I agree. I think 7.7 is a bit too low. I think it's more likely it's been rigged the other way round.
E.g. people who hate gay people or Tom Ford rated this low just on purpose.
I mean look at the other films that were Oscar nominated. They are all higher than Nocturnal Animals, but they are, in my humble opinion really boring movies. I mean, La La Land? Come on, there is nothing subtle about it, and yet it is higher rated than Nocturnal Animals.

It's too low.
Give to Causes For Free:
http://theanimalrescuesite.com

It's quite simple really: It's an excellent movie, and many people enjoyed it.

It's actually rather a good movie - not a genius masterpiece, but well worthy of respect. It flew over the heads of a lot of mental midgets, but it's certainly far superior to Passengers which scores 7.1 and has made 8x the money. It's a mystery what the public will pay money to see, but it should be obvious that a film which has won prestigious awards has some positive qualities - unfortunately, they might be too subtle for mmq.

The same way it did in November when Trump "won."

"In your opinion?"
"Um, yes your honor, in my opinion."

Would someone care to explain how the business of fake votes works?

I was wondering about that too. There is no way this pile of crap got a 7.7 legit. Maybe Tom Ford's many, many fabulous friends and bosom buddies upvoted it to high heaven?