The Meta-Poll Poll — What should be the "standard" poll choices for rating movies?

[The Bus]

Alright, based on <a href="http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=534701">this thread</a>, it seems we're OK with starting thread titles using this format:

Movie Title (Director, Year of Release) — Actors/Tagline/Etc

Example thread titles:
<a href="http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=534721">Mirrors (Alexandre Aja, 2008) — Kiefer Sutherland in horror movie about... mirrors</a>
<a href=http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=534733"">Hellboy II: The Golden Army (Del Toro, 2008) — The Reviews Thread</a>
<a href="http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=528537">Meet Dave (Brian Robbins, 2008) — Eddie Murphy as... a spaceship (cue facepalm)</a>

That cool long dash is an em dash and is typed by holding down ALT and typing 0151. So ALT + 0151 results in —

But, most importantly, how should we rate movies?

[mdc3000]

I voted for 0 to 5 - but I've been using that scale in my 'rank them as you see them' posts since 2001 (and flixster is a 5 star scale, so it's what I'm used to and prefer).

[Cellar Door]

I also voted for 0 to 5. I think the IMDB 1 thru 10 scale or the A+ thru F scale would "blur" the results by spreading out votes too much. I also think 1 to 10 scales tend to skew the scores upward--for some reason there are people who won't give below a 5 no matter how bad they think something is.

(I'm basing this on my experiences at work, where I've often used rating systems like these)

[TheGodfather]

0-5 is cool as long as we can use .5 stars. I hate Netflix's whole star policy. Some films are neither 3's or 4's, but rather 3.5's. That's just a truth of life.

[The Cow]

I voted for no polls just because I think everyone has different tastes.

I see what I think looks good to me.

On the other hand if someone chooses movies based on others opinions, then it should probably be from the largest sample group as possible, naming doesn't really mean anything.

[Sierra Disc]

Who's going to "enforce" all this anyway? The mods? Or are we just going to get a lot of bitching in threads that you're not doing it the "right" way which could get really old really fast? Just wondering....

[Arpeggi]

That's not the Patman scale.

The Patman scale: A through F OR stars rating

I give this an A or 4 stars.
I give this a B or 3 stars

[DVD-ho78(DTS)]

Somehow I missed that Meet Dave trailer before. Man, that is brutal.

I like the 0-4 stars. 4=great 3=good 2=avg 1=bad 0=worst movie evar!

[pridesticks06]

0-5 is cool as long as we can use .5 stars. I hate Netflix's whole star policy. Some films are neither 3's or 4's, but rather 3.5's. That's just a truth of life.

What he said. I've also noticed a trend to bend scores up on 1-10 scales on various internet sites. If .5's are allowed, 0-5 would work imo a la flixster.

[JPRaup]

I vote for 1-10.

[Trevor]

"Enforcement" will be difficult. Unless a mod is willing to edit 5 or so threads a week, it may take quite awhile for the new plan to take hold with everyone.

Maybe the best plan is just for a few of us to "take charge" and start threads in the new format.

Personally, I think it can be simpler than the above format. Why complicate things, or add personal comments? Why not keep it simple? For example:

Hancock (2008) - Review Thread

Hancock (2008) - Hype Thread

As for the poll options, I'm still mixed, but agree that 1-10 should be out.

[The Bus]

0-5 with 0.5's is the same as 1-10, practically.

I thought four stars was the norm for movies, but I just noticed that DVD Talk has 5 stars.

Problem is, 0-5 stars with ½s won't work because that leaves you with 11 choices: 0 to 5 is six, and then there's five ½ steps between them.

Of course, that could be easily resolved by having these options:
<ol>
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/4.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/4.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/3.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/3.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/2.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/2.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/1.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/1.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/0.gif">
</ol>

I'd even propose to make it simpler, like this:
<ol>
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/4.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/4.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/3.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/3.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/2.5.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/2.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/1.gif">
<li> <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/0.gif">
</ol>

A movie with less than 2.5 stars is below average, I don't think we need to really distinguish between a 0.5 and a 1 or a 1.5 and a 2.

