AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047 
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Apr 19, 2017 2:06:46 GMT
It's only at a 7.6 rating now. Obviously the review voted "most helpful" claimed the film is only acclaimed because of Oscarssowhite.
I mean, I knew whatever film won Best Picture would get this kind of hype backlash, but still, too bad.
|
|
|
|
Post by taranofprydain on Apr 19, 2017 2:14:17 GMT
7.6 is still more than solid (since most films get between the 6 and 7 range on IMDb) but it is a big drop. Truth is, the Best Picture prize is a bit of a curse. Sure, the filmmakers get the much-wanted trophy and the film is kept in the recordbooks, but the public starts scrunizing the film more, eager to point out faults. Same backlash would have happened to La La Land if it had won.
Moonlight might be getting it twofold though, for being a black film (which are notoriously underrated on IMDb) and for beating out La La Land, a big crowdpleaser.
|
|
|
|
Post by bob-coppola on Apr 19, 2017 3:21:16 GMT
That place is really going down the hill ever since we left it.
|
|
|
|
Post by Christ_Ian_Bale on Apr 19, 2017 3:52:10 GMT
Shame, since it's the best BP winner since No Country for Old Men.
|
|
|
|
Post by taranofprydain on Apr 19, 2017 4:59:11 GMT
That place is really going down the hill ever since we left it. They forced us out. I am still rather hurt about it. |
|
|
|
Post by therealcomicman117 on Apr 19, 2017 6:48:21 GMT
That place is really going down the hill ever since we left it. They forced us out. I am still rather hurt about it. And they wanted us out, because they didn't care for us having a forum, which is just sad. |
|
tobias
Full Member
Posts: 824
Likes: 397
|
Post by tobias on Apr 19, 2017 7:23:08 GMT
It's only at a 7.6 rating now. Obviously the review voted "most helpful" claimed the film is only acclaimed because of Oscarssowhite. I mean, I knew whatever film won Best Picture would get this kind of hype backlash, but still, too bad. Meh People just aren't that mad about it. La La Land has much more votes and more hype and technically also won best picture and dat one is 8,3. And most helpful user reviews... 2/4 the 4 most helpful La La Land reviews give the 1/10 (aka. the desparate for attention rating) Clearly those were very helpful. It got backlash simply because much more people have seen it (and maybe a tiny bit of racism/homophobia). That happens to every popular film the only thing the Oscar has to do with it is that some people watched it because it won an Oscar. I've also heard incredibly often that it's just not that good. |
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Apr 19, 2017 7:46:59 GMT
7.6 is still more than solid (since most films get between the 6 and 7 range on IMDb) but it is a big drop. Truth is, the Best Picture prize is a bit of a curse. Sure, the filmmakers get the much-wanted trophy and the film is kept in the recordbooks, but the public starts scrunizing the film more, eager to point out faults. Same backlash would have happened to La La Land if it had won. Moonlight might be getting it twofold though, for being a black film (which are notoriously underrated on IMDb) and for beating out La La Land, a big crowdpleaser. It's a forgettable movie, talked about only in terms of its play in the Oscar race. Can anyone in their right mind see that most people won't have found new flavors of the century to talk about in 3 years? |
|
AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Apr 19, 2017 7:48:16 GMT
It's only at a 7.6 rating now. Obviously the review voted "most helpful" claimed the film is only acclaimed because of Oscarssowhite. I mean, I knew whatever film won Best Picture would get this kind of hype backlash, but still, too bad. Meh People just aren't that mad about it. La La Land has much more votes and more hype and technically also won best picture and dat one is 8,3. And most helpful user reviews... 