Do you rate ridiculously bad movies 0 or >0 ?

Introduce yourself to the community or chat with other users about whatever is on your mind
Proximity
Posts: 40
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Sun Feb 03, 2013 2:29 am

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by Proximity »

ribcage wrote:
livelove wrote:The rule is to vote based upon the enjoyment level, ok.
But enjoying a movie because it's soooo bad, to me is not the rule but the exception.
And in this exception, I'll vote 0 to reflect that.


But it's not the exception, it's still the same rule. As Paulo called it, it's a "different flavor of enjoyment" but the rating is still the same.

If you have voted a movie "so bad it's good" a 0, alongside something boring, unredeemable, unwatchable a 0, then you've gone the other way away from being able to identify this elusive "so bad it's good" status. 0 is just bad, no enjoyment. So if it's a 0 as a technical failure, but a 70 for the actual pleasure of watching it, you giving it a 0 implies no value of any kind. So that does the reverse of rating purely on enjoyment value (which gives a higher number) and still can't give a true representation of the film.

I suppose, if someone wanted to, they could rate by, let's say increments of 5 only but reserve scores ending in a 4 or a 9 to indicate a technical failure that still entertains. I.e. 80 is a traditionally "good" film and a 79 is a film of equal enjoyment but not equal in technical skill, not traditionally "good."

Really what we're discovering is it just can't be defined by a number because no number can justify the contradiction.


Well, I guess The Room is a masterpiece then. :roll:

Narg
Posts: 3
47 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Feb 05, 2018 8:32 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by Narg »

I pretty much always rate on enjoyment with some wiggle room given to how "objectively good" I think a movie was. In the case of hilariously bad movies I will still give them a 0, because they are so far off the scale in "objective goodness" that rating it above a 0 would feel like cheating to me.

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

Narg wrote:In the case of hilariously bad movies I will still give them a 0
thank you. Just when I started to wonder whether I was all alone in my approach.

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

TimeCapsule wrote:I haven't actually given any movie a zero yet since part of me feels like there is always something worse out there, that I just I haven't seen yet
by the exact same token, you could never give a movie 100 points, because there could always be one that's better, that you just haven't seen yet ...

I know an easy solution for this conundrum:
Don't shy away from handing out zeros and 100s and if you really encounter something better/worse, then just revise your rankings accordingly, as they are not set in stone forever.

TimeCapsule wrote:I challenge people to watch something like "Still Flowin': The Movie"(2014), or better yet "Things"(1989) and not think it's so fascinatingly bad, and so much so that you are almost both sure it's the worst thing you've ever seen
thanks for the tip, will gladly have a look :)

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

paulofilmo wrote:
gabba2k7 wrote:i give 40-70 to bad movies. though even 75-79 can be bad
Oohf, the recs must be balls for you. If a score of 82 is your 44th percentile, you're presumably alienating a lot of users that actually have similar taste to you.
@gabba: ok so what do you use 0-40 for ?
paulofilmo is right, this might mess up your TCIs.
That's a good example for why I suggested a different TCI calculation method respecting nominal user ratings.
Last edited by livelove on Wed Sep 25, 2019 3:17 am, edited 1 time in total.

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

MockHamill wrote:I rate movies based on how much I liked watching them, and to some degree how many times I would like watching them
in my view this is a separate issue, which I call the rewatchability factor (RF). IMO the RF does not at all correlate with the movie score:
excellent movies can have a very low RF if much of what makes them good/excellent movies requires surprise/suspense which obviously is significantly reduced the second time around when you already know what happens.

The RF is a multiplier, so an excellent movie with a low RF can be equally (or even lesser) appealing to rewatch as/than a decent movie with a high RF.

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

ribcage wrote:
livelove wrote:I mean, what is a voting system good for, if a number like 65 can either mean
"pretty good film"
"extremely bad film"
?
Because if you aren't trying to rank, quantify the highly subjective quality of the film itself, but rather the highly subjective quality of the viewing experience […]
actually, I WAS referring to the viewing experience and NOT the movie quality. It's a language issue. If you look on the graph on page 4, you'll see that the term "good/bad movie" is used for both the x-axis and the y-axis. I was referring to the y-axis (movie enjoyability) in this case. Although I have previously misspoken, which might have contributed to the confusion.

ribcage wrote:I will agree that finding the fun bad movies is hard, as it's a very elusive sweet spot, and as you move away from established cult films it begins to vary wildly on personal taste. But getting a number to this would hardly help
oh, it surely would help. If everyone scored SBTAG (so-bad-they-are-good) movies 0, then those movies would be easy to find.

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

paulofilmo wrote:
livelove wrote:I don't think we disagree though, because if it's a movie you appreciate and that you would recommend to your former self, well than it's a good movie in your book, right?
Yeah. I think the confusion for me came from your 'Now if users use their vote to reply to different questions.."How much did you laugh?"... then the film's aggregate score doesn't reflect anything.' comment. I guess you were giving sort of hyperbolic, singular criterion/values for film appreciation (Citizen Kane didn't make me laugh very much, therefore it is a bad movie!). And I just misread you.

