>To fight back against coordinated "review bombing" (where trolls flood a movie with 1-star reviews over cultural or political casting backlash), Rotten Tomatoes overhauled its audience score. However, this fix sparked its own massive backlash.>The Fandango Monopoly: Under the new verified "Popcornmeter" system, only users who bought tickets via Fandango (Rotten Tomatoes' parent company) or partnered theater chains see their scores count toward the main audience percentage.>Silencing Real Viewers: Audiences complained that if they bought tickets physically at a theater, used local apps, or watched movies on streaming platforms, their legitimate reviews were relegated to an hidden "unverified" tab.>Studio Protection Allegations: Critics of the system argue that the platform effectively eliminated organic public sentiment to protect Hollywood box office returns and insulate poorly received studio blockbusters from bad word-of-mouth.
I just watched the movie on a webm, it sucks.
>>221835436They passed around you mom to journalists as a promotional event.She gives the best blowjob in the whole press.
>>221835716Jesus, the chuds are so triggered by this film. Its only a movie man.
>>221835436Those scores dont count.
>>221835436Is popcorn meter audience meter? Wasn't it normally called "audience meter"? What is going on?
>>221835716GOODMORNINSIRS
>>221835564>IMDB no user score yet (dead site) >RT: all audience popcornmeter 82% (1000 ratings)>Metacritic userscore: 5.9 (191 ratings)>Letterboxd userscore: 8.6 (227,803 ratings)Tell me why do we take RT, IMDB and MC seriously again when the active Letterboxd userbase dwarves them 1000 times to one
>>221835793letterboxd is another compromised site. you think they would let a free site become that big and popular?
>>221835778>>221835749If my post hadn't get you, then your reply wouldn't have been necessary.
>letterboxd>sinners 8.2/10 with 4.5m ratingsyeah let's listen to that (((site)))
>>221835436
>>221835436>"verified ratings"wow it's doing slightly better than the worst movie ever made.
>>221835858it isn’t big or popular
>>221835564You know damn well every chud would be making alt accounts to give it a 1 star despite never seeing the film a single time.
>>221836069It’s always worth pointing out that it’s impossible to leave a user score under 7/10. Anything under that gets “rounded” to 7/10. So if 70% is actually zero, 86% is actually ~52.8%
>>221836310They should do something like a "competency score" where reviews are really only weighed if the comment is coherent. Not being able to review under 7 is kind of dumb.
>>221835716
>>221835881>If my post hadn't get you
>>221835906it's a good movie
>>221836071>check letterboxd review>Gives a movie 5/5 or 4.5/5 or whatever>their review is some political own against the right or "omg this dude is so hot"Letterboxed might be a community site but it's even more useless than critic reviews
>>221835749We are, but only because it trying to deconstruct and destroy western civilization, like all woke filth.
>>221836195>it was real in my mind
>>221837099Too bad bear didn't use the willow to bar all esl browns from accessing the internet now and forever.
>>221836195Your side does the same shit. The only difference is your side doesn't have the resolve to make a review bombing effective.
>>221836195You overestimate our level of investment.
>>221835436It's actually wreckers orchestrated by the anti party group.
>>221837492>>221835858>>221835793>Two of the top Odyssey reviews are joke reviewsThis is supposed to be a serious site?
>>221835564dang guess the era of real reviews is over. first it was coin clipping now it's culture clipping. consume the goyfeed.
>>221837502Chuds are not part of the western civilization so why do they care?
