My goals for Film Ratings

Home Forums Governmental Forums Citizens My goals for Film Ratings

This topic contains 93 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by Profile photo of Ladon Ladon 8 years, 2 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 51 through 60 (of 94 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #250447 Reply
    Profile photo of brianfast
    brianfast
    Member

    “Ladon” wrote: [quote=”brianfast”]I don’t like the idea of a rubric. I wouldn’t have paid 3 dollars to follow your guidelines. I will rate as I please. I do think the staff ratings being displayed is a good idea, however.

    Sir, rating ‘as you please’ is the exact problem here. Because ‘as you please’ isn’t the same as ‘as someone else pleases’, which means that the films aren’t getting the rating that they deserve. If everyone decides for themselves what an average film is, then the ratings are never going to be accurate, and an accurate rating is what the director deserves.[/quote]
    I am entitled, as a film reviewer to have my own opinions one what makes a film good. I shouldn’t have to follow a rubric that might overvalue some things and undervalue things in my opinion. IF the rubric says that it has great lighting for a 7 but I think great lighting is a 5 then I should be able to give my opinion. Its not like I am the only person rating the movie. There are also people who would (according to your rubric) overvalue the films aspects and it would weigh itself out to get a more balanced score. Prime Example: SYBSM had 8s in more category’s for a while but then reality sank in and people stopped giving it all 10s and the scores dropped to the 5s. Your never going to stop people from mass lowering film scores like Carnage and COTY rubric or not, rubric or not.

    #250450 Reply
    Profile photo of Cometgreen
    Cometgreen
    Member

    “brianfast” wrote: I am entitled, as a film reviewer to have my own opinions one what makes a film good.

    That is a valid point, as film raters do pay to have this right. The only exception is film reviewers, of course, but we can assume they’re all mature enough to rate responsibly.

    I’m not sure I agree with the rest of your argument though, brianfast. Ratings should not jump around because members have a different definition of what is average. “Average” should be set in stone so everyone can understand what the ratings mean relative to other films. That is the most vital component of a ratings system.

    Cometgreen

    #250457 Reply
    Profile photo of brianfast
    brianfast
    Member

    Once a film has 5 ratings it won’t really jump around from one rating. I disagree that 5 should be set in stone, a movie might be very poor in lighting but it might have the best camera shots you have ever seen; what does that get you? People have different opinions on what makes a film deserve a specific score, and therefore ratings will vary. This rubric will also hurt movies that appeal to people in aspects that are not worth as much in the rubric as other aspects.

    #250554 Reply
    Profile photo of Ladon
    Ladon
    Member

    “Dragoon” wrote:

    Suddenly it’s not about the end result, but how much ruckus you can stir up along the way.

    You opened a thread about your ideas for changing the ratings system, you should expect some response. I’ve made two posts in this thread, both of which voiced genuine concerns about your plan (which were largely alleviated by yourself and Stefan). Furthermore, with you being the only candidate so far to actually lay out a plan of any kind (and a detailed one at that), you certain have my vote as we speak. I believe Cometgreen said something similar.

    So don’t complain.

    My signature has nothing to do with the current topic or this thread, actually. It was an unfortunate coincidence that I spotted that quote and enjoyed it at this point in time. Sorry if it seemed a little too topical, it wasn’t my intent to complain :)

    I’ll change it back, I think.

    “brianfast” wrote: Once a film has 5 ratings it won’t really jump around from one rating. I disagree that 5 should be set in stone, a movie might be very poor in lighting but it might have the best camera shots you have ever seen; what does that get you? People have different opinions on what makes a film deserve a specific score, and therefore ratings will vary. This rubric will also hurt movies that appeal to people in aspects that are not worth as much in the rubric as other aspects.

    So you’re suggesting that a director shouldn’t know what they did right and wrong with their film? It’s everyone’s varying opinions on what a ‘perfect’ and ‘average’ score is that is messing the ratings up right now. How is a director supposed to know what your rating specifications are, or someone else’s. All they have is a bunch of numbers in the end, and they aren’t always very helpful. But if everyone rates according to guidelines, then the director will actually understand what they succeeded in and what they failed in.

    This rubric will also hurt movies that appeal to people in aspects that are not worth as much in the rubric as other aspects.

