Yea, but all of this is true.

Difference between critic and audience tells me if it's an artsy movie that I won't understand.

Confirmation bias is a hell of a drug.

This is called confirmation bias

Could experiences differ per individual and no thing is made that will apeal to everyone? Nah, everyone is just stupid and I know what taste is.

Your own opinion is the only one that matters.

Unless you like Expendables 4. If you liked that you deserve prison.

I've only seen rotten tomatoes enough to have looked harder at this macro to see it is in fact that. I judge my movies by how many people are seeding them. I have the digital space and real life time to watch whatever. I've seen the worst shit and the most incredible masterpieces. People should be more thankful for everything, good and bad. You won't have it forever.

honestly, i stopped caring for aggregate scores & started reading individual user reviews, particularly the ones in the 6-9/10 range seem to be the most honest. then I'll watch the movie anyway & form my own opinion. every piece of media is essentially someone's masterpiece, including video games too, even the bad ones are worth playing just to see someone else's perspective.

if we're talking the worst of the worst, like the last airbender m*vie, i personally dont regret watching it cuz it really put the good movies into perspective.

I will 99% of the time ignore the critic review because they miss and have missed hard sometimes.

Low critic high audience. Some good entertainment value but probably isn't much depth which is fine. Sometimes you just want a popcorn flix.

High critic high audience. Will watch and decide for myself.

Anything else, total crapshoot.

I have yet to watch an audience 80%+ movie that I didn't like.

I've seen plenty 80%+ critic movies that ended up being mastrubatory garbage.

So now, audience score is all that matters to me. 50%+ gets a chance in my book.

I only ever use those sites if i really disliked a movie but can't figure out why.

As a way to select a movie they're really pointless, I think a system that matches tastes of people and recommends movies based on that would be more promising.

This is me irl

Film critics are the people that went to film school but couldn't get a job making movies. They tend to judge a movie on it's technical merits.

Audiences mostly just want a good story. If the cinematography isn't great, if the shot composition is boring, the editing is janky, the audience may not care as much about those things, but a film critic will obsess over those kinds of problems.

A film critic can be so wowed by technical proficiency they don't notice it's in service of a poorly written story.

Also a film critic watches movies as their job. They're more likely to notice when a movie isn't all that original. They tend to want something that's unique to make their job of watching movies to be less boring. Someone in the audience doesn't care about that so much, mostly it's just important that the movie is entertaining. If the movie is sort of like a movie they didn't see, why would they care?

So I think a high critic score low audience score means the movie looks really good, but probably has a poorly written story. The critics went to film school, not writing school. For the converse, it's probably going to be fun and entertaining but isn't going to change my life.

Still hoping for a decentralized FOSS alternative to Letterboxd/IMDB/TMDB/etc. Like what BookWyrms is compared to Goodreads. I really like logging what I consume (read, watch, listen) but I don't like relying on and donating my data and reviews to for-profit companies.

Our cognitive biases are fascinating, aren't they

I've literally only gone there when there's been drama like with Captain marvel