Do you take Rotten Tomatoes/IMDB rating system seriously?

After reading this:
http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/new...column-1047286

I was wondering, anybody here really take this ratings system seriously? Personally I don't understand why this rating system (IMDB and others too) are taken so seriously.

Look to this:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1480656/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

It's a wonderful film! I watched 3 times in four days and it deserves an 8 or 9 for me! But it got a "5" on IMDB.

Well, sometimes they are right, like this:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2620590/?ref_=nv_sr_1
This is one of the worst film that I've seen in awhile, but why I think that they are right? Because I hated the movie. One man's trash is another man's treasure. Someone can watch and think it was very good! So why bother with this things? I just don't get it!

IMDB has The Dark Knight listed as the fourth best movie ever. I think that makes it fair to say that their ratings are total bullsh!t.

__________________
Letterboxd

IMDB is the worst. The majority of people who rate films on there are morons.

Rotten Tomatoes I never look at tbh, seems a pretty daft ratings system to me with regards the classification as 'fresh' or not.

IMDb's system is prone to manipulation (as is any such honour-based type system) so although I sometimes take a look out of interest for completely blind purchases (cheap order fillers to qualify for free postage so effectively free fillums) I mainly only bother looking at their ratings after I've already watched the film.

I don't even rank TDK as a top four Nolan movie, let alone ever.

Even more laughable, they have Shawshank rated as THE best movie ever. Shawshank is a good movie and all, I enjoy it, but best movie ever? LMAO.

Not seriously, i think that ppl learn otw about all the thing in those "consensus" sites. I mean bunch of subjective ratings from random ppl with surely different perspective and standar is sound unlikely in any [insert medium]

But again it not all pretty bad for quick refrence. I mean if you want to know what probably quickest summary of reception or ppl thoughts, what seems as good score simply mean got most positive acceptance but again it wont/shouldnt be end of the line. The most imprtant it's not determine or affect any of personal assesment.

I do not care for either of those, honestly when it comes to movie ratings they are pretty individual, but there is some kind of trend lately that popular stuff either gets bad or good rating based on social media coverage and things of that manner, people not being objective and so on.

__________________
“By definition, you have to live until you die. Better to make that life as complete and enjoyable an experience as possible, in case death is shite, which I suspect it will be.”

The imdb itself is accurate, it represents the taste of the majority (who visits the site).

I hate marvel films, but i get why some people like them and the imdb only reflects that.
It all comes down to people's tastes, because cinema is not science and films are not objectively good or bad...

This ^

I might look at the ratings. But I'll never go by them. (unless a film has below 4 perhaps)

I mean at the moment, Fellini's '8 and a half' is rated 236th, and 'Snatch' 101st.

IMDb represents the taste of the people who take the time to rate films on IMDb, so it's not especially useful in determining what "the majority" thinks of a film - its key demographics tend to align with those of the stereotypical "filmbro" so they do end up emphasising a certain type of consensus more so than a general one. I always take its ratings with a grain of salt.

The same goes for RT, though at least there's a veneer of professionalism to their system that gives it an edge over the unreliability of IMDb.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

I have a friend who lives and dies by Rotten Tomatoes...I've never been to the site in my life. I will sometimes check an IMDB rating before I watch something and might give it in some weight when considering watching something but will I watch or not watch something based purely on an IMDB rating? Absolutely not.

This^

I do look at IMDB but only as a general guideline and THEN I keep in mind some people will go orgasmic over certain movies just because they tickle their fancy, or it's the trendy thing to do. I'm always the best judge of what I will personally like.

It's all subjective, really, so I avoid ratings on both of these sites. I find IMDB useful when I can't think of a name of an actor or if someone I like has died, tbh.

Plus, I'm used to movies I like not even being noticed or ranked low by IMDB frequenters who think they are 'weird.'

I hate Rotten Tomatoes. I love Scorsese even more now. I have a friend who listens to Rotten Tomatoes religiously - he'd literally rate a movie differently depending on the rating on RT. It's really disappointing. The worst thing is he won't go see a movie if it gets bad reviews, even if it's a movie he had been interested in before reviews came out. He loses interest because he thinks if RT says it's bad, it's definitely bad. I don't get it personally.

We've got a handful of threads about this already, and what I pretty much always say is: I take it seriously at the extremes. It's very unusual for bad films to have really high scores, or good films to have really low ones. Not impossible, of course, and for some films I don't look at it at all, but for anything borderline, and as I find time to be increasingly scarce, I find listening to it at the two far ends of the spectrum to work pretty well.

I use them for another opinion in my ongoing struggle deciding what to watch when I have so many I haven't saw right on my DVR, etc.

Not 100%..ba dum ch!

IMDB's ratings are good for a laugh, and for me Rotten Tomatoes is nice if I have zero interest in a movie.

However, the real problem with them lies with the Hollywood system, and how ratings have seemingly affected their approach. Also, it's really amusing to study which directors receive preferential treatment from critics, and compare it to my own sense of taste.

Never use either. Critics can occasionally be useful if it's something I'm still on the fence about even after the premise, cast and trailer, but that's about it. I'm going to see what I want to see, and I'm not going to see something that doesn't interest me.

And I'm sure I've responded at least twice along the lines of what I'm about to say.

The problem wih RT is that you can have a film that everyone thinks is at least "good" or fresh if you like, and it ends up with 95%. Like for example the Hunger Games movies. The average rating is about 7/10 but it ends up with 85% because critics liked it.

Then you get a great film that divides opinion a bit, like say Interstellar ending up with 71%.

__________________