2/4 the 4 most helpful La La Land reviews give the 1/10 (aka. the desparate for attention rating) Clearly those were very helpful. It got backlash simply because much more people have seen it (and maybe a tiny bit of racism/homophobia). That happens to every popular film the only thing the Oscar has to do with it is that some people watched it because it won an Oscar. I've also heard incredibly often that it's just not that good. Oh yeah, you're completely right. It does happen to every film. My intention wasn't to suggest otherwise. My point was that the rating dropped considerably after it won Best Picture. Whether or not something good is obviously completely subjective. I'm not saying those who dislike the film are invalid (although some of the reviews on IMDb came off as kinda shallow to me. The "most helpful" review complained that nothing happened and the characters weren't extraordinary). It's not uncommon for films that win Best Picture or Director (since there has been a split often recently) tend to have their rating drop considerably on IMDb after the fact (Birdman, Argo, Gravity, The Revenant, The Artist). It was mainly just surprise that it dropped as low as it did. It feels lower than usual. It's the lowest rated Best Picture winner on IMDb since The Hurt Locker. I am gonna disagree with you about the idea that people aren't that mad about it. Even before it won best picture (but especially after), I still remember seeing so many comments from people saying that same sentiment that people only like it because it's a film with a gay, black protagonist. Though I will admit actually measuring how "people feel" is difficult and I'm basically going off of anecdotal evidence. You do make an excellent point though that most highly acclaimed films on IMDb tend to have mostly negative reviews voted most helpful. |
|
AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Apr 19, 2017 7:56:31 GMT
7.6 is still more than solid (since most films get between the 6 and 7 range on IMDb) but it is a big drop. Truth is, the Best Picture prize is a bit of a curse. Sure, the filmmakers get the much-wanted trophy and the film is kept in the recordbooks, but the public starts scrunizing the film more, eager to point out faults. Same backlash would have happened to La La Land if it had won. Moonlight might be getting it twofold though, for being a black film (which are notoriously underrated on IMDb) and for beating out La La Land, a big crowdpleaser. It's a forgettable movie, talked about only in terms of its play in the Oscar race. Can anyone in their right mind see that most people won't have found new flavors of the century to talk about in 3 years? I mean calling it forgettable is pretty subjective. My father has an awful memory when it comes to movie. Even when he enjoys a film, he tends to mostly forget about it after a week, but he was talking about Moonlight months later (which he went into completely blind). But I do disagree with the fact that it was talked about only in terms of its play in the Oscar race. I remember a comment I made on the Movie Awards board on IMDb where I said I figured Fences would be the "black" movie that would get the most Oscar love because it'd be more accessible to Academy members than Moonlight. When I first heard about it, I figured it was way too indie (unknown cast, unknown director, small studio, potentially niche subject matter) to get any Oscar attention. When it came out in October, the attention was more on how critically acclaimed it was than anything. But honestly it will be interesting to see how the film stands the test of time. I think it's the best film to win Best Picture since No Country for Old Men and both films are some of my favorite movies of all time. But that's just my opinion. You very well could be right. It's too early to say how it'll go down in history. |
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Apr 19, 2017 8:10:44 GMT
It's a forgettable movie, talked about only in terms of its play in the Oscar race. Can anyone in their right mind see that most people won't have found new flavors of the century to talk about in 3 years? I mean calling it forgettable is pretty subjective. My father has an awful memory when it comes to movie. Even when he enjoys a film, he tends to mostly forget about it after a week, but he was talking about Moonlight months later (which he went into completely blind). But I do disagree with the fact that it was talked about only in terms of its play in the Oscar race. I remember a comment I made on the Movie Awards board on IMDb where I said I figured Fences would be the "black" movie that would get the most Oscar love because it'd be more accessible to Academy members than Moonlight. When I first heard about it, I figured it was way too indie (unknown cast, unknown director, small studio, potentially niche subject matter) to get any Oscar attention. When it came out in October, the attention was more on how critically acclaimed it was than anything.
