Flickchart

[Owen McKenna]

(Owen McKenna Rio Rancho, NM) A friend recommended Flickchart and I got a profile. I think Criticker is much better. Maybe it's just me, but Criticker seems more user friendly. Has anyone else tried Flickchart?

[snallygaster]

Flickchart is cool & quite addictive for a little while, but use it for a while & you'll realize it's not really a useful way to rank movies. You could spend half your life clicking those movie posters and you'd still never get a decent rankings list. It's more of a diversion/game.

[MmzHrrdb]

Flickchart is cool & quite addictive for a little while, but use it for a while & you'll realize it's not really a useful way to rank movies. You could spend half your life clicking those movie posters and you'd still never get a decent rankings list. It's more of a diversion/game.

Hits the nail on the head. For anyone hooked on ranking films it soon becomes a nightmare. During my short time using the site I was constantly coming across 5/10 films that were ranked so much higher than, say, 7/10 due to the horribly limited method of ranking the site employs. Didn't take long for me to completely give up on it.

[Paxton]

I only heard about this website from this thread, and everyone here is right about it's uselessness for ranking films. However, going in with that knowledge, I began using it solely as a means to pit my favorite movies against each other. Obviously, the difference between best and favorite can be pretty contradictory. And as far as that is concerned, the site is amazing because it asks you questions no one else would ever ask.

One of the first pairings I had was Psycho or Raiders of the Lost Ark. I wouldn't naturally think about those two in comparison with each other. I mean, where exactly on your list of favorites do classics actually fall? Is Citizen Kane more enjoyable to you than Jaws? Is Caddyshack more consistently palatable than Pulp Fiction? How do you actually place a familiar standard like A Christmas Story on your list of favorites? Furthermore, you hate Phantom Menace, but do you honestly hate it more than Legally Blonde? Both your favorites and least favorites will be questioned.

I had a lot of fun with this site.

[mattorama12]

Furthermore, you hate Phantom Menace, but do you honestly hate it more than Legally Blonde?

Much more. If we're talking Legally Blonde 2: Red, White & Blonde, then we have a conversation.

[inmate]

i was addicted to it for a while, but it became kind of pointless when i found this site. now when i rank my movies here i basically do the same thing anyway. i spent hours on there, and my list was never close to accurate. the best part about it is that it's easier to flip through and find the movies that you've seen than it is on this site. it made it much easier to transfer all of my rankings here.

[MmzHrrdb]

I personally love the site, and have no difficulty keeping my list in an agreeable order, but of course, it helps that I've seen so few films.

[ShogunRua]

Just visited the site and read what it is all about.

There are many ranking and recommendation sites. Some I like more, others less. None are perfect, including Criticker, which I think is very good.

However, Flickchart might be the single most idiotic, worthless, useless one yet. The very idea behind it is moronic! How can anyone possibly compare two movies across vastly different genres, styles, and time periods? Oh, and let's not forget that movies often have different purposes.

Simply asking what is "better" between Gone with the Wind and Snatch is an exercise in futility. Even ranking with a number has its pitfalls, which is why I prefer mini-reviews these days, and post my reviews on Cinemageddon with no numerical scores at all.

However, numerical rankings can be used as a general personal assessment. They do not, however, mean that a movie that I rank 75 is automatically better than one I ranked a 73. For instance, I ranked the original Godfather (1972) with a 78, T10. Meanwhile, Ninja Scroll (1993) sits at an 81, T10. Does that mean I think the second is "better" than the first? Of course not. I ranked the second higher because I felt it was closer to perfection in terms of what it was trying to do.

But of course Godfather is the more significant, "greater" film.

Additionally, we are not computers, and we don't automatically remember the transitive property for every ranking. So if you rank movie A higher than movie B, and movie B higher than movie C, one could very well rank movie C higher than movie A. In fact, for a larger list, that becomes an inevitably. And again, with films that are fundamentally incomparable, why shouldn't it?

Once the novelty factor wears out, I'm sure many Flickchart users arrive at the same conclusions I have.

[MmzHrrdb]

How can anyone possibly compare two movies across vastly different genres, styles, and time periods? Oh, and let's not forget that movies often have different purposes.

Simply asking what is "better" between Gone with the Wind and Snatch is an exercise in futility. Even ranking with a number has its pitfalls, which is why I prefer mini-reviews these days, and post my reviews on Cinemageddon with no numerical scores at all.

However, numerical rankings can be used as a general personal assessment. They do not, however, mean that a movie that I rank 75 is automatically better than one I ranked a 73. For instance, I ranked the original Godfather (1972) with a 78, T10. Meanwhile, Ninja Scroll (1993) sits at an 81, T10. Does that mean I think the second is "better" than the first? Of course not. I ranked the second higher because I felt it was closer to perfection in terms of what it was trying to do.

But of course Godfather is the more significant, "greater" film.

Additionally, we are not computers, and we don't automatically remember the transitive property for every ranking. So if you rank movie A higher than movie B, and movie B higher than movie C, one could very well rank movie C higher than movie A. In fact, for a larger list, that becomes an inevitably. And again, with films that are fundamentally incomparable, why shouldn't it?

That's a fair argument. For me, I personally rank a film based on how much I enjoyed it and how much I was entertained. So while a film like It's A Wonderful Life is a "better" film than, say, The Adventures of Tintin in terms of story-telling, depth, and acting, I was far more entertained by the latter, and therefore, ranked it higher on my Flickchart (and gave it a more positive ranking). Yes, the two seem incomparable in many respects, but when things are boiled down to sheer entertainment value, it's much easier to rank them. That's probably why I'm personally more in favor of the site.

Anyways, that's my two cents.

[lisa-]

Additionally, we are not computers, and we don't automatically remember the transitive property for every ranking. So if you rank movie A higher than movie B, and movie B higher than movie C, one could very well rank movie C higher than movie A. In fact, for a larger list, that becomes an inevitably. And again, with films that are fundamentally incomparable, why shouldn't it?

that's its biggest problem. it doesn't bother with the slightest statistical methods, but rather just places A one spot higher than B if you say you prefer B even if you have previously preferred B to A a hundred times before. i.e. it assumes perfect transitivity across all movies.

i thought the idea sounded fun, just to see what list it would spit out, but the above flaw renders it entirely useless.