Official RAZZIE® Forum Homepage
Forum Home Forum Home > FORUMS on 30th RAZZIES Choices > MISS MARCH
  New Posts New Posts RSS Feed: How LOW Can Your Libido Go??
  FAQ FAQ  Forum Search   Calendar   Register Register  Login Login

How LOW Can Your Libido Go??

 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345
Author
Message
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: How LOW Can Your Libido Go??
    Posted: December 20 2010 at 12:20pm
Suits yourselves, guys. It's just in my opinion, you can't get more specific than "1-5 = great, good, okay, alright, bad", rather than "1-10 = within the range of being good, within the range of being bad", etc.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
Mayhem5185 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 10 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 259
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mayhem5185 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 1:46am
And as for school grade point averages, as you have seen from my debates with MWG, I apply them to RT ratings. Where as he would consider 50% to be a good thing, I see it as an "F", since that was the GPA method in school. To each his own I suppose.

I always thought the whole taking rotten tomatoes as a literal grade to be kinda silly, the one thing that metacritic does right over RT is that they explain what the score means rather than provide a vauge consensus. for example a 50% means mixed or average, which is far from an F (Not saying it's a good rating, just saying that your looking at it the wrong way)

A 50%ish score on RT doesn't mean an F, it means that about half the critics didn't like it and half of the critics did, thats means that critics were split on the movie, and not a failing grade. So in a way maybe Gee-Wiz does have a point to some extent... although just saying that in itself is an oxy-moron LOL
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7172
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 9:31am
If I use the 5 stars it's: Very Good, Good, Average, Bad and Very Bad. Most people I know prefer that. But as a reviewer (I don't call myself a critic because it's not my job) I analyze everything in the movie, so it's One Of The Best, Excellent, Great, Good, Okay, Average, Mediocre, Bad, Awful, Horrible, One Of The Worst.
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 12:00pm
Yeah, 50% on RT is nothing to get all excited about. That's far from being able to go all "See, see! 50%, that means the movie is good and not razzie worthy!" (a common excuse used by Gee-Wiz). But as I have been saying, my perferred methods of movie rating systems are 1-5 stars or letter grades, hence why I translate percentages into letter grades. But hey, that's just me. I'm sure everyone uses RT ratings differently ... like Gee-Wiz thinking anything not below 20% MUST be "good". 

Originally posted by Mayhem5185

I always thought the whole taking rotten tomatoes as a literal grade to be kinda silly, the one thing that metacritic does right over RT is that they explain what the score means rather than provide a vauge consensus. for example a 50% means mixed or average, which is farfrom an F (Not saying it's a good rating, just saying that your looking at it the wrong way)

A 50%ish score on RT doesn't mean an F, it means that about half the critics didn't like it and half of the critics did, thats means that critics were split on the movie, and not a failing grade. So in a way maybe Gee-Wiz does have a point to some extent... although just saying that in itself is an oxy-moron.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 12:08pm
That's fine, that works. But as for things like "one of the best, one of the worst, etc.", that's really not a movie review thing, it's more of year in review or decade in review thing. As a reviewer, you're suppose to judge the movie on it's own merits in the PRESENT DAY, not what it's place in movie history will be ten years from now. You're spreading the quality meter too thin. "Excellent" and "great" are interchangeable as one degree; "good" is a stand alone degree; "okay", "average" and "mediocre" can all be combined into one degree; "bad" is a stand alone degree; "awful" and "horrible" are interchangeable as one degree. You see what I mean?  

Originally posted by Vits

If I use the 5 stars it's: Very Good, Good, Average, Bad and Very Bad.
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 7172
Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 1:44pm
Wow!You turned my 10 ratings into 5!Snap!
You can follow me @Vits_Chile
Back to Top
BurnHollywoodBurn View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 03 2010
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 3557
Post Options Post Options   Quote BurnHollywoodBurn Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 1:50pm
Yes, yes I did. Do I get my cookie now?
The Four Horsemen of the Moviepocalypse: uncalled for sequels/remakes/reboots, 3-D surcharges, untalented "celebrities", and anything with Michael Bay's name attached to it.
Back to Top
Mayhem5185 View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: October 10 2007
Location: United States
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 259
Post Options Post Options   Quote Mayhem5185 Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 2:07pm
I already ate it... 


I don't have pet peeves, I have major psychotic f**king hatreds! George Carlin
Back to Top
Grounder the Critic View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: November 12 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 304
Post Options Post Options   Quote Grounder the Critic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 21 2010 at 5:17pm
I ate mine too.
Pictures move, do they?
Back to Top
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  <1 345

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down