To the people who actually rate out of 100

For posts related to a specific film -- beware of spoilers o ye who dareth enter!
Kokolo
Posts: 2
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun Dec 06, 2009 8:12 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by Kokolo »

Astually, this 1 - 100 system is not working for me anymore. Sometimes I just cant decide between 62-63. i really advise 1 - 1000 system. It would be so much easier and it would spare me around to 3 hours a year, which i would have spent on doing something existentially important, instead of splitting hairs over this nonsense.

cameron326
Posts: 153
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Fri Feb 25, 2011 8:54 am

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by cameron326 »

At the end of a film I have a pretty strong impression what the first number should be, eg. 70something, 80 something or whatever. But I'll still give myself half an hour or so to absorb and think about the strength of the film rather than rushing to the keyboard. So occasionally an initial 80 might become a 70 or a 90 on further reflection.

Once I've got a round number in my head, I'll start to think about whether it should be towards the bottom, middle or top of that. Eg, low 80 or middle 80 or high 80. To aid this process, I will often have a quick glance at other peoples minireviews to see if there's anything obvious that I might have missed or neglected to consider concerning the merits or flaws of the film. I'll also see where I think it might fit into my existing database.

I think it actually works. Why? Because I'm not so much marking the film in isolation, but rather considering where I think it fits in terms of factors such as its quality, longetivity, influence, and so on, in the history of film - as well of course as considering more basic things such as general enjoyment, acting, directing, etc.

Thinking in these terms, ie, rating against your exisiting database, Critickers 100 point system works a charm.

Without this context though, eg using a 100 point system in a weekly review section in a newspaper, the 100point system wouldn't work.

pnh
Posts: 14
101 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun Apr 17, 2011 2:38 am

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by pnh »

In my case, it's simply based on taste. The use of semantics like the tiers help to, because of the number abstraction. So the films are grouped on lots of multiple 5. If I was incapable to difer this, wich can be considered to large for one, I would use multiples of ten...

I always thoght that the problem of using this kind of site to rank movies based on quality (since, I assume for what you said, that you don't rank only based on enjoying, charm, etc) is that recomendations wouldn't be precise. If you define a list on quality, the response that you will receive will be on what you consider to be 'quality' (inacurate, of course, since we are not especialists and eventually lost one or other detail) on a movie. If you defines a list on enjoyement, the response will be based where the ideia of the site lays.

A curiosity of mine: how do you (and others) conciliate this problem? Do you use those direfences of quality (that don't prevent enjoyment, like, e.g. simple cinematografy on a film of good acting and storyline) to rankting?

(grammar nazi forgive me, I'm not english speaker)

afx237vi
Posts: 185
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Tue Oct 26, 2010 12:38 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by afx237vi »

When I first joined Criticker I ranked in multiples of 5, but after a while I decided that wasn't specific enough, so I rejigged all my rankings into multiples of 1. Then after a while I decided that was ridiculous and it was impossible to differentiate between a 87 and a 88. So I put all my rankings back into 5s. Now I decided I don't like that either. After all, some 85s are better than other 85s!

So I decided to compromise. All my rankings are now multiples of 2.

last request
Posts: 4
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Tue Apr 20, 2010 10:04 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by last request »

I just give it the number I feel it should get.

Red_Falcon_
Posts: 1
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 16, 2010 6:04 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by Red_Falcon_ »

I typically start the rating in 5 point increments and go up or down in one point increments when I look at my previous scores and see where this film fits in with other films I've rated.Sometimes a new film will lead me to adjust the rating of a previous film.
Usually I rate films on two main points, was it enjoyable for me and\or did it challenge me in some way.My base for films is 50-79, below this was means it was pretty much a waste of time to watch.Any film in this range has succeeded at one of those two points to some measure.Anything 80-89 means that it is also one of the films I've seen that stands out for me as an especially good movie.90 and higher means it's also one of the best\favourite films I've seen or resonates with me in a way that most films don't.

CosmicMonkey
Posts: 594
160 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun Apr 05, 2009 6:52 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by CosmicMonkey »

When I started, I first starting ranked it in Multiples of 5. I decided that it wasn't specific enough and now I rank in multiples of 2.5 (rounding up, so that 82.5 becomes 83). I'm pretty satisfied and most rankings fit in the curent system pretty well. That being said, there are time sI do have huge difficulties deciding if something is say, a 70 or 67.5...

cagedwisdom
Posts: 827
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:44 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by cagedwisdom »

FitFortDanga wrote:I can't put it into words, it's just a gut feeling. I admit that most of the time there isn't much difference between a 62 and a 63, but sometimes there totally is.


Very much this for me.

I also frequently (yearly or bi-yearly) go through all my rankings and even them out so 50 is the exact middle (OCD tendencies, I know). In doing so, I will see two films, recognize that I liked one marginally more than the other, and that becomes the distinction between for example 62 and 63.

TheDenizen
Posts: 1638
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Apr 13, 2006 12:51 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by TheDenizen »

Rufflesack wrote:I also frequently (yearly or bi-yearly) go through all my rankings and even them out so 50 is the exact middle (OCD tendencies, I know).

:shock: that's insanely labor intensive. What does it gain you? More accurate PSIs? More evenly distributed Tiers?

cagedwisdom
Posts: 827
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Wed Jun 14, 2006 9:44 pm

Re: To the people who actually rate out of 100

Post by cagedwisdom »

It's not as labor-intensive as it sounds. I did it when I hit 600 and 700 rankings, and then not again until I hit 1000 I believe. It's only a 5-7 hour job, I'd estimate, and the kind of thing I'll do over a week or so.

But yeah, I could probably shave 75% off that time if the full rankings list had a more interactive/streamlined ranking input integrated into it. :P

I think it's good for many things. Improves my rankings, gives me perspective (reminds me of films I forgot I had seen, for instance), perfectly distributed tiers where 50/100 is the average, and really I just like doing it once I get going. It's just another excuse to think about films, particularly ones I haven't thought about in a while. :)

Post Reply