Hmmm okay not sus at all
>>221860827because it’s being review bombed by people that didn’t watch it?
>>221860827Almost like faggots are fagging things up because they're faggy.
>>221860971>it's a "reviewbomb" if it's negative>but it's legitimate if it's positive
>>221860993True
>>221860971You mean all those redditors giving it a 100% to town the chuds?
>>221860993where did i say that
>>221860827It's more astroturfed bullshit. Last Jedi all over again.
>>221861026It's implied through your assumption that they couldn't possibly have seen it.
>>221861004Kojima is a genius.
>>221861044where is that implied?
https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/the_woman_kinghttps://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tillhttps://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/harriethttps://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/rule_breakershttps://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/respect_2021
In a better world, online movie reviews will require an online movie ticket as proof you at least paid money for one. So you will have to pay to review the film, which will eliminate the problem of review bombing.
>>221860993Chuds also flood movies they don't watch with positive reviews so long as their favorite movie chud youtuber tells them to.
>>221860827Rotten tomatoes is owned by Universal. They always do this during the first week of their film's release
>>221861026then why didn't you say something like>because it's being reviewed by people that didn't watch it?
>>221861157thats just semantics
>>221861179are you anti-semantic?