Reply to Also, the audience rating on RT is 93% on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 22:27:43 GMT

fgadmin — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 22:27:43 GMT

hodie — 13 years ago(April 13, 2012 05:34 PM)

RT classified the Sarah Palin film
"Undefeated" as Science Fiction/Fantasy - regardless of how one feels about Palin, that was just snarky and self-indulgent; the comments on that film were rough on IMDb, but the site itself didn't impose any editorial views, which is why I love this site. RT seems like more of a self-proclaimed hipster site. IMDb is a better cross-section of viewers, imo.
But IMDb favors newer films that appeal to the masses. Maybe it will be more balanced 100 years from now, but people are people, and so I doubt it.
For what it's worth, I loved BTL.
"Joey, have you ever been in a Turkish prison?"

Reply to Also, the audience rating on RT is 93% on Mon, 27 Apr 2026 22:27:34 GMT

fgadmin — Mon, 27 Apr 2026 22:27:34 GMT

Disardor — 14 years ago(August 07, 2011 10:44 PM)

IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes use different scoring systems. 7.5/10 is 3 out of 4 stars. 3 stars is considered a positive review. So if 95% of the critics calculated in Rotten Tomatoes' score gave the film 3 out of 4 stars (or more) it would be considered 95% "fresh." Ditto the compiled user ratings. A high percentage of good ratings on Rotten Tomatoes does not necessarily equate to a high overall rating on a 10-point scale.