[Groucho]

As a long-time Ebert reader, I like 0-4 stars. But will be happy with any of the methods.

[The Bus]

Personally, I think it can be simpler than the above format. Why complicate things, or add personal comments? Why not keep it simple? For example:

Hancock (2008) - Review Thread

Hancock (2008) - Hype Thread

You can certainly do that. Comments aren't really necessary but some people like them. I'd like to at least see the director's name though. I would've been more excited about Hancock from the beginning if I had known it was from Peter Berg. And after all, we're a bit better than the "average" (think something like Rotten Tomatoes or IGN) discussion forum.

I honestly doubt if I had made the Mirrors thread "Mirrors (2008)" that people would've been interested in it. I had no interest in the movie until I heard it was directed by Alexandre Aja.

[The Bus]

"Enforcement" will be difficult. Unless a mod is willing to edit 5 or so threads a week, it may take quite awhile for the new plan to take hold with everyone.

Maybe the best plan is just for a few of us to "take charge" and start threads in the new format.

Agreed. Once enough of us start doing it, then we'll see a change. I've done this format for the past ~6 months (or more, possibly) and it's been nice seeing more people adding directors and years to the movie titles.

There will always be threads that don't do it but unless it's a weird title ("Pirates 4 maybe!!!!") I think we'll be ok.

[Trevor]

Bus, I agree with you, and would prefer half stars as well. However, I think even your simplified option with 9 choices is just too complex for this particular purpose. For it to take hold and become a norm, simpler is better, don't you think? 0-5 stars would give six degrees of rating, which seem more than enough for a general feel of the movie.

We're not creating a definitive database here. In a massive review database, I would want to differentiate more, and have a layer between 4 star and 5 star. But this is just a general consensus poll, to give us all a vague idea of what the DVDtalk masses are feeling about a movie.

[macnorton]

I think the DVDTalk rating system works the best...also I like uniformity. However I am not opposed to a numeric scale.

But for the system to work, it will need to be enforced.

[DeputyDave]

I think it's a great idea. I hate to read review threads before I see a movie but I really want to know what the forum thinks before I see a movie.

I prefer the star method. I voted for the "4 Star Ebert" option simply because it seems standard for movies but if we aren't doing half stars we should have more range and make it 5 stars.

[JPRaup]

I think the DVDTalk rating system works the best...also I like uniformity. However I am not opposed to a numeric scale.

But for the system to work, it will need to be enforced.

If the regular members here remember to do it when we start threads..it will eventually catch on. We could also have a sticky thread explaining the correct way to make a movie thread.

[Trevor]

You can certainly do that. Comments aren't really necessary but some people like them. I'd like to at least see the director's name though. I would've been more excited about Hancock from the beginning if I had known it was from Peter Berg. And after all, we're a bit better than the "average" (think something like Rotten Tomatoes or IGN) discussion forum.

I honestly doubt if I had made the Mirrors thread "Mirrors (2008)" that people would've been interested in it. I had no interest in the movie until I heard it was directed by Alexandre Aja.

Good points. I see that the director, and a blurb w/ maybe an actor name would enhance the thread title. However, I still think we want to keep it fairly simple, and somehow differentiate between the hype threads and the reviews thread.

Maybe make a "rule" that the thread title ends with either "Hype Thread" or "Review Thread"?

[DeputyDave]

If the regular members here remember to do it when we start threads..it will eventually catch on. We could also have a sticky thread explaining the correct way to make a movie thread.
If we decide on a standard poll maybe some kind of macro or tool bar button to automatically set it up right. The actual poll doesn't need to mention what movie the vote is for, just the standard star (or whatever) options.

[Charlie Goose]

I like the Ebert Star Scale.

