<?xml version="1.0"?>
<feed xmlns="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom" xml:lang="en">
		<id>https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Careysub</id>
		<title>explain xkcd - User contributions [en]</title>
		<link rel="self" type="application/atom+xml" href="https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/api.php?action=feedcontributions&amp;feedformat=atom&amp;user=Careysub"/>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php/Special:Contributions/Careysub"/>
		<updated>2026-04-29T00:04:16Z</updated>
		<subtitle>User contributions</subtitle>
		<generator>MediaWiki 1.30.0</generator>

	<entry>
		<id>https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2184:_Unpopular_Opinions&amp;diff=177391</id>
		<title>Talk:2184: Unpopular Opinions</title>
		<link rel="alternate" type="text/html" href="https://www.explainxkcd.com/wiki/index.php?title=Talk:2184:_Unpopular_Opinions&amp;diff=177391"/>
				<updated>2019-08-03T14:21:09Z</updated>
		
		<summary type="html">&lt;p&gt;Careysub: &lt;/p&gt;
&lt;hr /&gt;
&lt;div&gt;&amp;lt;!--Please sign your posts with ~~~~ and don't delete this text. New comments should be added at the bottom.--&amp;gt;&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I wonder if it has to be below 50% with critic score, audience score, or both? [[User:Andyd273|Andyd273]] ([[User talk:Andyd273|talk]]) 17:36, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
:Genisys has an Audience Score of 53%, so I think it has to be critic score (Tomatometer). [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.124|108.162.241.124]] 21:42, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
::Critics and audiences are really two distinct groups.  So to be &amp;quot;apples to apples&amp;quot;, I'd think it would have to be a movie with an Audience score below 50.  Disagreeing with something critics hated isn't that rare among the general audience.  [[Special:Contributions/162.158.106.18|162.158.106.18]] 04:46, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
[https://www.rottentomatoes.com/browse/dvd-streaming-all?minTomato=0&amp;amp;maxTomato=49&amp;amp;services=amazon;hbo_go;itunes;netflix_iw;vudu;amazon_prime;fandango_now&amp;amp;genres=1;2;4;5;6;8;9;10;11;13;18;14&amp;amp;sortBy=tomato Movies] on DVD or streaming, tomatometer 49% down to 0%. &lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Plenty of Twilight fans will raise their hands - it is rated 49% --[[User:Thomcat|Thomcat]] ([[User talk:Thomcat|talk]]) 18:09, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
:Well, I'm around the typical age of (original) Twilight fans, and none of the movies in the saga came in my adult life. (But they're all below 50%)[[Special:Contributions/162.158.103.147|162.158.103.147]] 18:27, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I mean, Shaft got a 30% on the Tomatometer and a 94 on the audience score, and I loved it. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.241.22|108.162.241.22]] 18:57, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Do Waterworld, in spite of the fact that it only ticks two of the boxes, count? I really liked that one.&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
:If it didn't come out while you were an adult, then it doesn't count. [[User:N0lqu|-boB]] ([[User talk:N0lqu|talk]]) 20:16, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I don't watch enough movies (or know Rotten Tomatoes well enough) to participate in this particular challenge, but it seems like every time I enjoy a video game, it turns out to have a sizeable and vocal hatedom. I seriously can't relate to the caption here. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.165|162.158.107.165]] 20:25, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Batman v. Superman is probably a good answer for a fair number of people-it has a reasonable number of fans (including myself) who liked it, despite its very poor rating (28%) [[User:SirEpp|SirEpp]] ([[User talk:SirEpp|talk]]) 21:05, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Not a movie, per se, but I thought season 8 of Game of Thrones was fantastic. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.214.88|162.158.214.88]] 22:23, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Critically panned films that I like include: Crimes of Grindelwald, Passengers, and Warcraft.&lt;br /&gt;
:Oooh, ''Passengers'' is a good one, I'm stealing that. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 01:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I second Crimes of Grindelwald (37 RT), and add Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (48 RT), which I also enjoyed and actually recommend to people. Now these movies aren't &amp;quot;classics&amp;quot; or &amp;quot;great movies&amp;quot;, they aren't perfect, but they are effective entertainment, and ''not'' because they &amp;quot;are so bad their good&amp;quot;. Grindelwald has many effective scenes and acting, and Valerian is a very effective effort at making a movie out of a comic book that ''feels like a comic book''-- a fact I appreciated. Of course 48 RT is also just under the 50 RT threshold.[[User:Careysub|Careysub]] ([[User talk:Careysub|talk]])&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Critically acclaimed films that I do not like: Avatar and Life of Pi. [[Special:Contributions/173.245.48.213|173.245.48.213]] 22:47, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Not under 50%, but I'm shocked that &amp;quot;The Secret Life of Walter Smitty&amp;quot; has only 51%... National Treasure has only 46%... I like this game, it is a test in optimism.&lt;br /&gt;
:&amp;quot;The Secret Life of Walter '''Mitty'''&amp;quot; deserves a low rating, particularly when compared to the original with Danny Kaye. [[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.73|162.158.107.73]] 05:31, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Frankly it would be easier to list the movies I like that aren't below 50% on rotten tomatoes. [[User:CJB42|CJB42]] ([[User talk:CJB42|talk]]) 00:23, 3 August 2019 (UTC)s&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
