Sounder SIGN UP FOR FREE
Talking Images
Talking Images

Episode 36 · 9 months ago

Thumbs Up or Thumbs Down: Is Rating Films Actually Worthwhile Communication?

ABOUT THIS EPISODE

Get out your spreadsheets fellow film nerds, this episode is dedicated to you! 

It will for once be decided if the answers are truly written in the stars, or if the good old 10/10 system is more than enough.

In our effort to discover the best rating systems and make sense of some of the universe's greatest questions we will also, of course, insult every fan of Rotten Tomatoes and At the Movies.

IMDb's 10/10 scale vs. Letterboxd's 5/5 scale will be examined, and hell, even good old Criticker will get a mention.

We will also discuss some of the rarer and dear systems, such as the classic Norwegian die role, and ask: just extreme can we be. 

Don't be surprised, some of us have used the 100/100 scale, and there are still active promoters of 20/20.

Above all though, we will ask the key question: Are ratings actually a worthwhile form of communication?

You are listening to talking images, the official podcast of ICM Forumcom. Welcome back everyone. I'm Chris and for the purposes of this episode, let's just say I have only one term and it can do one of two things. Point upwards or downwards. There are simply no other options. The quality of films assessed the exact same way if you are in Phoenix, the sides whether gladiator gets the limb or die. I have to warn our listeners there. If there's anyone in our audiences that already have their spreads, it's out with a clear outline of what the perfect rating scale is. This episode is about far more than numbers, stars, terms, percentages, die or even tomatoes. It's about communication. It's about the purpose of the ratings themselves. Are we communicating something to the people who see our ratings, or is it simply for ourselves? And if the former, if the rating truly is about communication, which is clearly the case for critics but also for many of us, is it valuable communication? Are you actually providing some kind of information and now the human being can see and use with us today, it to walk down this question of especially existential dread for many of us. Are Three absolutely wonderful cohosts, Adam, Tom and Saul. Introduce Yourself, skies, and let's kick this off. Hi, am Adam, I'm not going to be able to match Chris has incredible levels and enthusiasm since I woke up ten minutes ago. Well, I'm very happy to giant today. Hi, this is Tom from England. Excited to be and discussed a rating scale everyone today as a soul from Australia, and I'm also very curious about talking about this topic, especially because my stance and writings has changed so much now. That sounds exciting and same for me actually. So let's just jump right into it and I think we all have our answer more or less. But do you rate films and, if so, how long have you been doing it and do you actually take ratings seriously? Okay, so I've been writing films or as long as I've been a member of IMDB, which is September two thousand and one. Initially, when I was writing films I did take the writings very seriously cause I was running a teenager when I joined. I thought, all this needs to be something that reflects really will what I thought about a film, what it's quality was. As it's evolved over the years, writings have become a lot more meaningless to me and it now comes to the stage where I don't really think any too much about my writings at order. I really care about them, whether they reflect that much. But I still use them because the websites that I'm registered that required or write films order see them like it. I checked movies, can just take a box and it's checked, but if I'm logging something on IMDB and need to actually write it, so I started. I have a writing and with a letter box to do of the option, but as much is as store through what you've seen if you've given it all writing like soul. I started rating films when I joined IMDB. I think it was a little later on, at the start of university, so that would have been around two thousand and five. And like so many of these episodes of mentioned, it was the IMDB top to fifty that started my passion for films and that influence my rating scale to some degree. Now, a film needed at least an eight to feature in the IMDB top to fifty. So when I started rating films, I only give it eight or both to any films that I deemed worthy of inclusion in the top to fifty from my perspective, and that's something that is stuck with me throughout. So I do take my rating seriously. I rate on for separate websites after watching a film. Kea Track of everything, but I love just using ratings to help me pick out films to watch and Gad my view and habits, although I agree with sold that they do become less meaningful as you go on and watch so many films. All right now, now I think you actually have a proper the bait going because of the give your view of the ratings are a bit controversial. That'll just jump to Addam first and continue. Yes, similar to Tom and so, I started writing films and I joined MDB and when I was watching the top to fifty. So I think in around treason and they are treason and name when I was at university. I don't think ...

I take the ratings. I give you that seriously, but I do pick the writing on I amdb seriously or RTENOM matters or any website like that. Of all, my my opinion on the IMDB ratings is probably changed. You know, I probably value IMDB writtings less than I did when I first started using this site. Have a bit of a question for Tom Before we move on. He said that you write films or mark them as sale for website. So obviously we've got IMDB, I shay movies and letter boxed. What's the fourth one that you use? The fourth one is flick chart, which basically ranks all of your films in Auder of preference and each time you watch a film, the website matches it up with one of the other films you've seen and you say which film you prefer and it does that about ten times for a new film and then positions it accordingly in the grand list of films. So every time you watching new film, it kind of puts it up and works out where it should be in your preference. It's quite fun. I remember this website. I thought dead. I used to use it like Orridicut. They go. I love it, but I mean it's one of those that if you've not used it some time, there's no where you're going to go back and put every single film that you've ever seen in there because of the amount and that would now take you. Yeah, I think that website was recommended to me back in the IMDB days somebody was using it and I do see it pop every so often a letter box. The whole comment will be like where it entered on their flick Ron and all the things that have showed them. But I think the thing which got me about that one is that you write it after you've seen about a lot of films. For me, when I have a few days to think it over, my preference about it changes. So I don't think on everyone anything as a static as that, but I understand the appeal of it. I was actually surprising no mentioned crittiguer. I'm not always any more either, but that was also one of the ones that were really big for a while. It's started taking about quitticer when Tom was speaking, because that also had this view of ratings that they were proportional to what we had seen the rather than based on some kind of fervor bacteria. Like I remember importing all my ratings and like my eights becoming seventy one, for instance, or my nines are, it rarily, becoming eighty two sor eighty five, just based on how many nights and how many tense and how many eights and sevenths I had because it had this idea of how many films to be in each tear and it's that seems pretty much the way part is thinking, though perhaps only with the top tier is at right down. That's right, and it's really strange because naturally I'm geared towards rating films. Five are both because I enjoy films. So I got to lie out of him. But flick shot thinks that any film in the second half of all of the films I've watched would get a score of like fifty or be low, and it doesn't really correlate, wow, with what I've seen. Yeah, because the problem would like things like flick hi was the one to do a bill curve form my viewing habits are built. Doesn't make sense, because I don't know, a bit challenge obsessed, but I generally watch films that I want to see and that I expect to like. So I get a very few films are right lesson of four out of ten. Just because of other thing I like, I'm not going to watch it, and also I'm watching all sorts of films. Are Not being discriminate about it at all. It makes no sense actually have a bill of exactly. Think the only way would even get anything close to belcome is if you're a professional critic and have to review absolutely everything, like being stuck to watch everything ration of state date movie. That sounds awful. He would be a quitting sympathy for all of the critics out there and then has to step put the rating on it and right five hundred of thousand words depending on where they work. So, although I guess there's there's a bit of a pleasure in the writing skating reviews as well, I think we can get into this hole. We think about the ratings a little bit later. I have that kind of spreadsheet discussion I mentioned. It didn't throw stuff the way at the far ends. We get our listeners a bit hyped up first, but that I will definitely challenge you them on your only two hundred and fifty exclusionary eight plus ratings. It doesn't actually work that way. I don't exclude it to only two hundred and fifty. It now goes. I think I probably got about five hundred odd films that are a rate Bot, but it was just from a perspective whether I thought that film would fit comfortably in the IMDB top to fifty was part of my perspective, I suppose. Did the your opinion of the bit of the fifty change short a time, and did that there anything to do with the with the change in how you were ranching and writing? Yes, my opinion of the top two fifty has changed over time as I completed it...

