No one can give a legitimate score before they can possibly have seen it.
The thing is that advance screenings are shown (for the public and for critics).... so *some* (certainly not all... or even most) of the votes that have been put in could indeed be legitimate scores.
The other option would be, as you said, to hold off opening ratings until the movie hits it's first major release date. But, IMO, the problem would still exist. You would have zealot fans that would still uprate the movie (without having seen it) and you would also have zealot haters (for certain types of films... think Comic Book films where apparently one is not allowed to like more than one comic book company) that would downrate the film without having seen it.
Ultimately (IMO), the IMDb user ratings have not been overly relevant for years, not since Nolan zealotfans got it in their heads to massively downvote a number of very good classic films just so one of Nolan's Batman films could make it to the top of the IMDb 250 ranking - the ratings for major blockbuster films haven't really been the same since.
NillindeielAgent Hill: ...Then aliens invaded New York and were beaten back, by among others, a giant green monster, a costumed hero from the 40's.... and a god.
Agent Ward: I don't think Thor is technically a god.
Hill: Well...you haven't been near his arms.~Agents of SHIELD; Season 1 Episode 1 "Pilot"
reply
share