My experience with rotten tomatoes ratings in particular is that they have no clue and I find their ratings useless.  The challenge from Randall in this comic is a case in point: the first movie I though to check, “Another Gay Movie” gets a 40% on the tomatometer yet is one of my favorites.  Same thing with all the “Eating Out” movies: good comedies that I enjoy, yet Tomatometer scores of 16%, 44%, and 17% for the first three. (And why is “Eating Out 2: Sloppy Seconds” so much higher ranked than 1 or 3?  It’s not that different...)&lt;br /&gt;
I think the criteria that Randal assumes (but doesn’t mention) is that the movie has to be a box office hit that appeals to mainstream audiences.[[Special:Contributions/162.158.107.73|162.158.107.73]] 03:55, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I don't see why Suicide Squad got trashed. It was light, colourful, had an engaging story, and well made. [[Special:Contributions/172.68.253.209|172.68.253.209]] 04:04, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Sucker Punch. There, I said it. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.99.77|141.101.99.77]] 07:36, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
There's a certain type of movie that 'h8ers' will auto-trash before they even come out (especially &amp;quot;Gender-switched version of a classic&amp;quot;, like that ''Ghostbusters'', and &amp;quot;Strong female type&amp;quot;, like ''Wonder Woman'' - as easy examples of those that some people love to hate, regardless of actual merit). So I recon there'd be good mileage in keeping an eye on (for example) the double-whammy that is the upcoming Female Thor movie. If it doesn't ''actually'' turn out to be so bad that you personally don't like it, I predict that it'll be pre-release troll-sniped down below 50% in &amp;quot;popular&amp;quot; opinion and even if they're not at all right about their guess there'll be a window of opportunity before any counter-viewpoint from actual viewers ups the score again. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.66|141.101.107.66]] 10:21, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
== Post-2000? ==&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Anyone have an idea why &amp;quot;post-2000&amp;quot; is a criteria? [[User:Stevage|Stevage]] ([[User talk:Stevage|talk]]) 23:58, 2 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
:Maybe because Rotten Tomatoes was launched close to the end of the 1990s, so post-2000 movies are the only ones that have been reviewed as they came out? Or perhaps it's to limit the scope of &amp;quot;movies that came out in your adult life&amp;quot;, since adult life could go back a long way for some people. [[User:Hawthorn|Hawthorn]] ([[User talk:Hawthorn|talk]]) 01:16, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
:I don't know for certain, but I feel incredibly confident that it's the timing of Rotten Tomatoes, that older movies that came out before the site existed won't be thoroughly / properly covered. Like if you look closely you'll see the 40% rating on this movie comes from only 1 vote. I suspect Randall feels that as of 2000, there was enough activity on the site to provide sufficient coverage. [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:40, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
:Pre-2000 films, being prior to RT, have the 'benefit' &amp;lt;!-- Though I suppose it's what you look for. I always wanted a &amp;quot;Oscars of the Ten/Twenty/Thirty/... Years Ago&amp;quot; thing that redid the award with (today's version of) historical hindsight that would end up giving a running commentary of the merits/otherwise perceived at various points in time... Anyway, not that anyone will read this comment, I'm sure. --&amp;gt; of studied hindsight. Anybody who bothers to review [https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/1003722_casino_royale the ''original'' Casino Royale], which would be my choice for this if I were allowed, just has far too much baggage to be thinking the same as with something just being appreciated in the context as a new-release. Including me, probably, across the many years since I first saw that film and fell in love with it, despite the obvious and total car-crash of its Development Hell! [[Special:Contributions/141.101.107.66|141.101.107.66]] 10:21, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
I KNOW that there are many, many movies I can apply to this challenge - I often find myself enjoying unpopular movies. Plus, critics suck, they seem to always forget that this is ENTERTAINMENT. A clever movie that is dull as dirt and makes you fall asleep should NOT receive high praise, it fails at the primary function - but I can't think of them in the moment. About a week ago on Facebook I had a memory, a list of facts about Eurotrip, where the article called it a flop, while I loved it, so probably that one. This comic triggered my first ever visit to Rotten Tomatoes, who lists Eurotrip as I think 46%, but much higher for Audience score, so I THINK it counts? What bumps me is that it seems like &amp;quot;Audience Score&amp;quot; would be popular opinion, making Eurotrip actually a Popular movie, which seems like then it wouldn't apply here. ???? [[User:NiceGuy1|NiceGuy1]] ([[User talk:NiceGuy1|talk]]) 04:40, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;br /&gt;
&lt;br /&gt;
Hypothesis: People generally give more positive then negative reviews, and positive reviews also cause more people to watch. The number of watching for something bad is therefor lower, while a good movie is watched so often there is always a critic.&lt;br /&gt;
[[Special:Contributions/172.69.55.190|172.69.55.190]] 10:19, 3 August 2019 (UTC)&lt;/div&gt;</summary>
		<author><name>Careysub</name></author>	</entry>

	</feed>