...and realize that was only the tip of the iceberg and there so many more masterpieces that aren't even mentioned on the list. Bought because my way of rating films had kind of been set in stone and you become attached to it and you don't want to go back and change all your ratings. That's just how become fixed. So an eight out it ten or board visit and favorite for me and one that I would review. So I one that I would view is sitting comfortably in the IMDB top to fifty, even though I don't really appreciate that list anymore. That that's could lead to all kinds of weird results in that case. Oh did this one would be very pleasing to people of wot on Imbat of the fifty. Here's an eight, here's nine, the most recent crowd pleaser. But I think we all talked about just how seriously. We seem to take ratings now. So that was my next question, like what do you even mean when we say taking rating seriously? And I suppose, while I was originally going to say no or give him more moderate to her respire response, I have actually done what you didn't do Tom I have gone through my ratings and change essentially all of them at least twice in my life. Oh My, Oh my, only be just too ranking him up from from ten to one, and then this going through. Is this actually a ten? o? Ken, no, nine, no eight, no seven, and you go doing that manually and at least twice. Wow that it was. Yeah, but I think as I've gone older older I'm just become stricter and stricter and a lot of things just didn't it felt really odd to have that many tenses, especially when I didn't feel a strongly about them. So I think like when I first started rating on IMDB, we within a year or two maybe I'd seen two thousand plus film. Fairy three thousand, I had at least hundred tens, I think, and by the time I seen five thousand films I had three hundred or two hundred and fifty ten. So I just scale that down to probably hundred and fifty, and then last time I scaled it down to well under hundred. So it's just this kind of consistent friend towards becoming old and hateful and not liking films that much anymore. That's really all. I don't think I've actually got more tense and really these days then I did when I first started watching, when I thought started watching and writing them an IMDB, I was really strue and as I thought was a perfect film or nothing that would change about it, wouldn't give it a ten. But these days I'm re watching a lot of stuff at stuff which might have given an ige or a ninety Backun't I a lot of it is just running up to a tend because it's in my top two, a little thrown films. It's like Wilma as will be at him, and that's actually kind of happening to me too. With rewatchers are some more films, not not as many as your horse, but like there are some of my nice nine point five Steve managed to creep up to the ten. But no, I think if general, I've just been stricter and stricter. Like I u shouldn't see a single ten out of ten as the first time viewing a year anymore, and that's with, you know, quite a few undred film scene. So it's it's getting more sad, more depressing, but I think also my writings mean a little bit more. So it's a given take. I guess I'm with you and I rarely see ten these days. The last one was played run of two thousand and forty nine. That really changed with me. That was a transcendental experience that I just love too. Interesting choice. Yeah, it just worked for me. It was a it was a magical experience that I loved it. And the once is you go back to the rating scale, about how you change your ratings. Christ, I've got this strange armishrry ruling in place where I will change a rating of the film if I watch it again. Okay, yeah, so I've films that I watched when I was young and I absolutely loved and given a ten, and I know now that not a ten bought. That rating is not a change unless I go back and watch it and at that point I'll then be able to reassign a rate into the film. Interesting for me. I had rated films so careful. So at that point I wasn't even using the ten other ten scale. I was using essentially a hundred point scale. So I had everything teared up and that I could quite easily does push like all eight down to seven or seven point five, and the all eight points fives down to eight, for instance, so it was a bit easier for me. I guess at one point that even had a two hundred point scale, which is ridiculous because I was so focused. I'm managing this to distinguish my favorite films that didn't have Leick chart at this point in time. First at I guess, I had my ratings as ten and nine, and then ten nine point five, and then nine point eight, nine point seven, nine point six, one point. I think I was doing like ninety eight point five, five percent try to distinguish the tears in my pop hundred. It's...

...pointless, though, US, really pointless. But then for some reason I taught us the necessary and helpful I'm always impressed when it. I'll assign numbers to the films and in that way, you know, give ninety seven or ninety six, like. How can you differentiate between the two films that that closely? It always impresses me. I can't work out how I'd manage that kind of system. I think it's just about emotional response and trying to quantify it, which was actually got really good that. Like I managed to get that. I can pretty good sense of where would be mean. It's all fairly arbitrary. There's not a big difference between six like ninety nine point six nine point seven. But you know, it's it's all about this exact feeling of everything from the quality to the intensity, to the rituals to the acting performances. All of that kind of blended to get in my mind because I got so used to it and I could immediately give an approximate rating and then those two change. Obviously with the Remashi could change drastically, but it felt very natural to me. On which I might just mention if they jump back a few topics and I really write a film and give it a form writing, I actually don't always change an IMDB. I've got my own word documents. I might change them there, but a lot of the time it's just like going beb writing. So pretty much meaningless to me. But one friend who like if five some refreshes my page every single day. But most people don't look on my writings at all. So I usually actually don't change, especially the friend that's a Fab it's probably going to listen to this podcast because it doesn't really do podcasting, but he's obsessed with my writings or whatever. But look, most people don't care whatever. So I just have been changing my word documents. I've and charged that IMDB. IMDB I've got it as marked to scenes that way when I do a power search and come up in a power search. So I've seen it, but I don't really care that much what I've writ it on IMDB. But it's probably just me. So why are you using a word documents spreadsheet? I am as well, for my mind isld. I grow using word docums. I've been doing this since I was a thirteen or fourteen years old. So the first thing that you learn is word you get very used to uncomfortable doing a word and I've really had no reason to my great iye of everything's been in a word document since two thousand and one miles will stay that way. But the best part of so much is a spreadsheet. So come on, putting Lauren on this podcast back mail. I've never used spend. She's bed is root documents less and less, but I have this one road document I've had since two thousand and five, two thousand and six, and this kept transferring between computers. I think we need to Spetch you episode. I did try putting the daughter into a spreadsheet at one point but there was just so much to end and I just gave up on it. So you can expose it for IMDB, all the information. So yeah, exactly. HMM, I guess I'm Eke sense go I was doing at the trying come here from world to Exhale, which is just ridiculous. So a go we not. And just just to be clear, I don't actually rate everything in spreadshets. What I do is that they have my top list from every single year with their ratings, so I everything from eight and up essentially, so I can always go in there for any kind of pool or vote on for a METC and just order my personal use to see what's my top ten or even top twenty thirty of any given year, and I can just immediately see it. And they have them tiered. No ONA. Essentially I have eight, eight, point five, nine, nine, poty five and ten. That's it. See if you use flick shot, you wouldn't need all the streadsheets because that just the same. I would, I would that come but flick shot. The slick shot breakdown in two years. What years is direct is everything you want? Yeah, like, I think so. I used to do this before I found I seem too I used to have every single top list I was interested in in a word document as well, just with big titles and then just the full list in text, and I would mark the films had seen in red and the other should be in black. Sometimes I would rude the ones had seen and then I would, you know, store it. And when I found I shake movies, I was like, oh great, I don't need to do this anymore because all the lists are right there. So if someone listening or would finally create a website where I could both rate and rank films and rank them in yearly lists and I could just drop my route document, but that doesn't exist. Deet. Oh well, so, while we are crying about the limitations of Technology in two thousand and twenty one, let's get onto my next question, which I think all of us are already answer, because you've only talked about the ten. Other ten scale with which I guess means we all grew up on IMDB. What is your rating scale of choice like? Do Use Toms, starts die ten or ten percentages? Want a hundred? What is the rating scual you prefer to use? My writing scale of...