However! If someone only really valued laughter, then, yeah, they ought to rate accordingly. And ideally they find people who have the same sense of humour on Criticker. Or Criticker should somehow adapt to this sort of rater.
yes, you got that exactly right. thanks for disambiguating my remarks. The "how much did you laugh?" line was meant to be inline with the "how much did you like the cinema popcorn?" question. I deliberately put both in the same basket, just to exaggerate a little for caricatural purposes. Of course there is value in laughter. But again, for me there is a ginormous difference between laughing with a film or at (the expense of) a film. If a film is deliberately poking fun at itself, it might get a good score from me. But if a film is dead serious and unintentionally funny (because it's sooo terribly bad), then that's where I hand out zeros.

It's a bad comparison, maybe someone can come up with a better one, but because I don't have a better comparison handy:

Imagine you had to score sex. (I know, it's a terrible example.)
If you are expected to score your experience anywhere between 0 and 100, with good sex rated 100.
Now, if you had sex and it was so bad that it was laughable, then I think we can agree that it was pretty bad sex and should be rated zero, right ?


paulofilmo wrote:
livelove wrote:I feel there is a difference between enjoying a film, because it is good, or because it is sooooooo bad.
And that should be reflected in the numbers somewhat. Would you disagree ?
I disagree. Not with conviction, though. I'm not the best person to engage with this, because I don't search out/or have seen many of these soooooo bad movies. I gave American Flyers a 'would recommend this to my former self' score. Naive things can have a peculiar charm that I appreciate/value. Yes it's a different flavour of enjoyment, but I value it about the same as Chinatown or The Bridge on the River Kwai. Heck, it's one point below The Godfather.
sorry, I have not seen these films. But if you want to get an idea of what I am talking about, try Yeti: Curse of the Snow Demon. I might even find better examples, if you are interested.


paulofilmo wrote:
livelove wrote:Because otherwise you can't distinguish a good film from a bad film, and that's certainly not the purpose of a voting system, right ?

I mean, what is a voting system good for, if a number like 65 can either mean
"pretty good film"
"extremely bad film"
?
I don't know what the purpose is exactly. Criticker is a log of my film memories/experiences, roughly ordered. And it's nice to find people who seem to have had similar memories.
you are right, Criticker has many different purposes. But I think its main purpose, as defined by the site owners, is to give personalized film recommendations:

- www.criticker.com/about wrote:Our Mission
Criticker aims to match you with the people who share your taste most exactly.

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

Proximity wrote:You can just give the worst films a 1, which is what I do. It hasn't fucked my TCI at all.
well 1 is pretty close to 0, so that's quite alright 8-)

livelove
Posts: 759
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

Re: How do you rate ridiculously bad movies: 0 or >0 ?

Post by livelove »

Neowulf wrote:To me it doesn't matter if a movie is technically inferior, zero-budget, made by unskilled people, hated by critics, or if I enjoyed for the opposite reasons that the film-maker had hoped I would. If I enjoyed watching it, it gets a high grade. If I hated watching it and wish I hadn't, it gets a zero. Surely this should work out correctly for PSIs and stuff. If you would say to your friends, or as was cleverly posited, to your former self, "Hey, you have to see this movie, it's hilariously bad, I had a really good time!", how can you then possibly give it a zero? It makes no sense to me.
I do understand you, but notice that even in your quote you made sure that you added "it's hilariously bad". You wouldn't just recommend the movie just by saying "I had a really good time!" – simply because it matters, whether you had a good time, because the movie was good, or because it was terribly bad. It just is not the same thing. So to put the same number on it, just makes no sense to me.

I don't even know if we are talking about the same type of movie. I am not talking guilty pleasures or movies that are aware of themselves being bad and poking fun at themselves, neither am I talking about movies spoofing other movies, because they need to be bad for the spoof to work.
I am talking about none of these movies.

I am talking about movies like this:
Yeti: Curse of the Snow Demon

I once started a "100 things I have learned" thread on IMDb and I think we easily topped 300 or so. It was hilarious.

Measuring how much I laughed, I could easily give this 100 points.
Are you seriously suggesting this movie is on par with the best cinematic masterpieces ever made (even if you take your own personal, subjective cinematic masterpieces) ?

Neowulf wrote:And what do you then give movies that you actually hated to watch?
my rating system is explained here: RULES that help you decide how to vote


Neowulf wrote:
livelove wrote:Sometimes, if I am in the mood, I am intentionally seeking a terribly bad movie I can laugh at. And to find such movies on Criticker, I obviously need to search for the lowest possible ranking or TCI, i.e. zero. If people rate such movies 70 or higher, than that obviously defeats this purpose. And that's just one example to illustrate why this harms the ranking system.
But in this scenario, how do you distinguish between movies that are so bad they're funny, and those that are actually just terrible and boring?
you are right, it's technically possible that a movie is just terrible without being funny. In my view, every point has to be deserved, so if a movie has not earned anything, it gets zero points from me.

But since both type of movies are terrible, the 0 vote is correct for both, as the Criticker ranking scale is not meant to be a laugh-o-meter but an appreci-o-meter.

Post Reply