Return To: Board Index | General Discussion

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
livelove
Posts: 622
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

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

Postby livelove » Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:41 am

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.
As Paulo called it, it's a "different flavor of enjoyment" but the rating is still the same.
That this is problematic is exactly my point.

ribcage wrote: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.
Technically, I would need to resort to negative values. Like 70 for a positively pleasing film and -70 for a SBTAG film. But since 0 is the lowest possible score, everything needs to be accommodated within the 0-100 range.

ribcage wrote: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."
good idea, but also defeats the Criticker algorithms, because for 99% of other users 79 and 80 have a different meaning.

ribcage wrote:Really what we're discovering is it just can't be defined by a number because no number can justify the contradiction.
well, before this discussion started, I could not fathom why anybody would want give high scores for bad movies. I admit that I do better understand now where you all are coming from. But I still think it's wrong to give movies like the Yeti movie above and Godfather (or whatever you consider a masterpiece) the same score.

Why can't it be easy?
We give bad movies* bad scores and good movies* good scores. No?
That's easy. Why make it complicated?

(* again: I'm not referring to the technical quality here)

Neowulf
Posts: 7
260 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Mon Apr 27, 2015 1:05 am

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

Postby Neowulf » Wed Sep 25, 2019 8:57 pm

livelove wrote:oh, it surely would help. If everyone scored SBTAG (so-bad-they-are-good) movies 0, then those movies would be easy to find.

Hmm, I don't think so? For one, people disagree on which movies are SBIG and which are not so they will still fall within a certain range and secondly, if we rate movies that we hate to watch in the very lowest percentiles as well, they get mixed up with the SBIG.

livelove wrote: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.

That's not why I had the phrase there. But anyway, will you avoid putting a great disturbing horror film, a great tragic drama, and a great funny comedy at the same number? You loved watching all of them equally but the reasons why were vastly different.

livelove wrote: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) ?

Maybe I should say for the record that I find it difficult to imagine a SBIG that is so unbelievably funny that it's on par with the movies at rating 100, the ones that have moved me or meant the most to me ever. Usually they would fall in the 40-60 range.

livelove wrote:my rating system is explained here: RULES that help you decide how to vote

Right, so you do put both movies that are SBIG, and unwatchable things you hated, at the very lowest ratings. So let's say all your TCIs followed the same rating system and had very compatible tastes with you. Now you spot a movie called "Yeti 2: The revenge" and it has a PSI of 0. And you're in the mood for a SBIG. Should you watch it or not? Is it funny or is it actually just unwatchable?

livelove
Posts: 622
0 Ratings
Your TCI: na
Joined: Thu Sep 17, 2015 9:36 pm

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

Postby livelove » Wed Sep 25, 2019 9:50 pm

Neowulf wrote:people disagree on which movies are SBIG and which are not so they will still fall within a certain range
yes but that's true for all movies and secondly those movies would have a lot of zeros in the Criticker rankings tab.

Neowulf wrote:if we rate movies that we hate to watch in the very lowest percentiles as well, they get mixed up with the SBIG
well, yes, but I think if it's really a clear-cut case, we won't watch it anyway, and if it's not, then the movie will probably get 5, 10 or 15 points (because chances are there is at least something deserving of some points), so there is the distinction.

Neowulf wrote:That's not why I had the phrase there.
I very much doubt you would tell your friends to go see a terrible movie without any further clarification.

Neowulf wrote:But anyway, will you avoid putting a great disturbing horror film, a great tragic drama, and a great funny comedy at the same number? You loved watching all of them equally but the reasons why were vastly different.
you are confusing something here. You might love them for different reasons, but they are all good films in your book. That's the difference.

It's like laughing WITH different people for different reasons. But you still laugh with them. That's very different from laughing AT someone.

Neowulf wrote:I find it difficult to imagine a SBIG that is so unbelievably funny that it's on par with the movies at rating 100, the ones that have moved me or meant the most to me ever. Usually they would fall in the 40-60 range.
one might argue whether comedies may ever deserve 100 points, but if someone finds that legitimate, then I don't see a problem with rating Yeti: The curse of the snow demon 100, as it is better than any comedy. If I hadn't rated it 0, I would probably rate it 100 following your logic.

Neowulf wrote:so you do put both movies that are SBIG, and unwatchable things you hated, at the very lowest ratings.
yes, and that's perfectly logical. In physics, when you approach extremes, effects are sometimes inverted. Same here. You can get fascinated by what you hate — although that's not really what I am talking about here.

Think of it this way:
If I had the choice, I would rate unwatchable stuff zero, and my favourite stuff 100. And for SBIG I would prefer negative values, if I had the choice. Now given that Criticker only allows the 0-100 range, I have to squeeze/compress the scale:

Code: Select all

-10 SBIG .............. 0 unwatchable .........................100 perfect

becomes

                        0 SBIG .... 5 unwatchable ............ 100 perfect


Neowulf wrote:"Yeti 2: The revenge" and it has a PSI of 0. And you're in the mood for a SBIG. Should you watch it or not? Is it funny or is it actually just unwatchable?
May I remind you that predictions are no guarantee, so even a PSI of 100 is no guarantee you are gonna love that movie. A 5min background check is always advisable. Having said that, the PSI of 0 is a pretty strong clue. And with a little background check, it's easily identifiable that there is huge SBIG potential ;)


Return to “General Discussion”