...choice is actually no writing scale at all. When another sounds controversial, when I first started posting the reviews on the weekly threads on the I check movies forum, I would just post my review and I wouldn't put any writings next to it, and I think a few months went by some people just say, you know, really just like to see a writing in there, because I want to be able to see at a glance where you like to film and or without being able to read your whole paragraph. I'm sort of like will it goes against the whole point and what you really want I've written, rather than just looking at the writing. Anyway, I ended up going for a very simple system which makes sense to me. So it's a four star system, and basically the four stars is anything which is eight and above, so favorite for me. Seven out of tens. Three Star, six out of ten above averages two stars. Anything which is average rule below gets one star because it's sort of like it's average or worst or I really need to explain it or singify just how bad there's. The fact that I've given a one star just shows it. It's either not interesting or worse than that. So that's my preferred system, just something where I can say that I either really liked a lot, I liked it, it was okay, or was average or worse. That's my preferred system. But I do use the out of ten system because IMDBA requires it. I use the five star system because it's the best way to reflect on letter box or my position was on a film. I was not something which I think is actually necessarily something that I need. It's good to sort of things personally. That's not something which I think I need to communicate with the world. All right, and that's actually a pretty good one. And they're onically, a Tom and I have both signed up to be programmers for ICM FFF, the fifth one, for two hundred and twenty one, which is the ICM for a film festival. We pretty much use your system. They're only from serial two three, which which is actually exactly the same format. So well then, all that's all. That's right and I kind of struggle with systems that aren't the one to ten that I've gone up with. It takes some kind of age exactly where film should be if the scale isn't similar. When letter box t came along, obviously there was the five star scale, but you can do half the star, so that translates easily for your rating. When you used to it. Yeah, an ten scale. Yeah, definitely the ten at ten scale. Like Sol said, it's something that I agree up with an IMDB so that that's just just stuck with me and that's how it will be forever, I imagine. For me I used the ten at a ten scale on IMDB, but I would I would rather there was an option for five. So I guess I would rather it was at twenty because when I look back at like a seven hundred ten, I'd rather be uple to put seven point five, six point five, that kind of thing. I also don't like the star system. I don't know how people can write out of four or five. I think is limiting, very limiting in what you can do. I think a hundred I'd probably like as well. Holtholl, I think eventually you get to a point where I like, how can you write something like sixty two hundred. They gets it too specific specific, but I think, I think you completely right that I'm I would absolutely refer a twenty point scale as well, because to me like that, that's the difference between eight and the eight point five and nine is really big. To me at least, there's a quantit quantifying greatness. It's probably the thing I've struggle with them all. Is why I also used to go all the way two hundred scale back in the day, just because quantifying greatness, it's it's a really harding to do and it's just feels like there's so many levels of love. Yeah, I think twenty would be my favorite scale if it was possible. It was just me. I don't feel the need to quantify greatness. I mean, if it's something which I liked a lot or loved or whatever, I don't think I need a quantify whether I love love, loved it, loved it, love love, Blah Blah, loved it, or whether I just liked a lot. So that's why I just like that go or value system or the four stars anything. I don't tell her above means it was amazing to me. It doesn't matter if it's I do or I don't? Ten or eight and a half, nine and a half? I don't think if anybody really are reviews or whatever, it's going to make that much more difference to them. The thing is you're patching it from the point of view of other people reading your reviews, but my rings are for me. So in like ten years time, maybe I'm looking at list of Japanese films and the plots are very similar and if I know, I gave us one to a seven point five, one film and eight. You know, it helps me to remember which one I preferred, and so I'm very much looking at it for my own point of view of ranking, my own ranking, my thimbs. That's exactly...

...the same for me, like when I did that the two other dolls, only for me and only so I could get the better idea of where I was dragging things. And this might just go back to list making and loving to make lists, etc. But there as the main reasons why I would break it down so much. Those because I would you use this to create list for anything like so I could immuse you know. Okay, this is my other way things. Now going to make a top list of standish films of French films. These are directed this one eight point seven. I reckon this one, eight point six, discoes be all about the other one. So it was just like a really quick year memory taking, you'd like, that I can still use after ten plus years. So I think when you break it down in that much details, it's mainly for yourself, not for an actual reader Interestin t I mean, I get that. I guess I just Fote for myself that if I couldn't remember enough about my position on a film, I don't know how come so be a feeling about including in a list in the first place, whether there was an eight point six or, I wait here, eight four five, recurring or whatever. And I maybe it's just me, but I found a lot of lists that I've done for the forum list. A lot of them I want where deliberately left off films. I've seen that many years in which I actually have a strict opinion or anything. I like to just go on the dekmal point nextually I am next to the seven. How much truly like to win ranking it. Yeah, I can see that. So I think I might be moving in that direction a little bit too. I think it was much more important like the first ten plus years when I was watching films, because I would forget a lot of it, that I would have impressions, I would have memories of them. But now, whenever watching films for quite a long time, it did, it's it changes a bit. You know, we taste have changed so much that you might not like so these films you've given eight anymore. Even so, it's stranger and strange shared the longer even more films. In the warrior case, that shanged. I get frustrated with ratings because kind of what Chris was just saying, maybe I watched it from ten years ago and give a nine out of ten and then ten years later my rating scale might be quite different. So I find it very hard to make ranked lists. I find I can overwhelming because I'm like, Gosh, you know, these films on nine right now isn't the same as and nine and a few years ago. And I get to talk and all and up just sort of giving up when I'm doing this half of them. So I do think that we were talking about how this distinguishing things, it's gets more more help for for yourself the broader it gets. That I do think that when you strip away too many distinguishing marks, it starts to become pointless. So I really like the soul's four point scale, whereas actually anything that's mediocre or less so, anything that's Tupid, the rated five and down just get zero because it's not interesting. I think that's a pretty good scale, though would personally have liked that, you know, exter low rating where you just joking. This is just horrifyingly bad and just war people against it. But I think that that's that's a really good and solid scale. However, I think one system I really really disliked it is this is feel ever at the movie is rating system with tombs up toms down, which is essentially is the rotten tomato system as well, with rotten or fresh tomatoes. And and what that really hate about this system is that it just have two options. It's good or it's bad. It doesn't make any sense to me because, like s all pointed out earlier when he did this four point scale, like a seven, which is that usually the most people are very good film, and I six, which is usually most people good film, would get, you know, a to and the one. But in the rotten tomato scale, like everything that's six plus would get a fresh tomato. It's just meaningless to me. It can be the greatest film of all time, get ten out of ten and that's identical to someone this thinking this is a pretty okay film. That's still this is meaningless to me. What do you guys think about rotten tomatoes and there at the movies? Writing. I've never been a fan of the rotten tomatoes rating scale, and that's probably because I became obsesster of IMDB and it's a lot clearer. Our film is rated on there, and I don't agree with the thumbs up thumbs down scale because, as you say, it doesn't communicate enough about the quality of the film. It's just a coin for is it God, is it bad, whereas the IMDB rating can paint a more clear picture of the quality of the film that you're going to see. Yeah, rutten tomatoes is very interesting and the whole way that it's auction so that it buy just to look at number of negative versus positive reviews does lead to a lot of things. Getting nine on a hundred percent era or reviews just seven out of ten rather than nine ten out and reviews, I would I quote into Batos too seriously. It is one of the official lists on I check the...