    There is no use in voicing these issues without going into detail. Which aspects are these? If it says in the Director’s Comments that the intent of the film is to be terrible, such as the Anne Frank films, then shouldn’t the ratings reflect that? If they intend for terrible animation and flickering lighting, and they succeed, then the ratings should show that. The enjoyment ratings is where the film’s score would be. Everything other than that should be entirely objective, whereas the Story and Enjoyment should be subjective.

    Furthermore, I have nothing to do with your position as a film reviewer. This is not the election for Minister of Film Review. Yes, I do understand that the ability to rate a film is an added bonus for giving a yearly donation to the site in order to help keep it running. I feel that this is mainly so people cannot once again ‘mess with the system’ by creating multiple accounts to rate films. Since some films only recieve three or four ratings, even a second account would mess everything up.

    As a final note, I don’t see how people can have varying opinions on technical ratings. Those are the ones that should stay relatively still. It’s the Story and Enjoyment ratings that are telltale signs of a good or bad film, and those are the ratings that will definitely vary from person to person depending on their opinion.

    -Ladon

    #250561 Reply
    Profile photo of brianfast
    brianfast
    Member

    “Ladon” wrote:
    So you’re suggesting that a director shouldn’t know what they did right and wrong with their film? It’s everyone’s varying opinions on what a ‘perfect’ and ‘average’ score is that is messing the ratings up right now. How is a director supposed to know what your rating specifications are, or someone else’s. All they have is a bunch of numbers in the end, and they aren’t always very helpful. But if everyone rates according to guidelines, then the director will actually understand what they succeeded in and what they failed in.

    This is why we have a post and review forum.

    “Ladon” wrote:

    This rubric will also hurt movies that appeal to people in aspects that are not worth as much in the rubric as other aspects.

    There is no use in voicing these issues without going into detail. Which aspects are these? If it says in the Director’s Comments that the intent of the film is to be terrible, such as the Anne Frank films, then shouldn’t the ratings reflect that? If they intend for terrible animation and flickering lighting, and they succeed, then the ratings should show that. The enjoyment ratings is where the film’s score would be. Everything other than that should be entirely objective, whereas the Story and Enjoyment should be subjective.

    Furthermore, I have nothing to do with your position as a film reviewer. This is not the election for Minister of Film Review. Yes, I do understand that the ability to rate a film is an added bonus for giving a yearly donation to the site in order to help keep it running. I feel that this is mainly so people cannot once again ‘mess with the system’ by creating multiple accounts to rate films. Since some films only recieve three or four ratings, even a second account would mess everything up.

    As a final note, I don’t see how people can have varying opinions on technical ratings. Those are the ones that should stay relatively still. It’s the Story and Enjoyment ratings that are telltale signs of a good or bad film, and those are the ratings that will definitely vary from person to person depending on their opinion.

    -Ladon

    For Example:
    An opinion on animation can very easily vary. Everyone probably judges it by the smoothness of the animation/the difficulty of the things they animated. I would say “Grace” has better animation because it is much more difficult; while “Where did the Cheese Go?” has very simple animation but is just as smooth.

    #250564 Reply
    Profile photo of Ladon
    Ladon
    Member

    “brianfast” wrote: For Example:
    An opinion on animation can very easily vary. Everyone probably judges it by the smoothness of the animation/the difficulty of the things they animated. I would say “Grace” has better animation because it is much more difficult; while “Where did the Cheese Go?” has very simple animation but is just as smooth.

    This is a good point, and I’ll now try and clear it up.

    Animation is about challenges. For a film to get a phenomenal rating in animation, it doesn’t just take smooth animation. And so where ‘Grace’ would end up getting between an 8 and a 9.5 for its superb fighting animation, ‘Where did the Cheese Go’ would get between a 6.5 and a 7.5 according to the rubric. ‘Cheese”s animation is above average, but it shouldn’t be at the top because it clearly wasn’t the most detailed and challenging animation.

    “brianfast” wrote: [quote=”Ladon”]
    So you’re suggesting that a director shouldn’t know what they did right and wrong with their film? It’s everyone’s varying opinions on what a ‘perfect’ and ‘average’ score is that is messing the ratings up right now. How is a director supposed to know what your rating specifications are, or someone else’s. All they have is a bunch of numbers in the end, and they aren’t always very helpful. But if everyone rates according to guidelines, then the director will actually understand what they succeeded in and what they failed in.

