Skip to main content

Sat, Apr 4, 2020 6:59 PM

1

IMDb needs to put out guidelines for ratings.

IMDb needs to put out guidelines for ratings. If you give a move a 1 out of 10, that should mean you walked out of the movie in the first 30 minutes and demanded your money back. A 10 should mean it’s one of the best movies you’ve ever seen. I just looked at the reviews for Avengers Endgame and there were far too many 1’s to be realistic. Was it the best movie ever? No. Did I see ANYBODY walk out of the packed theater? Absolutely not. I have personally given a few movies a 10, but the lowest I’ve ever given any movie was a 4, as I believe that any movie truly deserving a 3 or less has to be a direct to video release and just simply never gets released to theaters because initial screenings were too bad.
Thoughts? 

Responses

cinephile

2K Messages

 • 

43.2K Points

10 months ago

NO!!!!

IMDb is based on the fact that anyone can give any rating to any movie, if you put rules to the rating system, It would affect negatively, the freedom of speech of users as well as the system of "crowd of wisdom" which at the end of the day allow IMDb to have one of the most accurate rating systems.

In a practical aspect, if you reduce rating options for certain movies, you will end up with results like Google has where each rating is too close to each other to give an accurate depiction of the quality of each movie.

For example,

If the average ratings in the Top 250 were 99% like on Google, there will be no purpose of checking that list since you can hardly compare movies in terms of quality.



I'm sure that everyone here, can explain to you better than me, how that is bad, but I gave my opinion.

Champion

 • 

3.7K Messages

 • 

105.2K Points

10 months ago

My rule is I won't rate something that I don't watch all through. Too many films/shows have redeemed their value at the end. I also haven't rated anything 1 or 2, and precious few 3s. A 4 means to me: don't ever ever watch this again. A 5 means that it was awful, but in a different mindset, maybe. A 6 is just ok. 7 is recommended. 8 means I Liked it, I really did. 9 means it's great. 10 is at or near perfection. I give a lot of 6s.

I think it would be interesting to know other's word associations with the numbers. Until then, I can't imagine whether an IMDb recommendation for those word associations is feasible.

It's sort of like that medical question: on a scale of 1 to 10, how bad is your pain? Someone I know answered 5 recently. Turns out she thinks that's "mild."

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

I'm somewhat a connoisseur of bad movies. I don't rate a lot of movies below 3 but there are some that definitely deserve it. Anything like Manos, Hands of Fate or Plan 9 from Outer Space or any of the Leprechaun movies. But, the again, I search out bad movies to watch. Some aren't as bad as their reputation, but most are.

1.8K Messages

 • 

61K Points

Series: Extremely cringeworthy, watched 1 episode only.

Just out of curiosity, do you vote for an entire series if you've only seen one episode? If I've seen one (or a few) episode(s) for a series, I vote for the specific episode(s), but not the series as a whole.
I personally have the same rule as bderoes, I don't vote for something I haven't seen completely.

1.8K Messages

 • 

61K Points

Abi, I know you reserved it for some titles. But that still means that in some cases, you vote for a series while you've only seen 1 episode. So to me, it appears you are one of these people who are able to judge a book by its cover (and first chapter). :) 

1.8K Messages

 • 

61K Points

Marco, go play with your buddy Professor Kent, or the new troll from Iran.

Abi, no need to worry. This will be my last reply to you ever. I would appreciate it if you would ignore me as well from here on.

1.8K Messages

 • 

61K Points

Marco, go play with your buddy Professor Kent, or the new troll from Iran.

Abi, no need to worry. This will be my last reply to you ever. I would appreciate it if you would ignore me as well from here on.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

I've watched the entire runs of both Batwoman and Black Lightning. Neither are political propaganda. The fact that you think so says more about you than the series themselves. Both are subject to troll fan boy voting that are against anything other than white, straight, male superheroes. More comments like this will probably lead to this thread being closed or the offending posts removed.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

I've watched the entire runs of both Batwoman and Black Lightning. Neither are political propaganda. The fact that you think so says more about you than the series themselves. Both are subject to troll fan boy voting that are against anything other than white, straight, male superheroes. More comments like this will probably lead to this thread being closed or the offending posts removed.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

Ed, freedom of speech does not apply to hate speech. It's not a difficult thing to understand. Also, you use "politically correct" as a slur but what you really mean is "why do I have to treat everyone the way I want to be treated".

Calling out bigotry is always called for. You know that and just disagree because you are part of the problem.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

Actually, it's not full of assumptions. You are pushing something that isn't politically correct. Diggle is no more developed than Black Lightning and I would say Black Lightning is a whole lot more developed than Diggle who is just a sidekick to the main white hero.

