365 Dni (Days)

Tools    





Also the camera does seem to be on the maybe about 60-70% more of the time, so maybe it was geared towards more women in that regard?
I can't comment specifically (because I haven't seen it any ya'll are NOT going to sucker me into watching it!).

But in (I think) the second Folding Ideas YouTube video about the 50 Shades series, he makes a point about how once the male directors took over, the films got more squeamish about showing the male character in an eroticized way.

Again, more women are talking about the film, but I'd be interested in an actual breakdown of who is watching it. For example, the IMDb statistics showing more male ratings than female ratings. (Then again, there is a pattern on IMDb of male users downvoting movies aimed at women so who knows?)



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh really? Why do guys downvote movies on the Imdb for that reason? What do they care if a movie is aimed at women?

Also, in this movie, without trying to sound too bad about it, when you watch the sex scenes, it looks like it was shot with a camera with not so wide lenses. but then when they show certain shots, like the oral sex shots, those ones look like they were shot on a i-phone or something cause the lenses are much wider and have barrel distortion in them.

Why did they shoot those shots that way I wonder. Did they think the wider lenses, would emphasize the oral in some way? It's a weird observation but it sticks out like a sore thumb to me.



Oh really? Why do guys downvote movies on the Imdb for that reason? What do they care if a movie is aimed at women?
It's a weird phenomenon. It's both downvoting female-led films before they come out (which was bad enough that IMDb changed their policies so that people can't rate a film until it is released) and just generally down-voting female-demographic movies and shows. (I should point out that it's not always gender-based. There have been other films that have been victims of aggressive down-vote campaigns before they even got released).

There's an article about it here: https://fivethirtyeight.com/features...imed-at-women/ The most interesting thing to me about the article is that men and women overall really tend to vote the same on "neutral" shows, and then the big disparities come in for shows with skewed audiences.

It can be interesting to look at the stats on films that people seem to decide are "for men" or "for women".

For example, 25% of female voters gave 365 Days a 1/10, compared to 34.7% of male voters. But on the other end of the ratings scale, 4.8% of male voters gave it a 10 compared with 16% of female voters.

A question that's hard to answer is how many of the people rating these things have actually seen them or are rating them "on principle". I would guess that a lot of the men giving, for example, Sex in the City a rating of 1/10 haven't actually seen the show.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay, well how do we know whether or not the guys have seen it, because they are rating it before it's out? If this is the case, then the imdb shouldn't allow ratings, if the movie isn't out yet.

Well I watched the full video that was linked and the guy talks about how Christian Grey was abusive towards Ana, but he makes it seem like how the abuse was worse than I remember in the first movie. Was he more abusive in the book then, compared to the movie, because I only saw the first movie but didn't think he was that bad though as he thinks.



Oh okay, well how do we know whether or not the guys have seen it, because they are rating it before it's out? If this is the case, then the imdb shouldn't allow ratings, if the movie isn't out yet.
You don't. But I mean, you never do. I could go rate a movie on IMDb right now that I haven't seen. But they did change their policy so that movies can't be rated before they are released.

One example is the female Ghostbusters. There were 12,000 votes on IMDb before the movie hit theaters. 83% of them were from male users. And the average score that they gave it was a 3.6. (Even now, male-identified users account for 100,000 votes and female-identified users account for 33,000 of the votes. Average male score: 4.9. Average female score: 6.5. 20% of men give it a 1/10; 4% of women give it a 1/10).

It's a problem with any online rating system: how do you know if the person has actually seen the movie? I guess you hope (which I do) that most people are honest in rating films and don't just go score something super high or super low to make a point.

It's honestly partly why I appreciate film discussion boards. When someone says something is a 2/5 or a 6.5/10, what does that mean? There are people on this board who tend to give 2/5 scores to films they actually seem to like, while I give things I like at least a 3 or 3.5. So having a chance to discuss things and compare your taste and interest to others is really valuable.

