honolulu_styles's profile

98 Messages

 • 

3.3K Points

Mon, Feb 22, 2021 7:40 PM

Drishyam (2013)

Hello,

i'm writing because i've found a strange distribution of votes for this movie.

In the last 2 days the avg. votes went from 8,44 to 8,48.. an extremely high upvoted title..75% of votes were 10s.

I think we are witnessing to another "Dil Bechara" kind of votes where I think we can see 90% of 10 votes. For that movie IMDB decided to remove the title from the IMDB Top250 List. Now Drishyam is back in the top 250 list of all times and with this strange distribution of votes it looks fake.

Can you verify if everything is correct ?

ps: Too bad that 99% of strange distribution of votes comes with Turkish or Indian Movies. Since they can't rate the way the whole other world rate I think they should have their own country list and do not spam their movies in the WORLD lists. (And I'm not hating because of the country in fact i've liked Wasseypur or Dangal but when it comes to votes their ratings are not fair).

Responses

4 Messages

 • 

90 Points

3 m ago

Drishyam 2 was released Feb 21, a bunch of fans of the the original Drishyam (2013) noticed it was lower rated than the Bollywood remake Drishyam (2015) and started spamming Drishyam (2013) with 10s. If you sort the Drishyam (2013) votes by 'Review date' you can see the often aggressive - as someone else stated, nationalistic one-liner 10s from Feb 21 leaking into March 21. IMDB claims to take into account spamming, so we'll see. I do agree though that if you're doing the IMDB 250 challenge (like me) this kind of manipulation of the chart makes it hard going - I've already seen the 2015 remake, which is still on Netflix and thought it pretty good so I'm not going to watch the original and have just ticked it off the list ...

98 Messages

 • 

3.3K Points

@MrBohdiem exactly...they say IMDB don't cound random votes and manipulation but Drishyam 2013 gained 10 positions in a month...it seems very strange.

By the way if you are doing the IMDB 250 challenge also some Japanese Anime looks like having a manipulation of votes on the regular: Neon Genesis and A Silent Voice have a huga fanbase that manipulate the votes in certain weeks and they go up and down in a strange way

4 Messages

 • 

90 Points

Yeah, I got to 246 / 250 and have quit. There is clearly some manipulation as you say with Pather Panchali (1955) moving in last month and now sitting at no. 76, some sort of campaign by the home team - most of the IMDB accounts for the recent 10/10 scores are as old as the reviews so have been created to push the movie up the chart. I would guess the IMDB team have seen it all before, as campaigns come and go and everything settles down in the long run - as this movie is 65 years old and unlikely to stream on Netflix, Prime etc. it won't get much casual viewing and reviewing so is assured a good stint in the chart

2K Messages

 • 

64.1K Points

There is clearly some manipulation as you say with Pather Panchali (1955) moving in last month and now sitting at no. 76, some sort of campaign by the home team

There is no reason to suspect such a campaign for Pather Panchali. The reason this film (that has had a very high rating for years now, see below) recently made the Top 250 for the first time is that it hit 25,000 votes. Since July 2012, that number of votes is required to be eligible for the Top 250. Before July 2012, this number was 3,000. I don't know since what date it was 3,000 though.

In 2003, this film had a rating of 7.6 on IMDb (http://web.archive.org/web/20031207095215/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/), in 2005 it had climbed a bit to a 7.7 (http://web.archive.org/web/20050218025701/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/) and later that year to a 7.8 (http://web.archive.org/web/20050816174451/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/). In 2006 it was already up to an 8.2 (http://web.archive.org/web/20060613193048/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/). Note that the number of votes was 1,774, so it might not have been eligible for the Top 250 at that time.

That being said, the rating had dropped to a 7.9 four years later, in 2010 (http://web.archive.org/web/20100817034941/http://www.imdb.com:80/title/tt0048473) but a year later, in 2011, it was already back up to an 8.1 (http://web.archive.org/web/20110928200713/https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473). In 2014, once again the rating of an 8.2 was achieved (http://web.archive.org/web/20141115184310/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/). The next year, in 2015, an 8.3 was reached (http://web.archive.org/web/20150729033321/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/). At this time, the number of votes was still below 25,000, otherwise, it would've probably hit the Top 250 around that time.

In 2016, an 8.4 was reached (http://web.archive.org/web/20161102052010if_/http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/) and in 2018, an 8.5 (http://web.archive.org/web/20181227185649if_/https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/). Still having about 18,000 votes, the film wasn't eligible for the Top 250. And even when this film reached a rating of 8.6 in 2019 (http://web.archive.org/web/20191226101131if_/https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/), it still wasn't eligible for the Top 250.

Because of this, I feel the fact that the film is now listed in the Top 250 is not a manipulation, but a well-deserved spot that the film has had to wait for for quite some years. And why did the film have to wait? Because IMDb has this threshold to try and make sure films that don't belong in the Top 250 don't sneak in.