...movie, so I do have some interest in it, not really a lot of interest. is nothing that's really appealed to me that much. Yeah, first of all, I'm a bit surprised that the Europeans are calling it rotten tomatoes, considering we normally parents are rotten tomatoes, especially Tom. I don't know what's going on. That I would assos. I think it's just because I hit Chris. Say Not, Tom you've broken you broken my heart here. So I don't even want to conish American make he's being culturally sensitive. Yeah, I think Chris. I think Chris started and Tom was trying to be polite by continue instead. It's okay, I forgive you, though. I think the rotten Tomos they go for from something, frombs down, for a reason, because people are on that side. They just want to get a quick as this film, good or bad. So I personally don't like the system. There's no way I would use it, but I don't think it's a rating system in the same way as we rate films. I think it's a very quick kind of good or bad, and that's what that website goes for. You want to go on through on Tomatos. You want to see if it's good or bad. Basically, it's good or bad, even meaningful when it's like that boiled down, like, if anything I would ever great or not. You know, if it's eight plus, it gets fresh, if it's seven down, it would get rotten. That that would be preferable to be. Almost every film will be rotten, almost retrol. Yeah, exactly. But it's just the entire spectrum of yeah, pretty good, to the greatest film of all time. It just becomes completely meaningless to me, like I would never personally want to see out films that were just good unless it was something really important about them. I've also seen ones where they've given it a kind of fresh writing, for example, or rotten rating, and you read the review in your way. You know, I've read reviews and I thought, Hey, this one's been given, I can run rating, but actually it's fresh, or vice versa. I don't think it's a very good system, but I think they're going for a simplist to the more simplest possible, which is not something I'm a fan of. I understand why you might do that as a few website, because without doing that work that you need to do to interview website would come a lot more. So I think they just they want a straightforward system. Well, yeah, and I think things have moved in general and the world things have moved too much. More kind of thumbs up from stone system. But if anyone ever watched at the movies that even they moderate the system eventually. I remember this is the first episode of the Roger Ebert Pioneer, this sideways toime, which was mediocre. Like that would have been or like okay, that would have been pretty good moderation to where you could just have a great mato like this middle point, because that's that middle point. That's really frustrate thing. And like you said, that you can read a review and it's so negative. This still gets fresh, and that's because quite often a six other tempted people, which is, you know, good enough, usually can come for films that are really disappointing, just very well made. For instance, I think I said more or less enough about it. I'm not even sure if this devil spiracy theory, but I'll just throw with what I'd why I think it's the case, and that's because I think rock the Matles want to be on DVD covers and be listed the various places or for just add advertising purposes where essentially in the film can get a fresh score and it looks good and it can be used. That's my analysis or interpretation of why they would go with this system. That's interesting, Christ and I think you might be onto something there. It also baffles me as to how run tomat so's is made up of reviews from critics. That is used for the basis the score, but it doesn't go into as much detail as IMDB, when IMDB is rated by just the public. You know, you'd expect something where the score is based on critics reviews perhaps be more in detail and more in depth. So that is always surprised me. That's a really good point and it is strange to think that as huge film fans, we prefer that you ate it to rotten some martyrs rating. So we're basically siding with the general public on that. So that's the rotten to made those system we all talked so much about IMDB and how that actually is quite okay. I'm talking bit about letter box. So which of these rating systems, though they're practically the same, do you prefer it for the ratings on letther boxed or I am to be basically the same. And what's even interesting is that old say very close members all the time. The letter box writing, if you double it, is point one, point two spots away from the IMDB writing. The few niche films where there is a bit of a difference in there, but for a vast majority of films, if it's a high score on webs one website will be a high score on the other website. So for me they're pretty much one the same. Are the same sort of system. People treating them regular the same way. They just start doubling the halving. Well, so that's incredible insight, Song. It's quite understandable to but do you use in the bway things or let a box right things to inform what you view in any way? Yeah,...

...look, I'm usually not. I mean if it's something I've never heard of, I might look at the writing to see whether it's interesting. But you know, with something in the horror genre, as long as it's above four point zero and IMDB it's probably worth while. It's horror films are very harshly rated. I's anything below for on IMDB or below too and let a box. So probably would give it a skip unless it's really appealing and you ever really use them that much. Sometimes look over a new film surprised about how heights right and and that does get me interested, but I generally I just go off direct as I go off word of mouth and what I've heard about the film on the I check movies form and don't usually pay that much attention to writings unless it's something which is one of those big Oscar bus films that comes out with like a fight point something writing, something like the Ben Night Sky from George Clueing, which I still ended up putting myself through and it was not really worth it. But yeah, and I generally had long to Chanson writings. Wow, I do actually use ratings quite at a bit. It's those smaller sign of virus. It won't necessarily make me watch a film inside the rate that or discourage me if it's has a very low rating. But usually, for instance, if I try to explore a new director for the first time, I'll either shacked. which films I'd highest rated have the most waltz or princess are on the most top lists on I shake movies just to see like which are the most important films, or perhaps if I get several of this person's film or several films from any kind of farmer category, etc. I will usually look at films with a seven plus ratings and be a little more suspicious of films at lower ratings. Might the only one doing that? No idea. The same, Chris, I always refer to IMDB or I check movies to see what lists of films on. I will rarely watch a film if it's got a rating of a six or less on IMDB. Maybe considered somewhat of a film snob in that record, but I don't want to waste my time and watching rubbish films when there's so many great films out there. There are exceptions to that if there's a film by certain director or film that covers a certain topic that really appeals to me and I don't mind stepping below the six rating on IMDB. But that's a rule. It I kind of a dare to in order to try and make sure that I'm only can have a good experience when picking a film. Yeah, I was just going to say. I also, if I'm going to cinema, for example, are going to watch in the film, I instantly check IMDB ratings. I checked the percentage and what the mouts and if a film has a little rating, then I might just avoid it. And also slightly off topic, but for me three stars out of five sounds a lot better than six out of ten, maybe a bit. That's just my personal the way I use my rings. So if I was to use a star system, I stupid as it might sound, it wouldn't translate directly out of ten for me, because six out of ten for me isn't that isn't that great. A film was free. Star sounds sounds much better, but that's just my personal opinion. But yeah, I use ratings. I always look straight out rating and I'm to be in right thems before I watch anything and also, like Chris said, if I'm going to start watching a director or a certain set of films, maybe I when I first start watching Japanese films, for example, when I am DB and I checked diverage rating and I also think the average rating, and I am to be the older the film the more accurate it's likely to be. I think for some of the newer films come straight out with it. Five. It's true. She should takes about six months for the IMDB rings to catch having at less than flight, and I don't know if that's because it's studios and flying them or whether it's just the people who want to see it see it first and the people who are less interested to see it like drops down. But yet for newer films are pretty much know that the IMDB writing will go down by half a star or whatever all the time. You know, six rite months at passed. It is interesting for me to also here in regards that so many of you actually look at Ron and tomatoes. I'm theb and everything before watching a film. I do always look at I check movies because of its son an official list it is more interesting and I chay movies has sometime that goes along with it. So if it's got a high favorite to dislike ratio, then I can sort of go down letter boxed and sort of see what the reviews are like and sort of see what the star writing is if I'm curising your IMDB, but I usually I wouldn't really do much more than that. I use your check what it's like and I check movies and take it from there. When one more thing, one this actually I usually make my watch lists on. I only be as well, so I don't really use the Maine Watch this function. But they make watch list for each and every single year and obviously you see that rating right below the day title every single times. It's just impossible for that not to have some kind of an impact. Adding, I think, just respanting to Sol I think that our expert for older films because if I...

