>>81425147>>81425191That being said, it might be less.
I'm not sure where Rotten Tomatoes rounds to percents, but it's clear it's not exactly as I said, since as of now, there's 195 reviews, meaning before the rotten one, there were at most 194, out of which 2 were rotten, and we still had 99%, which should only have been possibly by my count, if there were 198 fresh ones against those 2, which is not possible with only 194 reviews in total.
So RT rounds up somewhere between percentages.
Basically we might just need 50+ fresh reviews. 