On a related note, will they be open polls so we can see who has shitty taste? :)

[Groucho]

On a related note, will they be open polls so we can see who has shitty taste? :)I'm somewhat in favor of open polls so we can see who's trolling and/or ballot stuffing.

[JPRaup]

I like the idea...maybe the "Hype Thread" includes the directors and actors name...but the "Review Thread" doesn't?

[scott1598]

well, i started this for next week to start precedent and i think it looks pretty good.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=534733

it is a little work, but nothing too bad.

what do you all think?

[Groucho]

well, i started this for next week to start precedent and i think it looks pretty good.

http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?t=534733

it is a little work, but nothing too bad.

what do you all think?:lol: Somebody's already given the film 5 stars.

[das Monkey]

Keep it simple. 0-4 or 0-5 in whole number increments. If a professional reviewer wants to give a film 3.5 stars, that's one thing; but it's overkill in this context and spreads the voting too thin to be useful. The point is to get a general idea of how a group of people feel about a film at a glance, not perform statistical analysis on their opinions.

das

[Trevor]

Looks good Scott, except for the nine choice poll range. I really think we need to limit it to no more than six (if we do the 0-5 star scale).

[Groucho]

The point is to get a general idea of how a group of people feel about a film at a glance, not perform statistical analysis on their opinions.You just cock-blocked wendersfan. :sad:

[Trevor]

Keep it simple. 0-4 or 0-5 in whole number increments. If a professional reviewer wants to give a film 3.5 stars, that's one thing; but it's overkill in this context and spreads the voting too thin to be useful. The point is to get a general idea of how a group of people feel about a film at a glance, not perform statistical analysis on their opinions.

das
Copycat.

:)

[JPRaup]

Looks good Scott! Except people are already started to cheat..It will eventually even out though obviously :)

and the vast number of options is NOT overkill. You will be able to see by the line graph what the consensus is.

[Cellar Door]

Keep it simple. 0-4 or 0-5 in whole number increments.

QFT (bolding mine)

[The Bus]

I think that's why we need to make the Poll Choices public. I also think that, in order, to not jump the gun, you should not make a Reviews thread until you've actually seen the movie. Otherwise the first few pages are just "can't wait" etc. until someone actually writes a review.

I also don't think every movie needs a "Hype" and a "Review" thread. If a movie's thread still has, say, less than 20 posts, I don't see why we need to have a separate review thread. If it has 40+ posts (2 or more pages, depending on your settings), then sure.

These are all guidelines, of course. I don't think we'd get anything from trying to "enforce" them aside from a mod maybe changing a title once in a while or adding the finalized "guidelines" into a Movie Talk sticky.

[The Bus]

Also, I figured making polls would be easier if you could simply type :5star: and have this appear instead: <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/5.gif">

And so on for :4star:, :3star:, :2star:, :1star:, :0star:...

So if you like that idea, <a href="http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?p=8785708">add your opinion to this Feedback Forum thread</a>.

[JPRaup]

Great idea, that would be perfect.

[Trevor]

I voted for 0 to 5 - but I've been using that scale in my 'rank them as you see them' posts since 2001 (and flixster is a 5 star scale, so it's what I'm used to and prefer).

For DVDtalk consistency, I voted for this option as well.

Those threads have become "standard" in this community to a large extent. We use the 5 star scale in the book threads as well. (Yes Virginia, there is a book forum.)

[scott1598]

:lol: Somebody's already given the film 5 stars.
yeah, that's trollish, unless someone did see an advanced and didn't post. is there a way to start polls at a given date, i know you can end them...

[scott1598]

Looks good Scott! Except people are already started to cheat..It will eventually even out though obviously :)

and the vast number of options is NOT overkill. You will be able to see by the line graph what the consensus is.
that's what i thought. when i rate dvd's on DVDSpot i like the 1/2 bc mostly i don't have solid 5's or 4's.

[Trevor]

I'm bored silly at work. Hope you all don't mind a rambling repetitive reply to a few comments. Should just give this thread a couple more days before posting more, but did I mention I'm bored?