But honestly it will be interesting to see how the film stands the test of time. I think it's the best film to win Best Picture since No Country for Old Men and both films are some of my favorite movies of all time. But that's just my opinion. You very well could be right. It's too early to say how it'll go down in history. Well, addressing the part where I bolded, I don't think that's much of a major upgrade to what I said if a movie's critical acclaim is its primary talking point. You're basically saying it's fun to discuss the fact that it's critically acclaimed. That's also kind of the basic point I was making. And.... lots of movies take a ratings hit after they won because most of the viewers watch any movie after the Oscars. A Beautiful Mind got a really low rating after it won Best Picture because it's a fiercely hated film. But after it started being shown on cable widely, the IMDB rating reverted back to very high again. Another example is Titanic, it was not very liked by the anti-populist crowd, but after it started being exposed to EVERYONE (ones who didn't see it initially) years after its release, its rating slowly got better. These things are kind of inexplicable. Some movies take a huge ratings hit, some stay where they are, some get better, some go back and forth. I just think the film is still underseen for Best Picture winners, the story is nothing special nor particularly stands out, and it doesn't have the mainstream appeal of Argo, 12 Years a Slave, or even The Hurt Locker. I think it'll be the most easily forgotten BP winner since Slumdog Millionaire. This is absolutely just my prediction, but I think many people will see it like The Artist in 5 or 6 years..... their reaction: "oh that movie... yeah, I remember that." |
|
AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Apr 19, 2017 15:23:56 GMT
I mean calling it forgettable is pretty subjective. My father has an awful memory when it comes to movie. Even when he enjoys a film, he tends to mostly forget about it after a week, but he was talking about Moonlight months later (which he went into completely blind). But I do disagree with the fact that it was talked about only in terms of its play in the Oscar race. I remember a comment I made on the Movie Awards board on IMDb where I said I figured Fences would be the "black" movie that would get the most Oscar love because it'd be more accessible to Academy members than Moonlight. When I first heard about it, I figured it was way too indie (unknown cast, unknown director, small studio, potentially niche subject matter) to get any Oscar attention. When it came out in October, the attention was more on how critically acclaimed it was than anything.
But honestly it will be interesting to see how the film stands the test of time. I think it's the best film to win Best Picture since No Country for Old Men and both films are some of my favorite movies of all time. But that's just my opinion. You very well could be right. It's too early to say how it'll go down in history. Well, addressing the part where I bolded, I don't think that's much of a major upgrade to what I said if a movie's critical acclaim is its primary talking point. You're basically saying it's fun to discuss the fact that it's critically acclaimed. That's also kind of the basic point I was making. And.... lots of movies take a ratings hit after they won because most of the viewers watch any movie after the Oscars. A Beautiful Mind got a really low rating after it won Best Picture because it's a fiercely hated film. But after it started being shown on cable widely, the IMDB rating reverted back to very high again. Another example is Titanic, it was not very liked by the anti-populist crowd, but after it started being exposed to EVERYONE (ones who didn't see it initially) years after its release, its rating slowly got better. These things are kind of inexplicable. Some movies take a huge ratings hit, some stay where they are, some get better, some go back and forth. I just think the film is still underseen for Best Picture winners, the story is nothing special nor particularly stands out, and it doesn't have the mainstream appeal of Argo, 12 Years a Slave, or even The Hurt Locker. I think it'll be the most easily forgotten BP winner since Slumdog Millionaire. This is absolutely just my prediction, but I think many people will see it like The Artist in 5 or 6 years..... their reaction: "oh that movie... yeah, I remember that." Fair enough. My point about critical acclaim was a bit too broad but there was definitely talk about what made it critically acclaimed in the first place: its structure, acting, cinematography, editing, subject matter etc. My main point wasn't that it dropped because I knew that would happen to whatever won best picture but that it dropped as low as it did. You are right though that IMDb ratings can  around a lot so it'll be to see where it is in 5 or 6 years. |
