The comment I was replying to said This would be no different than having two histograms side by side. And I pointed out that it is not.
Oh well I'll answer your question anyway. Because 90% of everything is crap (probably more than that on P2P sites). Re-watching a movie can be like walking in the same park more than once, looking at pleasant things with a sense of recognition. You could put a movie in to suit your mood. Sometimes you'd rather watch a good "original" movie again than watch yet another crappy remake or rip-off.
rewatchability should indicate a light-weight movie.
If you want that, you look at rewatchability, if you want something more complex, you use quality.
I think this is the underlying assumption.
Because the rewatchability rating doesn't just tell you how rewatchable a movie is, but also how good and "timeless" it is, i.e mainly how deeply it resonates with people.
This is not about picking a movie to watch again after you have already seen it once: this is about picking a movie you haven't seen but that is so good that other people like to watch it again and again.
Oh well I'll answer your question anyway. Because 90% of everything is crap (probably more than that on P2P sites). Re-watching a movie can be like walking in the same park more than once, looking at pleasant things with a sense of recognition. You could put a movie in to suit your mood. Sometimes you'd rather watch a good "original" movie again than watch yet another crappy remake or rip-off.