Ratings categories

Home Forums Website Site Feedback Ratings categories

This topic contains 57 replies, has 1 voice, and was last updated by  Brian of Gep 14 years, 4 months ago.

Viewing 10 posts - 11 through 20 (of 55 total)
  • Author
  • #4885


    Yeah, I totally agree with Hali.
    The “cinematography” is a real good point, because it’s related to the camera work and also to story-telling & timing.

    I do also think that an Effect rating is not the best : people will do movies with a lot of SFX only to have a good rating. Anyway, there are zillions of good movies that don’t have any effect.

    Perhaps we could find a term that covers both the set & the lighting, someting like “set design” or “photography”…



    I like where Hali is going with his categories. You’re right about ‘story’ and ‘effects.’ Story is kind of hard to define, especially in the realm of films averaging about 2 minutes in length, and with alamDV out there, effects are easy enough for anyone willing to spend the time.

    I was also looking for a way to define a ’tilt’ category without actually using the word “tilt.” I really like Lowweek’s suggestion of ‘fun.’ How much fun was this movie to watch? I think that could be a great equalizer for films that are entertaining without necessarily looking great or sounding great. This sort of accomplishes where I wanted to go with ‘story,’ too.

    I think ‘cinematography’ is a good way to cover camera movement, angles, lighting, sets, and can even be extended to editing. I think we can have special effects included in a large category like this, so that they can have a positive impact on the score but won’t overpower it.

    ‘Sound,’ which would include voices, effects, and music, works pretty good. This might give films with original scores a greater chance to be seen, which I personally feel is very important.

    And I do feel that ‘animation’ needs to stand alone, as it is the central focus of our art and the hardest aspect of a film to fake.

    OK, so now I like:

    I’m not sure I would like ‘originality’ to stand alone. ‘Original’ does not necessarily mean ‘enjoyable.’ I would propose including originality in ‘fun.’

    This discussion is going well. What other ideas are there?



    You could do them with different catergories like
    Set Production,
    and maybe a last one for Effectiveness, like if it’s an action movie, does it really feel like chaos, or if its a drama, does it really get the point across, but this would probably come under the story/plot catergory, but it could include sound, to see if the sound helps to sell whats happening.

    Then you could have the points from each section averaged from all the different reviews into the total for each catergory, and then these could go to a total overall rating.

    Slightly off the subject:
    And then from each reviewer have quotes from part of there review that sum up what they thought of the film. Like on rottentomatoes. And the Special mention thing sounds good for people who are searching for specially good movies in certain areas.

    Just my thoughts. 🙂



    As far as reviews go, they will be handled by a different group of people than those doing the numerical ratings. I’ll cover this in more detail when I’m ready, but for now it is sufficient to say that the numerical ratings displayed on the film’s page will be determined by an average of ratings from a poll-like system, and will be a separate entity from the written reviews.


    Shootin Bricks

    Sorry, but I have to chime in here.

    What’s wrong with story and effects?

    Just because a movie doesn’t have them and therefor gets a low or non rating, doesn’t make it a bad film. It just doesn’t shine in those areas.
    Some people, myself included, might want to search for a film based on whether it has a good storyline or not. And in my book, a film based on a one liner still counts as a story- it’s all in the timing and execution.
    Effects goes beyond Alum DV (or whatever it’s called)- it can be as generic as that, as mindblowing as some of the stuff done with Photoshop, or as basic as using cotton balls for smoke and blue bricks for water- but if it’s done right, it still qualifies as GREAT effects and I think deserves to be recognized. Imagine you were rating Rise of the Empire and there was no option for Effects or Story.
    I say they serve a purpose and need to be considered.

    And aren’t Cinematography and Animation basically the same thing?

    What has to be taken into account is that the moment you introduce specific ratings categories people will (on the whole) make films to maximise their ratings

    You say that like it’s a bad thing, Hali 😛
    Let’s see- If the last film I made got high ratings in everything but story, wouldn’t that tell me either:
    A- I need to work on my storytelling/plot development skills
    B- It’s simply not my strongsuit and maybe I should continue to focus on those areas in which I excel.
    Either way, it’s valuable feedback and I thought that was the whole purpose of a review.

    Perhaps what is needed is a way to simply not show catagories that don’t apply to a particular film. If no effects were attempted, then theres no need to include Effects when rating it (Either it simply doesn’t show up or is accompanied by an N/A). If, however, they were attempted and done badly, then that’s something that needs to be acknowledged and provided for in terms of feedback.

    Theres my opinion, for what it’s worth.



    Question: why do we want these ratings? My opinion was to have them for others to judge whether they will download the film or not, but you seem to think about them more as a system for the filmmaker to get feedback.

    Question: who is going to rate all 200+ films already in the database?

    Question: who is going to rate all new films? Will be a lot of work.

    Question: won’t they be biased? If some 11-year-old with a 2-seconds-a-frame film with bad acting called all his friends to vote for it?




    Sorry if this is too soon to ask, but are you thinking of some kind of small committee of members that would work in the film directory, rating films, etc? If that’s what you had in mind, you should choose people very wisely.




    “cometgreen” wrote: Sorry if this is too soon to ask, but are you thinking of some kind of small committee of members that would work in the film directory, rating films, etc? If that’s what you had in mind, you should choose people very wisely.

    Reviews – Small, probably 5 people

    Ratings – Limited, but not too small


    Revmen, as part of the Brickfilms weekly (or biweekly, whatever) show, a review section will be included. The review segment of the show will basically be a compilation of all different aspects of film making. An overall rating, out of 10, will be awarded, and other members reviews will be taken into consideration. I have been here for over a year, and have seen many many films. If you don’t mind, I would like to put in for the Film Reviewer position. I have no problems with the people in this community, and am a completly unbiased observer. This of course is your decision, and I respect that. I am just asking that you atleast consider myself while you make your decision. May our leader show us the way through the dark, so that we may see the light.

    Respectively yours,



    Brian of Gep

    If you really are serious about that,
    you should check out this topic:

Viewing 10 posts - 11 through 20 (of 55 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.