...use it, for example from going to the cinema and there's a whole bunch of new films have come out, I can get a quot overview from IMDB and whatten to matters, even if it's not quite accurate, whereas if I look at official lists for films from this year, you know it's not going to help me at all in terms of watching something. I know the in terms of official list and I it's not going to make a difference. But I usually check the e sect movies page anyway, just out of force to habit, and sometimes when I go there you can see from the number of favorites, the viorites to dislike ratio or from the comments of people have written. They're usually used me some indication of how the film's being received. It's not berthing. It's probably more just force of habit over the last few years, since I've got understood in mine shaped movies, I just go there instantly. It's one on one place to go. It's probably not perfect, but I don't know, it's just what works for me. I actually check the comments as well. I think in the past I probably would have checked the little forum and IMDB the specific film page forum. So I think I probably use ij movies comments as I a kind of small substitute to that. I think the check movies favorite ratio is is pretty accurate and a good indication of whether I'm going to enjoy your film or not. I remember when I first joined our check movies, the most favorite list was the one I became passionate about working on and it discovered so many brilliant films through that. So I think they're relatively smaller user base of our checked movies and comparison to something like imdb or letterbox, they can work in its favor because the people are all hardcore cinema fans whose tastes are going to be far similar to mine than the general public. So it is a good indicator. That's another thing about I check movies is that the writings are going to be in flazed on there like an ID be everybody talks about ranks bring in flight and sock compets, accounts, creen S, stears can push on their film and the same what happened on the at box, because quite a wee on website, whereas I showed movies, it's less well known. So I think there's more genuine uses, if I can called I think call them that. I think there's more genuine users on I showed movies. You know, you used to get those occasional accounts which, unlike, advertised different things. That's that's probably really true as well. It's not like I dismiss films that have, say, under seven or under six out of ten and in fact a notice. I went to my list of my favorite films of the last decade and five of the top fifteen are actually rated under under a six out of ten of the I B users. So I think it's it can be trusted to completely, depending on what your taste is. I'm quite interested in more articles films, for instance, and many of those are really divisive and some of them get really big launches as well, like, for instance, on the Guard for gives. Obviously not, for most people got a really big launch with their and Gossling in the lead role, and that the bound to get a lot rating. I tend to also look at who the director is, what kind of style it's in and that before I make up my opinion of what the rating means. Usually at least audiences are somewhat predictable, so I can kind of see, okay, this is like a really popular film. This means that eight, for instance, means little bit less in this area, but for me personally then for another type of films. So I can kind of quantify it, the style of the film, how it was released, and then I do guess what I will think about it. I'll really get that, Chris, and that just bring into mind how important it is to use a multitude if websites like we do to gather the information when making a decisions. Obviously IMDB is my first touch point, but by using the the other sides as well to have the information, it helps to give a good indicator of whether I'm going to enjoy a film or not. And Only God forgives is a great example, because that's one that I loved and the IMDB rating just doesn't do it justice from my perspective, and in this is also one of the reasons why it's so good. All of the critical list, especially critics that you think you have a great deal of things in common with. You know, follow the overall this from cite and sound goods in them, I said, are because there are films those lists that do have shockingly low ratings and you can maybe find some films that you might not have found otherwise. So I would never want to trust only average writing. Some films are really divisive and you might be in the group that the loves them, and some films just have a low rating because everyone finds them mediocre or bad. So I always have a bit of distrust for average ratings. But but I think Adam did bring up something really important earlier, which was that when he changes from a want to tend scale to a star's scale, which is zero five to five, exactly the same scale, he actually would change value of the rating,...

...because just stars means something else to him. And this made me think of a system which which I thought US really widespread but no one else had heard of, because it all apparently only exists in my native Norway as well as Sweden, which is the dye system, which is where everyate a film gets a rating from one to six, six being the better, and it's displayed on a die. And I think everyone we're absolutely shocked where. I told him that because to them die if there's something completely and utterly random. Yet I never heard of that rating system and was quite confused by it. Makes Sense now, but it's just strange to think that some find it's so commonplace to you can be completely alien to someone in another country. Exactly, and I think this is also ato system where I just my want ten scale quite a bit, because the way it usually works is that six is a masterpiece, five is a great film, for is a good film, three is an okay film and two and one variations of bad, essentially. And just like Saul, I would then change my system quite a bit, like several nines will become six has several nines. We emerged in with eight as five and then set my sevens would be four, my six would be trees, for instance. So I think when you just tweaked the system slightly, just everything can really quickly go tops the Derby. We but there we know we don't have to dwell and die writing. I really thought it was more common than it was. Like that's actually the way I started writing films like this is the way everyone rates films. This is the way with grade that in Norway as well. By the way, if we don't call the die system and we have like a one of the six, so the one that want the six system. Is this so prevalent in the region? Culture like is die? That the you know, the great all of the movie posters at the cinema and the DVD's to die are absolutely everywhere. It's used from book reviews, teater reviews, like anything you can imagine. It you even use for help to notice is about a healthy products are. So the die is everywhere. It is not random and it's been around with the S. I don't think there's anything wrong with using the one to six scale, because why? Why is it one, two, five or one to ten? But what confused me is the idea that you vote, if you vote dice, it's a random number that comes up and I finish. Strange. You know you're rating on basis of dice and just starts when I finish. Sounds back to me, but I don't think. I don't think one, two, six makes any lesson someone to one or five or one out of ten at Omoa. It's just whatever you're used to. But yeah, as obviously in origin Chang, yeah, I think that's even how we speak about we always talk about the let's rule the die when they were thinking something. So it's this is so seep into the culture. But to get to the last rating scale that's quite prevalent over the last two the one two hundred and the percentage scale which are sent should the same, except the percentagees are seal the hundred and they won't. A hundred scale is one two above hundred itself. Do you think these scales are too extreme? I obviously said I used to use these a little bit, but what's your general opinion about the this, you know, really large, really long and detailed rating skills? Yeah, I think they too extreme. I don't use some myself and don't really see the need for it. I guess. On the big thing is that we in my writings is that my opinion about a film will wax and Wayne over the days and sometimes a week since I've seen it. I've got a collection of films that I've read seven out of ten, then in a couple months time I can roughly order them from know what a seven out tend you know, is worth to me and I feel that I can rearrite. That gives me more flexibility rather spent in saying this is a sixty four, this is a sixty two, this is a sixty five, this is a sixty one. That gives her a flexibility later on if I want to shuffle things around. But I said how my opinion the film has evolved in time since I've digested but something all over, ever down, if you like using it. But I think it's a bit too inflexi little bit true rigid, because I don't think the film viewing experience just one of like go. I've seen a film, I've write it at that set up, digested it the end. I think of film stays with you and I think that's what you should really be writing. But maybe that's just me. I agree with what Saul saying there. I think it's too extreme. One to ten is enough for me to rate a film. I don't want to go into one, one, two hundred because it just opens up the whole kind of worms. So I don't know how I'd be able to differentiate between a film that's say, a sixty two or sixty three, so similar in quality, and that might change on any given day, as solar said, because a lot of your appreciation of a film is due to the emotional reaction that you have with a film at the time and that can change as your experiences change every time, in...

