83% Rotten Tomatoes, yet 40 MetaScore? GTFO!

This seems to be happening more frequently: an independent movie that really hits me hard has a low MetaScore. (This gets a 40, mostly from a Variety hit piece that reads like a letter from a jilted lover.) Though it seems more than a few agree with me that the story, tone, writing and especially acting deserve far better — Rotten Tomatoes gives it an 83%.

Why does this happen?
Is MetaScore unreliable?

I’m wondering if it might be like the long-married husband who, contemplating divorce, says, “I think we want different things.” MS seems to be farthest off on indies, particularly those pushing boundaries of expectation or taste — as with Coyote Lake. I was very put off by its premise — disgusted, actually. The idea of a mother-daughter team killing criminals for loot offends me, and I’m not that easily offended. I’d guess I have plenty of company on that.

But here’s the question: Did I get more out of this than any of the last few mainstream pics I’ve seen? Not counting obvious Oscar bait, yes. Clearly yes. Much more so than, say, Hanna, which I hated but which scored a 65. I’m just not interested in what Hollywood produces 10 months of every year, and when I forget that and watch one it’s as exciting and memorable as an Applebee’s cheeseburger.

And there’s this: between Beringer Estate Reserve Cabernet, Four Roses Limited Editions, and Wikipedia, I’ve started noticing something: maybe some things in life shouldn’t be done for money. Or can’t. And maybe we should include my favorite film genres — especially psychological thrillers — in that group.

Sara Seligman and even Camila Mendes are two I’ll be watching for in coming years.