Bloodshot & Rotten Tomatoes

I read the article "Bloodshot Is Better Than Any MCU Film of the Past 5 Years" on CBR and it referred to the poor 31% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I understand the influence and importance of Rotten Tomatoes but why do articles always refer to what the critic score is? When I went to look at Bloodshot's rating it has a 78% from the audience. Why doesn't the audience score matter more since they are the one's buying tickets? I personally pay more attention to the audience score rather than critics.

[QUOTE=mmurphy1968;4889345]I read the article "Bloodshot Is Better Than Any MCU Film of the Past 5 Years" on CBR and it referred to the poor 31% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I understand the influence and importance of Rotten Tomatoes but why do articles always refer to what the critic score is? When I went to look at Bloodshot's rating it has a 78% from the audience. Why doesn't the audience score matter more since they are the one's buying tickets? I personally pay more attention to the audience score rather than critics.[/QUOTE]

I personally tend to look at critic reviews over audiences, just cause audience views can come from such a massive range of proficiency in critical thinking. I can disagree with critics but at at least find that their critiques are generally coming from a more informed place, as opposed to audiences who may give a bad review based solely on weather or not its an MCU film or if the theatre they saw it in had a sticky floor. A critic will be more consistent in their reviews, even if I dont personally share their tastes.

But also, yeah, using a RT score to 'prove' a films quality is an arbitrary thing and a dumb way to quantify a films value.

RT scores are obsolete since they're shills.

[QUOTE=Triniking1234;4890494]RT scores are obsolete since they're shills.[/QUOTE]

How so? 10char

[QUOTE=Dark-Flux;4890513]How so? 10char[/QUOTE]

I'm going to assume "something something disney something something mcu"

Bloodshot's fun empty blockbuster schlock but it's middle tier MCU material at best.

[QUOTE=Dark-Flux;4890513]How so? 10char[/QUOTE]

There has been recent incidents where they incorrectly took negative reviews and making them Fresh for some reason on some titles, which surprised me. To be honest both the critical and audience ratings have been way off on some stuff lately.

Recently watched Bloodshot it was a fun action film, nothing groundbreaking but I have seen worse.

[QUOTE=mmurphy1968;4889345]I read the article "Bloodshot Is Better Than Any MCU Film of the Past 5 Years" on CBR and it referred to the poor 31% rating on Rotten Tomatoes. I understand the influence and importance of Rotten Tomatoes but why do articles always refer to what the critic score is? When I went to look at Bloodshot's rating it has a 78% from the audience. Why doesn't the audience score matter more since they are the one's buying tickets? I personally pay more attention to the audience score rather than critics.[/QUOTE]

The audience isn't considered a good judge because usually there are two kind of spectators who vote for this sites of reviews: the ones who loved the movie and the ones who hated it, so they usually give a very high or a very low score. Moreover usually the audience doesn't have the necessary knowledge to do a deep analysis of the movie, while the critics should have both the knowledge and the impartiality to do an objective analysis of the movie and so give a fair score to it.
The issue is that often the critics proved to be more biased than the audience, for example a critic said that the movie Joker was a violent and unartistic movie and to better explain his point, he cited Clockwork Orange like example of artistic and not violent movie!