Schlockading's film ratings terminus ad quem

HomeForumsGovernmental ForumsCitizensSchlockading's film ratings terminus ad quem

This topic has 1 voice, contains 31 replies, and was last updated by Avatar of Schlockading Schlockading 2900 days ago.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 32 total)
Author Posts
Author Posts
January 9, 2007 at 2:26 pm #251284
Avatar of Ladon
Ladon

There shouldn’t be absolute freedom in giving film ratings, because there has to be something that both the director and people viewing the films can base the ratings off of.

This is starting to sound awfully familiar…

Can you give an example of how people will access and view the ‘overall standard’? Just to make sure we aren’t offering the same thing.

January 9, 2007 at 3:31 pm #251298
Avatar of Watson
Watson

I think you should both be able to offer the same things. We don’t have a monopoly on ideas, but borrowing ideas from other candidates might be a bad move politically.

In any case, I don’t think that area should be considered a stealing of ideas. One of the the notions I had going into this was that it would be one the Minister of Film Rating’s main jobs to clarify what the numbers meant. I think the idea of telling raters what a 5 or 7 or 9 means was more of a requirement for this job, rather than revelation had by one person.

January 9, 2007 at 10:20 pm #251436
Avatar of Schlockading
Schlockading

I can tell you, Ladon, that I haven’t read your thread in enough detail to be “stealing” ideas from you. What is yours like? The overall rating standard I am suggesting (which I emphasize will be decided on by vote) will be readily available for viewing on a simple webpage. Where a link to this page would be in still uncertain, but it would be simple to create one that outlined the basic guidelines for how to rate films. That is, not to limit the goal of my campaign – to allow freedom of rating preferences – but to tell people not to give purposely bad ratings, use extreme rating scales, etc. That’s basically what the overall rating standard will be – not anything too drastic.

I don’t see what you mean by “revelation,” Watson. Could you elaborate a bit?

January 10, 2007 at 12:36 am #251478
Avatar of Toph
Toph

There shouldn’t be absolute freedom in giving film ratings, because there has to be something that both the director and people viewing the films can base the ratings off of.

Why can’t there be? Everyone will rate as they see fit, and most of the time, it will be pretty similar. But the few people that don’t rate a film in general accordance with the rest of the group will have their votes (along with each individual) shown to the public. If a film gets ratings which most people feel are undeserved, they will see that not everybody holds that opinion. The rogue voter can still rate, but no one will hold his vote in high esteem.

To sum that up, I think the best way to deal with bad raters is to let them fall into their own trap. If they want to act that way, they’ll lose respect and their films might get poor ratings. I think most raters will be mature enough not to let this get between them, however. This would require that the individual votes go public, but I can see you wouldn’t approve of that.

On the issue of flame wars, I can think of two examples. The first is TCOTY, which has already been discussed plenty in Ladon’s thread. The second is my own film, Stilts. In the 10 brick contest, I negatively reviewed a competitor’s film, and it wasn’t very constructive or wise of me to do so. We ended up in a little fight, and he gave Stilts a very low rating in the competition (it eventually placed 9th out of 20-something movies). I felt that the rating was out of place, but I came to learn to not give anybody a good reason to do that to me. I have come to see it as a good thing.

And by the way, I don’t think you should reformat your entire system if you think that’s best. I’m just giving my opinion on how this position should be run, and it would be fine to end up agreeing to disagree.

January 10, 2007 at 2:34 am #251522
Avatar of Schlockading
Schlockading

Sounds fine to me. But you’re saying that people’s ratings should be shown publicly because they’re bad? That doesn’t really make sense. There has to be some sort of order to it, or else the ratings system won’t change at all, and that’s the whole point my campaign is trying to get across.

January 10, 2007 at 5:31 pm #251601
Avatar of Toph
Toph

I’m saying each person’s individual ratings should be shown. That way, if my opinions don’t line up with Cometgreen because he likes The Fifth Element, something that he rates highly and no one else does I wouldn’t watch. But if my preferences are very similar to Dragoon, I would be more inclined to see a film that he gave a good rating.

January 10, 2007 at 10:52 pm #251687
Avatar of Schlockading
Schlockading

I see. In that case, maybe an idea I could implement would be an option where you could see who rated it, but the rater would have the option of showing their ratings or keeping them private. That way, the rater himself can decide instead of having a rule about it. It’s all about personal preference.

January 11, 2007 at 3:32 am #251763
Avatar of brianfast
brianfast

Patrons system is better then your approval system, people would pass the test then go on to give crappy ratings. People that pay 3 dollars are probably mature enough to rate films decently most of the time.

January 11, 2007 at 4:21 am #251777
Avatar of Toph
Toph

After reading in Ladon’s discussion thread on ratings, I realized that counting each rater’s votes would require Z to code more, so I no longer support that option.

Which means, that, since basically my whole logic was based on that, I’m going to re-evaluate the options and think a bit more.

Hmm…

January 11, 2007 at 2:06 pm #251831
Avatar of Schlockading
Schlockading

brianfast, I really do think there are a lot of people out there who wouldn’t give bad ratings. Ones who did would be immediately removed from the usergroup.

January 11, 2007 at 2:26 pm #251834
Avatar of Ladon
Ladon

I really don’t like the idea of ‘who rated what’, because even if you avoid the obviously negative aspects, suddenly it becomes a popularity contest. Instead of looking at recent films, people might just start looking at ‘Recent films given a high rating by Rev’ or something similar. In the end, it has to remain an anonymous poll or the statistics will be useless.

January 11, 2007 at 3:20 pm #251847
Avatar of saulgoode
saulgoode

I don’t understand how it would/could be determined that a rating is “bad”.

January 11, 2007 at 3:46 pm #251858
Avatar of Ladon
Ladon

Saul, I believe he means a malicious entry to the ratings of a film with the intent of dramatically changing the outcome of the averaging calculations in order to cast a negative image on the film with the resulting negative rating. Or maybe he meant they weren’t good, I’m not sure.

January 11, 2007 at 9:25 pm #251938
Avatar of Dragoon
Dragoon

Instead of looking at recent films, people might just start looking at ‘Recent films given a high rating by Rev’ or something similar.

I guess, but what’s wrong with that? What if you like films that were given high ratings by Rev?

January 11, 2007 at 9:33 pm #251943
Avatar of Toph
Toph

“Dragoon” wrote:

Instead of looking at recent films, people might just start looking at ‘Recent films given a high rating by Rev’ or something similar.

I guess, but what’s wrong with that? What if you like films that were given high ratings by Rev?

On that point, I agree with Dragoon. I tend to like A.O. Scott’s movie preferences, and I’m more inclined to see a film if he liked it. And if I see a movie ad, and the only positive comment is from Jeffrey Lyons, I will make sure I don’t see that movie, because I vehemently disagree with nearly all his reviews.

But the bad blood between members could be an issue. And other than telling immature brickfilmers to get over a supposedly “bad” rating, I’m not sure how that could be solved.

Viewing 15 posts - 16 through 30 (of 32 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.