^If it's sunk that much in just a day, then it could rise just as much by tomorrow. It takes time for a consensus to emerge.
Note also that the 58% rating for "all critics" is given a "rotten" symbol while the 60% rating for "top critics" -- which is statistically indistinguishable from the former -- gets a "fresh" symbol. Clearly the dividing line between what they label good and bad is rather arbitrary, and the icons are a gross oversimplification. (I read at least one "rotten"-labeled review that was actually largely positive. A binary system like RT's is not good at dealing with nuance and ambivalence.)
That's why I prefer Metacritic. It gives a more equal average (although it does give "top critics" more weight), and it has three colors, which correspond more or less to good, average, poor. It's also set with 80-100 green, 40-60 yellow, and 0-39 red.
Yeah, now that I look at it, it appears most of those "rotten" critics are simply giving the movie 2 to 2 1/2 stars or a C, which only suggests they thought it was so-so, not that it was awful or an outright bomb (we're not talking about an Adam Sandler movie here or anything!).
Although still... that's way too many people thinking the movie is just so-so.