|
tobias
Full Member
Posts: 824
Likes: 397
|
Post by tobias on Apr 19, 2017 16:03:36 GMT
Oh yeah, you're completely right. It does happen to every film. My intention wasn't to suggest otherwise. My point was that the rating dropped considerably after it won Best Picture. Whether or not something good is obviously completely subjective. I'm not saying those who dislike the film are invalid (although some of the reviews on IMDb came off as kinda shallow to me. The "most helpful" review complained that nothing happened and the characters weren't extraordinary). It's not uncommon for films that win Best Picture or Director (since there has been a split often recently) tend to have their rating drop considerably on IMDb after the fact (Birdman, Argo, Gravity, The Revenant, The Artist). It was mainly just surprise that it dropped as low as it did. It feels lower than usual. It's the lowest rated Best Picture winner on IMDb since The Hurt Locker. I am gonna disagree with you about the idea that people aren't that mad about it. Even before it won best picture (but especially after), I still remember seeing so many comments from people saying that same sentiment that people only like it because it's a film with a gay, black protagonist. Though I will admit actually measuring how "people feel" is difficult and I'm basically going off of anecdotal evidence. You do make an excellent point though that most highly acclaimed films have negative reviews on IMDb voted "most helpful" tend to have mostly negative reviews. Yeah, my observation about the user reviews can be summed up to this simple formular: The more unknown the movie, the higher the quality of reviews. At times I even find reviews which I think slamdunk professional reviews. It's a rule of thumb though. If a film has only one review, there is nothing to stop it from being complete trite. I think the reason Moonlight dropped so much is that it was a really, really small movie (it basicly had a 1,5 million $ budget, I assume that's the lowest ever for a BP winner) that not many people had seen before the BP win. Also the BP win was the most unusual ever and caused headlines. I've also heard good things about Moonlight of course, one of my really good friends with a very similar taste to me liked it quite a bit, but it doesn't sound like a movie that would be uber popular in the mainstream and that's where an Oscar (BP that is) takes you. For some perspective about the budget: Toni Erdmann cost double the ammount and even Guy Maddin has made more costly films. It's also less than 1/3 of what Boyhood cost. Moonlight has actually made 37 times its budget and it's not over yet. |
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Apr 19, 2017 16:19:23 GMT
7.6 is still pretty decent though (keep in mind I haven't seen Moonlight yet since I've been slacking)
For comparison sake , The Social Network ( a near perfect RT score) is just at 7.7 on IMDB.
|
|
Film Socialism
Based
99.9999% of rock is crap
Posts: 2,575
Likes: 1,414
|
Post by Film Socialism on Apr 19, 2017 16:42:19 GMT
should b lower
|
|
AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Apr 19, 2017 17:02:36 GMT
7.6 is still pretty decent though (keep in mind I haven't seen Moonlight yet since I've been slacking) For comparison sake , The Social Network ( a near perfect RT score) is just at 7.7 on IMDB. Oh yeah, if I made a film, I'd be totally satisfied with a 7.6 rating. It's just a big drop for the film, especially since it won Best Picture. That's shocking about The Social Network. I remember it used to be in the top 250. I knew it wasn't in there anymore but last time I checked its rating (years ago), it was at an 8. |
|
AKenjiB
Badass
Posts: 1,047
Likes: 653
|
Post by AKenjiB on Apr 19, 2017 17:05:39 GMT
Oh yeah, you're completely right. It does happen to every film. My intention wasn't to suggest otherwise. My point was that the rating dropped considerably after it won Best Picture. Whether or not something good is obviously completely subjective. I'm not saying those who dislike the film are invalid (although some of the reviews on IMDb came off as kinda shallow to me. The "most helpful" review complained that nothing happened and the characters weren't extraordinary). It's not uncommon for films that win Best Picture or Director (since there has been a split often recently) tend to have their rating drop considerably on IMDb after the fact (Birdman, Argo, Gravity, The Revenant, The Artist). It was mainly just surprise that it dropped as low as it did. It feels lower than usual. It's the lowest rated Best Picture winner on IMDb since The Hurt Locker. I am gonna disagree with you about the idea that people aren't that mad about it. Even before it won best picture (but especially after), I still remember seeing so many comments from people saying that same sentiment that people only like it because it's a film