Rotten tomatoes Is useful… dut I don’t think It’s the best way to judge a movie anymore

I still check Rotten Tomatoes before watching movies sometimes, but over the years I’ve realized it works better as a quick temperature check than an actual measure of quality. If a movie has a really low score, there’s usually a reason. But once you get into that middle range, the percentages can get misleading fast. A film sitting at 85% doesn’t necessarily mean people *loved* it. It can also mean most critics simply thought it was “fine enough” to recommend. That’s the part I think a lot of viewers misunderstand. The site is great for seeing broad consensus quickly. You can tell almost instantly whether critics generally leaned positive or negative. That’s useful when you’re deciding what to watch on a Friday night and don’t want to spend an hour reading reviews. But the downside is that the "fresh" or "rotten" system removes a lot of nuance. Some movies are divisive in interesting ways. Some flawed movies are still memorable. And sometimes a technically “good” film leaves no impact at all, while a messy one sticks with you for years. I’ve had plenty of experiences where I ignored a mediocre Rotten Tomatoes score and ended up loving the movie anyway. Horror especially feels like a genre where audience reactions and critic reactions can live on completely different planets. At this point, I think film discovery works better when you combine different perspectives. Critics can help identify quality filmmaking, but regular audience reactions usually tell you whether something is actually entertaining, rewatchable, or emotionally engaging. That’s also why I’ve started appreciating platforms that allow longer user reviews instead of just percentages. Sometimes one thoughtful paragraph from another viewer tells you more than a score ever could. Rotten Tomatoes still has value, but I don’t think it should be the final word on whether a movie is worth watching. Do you still trust review aggregate scores, or have you started relying more on individual reviewers and audience opinions instead?