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

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?

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).

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)

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.

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.

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....

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

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!

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.

I vote for 1-10.

"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.

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.

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

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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.

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"?

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.

I like the Ebert Star Scale.

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.

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

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?