C. Thi Nguyen

One tweet that you have is kind of slightly clever and a little bit funny and all 1,000 people find it mildly funny and then forget about it in 20 minutes.

That tweet will probably pick up like 1,000 likes or like 500 likes.

Imagine you say something else that's weird and thoughtful and almost no one gets it except two people have their life changed by it.

That tweet will pick up two likes.

This is Matt Stroll's point, that if you go back and you look at the reviews of like movies that are like generally considered great now, I mean, and I'm kind of dodging here because I'm using this like now they're considered great.

But if you look back at most of them, most of them were incredibly divided.

You had critics exploding like with, this is the most amazing thing ever.

And other people being like, this makes no goddamn sense.

Like everything is incoherent and weird.

And like that, when you take that to Rotten Tomatoes, that's going to show up as 50%.

Your mediocre crap cram will show up as 50%, but so will that.

Nothing about this has to be great.

Weird-ass comedies, like some of my favorite comedies

Get busting hysterical comedies also don't do great on Rotten Tomatoes because they only appeal to, like, there's nothing here that says gritty, right?

Some of this is just about particularity.

Let's separate.

There's so many things in this Rotten Tomatoes point.

But let me separate a few things.

There are two questions.

One is whether Rotten Tomatoes will accurately give you what you want.