    This is why we have a post and review forum.[/quote]

    So you’re saying that a rating shouldn’t be as revealing and informative as anything said in P&R? Should a rating be completely useless except for giving a film a false ranking in the directory?
    It should be completely truthful about the film, and tell someone browsing the directory exactly what they want to know about the film. If the animation is up to scratch, how the sound is, what the cinematography is like, and how much work was put into the effects. Then they see the enjoyment and story ratings. According to people who have seen it, is it a good film? Is the story good enough?

    This has nothing to do with the forums, some people don’t even go into the forums.

    #250607 Reply
    Profile photo of Matt Gillan
    Matt Gillan
    Member

    I cannot wait for this new rating system.

    So many films are underated or over rated.

    For instance “Christmas with Gary” got more in animation than “Encounter in the Lost City” even though it was jerky and not very smooth.

    Well done Ladon for coming up with such a good idea.

    #250765 Reply
    Profile photo of Smeagol
    Smeagol
    Member

    I would strongly oppose merging effects and visuals as one category. Currently the category is labeled as effects, though what it tends to represent in most cases right now is more precisely visual effects, meaning effects that are created in post-production. I believe I understand the reasoning behind the idea of merging effects with general visuals, but I think that visual effects are being used increasingly in brickfilms and warrant a category of their own. I would support the idea of adding a “overall visual” rating or something in a similar vein, but I do not like the idea of removing the effects category or putting it in a composite category. It might seem that I’m just saying this because my own films tend to be heavy in special effects, but I honestly think that this would be a change for the worse and would take away from the potential informative value of the ratings system. A number of people on this site have put a great deal of time and effort to creating amazing, realistic visual effects for their films, and it would be an injustice to have no difference in ratings between something like Out of Time and Jay’s Rise of the Empire trailer. Both have tremendous visual clarity and quality, but there is obviously a difference between them and it should be reflected by their ratings.

    -Smeagol

    #250815 Reply
    Profile photo of brianfast
    brianfast
    Member

    “Ladon” wrote:
    So you’re saying that a rating shouldn’t be as revealing and informative as anything said in P&R? Should a rating be completely useless except for giving a film a false ranking in the directory?
    It should be completely truthful about the film, and tell someone browsing the directory exactly what they want to know about the film. If the animation is up to scratch, how the sound is, what the cinematography is like, and how much work was put into the effects. Then they see the enjoyment and story ratings. According to people who have seen it, is it a good film? Is the story good enough?

    This has nothing to do with the forums, some people don’t even go into the forums.

    In addition to me not liking having to pay to rate films your way. I have a few problems with this.
    First of all, the directory’s ratings are generally decent, there a few films that are bogus sure but generally they tell you which films are worth watching. For your rubric to “fix” the whole directory we would need to remove all of the ratings so the film’s scores would be empty or be based on one persons opinion for some time.

    Secondly I do not see how a number 5 will tell you what you did wrong. Sure it will tell you that it is not enough for a 7 but which element of the category did the film fail?

    I also don’t like that there is no way to input a 6, indicating that the film was almost a 7 but better then a 5.

    #250909 Reply
    Profile photo of Ladon
    Ladon
    Member

    The rubric I posted in the beginning of this thread was only a beta. It is by no means the final rubric, and so there is no reason to believe there will be ‘no way to input a 6′.

    A number five along with the description of a number 5 will tell you precisely what you need to improve. I apologise that people will have to read, but that’s kind of important :)

    I don’t believe ‘deleting’ ratings will be required. I’ve said before, numerous times actually, that I don’t think changing old ratings will help. This will only affect ratings of films that are released after the changes are implemented. Yes, I realise that the ‘top’ films in the directory may not be affected, but I also know that people tend to go back and re-rate those films occasionally. Eventually most ratings will scaled.

    One more thing:
    Brianfast, how do you rate films, and why do you feel that your own scale is better than an averaged ratings scale?

Viewing 10 posts - 51 through 60 (of 94 total)
Reply To: My goals for Film Ratings
Your information: