ITT: We compile screenshots of rottentomatoes where ratio of

File: shitty-tomatoes-ghostbusters-2016.png (280KB, 755x458px) Image search: [Google]

280KB, 755x458px

And also the reverse... in the example of Ghostbusters

File: shitty-tomatoes-batman-v-superman.png (279KB, 941x403px) Image search: [Google]

279KB, 941x403px

>>82512931
oops wrong one. here's the actual updated version as of today

>>82513097
(((Hmmmm)))

File: shitty-tomatoes-the-passion-of-the-christ.png (398KB, 944x479px) Image search: [Google]

398KB, 944x479px

>>82513097
oh woops i got the fixed picture here

File: shitty-tomatoes-twilight.png (314KB, 948x477px) Image search: [Google]

314KB, 948x477px

I actually enjoyed the movie even though the book was shite

File: shitty-tomatoes-saw.png (182KB, 756x331px) Image search: [Google]

182KB, 756x331px

wew lad

its just about impossible to get an accurate audience score because spamming that up is standard marketing.

just like imdb scores.

File: shitty-tomatoes-saw-iii.png (297KB, 939x533px) Image search: [Google]

297KB, 939x533px

>>82513241
even though they are prone to score spamming there's just so many ratings i don't even know if it has too much of an effect. i know imdb themselves adjust the ratings shown on the movie page separately from the ratings when you see all the rating statistics page for each movie

File: shitty-tomatoes-suicide-squad.png (421KB, 940x543px) Image search: [Google]

421KB, 940x543px

lol

File: shitty-tomatoes-the-fast-and-the-furious-tokyo-drift.png (351KB, 941x527px) Image search: [Google]

351KB, 941x527px

Last one for the night... take this as you will

>>82513415
62 is still pretty low.

File: atlas.jpg (129KB, 680x578px) Image search: [Google]

129KB, 680x578px

>>82512875
Worst offender.

>>82513645
The problem with Atlas Shrugged in general is that your opinion from it will inevitably be linked to your opinion of Ayn Rand's politics.

I actually liked the book, despite certain narrative/characterization issues, the movies were shit though, mostly because of shitty actors and a decreasing budget.

>>82513026
funny when movies nowadays get high scores for the same fucking reasons

>>82512875
huge Warcraft fan here.

Critics were right, it's an awful movie. I loved it because I'm just happy to see something I love on the big screen, but as a movie it was awful..

>>82513241
imdb and rt spend a ton of time and effort getting rid of spam, or at least lessing it's effect. i don't work there, but i do work in data analysis and heard a talk by one of the heads at some conference.

>>82514062
i heard one of imdb's speak*

File: 24t525235.jpg (49KB, 772x392px) Image search: [Google]

49KB, 772x392px

But this is actually kino