I don’t know if “certified fresh” or “rotten” is good on the website rotten tomatoes, and at this point I’m scared to ask.
this post was submitted on 12 Jun 2026
59 points (92.8% liked)
movies
3580 readers
415 users here now
A community about movies and cinema.
Related communities:
- !television@piefed.social
- !homevideo@feddit.uk
- !mediareviews@lemmy.world
- !casualconversation@piefed.social
Rules
- Be civil
- No discrimination or prejudice of any kind
- Do not spam
- Stay on topic
- These rules will evolve as this community grows
No posts or comments will be removed without an explanation from mods.
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
Fresh means most critics liked it, certified fresh means the majority of critics liked it.
But those are just critics, pay attention to the audience score (popcorn bucket) instead.
Nah. The audience score is vulnerable to being manipulated by both bots, coordinated hate campaigns and diehard fans that loose objectivity. I understand why some people will prefer a general population consensus but I always put more weight with the well written columnists over the flippant audience reviews.
Edit: exactly what I'm talking about lol
Rotten Tomatoes having both scores is exactly why it's more reliable than IMDB.
I usually pay most attention to the critics score. If there is a massive disparity between the critics score and the audience score, it might be sus.
Rotten Tomatoes having both scores is exactly why it's more reliable than IMDB.
IMDb also has both.
lose* 🙇🏽♂️
Ty! Without your correction my comment would loose all mean, I write fast and lose. Their needs to be standards for those who choose too post.
It's considered good, it means at least generally positive reviews ... of course, that's not always a useful metric because some films that review badly can be a lot of fun
Rotten tomatoes is worthless. Metacritic is where it’s at.
metacritic is fandom-owned slop, you mean opencritic?
I absolutely do not.
I've never liked the sound of rotten tomatoes. Any movie advertised with the imagery of rotten fruit does not sound appealing.
I'm sure I'll watch it eventually. But man that is a horrible title
Given how easy is to get 100% on Rotten, I'm going to assume that this is a pretty meh movie.
The advertising for this was dogshit.
The trailer just.....it just looks pretentious or something. Can't quite put my finger on it, but I did not like the trailer I saw. The deer?
Hope it works better in the movie than it did in the trailer.
I mean I'm just not gonna bother. Spielburg outer space fantasy optimism just doesn't hit the same way anymore, and, yeah, the adverts didn't sell me.
81% For a big budget movie doesn’t sound that great. I suppose it could be worse.
This is the problem with aggregated review and the mentality surrounding them. It doesn't mean that it scored an objective 81% score, it means 19% of people didn't like it. Film is art and art is subjective and viewers are not monoliths.
I don't care what Joe Schmoe at the the NYT thinks about a piece of art, the only reviews that matter to me are the ones written by people with similar tastes.
Is it a PsyOp movie?
Hard pass on Zionist movies
What makes it zionist?
He made some statements just after the Hamas attack, when everybody and their grandma was in shock. He's also been funding orgs that protest Israel, leading to their media branding him a traitor to the race, but never mind that. Focus on the statements.
To my understanding, in the past 2 years his foundation has since started funding other orgs that are protesting Israel, so ignoring that in favour of events around the time of the Hamas attack, when everybody was in emotional shock, is rather questionable.
Sources?
It seems though it wasnt a shock that led him to zionism, but it was some sorry of shock that seemed to led him out of that.
Since he devoted seemingly His Life to Israel. But maybe he comes around devoting how Life to the education about genocide noch Matter who commits it.