The same can be said for Sara Lance. She's really not all that developed, at least originally on Arrow and she is more part of an ensemble on Legends than Batwoman who is the focus of a show. People accept sidekicks and ensemble casts much more readily than they do lead actors who need to usually fall in to line with "norms".

Also, no one assumed you were white. But, there are legions of fan boys who are white, straight men who downvote these series. There are articles exploring this topic about rotten tomatoes.

You can also explore the flaws of series without trying to slur them as "politically correct". Saying that you vote them 1 due to "political correctness" shows more a bias on your part than it says anything about the series, especially if you have only watched a handful of episodes. You aren't saying the series are bad. You are saying they don't meet your worldview which is not a good way to judge art.

4.3K Messages

 • 

134.7K Points

10 months ago

 
geislekm
Joined community on April 4, 2020 - new today
- - -
Message from IMDb
For Problems or Questions,
please include a link to the page(s) you are referring to if possible.
- - -
? ?
Avengers: Endgame (2019)
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4154796/reference
Robert Downey Jr. ... Tony Stark / Iron Man
Chris Evans ... Steve Rogers / Captain America
https://www.imdb.com/title/tt4154796/ratings
688,570 IMDb users have given a weighted average vote of 8.4 / 10
Rating            Votes
10   38.6%  266,100
  1     2.6%    18,230
- - -
Ratings FAQ
https://help.imdb.com/article/imdb/track-movies-tv/ratings-faq/G67Y87TFYYP6TWAV#
- - -
Not a helpful reply - just some useless data
.

4.3K Messages

 • 

134.7K Points

Your Ratings:
https://www.imdb.com/list/ratings/
- - -
Advanced Title Search
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/
User Rating between 1 and 2 (Sorted by Popularity Ascending)
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?user_rating=1.0,2.0
4,759 titles.
User Rating of 10 (Sorted by Popularity Ascending)
https://www.imdb.com/search/title/?user_rating=10.0
3,329 titles.
.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

10 months ago

If you think only direct to video should have a 3 or less, you haven't seen enough movies. I've seen a few stinkers in theaters. All ratings are subjective. For example, I never walk out of a movie (or turn it off since I watch very few movies in theaters these days). That doesn't mean it isn't horrible. I'm harder on bigger budget movies, for example, Basic Instinct 2, probably deserves a 1 rating.

1.8K Messages

 • 

62.1K Points

10 months ago

I’m kinda old school and the only rating that makes sense to me is 1 to 5 stars. One is ”bad”, two is ”average”, three is ”good” and four is ”excellent”. Five is only reserved for true classics/masterpieces. With 5-star rating there are many films that are ”3” and also many which are ”2”. But two is not bad, only mediocre.

With 1-10, basically 1-6 is considered ”bad” (or leaning to that, at least), 7 is ”average” and only 8-10 are ”good/excellent”. Not sure the point of that.
cinephile

2K Messages

 • 

43.2K Points

When I use a "5 ratings" systems, there is how I picture it.

1 = Unwatchable Correspond to a rating of 1, 2
2 = Horrible Correspond to 3, 4, Low 5
3 = Bad/Average Correspond to High 5, 6, Low 7
4 = Good/Very Good Correspond to a rating of High 7, 8, Low 9
5 = Masterpiece Correspond to a rating of High 9, 10 

On  a 10 Rating system:

1 = Worst movies of all time

2 = At the edge of being one of the worst movies of all time.

3 = Horrible

4 = DON't watch it even for free

5 = VERY BAD

6 = BAD/AVERAGE

7= High average/Good

8 = Highly Good/Very Good

9 = Excellent/Masterpiece Contender

10 = BEST MOVIE OF ALL TIME/ MASTERPIECE

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

My problem with this is that 5-6 should be considered average, not bad. The vast majority of my ratings are 6 which for is fairly average.
cinephile

2K Messages

 • 

43.2K Points

My average is rating 6,35. I think that it makes sense that 6 is average.

According to an analysis done in 2009, the average on IMDb is 6,38 so I believe that my ratings are perfectly fine.

1.8K Messages

 • 

62.1K Points

This thread alone kinda tells how differently people see these ratings. That’s why they’re often a bit meaningless.

They can be fun for the person who actually rates films (since he/she has some own ”system” behind it), but for the others trying to guess what they actually mean... perhaps not so much. I guess that’s why people usually write the reviews before rating them.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

Eboy,

I find individual's ratings mostly useless. The thing I like about sites like IMDb is that the aggregate is useful. I'm rarely surprised by a movies rating as the aggregate rating (assuming enough votes) is usually a pretty good indicator of the quality of the title. Of course, there is always personal taste involve. I personally despise Modern Family despite the overall ratings and awards its won.

