Should disappointment factor into your ratings?

Tools    





I'm not talking about Commercialization.

I could care less how much a movie makes.

popularity doesnt allways = quality

it rarely does actually.

The only films i care about the financial return, are the ones I've invested in.
Dude, you need to educate yourself on these concepts. A lot if this debate is down to misunderstanding as a result of your ignorance. While saying a film was 'commercially successful' would imply it did well at the box office. commercialisation is the process of marketing a product, including those trailers that have us drooling with excitement and expectation, like I was foolishly when I saw the avp trailer a long time ago.

Commercialization is often confused with sales or business development. The Commercialization process has three key aspects:
The funnel. It is essential to look at many ideas to get one or two products or businesses that can be sustained long-term
It is a stage-wise process and each stage has its own key goals and milestones
It is vital to involve key stakeholders early, including customers
The point again, is that not all films have commercialisation. If my mate hands me an indie flick produced by a film school he lectures at, I'll watch it usually without any prior knowledge of what its even about. No commercialisation what so ever. Films like this would stand to obtain an unfair advantage in a comparison as they have no expectations to live up to.



Keep on Rockin in the Free World
yes but seeing as you negged me speciifically because i used the Stinkeroo that was Robin Hood directed by Ridley Scott and starring Russel Crowe.

i should apporach a big budget studio flick with Rid Scott as if i'm watching a uwe bol epic?

cmon sally, give your pumpkin a shake.
__________________
"The greatest danger for most of us is not that our aim is too high and we miss it, but that it is too low and we reach it." - Michelangelo.



yes but seeing as you negged me speciifically because i used the Stinkeroo that was Robin Hood directed by Ridley Scott and starring Russel Crowe.

i should apporach a big budget studio flick with Rid Scott as if i'm watching a uwe bol epic?

cmon sally, give your pumpkin a shake.
Dear God man, I "negged" you because you proposed the concept we've all been debating for the last 30 posts. I've admitted myself that Robin Hood sucked 3 times in the Ridley Scott thread, I hated it too.

Judging by your petty 2 line responses pertaining to unrelated points, I'd say your participation in this debate is over. You clearly don't have the brain capacity to support an argument on a perspective it seems you never really understood anyway.

I'm sorry if this is harsh, but your stupidity has been infuriating.

Originally Posted by Dexter
and it arrived straight to DVD, it may have ok for what it was.
Dude.......... Never go full retard.



The point again, is that not all films have commercialisation. If my mate hands me an indie flick produced by a film school he lectures at, I'll watch it usually without any prior knowledge of what its even about. No commercialisation what so ever. Films like this would stand to obtain an unfair advantage in a comparison as they have no expectations to live up to.
You go on and on about commercialisation, but all DR said in the post that started this was that he expected more from Russell Crowe and Ridley Scott. This statement has nothing to do with trailers or posters or anything, but simply an obvious respect for the star and the director.

And let's also not forget that, unless you've lived your life in a bubble, there's no way to go into a movie called Robin Hood without any expectations.

Also just because people don't see things your way is no reason to start calling them "stupid" all the while expecting them to treat you "nicely." You've got one hell of a superiority complex, man.



Originally Posted by Miss Vicky
You go on and on about commercialisation, but all DR said in the post that started this was that he expected more from Russell Crowe and Ridley Scott. This statement has nothing to do with trailers or posters or anything, but simply an obvious respect for the star and the director.
Ummmmm no he did'nt he said
:From the thread " how do you compare movies.

Originally Posted by DexterRiley
Reasonable expectation plays a role for me.

its a weighted system.

For example:

I expect more from Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe than what Robin Hood was.
Robin Hood was just an example used with the concept he presented. Please check facts before posting. Expectation is derived from commercialisation, commercialisation is not present with all movies. Its not logical to use this as a variable for comparison.
--
I have no problem with people not seeing things my way provided they have even a half assed, slightly educated opinion to stand by, or an opinion atoll. I've destroyed that kid with logic and a knowledge of actual events of the original topic to the point were he's just babbling now, I'm beginning to question weather he actually knew what we were talking about from the beginning. I'm sorry my posts aren't presented with roses and chocolates. I didn't mean to hurt your feeling Vicky



As I said on the other thread, I try to understand the film- what its point is, what it's trying to say, etc. For example, it would be unfair to score a film low because you expected Boris to be nice and then it turned out that Boris was selfish, which is what the director intended all along.Lack of intention or meandering would also mean a low score.

Then I decide whether it has filled the intention. Is the actor playing Boris being selfish enough? Has it provoked in me the desired reaction?

Then I'd see whether I agreed with the intention. Perhaps I think that Boris' selfishness means that I am unsympathetic towards his romantic troubles or that it didn't fit with the situation.
__________________
You cannot have it both ways. A dancer who relies upon the doubtful comforts of human love can never be a great dancer. Never. (The Red Shoes, 1948)



Yes his REASONABLE EXPECTATION for the movie Robin Hood was that it would be of great quality, because of previous experience with the work of both Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe.