0-5 is cool as long as we can use .5 stars. I hate Netflix's whole star policy. Some films are neither 3's or 4's, but rather 3.5's. That's just a truth of life.
As The Bus pointed out, 0-5 with half stars actually leads to 11 choices. Might as well do 1-10 at that point. And I agree with the others that have said that would be too many choices for this particular endeavor.

Who's going to "enforce" all this anyway? The mods? Or are we just going to get a lot of bitching in threads that you're not doing it the "right" way which could get really old really fast? Just wondering....
I think we agree that no enforcement is really necessary. If we put it in the FAQ, and all try to follow it, it will eventually catch on. But, in my normal impatient mode, how about this? If the current Movie Talk mods don't want the bother of "fixing" 5 or so threads a week, make another Movie Talk mod, someone with the sole responsibility of spending 10 minutes a day to edit thread titles, add poll options, merge these threads?

I think it's a great idea. I hate to read review threads before I see a movie but I really want to know what the forum thinks before I see a movie.
Exactly. And as others have pointed out, polls give the lurkers in our community the chance to be heard a bit.

I'm somewhat in favor of open polls so we can see who's trolling and/or ballot stuffing.
Normally I think I'm against public polls. But I'm not sure why exactly. So ok, I'll vote for public polls for this idea.

I think that's why we need to make the Poll Choices public. I also think that, in order, to not jump the gun, you should not make a Reviews thread until you've actually seen the movie. Otherwise the first few pages are just "can't wait" etc. until someone actually writes a review.
True, but I could see it being beneficial for some of us to start the review threads a bit early just to push the new format. Just a few days before release, early enough where a few of us have probably caught a preview.

I also don't think every movie needs a "Hype" and a "Review" thread. If a movie's thread still has, say, less than 20 posts, I don't see why we need to have a separate review thread. If it has 40+ posts (2 or more pages, depending on your settings), then sure.
Agreed. Then of course we need Mods willing to edit threads to create the poll and make the thread title standard.

Also, I figured making polls would be easier if you could simply type :5star: and have this appear instead: <img src="http://www.dvdtalk.com/reviews/images/5.gif">

And so on for :4star:, :3star:, :2star:, :1star:, :0star:...

So if you like that idea, <a href="http://forum.dvdtalk.com/showthread.php?p=8785708">add your opinion to this Feedback Forum thread</a>.
Great idea. If we get enough "votes" in that thread perhaps our tireless and under appreciated admins can make the smilies happen.

[sundog]

A pox on star/number ratings!

I will stick to reading the well-reasoned, civil discussions found... inside the many threads...

I just don't like rating scales.

You all can take your uniformity and consistency and... post it.

[Trevor]

A pox on star/number ratings!

I will stick to reading the well-reasoned, civil discussions found... inside the many threads...

I just don't like rating scales.

You all can take your uniformity and consistency and... post it.

I don't think the polls will stop the well-reasoned civil discussions at all. It will just provide an extra bit of potentially interesting information. If you're not interested in the "forum score", just don't vote. If you don't vote you won't see the score, so this new idea won't affect you at all.

[das Monkey]

Copycat.

:)
Note to self: Read thread before posting.

das

[wendersfan]

One star to five stars is my preferred choice.

[Trevor]

One star to five stars is my preferred choice.

We need to leave the zero star option for Wayan Brothers and Adam Sandler films.

But speaking of moderators, you're not a Movie Talk mod, right? Has anyone made sure that this sub-forum's mods know about this idea? It would be nice to get all of their input.

Edit to add: I did the report to mod thing, so maybe we'll get their input soon.

[KillerCannibal]

I like the IMDb scale. It's essentially the same as the restaurant scale, but I think it allows for a more precise rating.

[sundog]

I don't think the polls will stop the well-reasoned civil discussions at all.

Agreed.












Now we just need those discussions to start.