Knowing all the above, I would think the "clear" manipulation you suggest is simply not there. Or it must have been a manipulation that has been going on for over half a decade, almost an eternity in internet time. :)

4 Messages

 • 

90 Points

RE: "there is no reason" ... I gave my reason, here it is again 'most of the IMDB accounts for the recent 10/10 scores are as old as the reviews so have been created to push the movie up the chart' - operative word being 'recent' ... instructions: sort reviews by Review Date and see the following:

18th May 10/10 one line review - account created date of the review, one review only

13th May 10/10 one line review - account created date of review, one review only

12th May 10/10 paragraph review - account created date of review, one review only

12th May 10/10 paragraph review - account created date of review, one review only

12th May 10/10 paragraph review - account created date of review, one review only

Pretty clear

2K Messages

 • 

64.1K Points

@MrBohdiem As I've already shown, in 2019, with a little over 20,000 votes, the rating for this film was already a 8.6, the same rating it currently has. So even if there was a campaign (for which I still fail to see any clue or evidence) it hasn't been very successful since the rating hasn't improved.

As stated above, the reason this film has made it into the Top 250 last month doesn't have anything to do with a recently changed rating or voting pattern, it has to do with a recently reached threshold when it comes to the number of votes.

You cite five ratings of 10 over a 6 day period as evidence for your claim that this film has been pushed up the chart. In May, this film already had over 24,000 votes. Why do you think five votes would be able to push the rating in any direction? Also, why do you assume that if someone has made an account to be able to write a review, they've done this to manipulate its rating? Isn't it possible that people are enthusiastic about a film, want to share their enthusiasms and register with IMDb when they find out this is a necessary step to be able to write a review?

Apart from that, in that same period (12-18 May, 2021) there were also reviews with the following votes: 4 - 9 - 8 - 8. So even if the five 10's you mention are part of a big plan, they're rather easily countered and with that not (very) successful.

On a semi-related note: I hate one line reviews as I feel they don't offer any useful information for the readers. In the past, IMDb didn't allow this, but unfortunately, now they do. See this thread if you like: https://community-imdb.sprinklr.com/conversations/data-issues-policy-discussions/make-sure-reviews-are-reviews-again-minimum-of-50-words-instead-of-50-characters/5f4a7b3e8815453dbacfe95a

4 Messages

 • 

90 Points

I feel like you're coming round a little bit - I didn't know about the 25,000 vote threshold so thanks for that, turns out I do need to be told twice. When Pather Panchali appeared in the chart it was in the 100s, then bumped up to 76 so you're right the recent batch of one line 10 votes confirmed my suspicions and nothing more - you have to read up to see where mine and the post originator Mr Styles' suspicions first arose, Drishyam the original (2013), the clues are in the reviews e.g.

"Don't listen to anyone else when they say the runtime is too long. Either they're from Western/European countries or stupid-the usual runtime of Malayalam movies are long so if you don't like it, don't bloody watch it, period. The movies aren't made to please you people, but for those of us who have grown with that; it's normal for us so suck it up, for gods sake."

Quite aggressive fans who potentially could (note my caveat) create multiple accounts to upvote their favourites, while treating the reviews sections as chat forums where other people's opinions need to be drowned out. You'll see some of the one-liners have similar structure, use of punctuation and sentiments etc. it's possible and of course there is an experimental way we can test the theory

Anyway Pather Panchali's on Prime so I'll give it a watch and I'll leave an honest review ; )

2K Messages

 • 

64.1K Points

Reviews like the one you describe should be deleted I feel because they don't tell us anything about what the reviewer feels about the film itself. But I know that an honest, useful review will be attached before too long :)

(in the Netherlands, where I live, the film currently isn't on any of the main streaming services, so I guess I'll have to wait a bit to see and vote for it....)

2K Messages

 • 

64.1K Points

9 d ago

Since they can't rate the way the whole other world rate I think they should have their own country list and do not spam their movies in the WORLD lists. 

I'm not sure spamming is the proper term here, given the low number of movies from those countries in the current Top 250. Or do you mean spamming from American movies? :)

Anyway, this is the current distribution of films in the Top 250 (from 250.took.nl)

98 Messages

 • 

3.3K Points

@Marco now india has 10 movies in the list. It's the 4th most for any country. It's too much since no indian film has ever made the1001 list of movie you have to see before you die. In that list you have Korean, Lebanese, Brazilian, alle European countries.. every nation in the world is represented except India. But now every movie and every TV series has an average rating of 9.0 or 8.9. It is a problem. Look drishyam 2, dil bechara, ratsasan, scam 1992..everything is rated so high! I personally have seen all the indian movies in the list. Dangal 8, wasseypur and 3 idiots are 7. All other are under the 6. None of them deserves to be in this list. USA has the biggest history and still has the biggest industry. It's obvious they have more movie in the list than any other country.

2K Messages

 • 

64.1K Points

@honolulu_styles You state:

"It's too much since no indian film has ever made the1001 list of movie you have to see before you die."