Reasonable expectation is not necessarily derived from commercialization. It can be derived from previous experience with the filmmakers/stars (as in DR's situation with Robin Hood) and/or previous knowledge of the subject matter.

You also seem to fail to understand that for many people, the quality of a movie and their opinion of it are two seperate entities and that a person's overall enjoyment of a movie will often factor more heavily into a rating than things like cinematography, plot, character development, etc.

If what you want is debate, then you need to stick with proper debating tactics and quit with the ad hominem attacks. This is a messageboard intended for discussion, yes, but the discussion needs to be civil.



Yes his REASONABLE EXPECTATION for the movie Robin Hood was that it would be of great quality, because of previous experience with the work of both Ridley Scott and Russell Crowe.

Reasonable expectation is not necessarily derived from commercialization. It can be derived from previous experience with the filmmakers/stars (as in DR's situation with Robin Hood) and/or previous knowledge of the subject matter.

You also seem to fail to understand that for many people, the quality of a movie and their opinion of it are two seperate entities and that a person's overall enjoyment of a movie will often factor more heavily into a rating than things like cinematography, plot, character development, etc.
Looking at previous work by the cast a crew is a good point and doesn't have anything to do with commercialisation, its the exception though, not the rule. Unless your going to compare two films by looking at the backlog of credits on each films director and star, decide how good you think the film is going to be ....... and then rate the film even worse if it fails to meet those expectation (How F88king stupid)..... I've said all this before, your not reading atoll are you?

Once again, how does his failed expectations affect the quality of the film? It doesn't!!!!!. I'm actually running out of steam with this argument. I've argued a logical and obviously correct point, people are to thick to retain. Its not a case of you saying, "ok, but I still fell that", your just ignoring what I'm saying and repeating the same rubbish thats already been said. You're boring.

I'm failing to understand that
Originally Posted by Vicky
for many people the quality of a movie and their opinion of it are two seperate entities and that a person's overall enjoyment of a movie will often factor more heavily into a rating than things like cinematography, plot, character development, etc
Can I ask where the hell I fail to understand what you've just said.

Ironically my point at the the start of the "how do you compare movies' thread was

Originally Posted by TNBT
Its really difficult to compare them on any of those variables, especially action and stunts .

Storyline, certainly, but if I'm comparing My sisters keeper with Terminator 4: Salvation. It gets kind of ridiculous.

I compare movies on, personal enjoyment factor I suppose. Its like if you list any two movies I can tell you which I like/enjoyed more in a heart beat. When you start asking why, I suppose it can become more difficult.
I understand what you just said, you fail to understand that has nothing to do with what anyones saying. Where talking about the exclusion of one variable when comparing films, and thats expectation.

Also its childish to go back and edit your posts once I've responded to them, its obvious my response in then incorrect. Try and say what you have to say the first time.

I wish the kids would kids would piss off back to 'TPAM thread'



I went back and edited my posts after I reviewed them, not after you responded to them. Apparently you must have been formulating your response to my posts WHILE I was editing them. It's also important to note that I did not delete any comments in my original posts, I simply added to them.

As for the difference between personal enjoyment of a movie and the movie's quality - disappointment may not affect the QUALITY of a movie, but it certainly will affect a person's enjoyment of it and therefore the rating they give it.



On a somewhat related note, the negative reputation I've given you in this thread is for your continued rudeness.

You may think it's "childish" to edit posts, but I find it far more childish to resort to name calling.



I went back and edited my posts after I reviewed them, not after you responded to them. Apparently you must have been formulating your response to my posts WHILE I was editing them. It's also important to note that I did not delete any comments in my original posts, I simply added to them.

As for the difference between personal enjoyment of a movie and the movie's quality - disappointment may not affect the QUALITY of a movie, but it certainly will affect a person's enjoyment of it and therefore the rating they give it.
As I keep saying, disappointment is brutal, especially when you've loved a franchise since you were a kid, got excited about the , concept, trailers, teasers, posters and then had to watch it all come tumbling down in the cinema (Aliens vs Predator). Disappointing, unfulfilled potential is something you have to deal with as you exit the cinema, it fuels an anger towards time and money wasted and art ruined.

Put simply though, it doesn't effect the actual movie. Its the same movie my brother watched, he doesn't give a **** about the franchise. This is so obvious, I feel like I'm on crazy pills.

Originally Posted by meatwadsprite
I'm with Next Big Thing on this one, your personal expectations don't change what you're watching at all. Disappointed or not, I think you saw the same movie.
amen



I don't think he was accusing you of saying that, he's pointing it out because it demonstates what he's saying: that judging movies based no one's level of disappointment is purely an emotional thing, and doesn't really make sense. Technically speaking, that's correct, whatever you think about the manner in which he's expressing the idea.