[TomOpus]

I voted 0-5 stars rather than 0-4 because that'll give a person a way to vote in the middle if they can't approve or disapprove of the movie. It's the Meh Vote.

[Boba Fett]

I've always rated films with the A+ through F scale; to me, when you rate something a 5/10 or 2 out of 4 stars, thats not average, thats crap, since 50% or below was always an F throughout my years in school and college.

[wendersfan]

But speaking of moderators, you're not a Movie Talk mod, right? Has anyone made sure that this sub-forum's mods know about this idea? It would be nice to get all of their input.No, I think all hell would break loose if I were a mod here. :lol: But I know this will probably be implemented soon. :up:

[The Bus]

No, I think all hell would break loose if I were a mod here. :lol: But I know this will probably be implemented soon. :up:

Does that mean we won't get ANOVA models on summer blockbusters vs. Oscar nominees, etc.? :sad:

[DVD-ho78(DTS)]

How would one rate an average film with the 5 star system if half stars aren't included? Seriously. There are a lot of films I consider average and worth one viewing in which they would get a normal 2 out of 4 stars.

[LorenzoL]

How would one rate an average film with the 5 star system if half stars aren't included? Seriously. There are a lot of films I consider average and worth one viewing in which they would get a normal 2 out of 4 stars.
This is a good question and one that I was thinking too. Might just limit to 4 star if half stars are not included.

[Trevor]

I see your point. With 5 stars, there are six options and no true middle/average choice.

I know that I have already argued for keeping things simple with fewer choices, but perhaps we could enhance/clarify the star system to include one more choice. I think we need 7 choices.

highest rating reserved for best of all time sort of film, rare to give out
great - film of the year maybe
above average
average
below average
bad/horrible
worst film ever

Number/star wise that could be 0 thru 5 adding a 2.5 to the middle for average.

[Patman]

Though I voted for my own scale choice, it's basically Ebert's 4-star rating system (rated within genres for the most part).

For me, usually anything I rate B- and above deserves to be seen theatrically, though a B- means I have some reservations about the film in general.

Any film I rate C- to C+ is a rental depending on taste in genres.

A rating of D+ and under should be avoided unless you are a cinematic rubber-necker who must see for themselves how crappy the movie really is.

[The Bus]

How would one rate an average film with the 5 star system if half stars aren't included? Seriously. There are a lot of films I consider average and worth one viewing in which they would get a normal 2 out of 4 stars.

An average film is three stars out of 5. "Zero" star films are an abomination, basically.

[Groucho]

"Zero" star films are an abomination, basically.That still seems too high for Boll and Shyamalan flicks.

[Trevor]

An average film is three stars out of 5. "Zero" star films are an abomination, basically.

Ok, but then why not reserving the highest score for absolute best of all time sort of films? I just think there needs to be a true middle rating.

If we end up with 5 stars perhaps we could just delete the 0 star option to have a true middle.

Either 5 choices, or 7. A true middle/average score with either 2 or 3 choices on either side would be best imo.

[hardercore]

Do the five whole stars option. Let's be fucking decisive about what we think about movies for a change. And as previously mentioned, the whole point is just so other users can get the gist of what the consensus is. Nobody's going to care that you rate it 3.75 stars, bordering on 4, on a 5.1 star rating, with the 0.1 star at the top being reserved for the greatest film of all time, limited to only ever giving it out once.

[PopcornTreeCt]

rottentomatoes

[Trevor]

Seems pretty clear that the vote is for stars.

Did any of the movie talk mods ever comment in this thread?

Still think we need an odd number of choices to have a true middle. So if we go with 5 stars we should eliminate the 0 star option imo.

[Trevor]

Over a week without any discussion, and none of the movietalk mods ever commented. So I guess this is just another idea that gets forgotten/dropped?

