software