The accuracy of critical acclaim

[Cookie Tookie 10,546]

The reviews have been biased more than ever recently. It’s like they’re rating the artist as opposed to the music. 

[ShayCristoforo 10,607]

For movies, I will read reviews and also look at the audience score on Rotten Tomatoes.

But for music, I really don't care about what others think. It's all subjective. 
Unless everyone is raving about something, then it's probably fantastic.

[Ronk 14,760]

Critics have hidden agendas such as supporting their faves or making themselves look good by writing what they think their viewers want to see.  Gaga had a tough time when it was deemed cool to hate on Gaga.  Critics jumped onto that bandwagon.  Even critics who try to give an honest, unbiased opinion are only one person, and every person has personal tastes.  Metacritic has so many biased reviewers that I don't pay attention to Metacritic scores.

[JaysAMess 27,843]

I'll never understand people who allow a review to determine whether they listen to an album/song or watch a movie/TV show.

[Chromatican 4,046]

I think overall critical acclaim is the most reliable predictor of quality in general, although it’s still only somewhat accurate. For instance MCU movies all get good reviews when a lot of them have messy third acts and cringey jokes, but they’ve built such a fanbase a lot of publications don’t want to criticize them. Music critics can be stuck up or biased and in general many films that got decent reviews at the time end up being classics. 

[Queen Bitch 10,513]

I usually don't read reviews, I don't care what professional reviewers think tbh

For movies I sometimes check the audience score on IMDB, because I think the audience opinion is more important that of snobby critics, although I will still usually watch a movie even if its score isn't amazing. 

[Guest]

I don't read reviews at all or give them much weight in deciding what I consume. It's just one person's opinion. One person whom I have no connection to so therefore don't care.

[weed 73,148]

Idk if I have ever looked at an album's ratings/reviews before listening lol but for films almost 99% I do. At least check the rotten tomatoes lol

[huttont 5,220]

I never listen to critics about anything. I like to watch/listen/experience it myself to form an opinion bc I don’t always agree with what they claim

[StrawberryBlond 14,696]

As an album reviewer, I can safely say that reviewing is all about one's own view (or it should be, at least) and outside opinion really doesn't matter at all when it comes to what art appeals to you. Ok, I haven't studied music through formal education or from a professional standpoint but I have extensively researched music through experiencing it and paying attention to how it moves me. Hot take here but I think there should be far more credibility given to what the public like as opposed to professional critics. Critics are paid to review art, meaning they sometimes listen to stuff they're not remotely interested in or even particularly understand, so lack of knowledge and bias can come into play. But the public will be drawn to a sound they like so of course they're listening as someone who gets it. This will naturally produce quite different verdicts. I believe the one who gets it should be the one who's taken more credibly. While music is subjective for the most part, there are definitely objective parts. Whether someone can sing or not, if they're in tune, if a song sounds too similar to someone else's song, etc. So critics are very useful to point out the stuff that a layperson can't.

But the big reason why critics can be hard to trust is because so many of them are totally being advised how to rate stuff according to their publication. I've read magazines that never give a negative review to an album, nothing lower than an acceptable score, which tells me that any truly negative criticism isn't allowed, which I think is wrong. And I read some reviews of work that really shouldn't appeal to critics, yet they're praising it and that suggests to me that they either got bribed to write a good review or they're just writing what they think the public wants to hear. Make no mistake, critics hate to look like fools. I've seen critics slam an artist's debut and then once said artist gets embraced by the public, they're so much nicer on their sophomore release. It seems really fake, is what I'm saying.