I didn't hate the old one this much but I did find them to be subpar movies and just ok. 

bigtakilla said: Boutros said: What? It never went down to 63%. It's up to 78% now. From what I see it's at 62% Ghostbusters Columbia Pictures Release Date: Jul 15, 2016 Summary Critic Reviews User Reviews Details & Credits Trailers & Videos Metascore 62 Generally favorable reviewsbased on 23 CriticsWhat's this? 3 days 9 hrs 37 mins 24 secs until movie release Starring: Chris Hemsworth, Kate McKinnon, Kristen Wiig,Leslie Jones, Melissa McCarthy Summary: Thirty years after the original film took the world by storm, Ghostbusters is back and fully rebooted for a new generation. Director Paul Feig combines all the paranormal fighting elements that made the original franchise so beloved with a cast of new characters, played by the funniest… Expand Director: Paul Feig Genre(s): Action, Sci-Fi, Fantasy, Comedy Rating: PG-13 Runtime: 116 min More Details and Credits »

62 in metacritic for a movie is pretty okay. Deadpool had 65, and I loved that.

lets be real here, the vast majority of movie critics are more likely to be carefully treading folks who are liberal and worried about reactions from the SJW communities.... I would be very surprised if you could take the critic reviews that seriously here (at least the RT reviews)

You think user reviews should be taken more seriously? lol

3432 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 3.5 / 10

Demographic breakdowns are shown below.

Arithmetic mean = 3.7.  Median = 1

It dropped to 60 now. Not to say that you won't like it, I love a lot of things that score low. I thought Fatal Frame V was an amazing game sitting at a 67 (actually, that's a better score than what I thought it had)... Point is, a score is just a score, but its a good point to where you should keep your expectations. Don't go in expecting a 90+ film.

Why people are using Metacritic instead of Rotten Tomatoes? While Meta is fine for games, its scores are usually ridiculously bad for movies. Rotten Tomatoes is way more accurate.

You do know how rotten tomatoes works against metacritic right? Rotten Tomatoes is literally Yes/No Percentage, while Metacritic is Average of Reviews Score. 

If Gaming had rotten tomato version, about all big titles would be 100%. 

It sounds like it's half way decent and not the full on disaster a lot of people tried to paint.

Maybe better than Ghostbusters II? Maybe not, but in that ball park.

So it's not terrible, just completely forgettable.

much better (not really).

If you look at the top films of all time on both sites, the RT list makes way more sense. It wouldn't work for games because gaming critics simply give ridiculous high scores for a lot of games. They just give perfect 10s to games that are good but have sizeable flaws. GTA IV is a 98 on Meta. It's a good game for sure, but it simply isn't even the best GTA game.

If you look at Meta, we will have films that won Academy Awards with scores in the low 80s, which is pretty weird.