Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

fivethirtyeight.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 214 posts

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#61

Post by crdb »

qrendel wrote: post #29
raspasov wrote: post #2

Rotten tomatoes usually matches my personal tastes pretty well. Their Critics Consensus summaries are pretty blunt and entertaining sometimes. Here's the one for Fantastic Four (2015). "Dull" is my favorite part. "Dull and downbeat, this Fantastic Four proves a woefully misguided attempt to translate a classic comic series without the humor, joy, or colorful thrills that made it great."

Most of the critic (and user) reviews are what I think of as "easy mode" ones. They don't really teach you anything about the film, just say whether they liked it or not, using the most colorful language they can possibly muster. The FF quote seems like a typical example. Alternatively there are some that really dig deep into the meaning and execution of the film and analyze it in ways I would never think of, not hav…

Thanks for the recommendation. These (FCH) reviews are awesome. Do you know any other such critics?

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#63

Post by bostik »

Oh wow, that's rich. Quoting from the article:

Sites like Rotten Tomatoes that aggregate movie reviews into one overall rating are being blamed for poor opening weekends.

The best part is that the quote above even provides a link to the reference they are using for the made statement.[0] In effect, the studios are complaining that news of the films' crappiness are spreading too fast.

Let that sink in. The studios confess that their productions are so awful they couldn't be used even for guano. It's almost as if the availability of reviews was the reason for such bad box office performance - not the dubious quality of the object being reviewed.

When a bunch of reviews can undo the effects of a massive, weeks or months long marketing push, I'd say it's time to rethink your product strategy.

0: http://www.hollywoodreporter.com/news/summer-box-office-how-...

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#64

Post by qrendel »

crdb wrote: post #61
qrendel wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Most of the critic (and user) reviews are what I think of as "easy mode" ones. They don't really teach you anything about the film, just say whether they liked it or not, using the most colorful language they can possibly muster. The FF quote seems like a typical example. Alternatively there are some that really dig deep into the meaning and execution of the film and analyze it in ways I would never think of, not hav…

Thanks for the recommendation. These (FCH) reviews are awesome. Do you know any other such critics?

Unfortunately, no. I came by them mostly by accident (recommendation on another forum). I too wish there were more like them, though. They're a very different style of review to the ones Rotten Tomatoes seems to aggregate, or that you would see in the typical "Arts" section of a paper or magazine.

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#65

Post by johnchristopher »

mangeletti wrote: post #56

The author might be mistaken. I think there's a pretty chance this is simply a demographical difference between the sites' visitors, and I'm pretty disappointed this wasn't brought up early on. Rotten Tomatoes is a hipstometer (if you don't believe me, look at the artsy film festival movies that rank highest there, or read some of the pedantic reviews). Fandango is what a lot of the RT fans would call a "low brow" ve…

> If the rank is lower on Fandango and higher on Rotten Tomatoes, it's usually a bit too artsy and pretentious for me (I go watch a movie to be entertained, not to stoke my ego).

Crass anti-intellectualism.

I like the Sundance Festival, Movies from all over the world and wouldn't got see 2012 on screen but I don't go pissing online on fans of Transformers.

Your definition of `artsy and pretentious' is just `things I don't like'.

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#66

Post by OSButler »

I usually only check ratings & reviews after watching a movie, just to see what other people think about it.

Seeing how easy it is to game such online ranking systems and how tastes can differ, not only on a personal level but also on the current mood, I simply don't trust the scores without having been able to make up my own opinion.

The same goes for any other aggregate "review" site, e.g. restaurant reviews. Those are even worse for restaurant owners, since a bad review can stick around, even if you used its mentioned points to improve your service.

At least movies don't usually change over time (Star Wars being one of the few exceptions), but it's still annoying to get caught up in a hype only to be bitterly disappointed, or the other way around, finally watching a movie after hearing so many bad things about it and then thoroughly enjoying it, making you wish you had seen it on the large screen instead.

...and not to forget paid social marketing, especially when it's not being disclosed.

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#67

Post by xixixao »

abruzzi wrote: post #44
eridius wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm curious, what was the 95% fresh movie that you thought was the worst movie in 2 decades?

Snowpiercer. I'm sure some people love it, but I could not think of a single redeeming thing after I got done. I honestly preferred "The Room", (though that ones 'quality' was unintentional.)

7.0 on IMDB and 69% on CSFD (the Czech IMDB equivalent). They both have a big number of viewers rating and a 100 point scale, I find them pretty accurate, which always baffles me given how subjective the questions "Do you like the movie" is. Although blockbusters might be overrated (like the Martian), I can always see why that is the case and the error isn't similar to "95% vs god awful".

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#68

Post by jmckib »

OSButler wrote: post #66

I usually only check ratings & reviews after watching a movie, just to see what other people think about it. Seeing how easy it is to game such online ranking systems and how tastes can differ, not only on a personal level but also on the current mood, I simply don't trust the scores without having been able to make up my own opinion. The same goes for any other aggregate "review" site, e.g. restaurant reviews. Those…

As someone who relies on online movie ratings (not Fandango), how do you choose movies then?

Re: Be Suspicious of Online Movie Ratings

#70

Post by hugh4 »

johnchristopher wrote: post #65
mangeletti wrote: post #56

The author might be mistaken. I think there's a pretty chance this is simply a demographical difference between the sites' visitors, and I'm pretty disappointed this wasn't brought up early on. Rotten Tomatoes is a hipstometer (if you don't believe me, look at the artsy film festival movies that rank highest there, or read some of the pedantic reviews). Fandango is what a lot of the RT fans would call a "low brow" ve…

> If the rank is lower on Fandango and higher on Rotten Tomatoes, it's usually a bit too artsy and pretentious for me (I go watch a movie to be entertained, not to stoke my ego). Crass anti-intellectualism. I like the Sundance Festival, Movies from all over the world and wouldn't got see 2012 on screen but I don't go pissing online on fans of Transformers. Your definition of `artsy and pretentious' is just `things I…

That's why he said "too artsy and pretentious for me" instead of "too artsy and pretentious in absolute terms and those who disagree can suck it". Chill, nobody is insulting your taste in movies.
Post reply on HN