Yeah, read that wrong. Also, it seems it is up to the critic to determine is a 50% rating is good or bad. For example, a critic of the Emoji Movie gave it a rotten rating at 2 stars out of 4 stars. Another gave it a fresh rating at 2.5 out of 5 stars.

dcaggie04 said:

---

Ulrich said:

---

BernArnold said:

---

fig96 said:

---

evan_aggie said:

---

Wife and I thought it was overrated (in reference to RT 97%).

She thought 6.5/7 out of 10 and I was more 7/7.5 out of 10. Eitherway, I'm surprised that others didn't feel just a little let down.

---

You would both have been in the 97%.

---

yeah it's not a 97/100 score.

It means 97% of critics rated it positively. On a 10 scale you could argue that would be anything basically above a 5.

So 97% thought it was at least above average ... possibly great. Somewhere in that range.

---

I thought we established that a 5 means it is a badly flawed movie.

---

Well, if a critic gave a movie a 5/10, it would be noted as "rotten" under the RT scoring. Movies get a "fresh" rating if it gets a score of 60% or better.

---

Thats why I said ABOVE a 5 i.e. 6 or more.

My own rating scale is
10 awesome (a must see, nearly flawless)
9 great (appeals to most, superior in many ways)
8 very good (appeals to many, qualities well above average)
7 good (general appeal, some good aspects, worth watching)
6 above average (appeals to some, has some redeeming qualities)
5 average (nothing to separate it from mediocrity, watchable)
4 below average (some detracting qualities, barely watchable)
3 poor (bad in many ways, not worth watching)
2 bad (intolerable, bad in every way, someone should be shot)
1 horrible (indescribably bad, shoot everyone involved)
0 unwatchable (not worth the celluloid it's printed on)


Unfortunately most people rate movies like 5/10 is bad. thats odd to me. it's literally average. and 7/10 is above average.

It's not school grading where 7/10 is a C because really everyone is going to be above a 60 unless they just quit.

I hate the 4 or even 5 star ratings. not enough granularity. although the 5 star ratings with half stars is basically the same thing.

but critics actually pander to movies (imho) and you rarely see below a 2/4 or 2.5/5. Thats ridiculous. And they give out 4-star way too freely.

Now personally I will admit I don't see a lot of 1,2,3,4 out of 10 movies because I don't see bad movies usually. But I have rated movies 0,1,2,3 out of 10. and critics should if they see them all.

Exactly. You could get a very mediocre movie with 100% RT theoretically.

I still think BP was an excellent movie.

This is the same issue TLJ ran into.

This thread is awesome. It starts out "this film will revolutionize the industry" ends in "well an 'above average' film could theoretically be at 100% on RT."

The Debt said:

---

This thread is awesome. It starts out "this film will revolutionize the industry" ends in "well an 'above average' film could theoretically be at 100% on RT."

---

too much is put into RT ratings these days.... it's just a single data point to me and not gospel

If I am interested in a movie anyway then I'll look at the RT and

RT of
50% or lower = I'm out
60% = meh probably won't see it
70% = ok I'll see it most likely
80% = more than likely will see it
90%+ = i'll see it

That's all I use it for. It should not be used to compare films by RT rating. It makes no sense because of how it is calculated.

IMDB rating is much more indicative of quality and can be used comparatively although more so after the fact. Before a movie is released RT is a good indicator of critical reception. that's all.

FWIW Black Panther has a 7.9 on IMDB which is certainly very good....but not great. 8.0 and up is really good.

The Top 250 of all-time on IMDB rate from 9.3 to 8.0, it is partly based on the number of votes using a weighted average method.

Doesn't mean you'll love every movie with an 8.0+ but it is a good indicator if you are interested in the subject matter, genre, stars, director, etc.

TCTTS said:

---

---

OK, explain to me why the 4 day total is historic if it's not the top?

Also, something doesn't have to be number one to necessarily be historic.

That I get, but the Hollywood Reporter is taking about the 4 day total.

AgMarauder04 said:

---

That I get, but the Hollywood Reporter is taking about the 4 day total.

---

Maybe read the article?

Quote:

---

In a defining moment for diversity and Hollywood, Disney's and Marvel Studios' Black Panther debuted to a record-shattering $242 million at the Presidents Day box office, according to updated estimates.

---

Highest total over President's Day weekend ever.

So the tweet and the article aren't the same? Got it.

fig96 said:

---

---

I hate you, Zack Snyder

Guess so.

Would certainly explain the why.

AgMarauder04 said:

---

OK, explain to me why the 4 day total is historic if it's not the top?

---

Also just in case you aren't aware - every film uses every possible "record" to promote itself.

This is not uncommon.

Biggest kids movie in March
Biggest family movie of the Holdays
Biggest independent film launch
Biggest mid week cartoon ever

etc. etc..... it's called marketing.

But these are pretty impressive numbers for any movie - much less a non holiday, non summer, big budget non sequel movie.

AgMarauder04 said:

---

I hate you, Zack Snyder

---

Most valid argument I've seen about Black Panther.

TCTTS said:

---

Think all that definitely qualifies as "historic."

---

It is quite a list. Impressive.

Calling it now... Will Smith will have a role in the sequel...

https://instagr.am/p/BfbXfUSnDg1

BernArnold said:

---

AgMarauder04 said:

---

TCTTS said:

---

---

OK, explain to me why the 4 day total is historic if it's not the top?

---

Biggest February opening weekend

Biggest non-sequel opening weekend

Biggest solo superhero launch of all time

Biggest Fri-Sun opening weekend for a long holiday debut

Biggest long holiday opening weekend

Biggest-grossing movie (in North America) directed by a black filmmaker

Biggest pre-summer opening weekend

Biggest Monday gross

2nd-Biggest comic book superhero opening weekend

2nd-biggest Sunday gross

2nd-biggest four-day gross

3rd-biggest non-summer opening weekend

4th-biggest Saturday gross

5th-biggest opening weekend of all time

8th-biggest Friday and 8th-biggest single-day gross


I mean thats pretty impressive.

---

Thank for educating me. I withdraw my question.

TCTTS said:

---

Calling it now... Will Smith will have a role in the sequel...

https://instagr.am/p/BfbXfUSnDg1

---

Not as long as he's doing DC movies.

TCTTS said:

---

Calling it now... Will Smith will have a role in the sequel...

https://instagr.am/p/BfbXfUSnDg1

---

translation: Please make me relevant again

Josh Brolin is 2 different characters within the same universe. I think it can be done.

AgMarauder04 said:

---

Josh Brolin is 2 different characters within the same universe. I think it can be done.

---

What universe is that?

Because he's Thanos in the MCU and he's Cable in the Fox/XMen whatever one, but while both Marvel they're two different universes.

Farmer1906 said:

---

AgMarauder04 said:

---

Josh Brolin is 2 different characters within the same universe. I think it can be done.

---

What universe is that?

Because he's Thanos in the MCU and he's Cable in the Fox/XMen whatever one, but while both Marvel they're two different universes.

---

Well, ok then....even better. Even an easier reason why Will Smith could do both.

But realistically, Suicide Squad 2 will wrap and be the last long before BP2.

I was a pretty big Will Smith fan since the early 90s. I've pretty much disliked everything he's done since The Pursuit of Happiness. I don't need him BP.

ryan reynolds says "hello"