I'm always kind of curious about the people behind the numbers. Who are the people rating 365 Days a 10/10? Who are the people giving it a 1/10? How many people rating it have actually seen it? How many people are giving it low scores to "balance" the high scores? How many people are giving it a 10/10 to snub the low scores?



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
But they did change their policy so that movies can't be rated before they are released.
Good thing. Similarly, I'm fed up with badass 100-year-olds who supposedly watched a film when it was first released. Obviously, we're talking about a long-lost film from 1916.
__________________
Look, I'm not judging you - after all, I'm posting here myself, but maybe, just maybe, if you spent less time here and more time watching films, maybe, and I stress, maybe your taste would be of some value. Just a thought, ya know.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Good thing. Similarly, I'm fed up with badass 100-year-olds who supposedly watched a film when it was first released. Obviously, we're talking about a long-lost film from 1916.
Which movie?



Sorry if I'm rude but I'm right
Obviously I don't have any particular movie in mind (still, maybe try the one Kino Eye flick that is lost, can't remember which one), but I've seen it a couple of times: People rating old, lost films as if they actually saw them. So if they really did, it means they must have seen them before they got lost, that is many, many years ago which in turn makes them old!

EDIT: Here it is. But that's just one of many.



Movie Forums Squirrel Jumper
Oh okay, I thought maybe they were rating old movies as if they had seen them nowadays compared to back then.



Did you sit through the whole thing?
I may have dozed off at some point, but, yes, I watched the entire thing. I almost bailed out, but surprised myself by finishing it.

My guess is plenty of dudes are fast-forwarding to the sexy bits (or, as you note, just watching them separately on adult websites), they just aren't talking about it.
But why bother when there is a ton of hardcore porn on the Internet? IMO there’s nothing especially lascivious in this movie that would cause guys to feverishly fast-forward looking for juicy bits.

Yeah that's true, my women friends are probably willing to watch a whole movie of erotica I guess.
What makes you think this?

I can't comment specifically (because I haven't seen it any ya'll are NOT going to sucker me into watching it!).
Must admit I’m puzzled as to why someone would join this thread who hasn’t actually seen the movie.
__________________
I’m here only on Mondays, Wednesdays & Fridays. That’s why I’m here now.



But why bother when there is a ton of hardcore porn on the Internet? IMO there’s nothing especially lascivious in this movie that would cause guys to feverishly fast-forward looking for juicy bits.
Maybe because someone on a shared network/computer would be comfortable cruising such films in Netflix but not actually going to a porn site?

Must admit I’m puzzled as to why someone would join this thread who hasn’t actually seen the movie.
Short answer: When you started this thread there wasn't much else happening on the main page, and also I wanted to give you a genuine answer (that I hadn't seen it and why) because you'd posted something similar in the Rate the Last Movie thread and no one had responded.

But long answer: It's kind of fascinating to me when a film like this becomes a bit of a phenomenon and I find that cultural response more interesting than I'd probably find the film. For example, I've watched all of the Folding Ideas video essays about the 50 Shades films, but haven't actually seen any of the movies. It's the discussion around the film in this case that I find interesting. Sometimes these discussions actually make me curious about a film (a thread like this is the reason I ended up watchingConstantine, but for very different reasons!) and I do end up wanting to watch it. As you even wrote in your original post, it's interesting that the film is apparently so popular (#4 on IMDb) but seemingly not being widely discussed.



Survivor 5s #2 Bitch
I had the "joy" of watching this the other day.

I made it through until the end! I went into it to see what the fuss was about and to see if it'd be a "so bad it's good" flick, but... Nope. It was bad, though. Unrealistic, well I guess no one goes into something like this expecting a gritty slice of life drama, but she nearly drowned at one point and then they do it continuously to the point he remarks they've only slept for an hour. But it was "having sex for around 12 hours with a one hour rest just minutes after nearly drowning" level of ludicrous throughout.

It was cringe, but at least somewhat entertaining cringe from the ridiculousness of it. The sex scenes varied from frisky to just uncanny valley (the sloppy bj on the flight, it was a no from me)

Also the blaring music over every other scene irked me a lot too. Felt like I was at a crap rave half the time.