I think there's merit in a film having been seen. And also that a film is more likely to be better if more people have seen it and deemed it great.
I don't think that "more likely" part is accurate, from a probabilty standpoint. In the limited data we have, both films are just about equally well liked. Let's say that the current data suggests that 80% of Filmspotter viewers each film great. The larger sample size of
Unforgiven viewers yields a smaller margin of error in projecting how future viewers will feel about the film. Just to make up a number, let's say ±2%. Conversely, the smaller data set for
Trust viewers leads to a higher margin of error in a projection. Let's say ±7%. So, if a hundred Filmspotters watched both films, the range of them that would probably see greatness in
Unforgiven would fall between 78% and 82%, whereas the likely range for
Trust would be between 73% and 87%. Yes,
Trust has the bigger potential drop, but it also the bigger potential gain —
and one is just as likely as the other. The
plus scenario has the same probability as the
minus scenario in the plus-minus confidence of a poll.
All of that is to say that
Unforgiven is equally likely (not more likely) to be deemed great by a new viewer as
Trust. But
Trust has the slight edge in the actual data, which is why it advanced.
Caveat: I made all that up. And I know some of it is wrong. But hopefully it still sounded good.
pixote