with a gay, black protagonist. Though I will admit actually measuring how "people feel" is difficult and I'm basically going off of anecdotal evidence. You do make an excellent point though that most highly acclaimed films have negative reviews on IMDb voted "most helpful" tend to have mostly negative reviews. Yeah, my observation about the user reviews can be summed up to this simple formular: The more unknown the movie, the higher the quality of reviews. At times I even find reviews which I think slamdunk professional reviews. It's a rule of thumb though. If a film has only one review, there is nothing to stop it from being complete trite. I think the reason Moonlight dropped so much is that it was a really, really small movie (it basicly had a 1,5 million $ budget, I assume that's the lowest ever for a BP winner) that not many people had seen before the BP win. Also the BP win was the most unusual ever and caused headlines. I've also heard good things about Moonlight of course, one of my really good friends with a very similar taste to me liked it quite a bit, but it doesn't sound like a movie that would be uber popular in the mainstream and that's where an Oscar (BP that is) takes you. For some perspective about the budget: Toni Erdmann cost double the ammount and even Guy Maddin has made more costly films. It's also less than 1/3 of what Boyhood cost. Moonlight has actually made 37 times its budget and it's not over yet. Yeah I think your point about bringing it into the mainstream is probably the best explanation about the drop. I wouldn't call it inaccessible per se. It's definitely far more accessible than say The Tree of Life, for instance. But it is an art house film. It wasn't made under the impression that it'd be a huge box office or awards success and I imagine that the Best Picture win did open it up to an audience that would've never been interested in the film otherwise and who the film wasn't geared towards in the first place. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2017 17:22:30 GMT
Well, IMDB always had inflated and racist troll votes (explains why basically every Nolan film is top 250)
|
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Apr 19, 2017 19:23:42 GMT
IMDB is full of trashy edgelord trolls so this really isn't surprising.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 19, 2017 20:44:29 GMT
I haven't been surprised at an IMDB rating for a movie in a long time. I'm too used to them being weirdly off (although in this case a 7.6 for Moonlight seems about right to me).
|
|
|
|
Post by countjohn on Apr 19, 2017 21:36:45 GMT
Not surprising. Nobody can like or not like a movie on its own anymore, your opinion on it has to be defined in relation to how much other people like it. It's like that for pretty much everything and not just movies too. The age of backlash.
Also, I would have thought this kind of troll "rate it a 1" downvoting would have stopped with the end of the forums since there isn't a forum to organize/gloat about it on anymore. I guess not.
|
|
no
Badass
Posts: 1,071
Likes: 423
|
Post by no on Apr 20, 2017 3:57:21 GMT
Better than Manchester by the Sea |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2017 12:26:21 GMT
Well, IMDB always had inflated and racist troll votes (explains why basically every Nolan film is top 250) I don't think this has anything to do with racism. Plenty of movies get high scores on IMDb with black leads, even movies with racism as a prominent theme. Both Django Unchained and 12 Years a Slave had just as much attention as Moonlight, and both still have impressive ratings. I think the difference is Moonlight is far less conventional, and similarly to Birdman, when it was introduced to a larger audience backlash was inevitable. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 20, 2017 13:03:44 GMT
Well, IMDB always had inflated and racist troll votes (explains why basically every Nolan film is top 250) I don't think this has anything to do with racism. Plenty of movies get high scores on IMDb with black leads, even movies with racism as a prominent theme. Both Django Unchained and 12 Years a Slave had just as much attention as Moonlight, and both still have impressive ratings. I think the difference is Moonlight is far less conventional, and similarly to Birdman, when it was introduced to a larger audience backlash was inevitable. Django ---> Tarantino-DiCaprio collaboration, revered as DiCaprio's best to date. Obv it'd be that high, even if the film isn't that special. Had it not been for Tarantino, the film would have much more Moonlight (slightly better maybe, since the film itself has more of an entertainment value) level rating. |
|
|
|
Post by Joaquim on Apr 20, 2017 16:05:13 GMT
Good. Should be a tiny bit lower and the infinitely better La La Land needs to skyrocket to the Top 30.
|
|
around a lot so it'll be to see where it is in 5 or 6 years.