Obviously - apart from the fact that IMDb bases its Top 250 on the votes of its users and on nothing else - it's rather arbitrary to use that specific list. For the film Pather Panchali (currently the highest rated Indian film in the Top 250) for example, I could point out it was nominated for a BAFTA and won 2 prizes at the Cannes film festival: https://www.imdb.com/title/tt0048473/awards. Does that mean (or even prove?) that it deserves to be in the Top 250?

But now every movie and every TV series has an average rating of 9.0 or 8.9. [...] everything is rated so high!

This is simply not true: https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?num_votes=20000,&countries=in&sort=user_rating,asc

Dangal 8, wasseypur and 3 idiots are 7. All other are under the 6.

That's your opinion. Other people might agree, other people might not.

USA has the biggest history and still has the biggest industry.

Of course it depends on your definition of biggest industry, but Bollywood seems to produce (much) more movies than Hollywood: https://constative.com/entertainment/bollywood-vs-hollywood-revenue-and-production/ and https://www.forbes.com/sites/niallmccarthy/2014/09/03/bollywood-indias-film-industry-by-the-numbers-infographic/?sh=14e2af7a2488

98 Messages

 • 

3.3K Points

My point was that 99% of what Indian industry produce is trash. Pather Panchali and the other movies i mentioned are just a small number compared to the amount they produce by year. The main issue is that if an Indian guy like a movie it's a 10..if they don't like it's a 9. Then downvote every western movie with 1. So waht western guys will do? Give 1 to the movie rated 9.0 or 8.9 to downvote them as well. I don't do that but that's the reason behind the distribution of votes of that movies and tv series. I am not saying we only have to have Western World movies but it's impossible to have a world list when people around the world vote movies in that different way. Cmon Scam 1992 is 9.5 !!!!!! Kota Factory , Flames is 9.2 (with an avg of 9.5) They are better than any other series in the world???? For real? Come on....a web series??? lol. If you go and watch the review, you can see 10 words review from accounts that has been registered in the last month. If it's not weird this I don't know ...

By the way, this is an example of how Indians rate movies and tv shows:
https://www.imdb.com/user/ur49252288/?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.imdb.com/user/ur89919760/?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.imdb.com/user/ur89919661/?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.imdb.com/user/ur109032152/?ref_=tt_urv

https://www.imdb.com/user/ur61591452/?ref_=tt_urv

I can go on and on .... votes between 2 and 8 almost doesn't exists...

2K Messages

 • 

64.1K Points

@honolulu_styles 

You state

The main issue is that if an Indian guy like a movie it's a 10..if they don't like it's a 9. Then downvote every western movie with 1. 

Apart from the fact that you can't speak for every Indian guy out there, I wonder how you know this. Luckily, you provide some links ("this is an example of how Indians rate movies and tv shows"). However, the first link kinda disproves your point. This person: https://www.imdb.com/user/ur49252288/ratings has indeed given a 10 to quite some Indian movies, but also to 12 Years A Slave, Wreck-it Ralph, the tv show Sherlock and The Dark Knight, to name just a few. And (s)he has given a 7 (so not a 9 or a 10) to an Indian film (see: https://www.imdb.com/user/ur49252288/ratings?sort=date_added,desc&ratingFilter=7&mode=detail&lastPosition=0

The next three people (who have registered a year or two ago by the way) you link to have only given one vote, but that was indeed a 10 for an Indian title. But perhaps they genuinely thought it was a brilliant series??? I don't know and I don't see a way to prove or disprove this. But personally, I don't think it's very weird that IF someone really likes a certain title (be it Indian or not), they want to share this and therefore sign up for an IMDb account to write a review and vote for said title.

The last person you link to has actually given a few 1's to Indian titles and thereby also kinda disproves the point you want to make: https://www.imdb.com/user/ur61591452/ratings?sort=date_added,desc&ratingFilter=1&mode=detail&lastPosition=0

This all being said, most votes for a title are not accompanied by a review. For example: Scam 1992 currently has 109,053 votes but "only" 3,310 reviews. Therefore, I think you should be reticent when it comes to basing (too much of) your opinions about the votes/ratings on the user reviews.

it's impossible to have a world list when people around the world vote movies in that different way. 

In the past, I have seen several western superhero fanboys state they voted a 10 for a then new superhero flick they - at that point - hadn't even seen yet. I consider that lying. My point: there are indeed people who try to manipulate the ratings on IMDb and there are indeed people who vote in rather peculiar ways (I've seen non-Indian user profiles of people that only have votes of 1 or only votes of 10, I really don't understand that), but I don't think that happens only in India and I see no reason to assume that in India a bigger percentage of the people do this than in other parts of the world. 

98 Messages

 • 

3.3K Points

You are right .. indian movies are the best. They win every prize in every show..oscar..bafta..Emmy..golden globe..Cannes..venice.. they all have 100 on metacritic and everybody in the world praise India as the top notch country for producing movies and tv shows. You're damn right