...your memories of the Film Ebb and flow as well, depending on your moods and where you're at in your life right now. So I think one to ten gives enough flexibility to give a clear indicator of how you felt about a film without getting too lost in a larger scale of numbers and get what common saw saying. Of all, I think there are arguments are more against written films in general. I don't know. I feel like soul, for example, things that reviews and written kind of things about for much more important than numbers for me. Like I said earlier, I think twenty would do my ideal system because I can say something as a good six, so good serving a bad six by Sid I think once. If it was a hundred, it just gets way too difficult to differentiate between a sixty one and sixty two, sixty three. But I understand when people do it. I don't think it's always because they're obsessed with numbers, are obsessed with exact ratings. I just think sometimes, if you're doing it just out of ten, it's quite hard because I could give like ten films or seven and my opinion of them could still be very different. So I can understand why people might like a more specific system and for me at twenty would be the best. Yeah, I can see that that I'm and I agree. But though, I do think we're doing what is said you wouldn't do here. We've been talking so much about various ratings, get health which ones are better, that we we almost, you know, missed out on the value of communication, which is really what this is all about, at least if you wrote a rate publicly. So do you think that, for instance, if you rate the film seven out of ten or eight other ten, do you think someone can just look at that and get some kind of clear information from it, or do you think it it's, you know, this workless? I think that it's quite useful. I will often check and see when people live either favorite to the film and I check movies or rate a film of eight or we're both UN letter ups there. If that happens, then I will investigate the film more. I think someone's obviously loved this film. It could be worth checking out and potentially and it's my watchlist then. So I do find the ratings useful just so that you can understand whatever people thought to the film. A Ed if quick clients. I think the ratings for me are useful, but only if you know the person behind it. For instance, I know that if tom rates something as three stars are above and letther box, that means he liked it. Even though three stars me is above average, for him it's a good rating. Conversely, we've got people like Kong speech, who's one of our forum users, who there's a lot of films four and a half and five stars. So I know that a four and a half of five is not quite as a meaningful is. If I's like saw Tom gave something of five, would be like well, must be absolutely amazing. And then, conversely, you've got people who more conservative with their rating. So another shout out to underhand, WHO's one of our Belgian users, and he's very conservative with his ratings for older films. So it's a film from before one thousand nine hundred and nineteen, is given it two and a half stars or more. I know they actually really really liked it. Not sure about that, but go ahead add another you really really liked to buddy actually found quite a bit of interest in it. So a lot of the films like when I've talked to him and discussed them on the forum on the weekly thread, I can see I was actually a lot of positive things that he liked about video drome, even though he gave it two and a half stars, and I go I actually, you know, for an older film, that's really high rating for you. So I'm just saying a lot of it just compends on the you sist him self. But if you know people and selves, you know are conservative or how generous they tend to be, then the ratings can be meaningful in journal Worlds. Like for most people three and a half stars or seven out of ten or more would mean that they liked it. But what's confusing as probably the for the five, the six out of ten, those middle ratings. But different people they'd be a between whether it's about average average drop below right average. So somebody gives it a three stars or two and a half or two, and I don't know who they are. Actually don't know that well with they like to remark. Likewise, as they gave it one and a half stars or below, I'm pretty surely didn't like it by those middle ratings, unless you know the person. The two and half, two and a half three stars, I think is very unclear. I was going to say something similar to soul that, without knowing how hope person makes films, I think the numbers are kind of meaningless. I mean for me personally, if I do something at six out of ten, it means I'm not I don't really like it very much, whereas that doesn't make much sense to a lot of people were success and maybe a good film.

I think alongside the number, you need some kind of opinion from the person for it to mean anything, and that's why I like when I rate films, the rating is kind of just for me and if I was supposed to put a film on the forum, I think the words I'd say about it would be more important, because the number is just my own personal rating. For me. I just think missing to someone, Oh yeah, this is seven hundred and ten, it's worth voiced by itself. Well, I think I'm in Tom Cat do, whether that or thought cuttery as well. That you know, if you know the person, you know you have general idy of their rating scale and what they think a rating can actually mean quite a lot. Like if someone I know that really gives out end of the ten and they give at an astander, even a nine, other time you noticed thing that deeply loved by them. This is something that might be in their top hundred even or in a top to fifty. So this is something that should definitely be investigated. And if I know that I have a lot of, you know, favorites in common with this person, I may get really excited. This might be because I've been on forums for so long and been, you know, rating things for so long. You don't. We don't do it on I say, I'm form maybe we should. But on film general, on My DB, before it was performs were closed, you would frequently, you know, rate films per year and then the average rating, the highest Iris Rating, would win, and they are. Of course, it became quite important to kind of hard to normalize and standard as the rating scale, because if you got these people which always rated films very low like this, really harsh rats. They take it completely crush any film they had seen, even if they liked it. So I think I became quite focus on trying to normalize my writing scales. I think most people more or less have exactly the same ten of the ten scale, like the little tweaks are different, but like ten to the ten, you know, fantastic or masterpiece, etct, like one of the waits films of all time. Nine, other ten would be, you know, a wonderful, great to get, you know, fantastic film, but not as great as ten. And then eight would be generally great. Seven, very good. Six good. Some people is just okay, but it's in that bar ball park. Five would be for some people okay, for some people mediocre, but again more or less the same for, you know, poor week film. Three and down, usually variations of bad, so say bad, terrible, you know, God awful or disgustingly awful, etc. I think almost everyone has more or less managed to fit in their ratings on that scale. But there are some acceptors, of course, and that's when things can get a little bit confusing. I think it's interesting, Chris, how you mentioned that the opinions of others could skewer films rating somewhat. And it's just reminding me that when I first started watching films in the IMBB top to fifteen, it was with the ratings. I had some friends who would pay because for you go and IMDB and give films extreme ratings just to why I'm you're just to show me that they've done it. A doubt that their ratings would have skewed the very language. There has been larger efforts of this guy. Didn't you want to mention it? But I mean the whole reason why the Godfather is not the number one film on my IMDB, and this is well known, was a spam campaign from two thousand and nine or two thousand and eight to maintain the dark night rises as number one. So it says you're just rating golf. All there, everybody just rating the Godfather one of the ten because you loved the dark the dark night like. That's the whole reason. And obviously the dark night fell further down and now show Shank is number one. Not The intended the result for these people, but because hundreds, thousands, maybe even. Don't know how many people did it, because so many people downrated the Godfather. They had this such a massive impact of the top three positions. His crazy, isn't it? These kind of extremes, you know, because they enjoy same films so much that they will sabotage over films just for a rating to go a few quaces. Exactly, such a big immobilization effort to destroy one film in favor of it. It's really interesting and obviously it does seemn have a little bit of a social impact, because I we don't know if these still one of the most respected or viewed list for a lot of people, and the number one there still has a lot of focus. Right think I've actually seen ads, etcetera, listing shortshank redemption as is the best film according to I and the beat of the fifty. And again that's simply because people want the dark knight to win. And of course you also see some other really fun times when people are from CIFIC countries have up mooted films and I know Adam especially at a lot of people are really frustrated, you know, the extreme amount of love a lot of Turkish waters show the their favorite films. It could be their personal opinion as well, but just the own slot of really high ratings for short and films to the point that I...

