Enjoy the Best, Not the Latest, Media

Post by bsanr2 » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 7:45 PM UTC

bsanr2 wrote: post #16

KarimDaghari wrote: post #4

> 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…

IMDB is notorious for having BIPOC- or women-lead films average ~1.5-2 points lower than you would expect from reviews (e.g., Metacritic or RT averages). I believe there was a chan-lead op some years ago, but it's also probably just part of the site's culture. 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-…

Post by clairity » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 7:48 PM UTC

kinghtown wrote: post #52

tallies wrote: post #26

As someone who apparently frequents much more pretentious online film circles than OP, the idea that the highest rated films and shows on IMDB represent the "best" of the mediums is kinda silly. The article uses Star Trek (2009) as its example of a mediocre film. Its IMDB rating is 7.9/10 from over 500k votes over 11 years -- surely this would place the film squarely in the "tried and tested" category. If I look on s…

I don’t think Netflix is entirely at fault. It’s sad how most people seem to be super ok with flushing the past down a toilet. Like anything from before they were born is irrelevant. I think it’s selfish in a way but mostly I think people are terrified of coming across as weird. Like imagine going to work at a generic office and trying to talk about a half forgotten French movie like The Green Ray. There are too many…

Post by JKCalhoun » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 7:49 PM UTC

tallies wrote: post #26

As someone who apparently frequents much more pretentious online film circles than OP, the idea that the highest rated films and shows on IMDB represent the "best" of the mediums is kinda silly. The article uses Star Trek (2009) as its example of a mediocre film. Its IMDB rating is 7.9/10 from over 500k votes over 11 years -- surely this would place the film squarely in the "tried and tested" category. If I look on s…

Post by danbmil99 » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 8:01 PM UTC

tallies wrote: post #26

As someone who apparently frequents much more pretentious online film circles than OP, the idea that the highest rated films and shows on IMDB represent the "best" of the mediums is kinda silly. The article uses Star Trek (2009) as its example of a mediocre film. Its IMDB rating is 7.9/10 from over 500k votes over 11 years -- surely this would place the film squarely in the "tried and tested" category. If I look on s…

Post by JKCalhoun » Sat, Oct 03, 2020, 8:05 PM UTC

spinach wrote: post #62

> Society’s norms with media and culture are stuck in the pre-Internet days People in society want to have jobs in creative pursuits, and for that they need money, they need people to consume the newest products. So on the other hand, isn't it better to support living people who are incorporating the current times into their art than to support old content where perhaps the creators are dead and won't see the money?