In order to rate as fresh you only need to rate it at 6/10
So if you only go by the fresh score you can only really assume at most 7/10 maybe 7.5

That's "decent"

This post was edited by FroggyG on Oct 22 2017 06:28am

i think you're confused, a fresh rating means it is no less than decent (if we consider 6/10 to be decent), it can be anywhere between decent and a masterpiece to those particular critics

you can't assume that it's 'only' a 7/10 movie, all you can assume is that it's an above average movie, which was his point in the first place... that it most likely won't be a shit movie

This post was edited by Condemn on Oct 22 2017 06:44am

Yeah. I wasn't disagreeing. He just decided to argue against himself.
stupidkid282

Was basically just saying that fresh score is pretty useless because you can only imply "decent" at most from it.


This post was edited by FroggyG on Oct 22 2017 07:12am

how is it useless to know that a movie is pretty much universally liked by critics? are you saying that unless there's concrete proof its a top tier movie it's not worth reporting or even watching? if so then you're setting the bar higher than most people and can only say it's useless to you..

Honestly froggy is messed up... He will call any movie I praise/hyped for utter shit because he is obsessed with me

So, I get being SUPER excited about ratings or w/e... but it's kinda sad when people don't seem to understand how they work, like, at all.

Right now, and I'm sure it was even less before, Thor Ragnarok has 7 real critic ratings, 6 of which are fresh, 1 rotten. That would be an 86% (.857). This movie will almost certainly end up in the 90s, but it'll be around where EVERY decent Marvel/DC movie is. These movies don't have to be OMFG good to get super high ratings, they just have to be okay, or pretty good, which is what they usually are. I might enjoy this one, but more and more Marvel/DC films have been hard to watch for me. I'll probably wait until it comes out on DvD (internet), unless my friends drag me to it, but I'm expecting it'll finish in the low 90s/high 80s once the ratings are actually done... (Cough Blade Runner was at a 98% too before it actually came out), which is still a good rating, but people shouldn't act as if ratings are law, since critics are flat-out wrong plenty of the time.

My point was exactly that, it’s not law, it’s a reference like any reviewing system for consumer products.

And again, it’s all about chance. As moviegoers all have different tastes, a highly rated movie has a better chance to please more people.

This post was edited by stupidkid282 on Oct 22 2017 02:31pm

I know that's what you were going for, but it seemed like your point wasn't get across to them for w/e reason, thought I'd try my hand at explaining it, since I'm in agreement with you.

Usually if a movie has a RT score in the 90s I tend to like it.


Doesn't necessarily mean it's a good film but I usually enjoy them. Metacritic is much better when determining an actual rating for the film.

Doesn't mean they are perfect either though.

I'm saying you can't ASSUME or IMPLY that the movie is top tier no what the fresh score is. All it can do is tell you 6/10.
If all you can do is assume above average then you may as well just watch the trailer and get that lol



That's not true at all.
I don't care what movies people like. I care about their reasons. Blatantly calling "this movie is shit" and "this movie is amazing" is mostly just stupidity to me. I dislike when opinions don't come with reasoning.

I enjoy watching a lot of the movies you've mentioned. But you don't give reasoning so your opinion sucks.

This post was edited by FroggyG on Oct 22 2017 05:12pm