I never said it did. Why don't you try actually reading what I've said?
I know what your saying dude, it just seems pointless to acknowledge that your rating a movie on a bizarre sort of personal variable. And of course if you could do this with ALL movies it would be perfectly fair since it your personal opinion of the movies anyway. Th trouble is you cant do this with all movies hence the reason its (WHAT I'VE BEEN SAYING ALL ALONG) "silly and unfair".

Take two movies that are equally ****. AVP shouldn't feature a lower rating than say.... saw 17 < or whichever number were at now because I actually give a crap about the alien franchises an expected more.



Everybody comes into a movie with some sort of expectation. If it's an unrealistic or false one, condemning the movie entirely wouldn't be reasonable. But if it's a perfectly reasonable one, failure to live up to it suggests that the movie may not be of high quality.

If a film sets a bar, it has a duty to live up to it. Failure to do so means the film is on some level a failure.



Thursday Next's Avatar
I never could get the hang of Thursdays.
I agree with The Next Big Thing that it would be silly to rate a film lower than you think it deserved simply because you expected it to be better - say, deliberately giving what you really think is a four star film three stars just because you were hoping it would be five.

However, I don't think it's always easy to know how far disappointment has affected your judgement and rating on a less conscious level, it may well be affecting how you rate a film without you being conscious of it, not deliberately marking a film down but marking it down all the same.

I don't think I consciously let disappointment affect my rating, but I know it does affect how I feel about a film. I remember watching two films, one I had expected to be good, but was actually average, the other I'd expected to be poor, but was actually average. I rated them both the same, as I felt they'd deserved, but felt more kindly towards the one I'd expected to be bad because it had exceeded my expectations rather than disappointing them.

(I do remember rating The Matrix Revolutions badly because it disappointed me. But then again, the reason it disappointed me was because it was ****, so I don't think that was undeserved.)

I think when considering expectations and disappointment it does depend on whether those expectations were reasonable in the first place. It used to annoy me that people criticised The Village for not being scary enough because I don't think that was the main purpose of the film at all. It's not reasonable to be disappointed because a film wasn't the genre you were expected, or you felt misled by a trailer or poster - disappointed with misleading marketing, perhaps, but it's hardly the film's fault. However I think it is more reasonable to be disappointed with a film that's a sequel/part of a continuing series because it doesn't stand alone, if it is supposed to be finishing a story or keeping continuity and characterisation it has to live up to that. Whether it is reasonable to expect a film adaptation to live up to a book it is based on is more debatable, it might be grounds for disappointment for fans of the book, but some film adaptations change the source material considerably and still succeed, so again if the film can stand up in it's own right, if the changes make a better film, it would be unfair to mark a film down for that.

As an aside, Mr. Next actually prefers to know nothing at all about a film before watching it so as to have no expectations.



Saying someones opinion is foolish and unfair in a comparison is about as timid and you can get. Beyond saying *english accent* "I respectfully disagree sir". Grow a brain Des, as usual your the only one not chipping into the debate, just attacking members for how they're constructing themselves.
Grow a brain? Hmmm, you first call me ignorant, and now I should grow a brain.

I'm giving as good as I'm getting. You treat people how they treat you.
Hell, I even winked with that comment. Apparently you have no clue how to treat people as they treat you. I do . . . in real life. On-line I take a lot more ***** than I do in real life, because I can't get in your face about it. Too many people are only brave when they're on-line, in my opinion.

as usual your the only one not chipping into the debate, just attacking members for how they're constructing themselves.
The last time I looked, I was simply replying in the shoutbox, so no, I didn't really have anything to say about the actual topic. This wasn't a thread.



Grow a brain? Hmmm, you first call me ignorant, and now I should grow a brain.



Hell, I even winked with that comment. Apparently you have no clue how to treat people as they treat you. I do . . . in real life. On-line I take a lot more ***** than I do in real life, because I can't get in your face about it. Too many people are only brave when they're on-line, in my opinion.
I suppose brainless and ignorant sort of compliment each other.

Please don't come to my house and beat me up Des!!!

----

I'd love to respond to your take on this debate but wait............ there isn't one.



I want to make sure that you all understand that I was not a part of this discussion. The Next Big Thing made a comment in the shoutbox about neg repping, and it being brought up in threads. The only thing we were discussing, was our opinions on it being brought up, if it should or should not be brought up, and examples of why. I was never a part of this other discussion. Should disappointment factor into your ratings? I did not make this thread, so the fact that I never commented on the exact topic makes this statement false. Grow a brain Des, as usual your the only one not chipping into the debate, just attacking members for how they're constructing themselves. He requested that this thread be made, but I haven't a clue as to how he twisted what we were actually talking about into this.



Kewl thread. I don't really understand the topic. But you kids sure are all worked up about it. Whatever it is.
__________________
We are both the source of the problem and the solution, yet we do not see ourselves in this light...