...in the be actually stepped in and removed some films. And remember how about was an ethel got its rating removed simply because so many people from Turkey loved it and it was, you know, their opinion, seemingly messing up the top to fifty. But it is not a Turkish phenomenon. Like normally did exactly the same thing with Maxmil has, with just a smaller country. But the Max mollness came out again this over ten years ago. I know there was a massive the region campaign to get that and keep that in the top to fifty at all costs. They've managed to stay there a little bit. So this is some of those really interesting thing with people really care about ratings. That I am the be it works, so, Chrisp because it makes you want to see a film if it's in the top two fifty. Well, it did it one time. So you can see why people get behind these marketing campaigns. I've never actually watched Max were honest, but it was on my radar exactly because of that popularity campaign that you mentioned. So these things do have an impact. As ridiculous as they sound, it is a way to influence people to get to watch a film they may not, over the wise, watch. Well, what you guys are saying is one of the reasons I stopped working on the top to fifty. I don't think I would ever work and I again I think I started. However, twelve years ago I was doing a top to fifty and if you look at and now actually there's been a movement towards more vision films, but I can't actually quantify that as and also from a couple of countries certain films in the list where those countries have some excellent films, but the types of the excellent films they have are not they don't make it in the top to fifty. The ones that make it the top to fifty from those countries tend to be ones I wouldn't like. So I stopped completely working on it because of that. I just I'm not there was a point of my life years ago when I would sit for a film for a couple of hours even though I didn't like it, and know it's like you know I can't be bothered and I know I'm not going to like it, so what's the point? No, it's exactly the same yea, and this seemed fitting. But decur because the fact that Adam and I and the few other people, learn included, would watch a lot of bad films. It started off with some of these really big high rate the the films of fields and lots of place that we knew would be bad for whatever reason. Then we went on to know the worst list of all time, like I only be bought on hundred, for instance, and it was a was a bit of fun. They did help me get more of a bell curved to my ratings, because before that I was hardly watching anything anything bad. We basically watched maybe like twenty thirty films, either ones with the diculacy high ratings from certain countries or bottom one hundred films. It was like it didn't last that long because it kind of became so painful. It was also when we were watching the top S F my MGB, there would always be a few films, it's like sneak in that are really painful to watch. That's kind of what started it. Any of you disagree with the general want the ten rating scale I put out earlier? I guess Tom Might, but anybody else disagree with this idea? Where you know, ten is ten, is the masterpiece. Nine is fantastic, eight is great, seven is very good, six is good, five mediocrel okay for poor, three bad to terrible and one God awful. Does anyone have a big disagreement with that scale? But not a big disagreement. But I guess I use slightly differently. Any writings that are really about four, five, six, seven and eight out of ten I don't really give out any other writings are not very often. When I went back looked at my letter box statistics of the last Onezero, two hundred and sixty films that I've logged, I've given none of them half a style, given two of them. What can I just ask? One thousand, two hundred and sixty films. That's a very specific number. I'm just why. That's why I joined letter box. I only joined it in December of two thousand and nineteen. You know, I would have liked to squeeze more films in, but I haven't. An important my writings is to actually it can what eight hundred at a time, so I've never done that. Just of one have gone and learn a box. I'm sorry, I guess the way I said it did sound a bit random at all. Logged since December, thirty two thousand and nineteen, I've got zero halves, I've got one stars, I I've got three, one and a half stars and I've got fifty eight to star films. There's really really from two stars at above. But I really start giving that right sort of writings out and you're basically when it gets two stars or four out of ten. For me that means that I didn't like the film. I mean I've used the one, two and three out of ten for like. It's some extreme cases really didn't like it, but really meaningless to me. If I didn't like a lot, it's a four out of ten. I don't really need to go any further. But yeah, fives, mediocre out or average. For me, this is above average. Seven is a really good but then again the top of Scout Eight, hundred and ten. That mean the...

...same to me really. I give it an eight or nine or ten. I mean if I we watch and I might fitle with that, just my own personal perspective that I might fill with what I write it on the letter box, but eight, nine or ten for me is pretty much all the same, just like one, two and three things pretty much all the same. For me they're pretty different, especially eight, nine, ten mean anything from three and down. That I do hate, but they did. It is quantifying variations of pay, but now I almost never see what do it ree. It's either. It was only back when I was watching a lot of these bottom I'm be abottom hundred and a few other films with Lauren Adam and a few other people that I was actually seeing a decent fy of these terrible films. They can general. You never ever see films this that. I try and avoid films that are rated one hundred and twenty three and I can't remember the last one I've seen that I've given out that rating. As Soul said, for and below is pretty much a dislike. But I also think about the as well as my enjoyment to the film. Think about the craft and the work that has got into the film. These films, although the man not resonated with me, the someone's Labor of love and you've got to appreciate the craft and the effort and ambition, even if it might not have resulted in a great film to watch. So I kind of look out for that and try and appreciate the positive aspects of the film, even if it is a largely negative experience. Having said that, I also rarely rate films nine or ten, on the other extreme in the scale, but when I do, it's going to be a film that I absolutely loved in connected with me in a way that most films don't. May I feel the thing way? Okay, first of all, I really love Tom's kind of passion about film, to the point that he looks to try and appreciate every film, respects that people have made a film. I think that's what drives has some tourism as well. But I've seen so many like terrible films that when I'm watching them, I roy don't care about the fact that people made it, because I think sometimes films are made and it's not for good reasons. I think sometimes does bad filmmakers just it as bad people who are bad at every job, and the fact it's a bad people, like a morally bad and is leaking out there with them status is like. Well, if you sit for some of the worst frongs, I'm not convinced are not bad people. Song Dumb and made me suffer. But in terms of the one to ten sing I have a pretty weird kind of system where a six at a time basically for me means I didn't really like the film. For me it plus means I really like the film. Seven is kind of okay. Seven and six are kind of okay, but pything. Yeah, five below is basically just like. So because of a lot of confusion, like when I talked to Lauren, if I give something a six, my six is so different from hers to that's part of it is and I think numbers and ratings are quite hard to talk about. It is it means somewhere, something very different to different people. But yeah, it cours for me. would be really good. I think it's not going into something else there too, though, because he's talk about things I kind of like in like etcetera. These version people kind of modified to various sense to likes. For some people, when they say they really like a film, they mean it's really great film or a even a fantastic film. Like some people could even say like casually, I really like this film and it could be, you know, the greatest film of all time. To them, like that's how they would use language. I think it even bearies a bit base of how language is used. I think, for instance, like feel stronger in the region than in English, for it's so it's a bit off, a bit of an odd thing too, I think. Another thing about ratings I just remembered was I've seen people post online, maybe even on the forum, that they never, never give a film like below four, and I think that really desarre because you know that means you're being a film out of seven basically. So I know Tom and so said they hardly ever give films like one, two or three because they don't watch terrible films, but the idea of specifically not ever giving out a certain rating to me makes little sense. I've also seen like times when people will only give a ten or at ten to like ten films. kind of understand it, but yeah, it's interesting to see different systems. It might be done. It's make for the record. I've got about eight ten at tense from about five thou films watched, but I'm I don't keep a track of it. You know, if a watch a film that's a turn out of ten, I won't have to write another film down. It's just a ten attend. That's how it is. Oh, moving away from what he said earlier, to do with the no specific top five hundred to you do your ratings have like a bird, if we willn't like an eighth is greater, an eight is fantastic, or if it just based on the amount of films in your top five hundred or like this top ECIL on.

