11–20 of 136 posts
Now, that said I haven't gone to see a summer blockbuster in a decade. I don't like Marvel movies or Star wars sequels. There was only one good star wars movie in the original trilogy anyway.
Note that their choices aren't perfect; I've watched some movies that won awards that I really didn't like. That said, I think these sources are a better starting point than lists based solely on popularity.
I think High Hopes is from 1994 (not 2003 as the article states). I think I know this because I bought the CD single in the 90s.
Probably an innocent typo and not a indication of a less than carefully crafted post.
> Go by the average rating, not popularity. It’s better to watch something a million people love than something 10 million people watched and consider okay. ... but the average rating is a measure of popularity :/. The best movies I have ever seen are rated poorly, because most people didn't understand them or they weren't "easy" to watch; if you want to find good content, you need to read reviews and find people who…
> but the average rating is a measure of popularity Not quite? Mulholland drive for example, was widely praised by critics and is remembered fondly by film nerds, but is not in most senses “popular”. I’m not arguing that ratings are perfect, I largely agree with you; just that they’re a weird measurement and not one largely of popularity.
Goodreads is kind of a weird space which shows that the popular vote is kind of useless. It’s hard to find a good book based on ratings. Everything seems to be either 4+ stars or garbage. The Fault in our Stars probably has a better rating than print copies of Hamlet. Actually, all classics seem to hover around 3.68 stars. Never 2. In fact, I don’t think any books published in the history of the world have a rating less than 3.
Anyways, the language you google in heavily affects recommendations. Searching in general is not a useful way to find anything cool. It’s much better to happen upon a good source of reviews or criticism which align with whatever gets your rocks off and settle for curated entertainment/art.
> Go by the average rating, not popularity. It’s better to watch something a million people love than something 10 million people watched and consider okay. I agree on the principle, however there’s a trust issue. Out of n reviews on IMDB and RT how many of them are authentic? And how much weight does a critic’s review bear on the overall score? In my case, be it for a movie or a book (not so much for songs though) t…
https://m.imdb.com/title/tt4975722/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt2024544/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt1454468/ https://m.imdb.com/title/tt5580390/
This is a long-winded way of saying, "Don't just look at numbers, be aware of context."
I have read that the best way to get started in finding good films is to use awards as a starting point: Academy Awards, Directors Guild Awards, Screen Actors Guild Awards. These organizations are made up of people who live and breathe film making, and they vote for what they think is the best, not the most popular. Note that their choices aren't perfect; I've watched some movies that won awards that I really didn't…
I have read that the best way to get started in finding good films is to use awards as a starting point: Academy Awards, Directors Guild Awards, Screen Actors Guild Awards. These organizations are made up of people who live and breathe film making, and they vote for what they think is the best, not the most popular. Note that their choices aren't perfect; I've watched some movies that won awards that I really didn't…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> but the average rating is a measure of popularity Not quite? Mulholland drive for example, was widely praised by critics and is remembered fondly by film nerds, but is not in most senses “popular”. I’m not arguing that ratings are perfect, I largely agree with you; just that they’re a weird measurement and not one largely of popularity.
> Not quite Goodreads is kind of a weird space which shows that the popular vote is kind of useless. It’s hard to find a good book based on ratings. Everything seems to be either 4+ stars or garbage. The Fault in our Stars probably has a better rating than print copies of Hamlet. Actually, all classics seem to hover around 3.68 stars. Never 2. In fact, I don’t think any books published in the history of the world hav…
Compare linking via epigraph in https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=24501978
Huh. Up til now I thought "potboiler" meant mildly entertaining filler, "a way to pass the time while waiting for a pot to boil", since "a watched pot never boils".
A quick dig around suggests the etymology described in the article is correct though. TIL, etc.