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  123 5>
Author
Message Reverse Sort Order
  Share Topic Share Topic  Topic Search Topic Search  Topic Options Topic Options
Grounder the Critic View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: November 12 2010
Location: Las Vegas, NV
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 264 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Grounder the Critic Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Topic: How LOW Can Your Libido Go??
    Posted: December 21 2010 at 5:17pm
I ate mine too.
Pictures move, do they?
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
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
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4800 		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!
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
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
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
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4800 		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.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
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
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 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
Vheid View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: December 10 2010
Location: Utrecht
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 977 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vheid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 12:16pm
Okey, intresting Vits. Can you explain how you mean specific?
I myself prefer the 1-10 system because I rarely give film a 9 out of 10. So one can imagine how much status the few films have that get a 10 out of 10 (same goes the other way around for a 1 out of 10 rating)

Originally posted by Vits

Yeah.At first I used to use that system too.I prefer the 0-10 because my opinion on a movie sounds more specific to me.
Back to Top
Vits View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: February 01 2010
Location: Chile
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 4800 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 12:04pm
Yeah.At first I used to use that system too.I prefer the 0-10 because my opinion on a movie sounds more specific to me.
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
Vheid View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: December 10 2010
Location: Utrecht
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 977 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vheid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 20 2010 at 3:13am
I still prefer 10 degrees for myself, but will admit that I understand why critics use it. It is a clearer system.

I do also have to admit that I never understood why a reviews always included a rating of the film. It doesn't make the words printed on paper stronger. So to me it always seemed a bit unnecessary.

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

Vheid, sorry if my wording upset you, but I was just going by what I was taught to be the correct movie rating system that is embraced by professional critics. You do have to admit, having five degrees of quality is easier to understand than 10 degrees, that's why it's the system that critics use.
 
Vits, my opinion, it was more like this according to that system. Laughs: 10%, Directing: 20%, Acting: 5%. 35% = F.
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 19 2010 at 1:20pm
Vheid, sorry if my wording upset you, but I was just going by what I was taught to be the correct movie rating system that is embraced by professional critics. You do have to admit, having five degrees of quality is easier to understand than 10 degrees, that's why it's the system that critics use.
 
Vits, my opinion, it was more like this according to that system. Laughs: 10%, Directing: 20%, Acting: 5%. 35% = F.
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: 4800 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vits Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 11:15am
I usually use the rating system from my country:

7,0=100%
6,5=90%
6,0=80%
5,5=70%
5,0=60%
4,5=50%
4,0=40%
3,0=30%
2,0=20%
1,0=10%
0=0%

By in sites like this I choose to write one that you all understand.

Art is an abstract concept,and in movies I consider it the quality of the technical aspects.

Laughs:90%
Directing:40%
Acting:50%
http://vits-ingthemovies.blogspot.com
Back to Top
Vheid View Drop Down
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum
RAZZIE® Inner Sanctum


Joined: December 10 2010
Location: Utrecht
Online Status: Offline
Posts: 977 		Post Options Post Options   Quote Vheid Quote  Post ReplyReply Direct Link To This Post Posted: December 19 2010 at 11:02am
I didn't mind that you believe your own system works better than other systems. It's just that claiming there is just one REAL system comes over as a bit judgemental (or even arrogant).

I asume this wasn't your intention, because so far you came over as a reasonable/rational person.

Originally posted by BurnHollywoodBurn

I guess it varies from person to person. To me, 1 to 10 ratings make no damn sense. At what point is the movie bad or good? 1-3 is bad? 4-7 is okay? 8-10 is good? 1 to 5 is so much simpler. 1 is bad, 2 is alright, 3 is okay, 4 is good, 5 is great. See, simple. Same goes for letter grades. A is great, B is good, C is okay, D is alright, F is bad.
 
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.
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 19 2010 at 10:32am
Originally posted by Vheid

I find this statement a little harsh. I think there is a surden personal preference in every ratingsystem. That doesn't mean one system is better than the other (as long as you can get your message across).

In my highschool they graded tests/exams with a one through ten rating. I myself would use this anytime before using a one through ten rating or rating something with letters, simply because I am more comfertable/used to this system. It doesn't mean my rating counts to a lesser extend because I don't use the same system that critics use (or the system that American high schools use).
I guess it varies from person to person. To me, 1 to 10 ratings make no damn sense. At what point is the movie bad or good? 1-3 is bad? 4-7 is okay? 8-10 is good? 1 to 5 is so much simpler. 1 is bad, 2 is alright, 3 is okay, 4 is good, 5 is great. See, simple. Same goes for letter grades. A is great, B is good, C is okay, D is alright, F is bad.
 
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.
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
 Post Reply Post Reply Page  123 5>

Forum Jump Forum Permissions View Drop Down