Henry Cavill

Metacritic you basically have to be a proper accredited critic with a major newspaper or magazine publication or a very large commercial digital publication. Rotten Tomatoes is for essentially everyone from TV critics to YouTubers to anyone with a blog who gets decent numbers - therefore skews more favoritism towards fanboy projects.

There's little question though, it's a big improvement over the theatrical cut.

Audience scores on these are mostly useless, they've been shown to be easily swayed by some Reddit threads or idiots who know how to program bots in the past such as with "Captain Marvel". Rotten Tomatoes says they have more oversight over them now but I'd be suspicious of that claim.

Metacritic also lumps middling scores in its own "Mixed" category, whereas Rottentomatoes doesn't. A movie that gets at least 6/10 by an approved critic is considered fresh by RT (and will raise the movie's consensus score) but mixed by Metacritic.

I tend not to look at audience scores since personal biases affect how a non-critic would score a movie more significantly than a critic who at least makes an effort to distance themselves from rating based overwhelmingly on emotion.