I really wish that IMDb gave what your overall rating for titles is. 46% of my titles are rated as 6. Statistically, according to IMDB, I rate 0% of titles as a 1 or 10. Though, in reality it is 0.04% as 1 and 0.1% as 10s.

1.8K Messages

 • 

62.1K Points

Yeah, sure, I see what you mean. I personally just feel that there’s a lot of ”fan service” going on with IMDb’s user ratings. Meaning, that if you’re a ”fan” of something, you’re most likely bound to give a higher score. Marvel and Star Wars movies are often rated pretty high (they’re often great entertainment, don’t get me wrong, but still just solid ”3 stars” usually for me), but then people are overly critical to some more serious drama movies.

Then again, who am I to judge. I have rated exactly one movie in IMDb. The Polish Moomins got 10/10. Not a big fan of 1-10 scale, as already said before. Maybe I would rate them more often with 5 star rating. Dunno.

Champion

 • 

1.8K Messages

 • 

57.2K Points

IMDb's ratings try and take bias into account. That's why they don't use straight average of vote but some statistical analysis. Stats really isn't my area of expertise but I understand the fundamentals of it.

Also, there are probably just as many haters as there are fanboys. I try to watch stuff with an openmind but it is impossible to tell if I'm successful.
cinephile

2K Messages

 • 

43.2K Points

It won't change my rating system and my perception of IMDb ratings.

For me, the average movies are average which shows that 6 is average and sometimes Bad, but most often "bad" than  "average". 

I see film ratings are like school grading. 60% or 6 is passable so the movie is way below what I consider good, but it is enough good to be watched, but it is still bad. 

Below 60%, the movie is not passable which means that it is not passable in other words. Not good enough for me.

100% or 10/10. I don't think that the way I see my rating system it would exist but I believe that it is necessary in a statistical point of view,  Cinema is subjective and I have never seen any "Perfect" movie in my life. One day or another, I will find flaws in any movie, I use it only to mark the movie that I believe is the best ever made, but it doesn't that this movie is "perfect".

On the other hand, the rating 1 has a reason to exist since sometimes in movies, you see that the freaking producers/director/actors knew that their movie was trash as hell but they didn't care one bit because what they care about is money,  not quality. In other words, all they want is that you buy their movie, they don't think a second about making it watchable.

When I see that they released a movie purposely knowing that everyone would hate it, it enrages me. Basically movies rated 1, are films, but they don't fit in the definition of cinema. 

Marvel movies are business, and that is one of the reasons why I dislike most of them. But, at the very least they make an effort to make the movie watchable and enjoyable. If they realize during production that the movie is a pain to watch they will reshoot some scenes. but that doesn't happen when you have producers/directors that come  into a movie with 0 interests in the quality

Then there is movies that I refuse to rate.

It happened 1 time for movies and a few times for videogame.

I refuse to rate videogames where there is no artistic effort of any sort.

Example: 

Crappy free videogames on crappy internet game sites.

I refuse to rate videogames that aren't a videogame.

Example:

Roblox, (In itself Roblox is not a video game, it contain videogames created by multiples users. Basically, it is only a host site for videogames.)

I refuse to watch/rate what I call "sexploitation".

Example:

Fifty Shades of Grey (These movies don't even have a screenplay, or the screenplay is only a pretext to hide what the true purpose of the movie.)

I refuse to rate ads

No example (Whatever Orson Welles said about the efficacity of ads in delivering a message in less than 30 sec, I don't care. Ads aren't cinema, and they don't even try to hide it, they are are pure business. If I was forced to rate ads, I wouldn't give them a 1 star because at the end of the day, they don't try to hide the fact that they are selling you, I find that reasonable.

I refuse to rate propaganda

If it is pure propaganda, I will refuse to rate it. Some movies are on the edge, but as far as you don't cross the line.

I refuse to rate Youtube video

I rate youtube video on youtube, I rate movies on IMDb, they are two separate worlds that shouldn't be confused with each other.

Basically, I refuse to rate anything that is against my perception of the arts.

4.3K Messages

 • 

134.7K Points

10 months ago

 
? ?
 
Add up score
1 point each for
Good Story
Good Direction
Good Actors
Good Locations
Good Editing
Good Music
Good Sound
Good Cinematography
Good Locations
Good Animation  (if used)
Good Costumes (if used)
Good Special Effects  (if used)
Good Visual Effects (if used)
Good Stunts (if used)
etc...
 
Rating 1 - Only a good story
Rating 10 - All did a great job
.