Which is why audience ratings of this movie continue to be highly questionable.And yet, the audience rating is pretty similar to the box office result, that GB16 is a flop.
Sure a bad movie can have a great box office. More rarely, a good movie can have a bad box office. But usually bad box office = bad movie. It's evidence that the audience ratings were not highly questionable, they were correct about GB16.
As I understand Alphagaia's argument is that quite a few of the 10's and 1's votes were done before the movie was even released or by people who had not seen the movie. They had an alternate agenda as opposed to an honest rating.Which was funny as the idea that a polarizing movie like GB16 would get a lot of 1's and 10's seems like a foreign concept to some people. Keeping in mind controversy was baked into the movie, with its promotion by the cast, director, and production company, and even had online trolling featured in the movie.
So is it fair to include rankings by people who have never seen the movie?
I noticed the same thing happening with the Blue-Ray before it was even released.
So is there any evidence that the audience ratings were skewed one way or the other by people who hadn't seen the movies? Maybe the audience ratings were skewed more positively than they should have been by people with an agenda?
All in all, arguing against the audience ratings just seems like a flimsy attempt to make a box office failure look better than it was.