Yeah, the top actual and it doesn't really come into it. And I've got no problem of having more than five hundred eighty a tempts or whatever I suppose. For me, ten at ten is masterpiece, perfect film. Nine out of ten I would consider it near masterpiece. It's just something that didn't quite work for me there, but I still absolutely loved it. And Eight is an excellent or great film which, as I said earlier, was one that, when I started writing films, would be a film that I would see comfortably in my top two fifty. But then it also brought a later meaning to it where if a film's got an eight or out a ten or both, it was one I would quite happily have in my dvd or Blu Ray collection. So I would want to own that. I've not kept on top of that. So there's a lot of films right it ate off that I haven't got some just aren't available and you know it's tricky to keep on top of them, but that's the kind of what's in the back of my mind when I'm I'm raising a film yet. But I like how even the merger of it real things they think she would actually pushes and put in your home as well. So that's the I really like that. I don't think about it the same way, but I think in terms of the words, views and the feelings for the films, it's more or less matchless, though I have noticed, though, that you push your sevens, I think, a lot stronger than I push my sevens, which might mean that at least some of my ace might be your sevens or, all right, versaman's. I guess all of those common things when you kind of have these version game interpreted slightly different ways. Definitely, and it's interesting to hear everyone's different perspectives and how they rate films, because we've all got a lot of similarities but at the same time, you know, just a difference between one number can mean a lot between different people and it's fascinating to hear exactly I think here that I think at least had more less the same scales, just slight variations, and I guess you think almost to a belt yard of these variations, where Adam and Laura might be in slightly different sizes of the belt care of. But that's about it, because Laura obviously quite really likes her success, like I guess for Laura, and as six is a very strong seven, well, for I can three week twelve, the fight, twelve to fight, because words and ratings means so many different things, but at least it seems most people, like I said earlier, are incinct. I'm just going to jump in just with the whole sevens and I discussion. I've got way too many seven's because I guess, like Tom Initially the films I was giving eight out of ten to. This is back in two thousand and one, two thousand and two, back, going back about fifteen or twenty years too, the films I was giving a eight out of ten to with films are who were good enough, my own top two hundred and fifty or top three hundred or whatever, credit of an artifice than there, because suddenly I've got all these films of even seven to which I like a lot. But when I watched them back in two thousand and six or two thousand and seven, or at that point when I watched them like, well, it's not good enough to be in my top two fifty, so I'm just going to give you a seven, even though I liked to a lot. A lot of my sevens should be close to the eight and I've tried to fix it up with in letter box or a lot of films that are written, not a lot, but on say on, and maybe about twenty percent the films that I've given a into an IMDB in the last year I've actually done as a four stars on their box, just because I'm sort of trying to round up the seven and a half to an eight that should be. It's of a problem just going back to when I started writing films. But yeah, I guess seven or right. Either way it means that I like to film a lot. Oh, I love this. This is so specifically endorsing the twenty point scale. No, no, I don't know want a twenty point scale it. I really want to get rid of all my writing tore together. I know that I sort of need them to be have a communic hope people out of glance what I thought about a film. But yeah, the more I think about the bore. You know, I don't really want to write films. I mean films, you know, pieces of art. Their experiences is it really didn't need to qualify or quantify that experience. We just describe and share the experience rather actually put a new and NU miracle scorner. But I don't know, just me that. I think that's that's such a perfect way to some of everything that ratings are too, though, like really or extremely quick communication because, like you mentioned, me more or less have the same rating scales. Most people more or less know what and they thought attend means are seven out of ten means. So it's just here information and that's it. You can get, you can the guest like thousands of these in a minute. You can scroll through something and see thousands of these ratings and get them like this little bite size of information about what you thought of them from it and and that's really all. There they are and you can miss any kind of nuance, anything of interest, which is both good and bad. And I think I actually completely agree with what you said earlier,...

...so in terms of removing ratings from your reviews, because that's both good and bad. Like I think I've been pointing with that idea as well, because if I add a rating, I can be pretty sure that most people will just see the rating and skin pass my review and not think about it. If I don't think lude the rating, I think it's a much higher chance that some of them will actually read the review. But then again, I gets a large amount does won't even register anything I'm trying to tell them. So it's a bit of a given. Take it whole to promote the film. Think it's sason sound magazine to the same and don't provide a ratant, just provide with you, and that's the angle that they're going for. So I can totally understand that. Let me just check that really quickly. I have my site and stuff right here, so this going to scroll up to the review section and yes, you are completely right. There's not a single rating or indication of rating at all here. So yeah, you're completely right, and obviously I do read all of the reviews in it might skip some. I don't want to spoilers off, because the one thing that's really annoying with citing sound is that they sometimes the spoil things without warning. But there we go. Site and sound. No ratings. So all is on the side of site and sound. So I guess then to kind of just wrap all of this up, and I think we covered more or less everything, and this arm of a talk about earlier communication it. Do think it's sad or not that good that people are perhaps more interested in a rating than reading what you think about the film, especially if you're writing reviews, if that's something that you find is a pointing or troubling or trashic. It's not sort of thing that's ever actually crossed my mind, but I suppose that, when I think about it, the reason I rate and review films is generally to share in highlight the films that I think I deserve in a more attention and that people should watch. So if someone sees that I rated a film in nine out of ten, whether or not they remi review, if that rating encourages them to check the film out, then I suppose that that makes me happy, that that's all that matters. If someone wants to remo review, great, but if the checking out film because of a rating that I've given it, then you know that that's a good thing. For men say that's just a pointing or some necessarily yeah, I would be nice, I guess, if there was more emphasis placed on opinions rather than just you miracle values, sometimes somewhat randomly assigned films. It's really part of the way society is progressing. Just you to go into letter box look at some of the one line reviews or some of the fun word things that people are riding or the communication by emojus. These days, everybody's just want something short, which is good, but it's against film discussion and I guess I've sort of grown up a movie forums ever since I was a teenager and I've sort of got really into that mindset of being able to dissect and discuss films in depth, and going by numerical ratings seems to go against that. But I think it's also been, in the air, pultable with the way society is heading at the moment. So I guess it is a little bit sad, but it's something that I accept and I guess from the most disappointing thing to me is when people take my writings. Like I told you, my friend keeps refreshing my IMDB page and he would take my reign so seriously. I guess that's what I find disappoint of people complain about me raise something too higher too low, because I'm like would don't turn the writing. Actually look at what I've written about one of my said about it. Don't ask me why it's not five styles or why it's only two stars or whatever. Actually look like what I've written. Discussed that with me and don't fix sate from the writings. I guess that's just oney. If you will fixate on the writing, I thought you get what common soul or saying. But I think if you're rate a proper review of the film, whether or not there's a seven out of ten at the start or at the end, if people are going to read a review, they're going to read it regardless. I do agree that as a movement, there's been a kind of movement to people writing less and just using a thumbs up, thumbs down, that kind of thing, but I do think a rating can go alongside a detailed review and not the tract from it. I love reading through reviews after I watch a film just to gain other people's perspectives and hopefully there's lots of other people out there, with some of you point to mine, who like finding out what other people made of certain...

...films. Yeah, I completely move that. I think that ratings are really useful. So I do like average ratings, even though I'm suspicious of them, especially, for instance, when we're on the forum and you see ratings from people you know. You can see ratings specifically from people you know we have an opinion closer to you can see right these, but if you got critics, you know you're closer to and get a really quick and often quite accurate idea even obviously get more information with the really reviews. I love reading good reviews. That's that's also why I love cycle, sound, etcetera, and it's it's really nice about before and after, though it can be a little bit dangerous before sometimes because some people speaking spoilers, but it's it's it's so nice to get more understanding why people like a film, to dive into the new dances and disgust them with with them. I agree with so all that. It's disappointing that it might just be boiling down to only ratings and I do hope that that changes, that people get more more interested in what other people actually got from the film and diving into that, disgusting that and learning from that seeing things different ways. But I do think ratings are really useful and I think most rating systems, except, and ivery say it's wrong with accept thumbs up, comes down and rotten tomatoes, do provide some actual value, and I do hope this episode has righted some value as well, that we able to go through these rating systems and talk through them discoverer was good and bad about them, that we actually had a proper look at what we're communicating, how good that communication is. This is also left for you to decide, so feel free to come to ICM for Umcom, find our treat about this with the link to this episode, and tell us what you think. Are we completely off or right? Is completely useless? It's rotten tomatoes actually the best system in the world. Join the discussion. Do let us know, and thank you so much for listening. Join US again soon. You have been listening to talking images, official podcast of ICM for USCOM.

In-Stream Audio Search

NEW

Search across all episodes within this podcast

Episodes (54)