[riotinmyskull]

Over a week without any discussion, and none of the movietalk mods ever commented. So I guess this is just another idea that gets forgotten/dropped?

the five star ratings have been used in the last couple "review" threads

edit: actually the last 2 have used different methods, my bad

[Trevor]

Exactly. I'm not expecting total conformity, but was just hoping for a more thorough conclusion to this idea.

It seems to be the DVDtalk way. People get initially excited about an idea, but then it just peters out.

This idea seems to be both constructive, and fairly easy to implement or even slightly "enforce".

I know that our mods here are overworked and underpaid, but I was hoping for some feedback from the three of them.

Of course, I'm probably just too impatient. But I just thought it would be nice if we made an effort on this.

[scott1598]

Exactly. I'm not expecting total conformity, but was just hoping for a more thorough conclusion to this idea.

It seems to be the DVDtalk way. People get initially excited about an idea, but then it just peters out.

This idea seems to be both constructive, and fairly easy to implement or even slightly "enforce".

I know that our mods here are overworked and underpaid, but I was hoping for some feedback from the three of them.

Of course, I'm probably just too impatient. But I just thought it would be nice if we made an effort on this.
i think i have been making an effort. i put 2 out there based solely on the discussions in this thread. used a lot of 'The Bus' ideas and fine tuning the rest to cater and make it look pretty. i've also been updating daily to reflect current RT #'s.

the "Hellboy" was prior to :5star: smilies and "The Dark Knight" uses them. i think going forward the "The Dark Knight" format should prevail. though i like the 1/2 stars, i don't think we will get those smilies and people don't seem to like them anyway.

i have been trying to appeal to the masses and used this and the "stars" smilies thread as inspiration.

sorry you don't concur Trevor.

[Trevor]

sorry you don't concur Trevor.

I'm confused. How do we disagree?

I think it's great that you ran with my idea and started those polls threads.

What I'm "upset" about is that the discussion here never reached a real conclusion. We had no input from any mods. The FAQ hasn't been changed as others suggested. Etc.

And we should have a clarification discussion or vote on how to apply the stars exactly. 5 stars won the vote, but adding the zero star option gives you 6 choices, and therefore no middle/average rating. There has to be a middle. We obviously need an odd number of choices in the polls, five I would imagine to be best.

[scott1598]

I'm confused. How do we disagree?

I think it's great that you ran with my idea and started those polls threads.

What I'm "upset" about is that the discussion here never reached a real conclusion. We had no input from any mods. The FAQ hasn't been changed as others suggested. Etc.

And we should have a clarification discussion or vote on how to apply the stars exactly. 5 stars won the vote, but adding the zero star option gives you 6 choices, and therefore no middle/average rating. There has to be a middle. We obviously need an odd number of choices in the polls, five I would imagine to be best.
i guess i was confused. sorry.

so you mean you want the 1/2 stars too or just no 0 star option and what is the difference if the 0 star option is there and makes it 6 choices?

[Trevor]

i guess i was confused. sorry.

so you mean you want the 1/2 stars too or just no 0 star option and what is the difference if the 0 star option is there and makes it 6 choices?

I think the consensus was fewer choices and no half stars.

And the difference with having a six choice range for rating something is that there is no middle, no way to rate a film as "average". One needs an odd number of choices to have an "average" score. With 5 choices seeming most logical given the poll voting and discussion.

So I'm thinking that 1 star thru 5 stars would be best for this purpose. 3 stars is average, with two ratings above average, and two ratings below average.

[scott1598]

I think the consensus was fewer choices and no half stars.

And the difference with having a six choice range for rating something is that there is no middle, no way to rate a film as "average". One needs an odd number of choices to have an "average" score. With 5 choices seeming most logical given the poll voting and discussion.

So I'm thinking that 1 star thru 5 stars would be best for this purpose. 3 stars is average, with two ratings above average, and two ratings below average.
i think with 0 stars, 3 stars would still be considered average by most. with 0 you have people who absolutely hate it and wouldn't recommend it on any level. a 1 is some level of recommend.