| Welcome to RT CD Refugees. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| What Do the CDDB Ratings mean to you?; I mean really what is a "mixed" | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jan 28 2017, 09:06 PM (610 Views) | |
| Mister Jiggy, Esq. | Jan 28 2017, 09:06 PM Post #1 |
|
Swingin' on the Flippity-Flop
|
Was going to watch The Handmaiden tonight but my crap cable company screwed me. So I went to to Netflix to find something to watch (after partaking in Wiener-Dog, as a Solandz interested party, not sure "fan" is still applicable) and considered Anne Fontaine's The Innocents. Went to the CDDB and there was one rating - esteemed fugee TBickles's "mixed". Well, what am I going to do with that? Which got me thinking, what do these CDDB ratings mean to individual fugees. To randomly generalize, a Yancy pro(+) may seem to me like Jiggy pro or a vornporn pro(-) - and a Maxine mixed(-) is like the greatest mystery. A Sharon Peters con is like an unqualified reco and a Karim pro coupled with an Aaron con is like a scene from Scanners. A Cassius pro is gold (go Canada) and a Dirt rating makes me think is this animated, or is there a Star Trek reference? If Conty goes pro(+) it goes immediately on my "to see list" with an asterisk :P. If Russ goes PRO - does one just assume there has never been a home video release? Guy is pretty much never wrong, and Dr. R needs to watch more movies (and so does Shay Casey). Gabe needs time in the penalty box for disappearing and can not be trusted :P. Essentially I'm tired of relying on reviews from Folco, Mrs. Allison and "Grouchy". Anyway, please respond using the following and explain what your ratings should mean to other fugees: PRO+ PRO PRO(-) pro(+) pro pro(-) mixed(+) Etc., etc. I'd add mine now but I'm tired of typing on my IPAD and need to finish Wiener-Dog which TBickle gave a mixed (-) and Cassius gave con. Pretty sure Russ might go mixed(+). :like: |
![]() |
|
| Dirt | Jan 29 2017, 01:52 AM Post #2 |
|
After all.....
|
PRO(+) - animated star trek movie PRO - animated movie with star trek reference PRO(-) - animated movie pro(+) - star trek movie pro - movie with star trek reference pro(-) movie with animation reference mixed(+) - movies that can not be paused mixed - movies that can be paused mixed(-) - movies that can be left playing while you make a snack con(+) - movies that can be left playing while you make dinner con - movies that can be left on while you check facebook con(-) - movies that are so bad but you only remember the title and how much you hated it CON(+) - movies that are bad but you remember how funny the really bad parts are CON - movies that are so bad you remember every suck moment of them CON(-) - citizen kane |
![]() |
|
| YancySkancy | Jan 29 2017, 05:32 AM Post #3 |
|
Administrator
|
PRO(+) - means I momentarily forgot that I never give this rating because it's impossible, like "giving 110 percent." I think the only PRO(+) I've given is to The Awful Truth. PRO - I really loved it, either after thoughtful consideration (Under the Skin) or inexplicable over-reaction to general dismissal (Calendar Girls) PRO(-) - A PRO movie that I've decided to nitpick pro(+) - Really loved it, but a couple of minutes of it bugged me for some reason pro - A good movie pro(-) - A pretty good movie mixed(+) - An okay movie mixed - A movie that didn't make me want to claw my eyes out mixed(-) - Thought about clawing one eye out con(+) - Crap movie, but some participants tried so hard con - Crap movie, but not crap enough to make me hate life con(-) - Hate it, but with the heat of only 500 suns CON(+) - 750 suns CON - 1,000 suns CON(-) - I don't think I've ever given this rating [similar to my reason for PRO(-)], but if I ever do, expect to hear of my suicide shortly thereafter EDIT: Added CON(+) |
![]() |
|
| Continental Op | Jan 29 2017, 07:32 AM Post #4 |
![]()
Fugee Emeritus
|
Haha, inspired post, Mr. Jiggy! I love it! I know I'm an easy grader. I love movies. I'm sure when I put in my pro+ to PROs you all take them with a grain of salt (as you should). Or you figure there must have been a monster in the movie, and if it was practical (vs VFX), I went really nuts. I have worked, in recents years, on not overreacting during the initial excitement I sometimes feel as the credits roll. I try and take a deep breath before entering my rating. Also, I think a lot of my PROs from the mid-aughts are more like pro+s...the excitability of youth and a time that was pre +/-, I think I rounded up a lot. PRO+: I try and save this for my all time greats...cause that extra 10% exists, Yancy! ;) I know I just gave it to Moonlight...I may have forgotten to do my credits roll breathing exercise...but it did feel like one of the best films I've seen in years. PRO: I loved it, and I'll get loud about it. PRO-: Just a few minor quibbles. pro+: very, very good. pro: good n solid. pro-: Slightly less good, slightly less solid. mixed+: the lowest rating where I still feel I'd recommend it to someone, because mileage between mixed+/pro-, etc, can vary so much. Somewhere between the world of okay and good...I haven't found the word for it yet. mixed: okay/mediocre. mixed-: not okay, not yet bad. con+: kinda bad. con: bad. con-: really bad. CON+/CON/CON-: Various degrees of awful. These usually end up being movies that I know are going to fall into this range when I seek them out. Maybe it's for an episode of How Did This Get Made. Maybe I just want to see a bad movie. These movies are choosing to be here...they've done it to themselves...and they know it. For instance, there's usually a film (or two) during awards season that absolutely doesn't work for me. Last year, The Revenant. This year, Hacksaw Ridge. But I'm not a monster. I get that there's something at least partially (usually technical) okay about them, that they don't deserve awful status. No, this is for the Dirty Grandpa and London Has Fallen of the years. This is their home. |
![]() |
|
| Russ | Jan 29 2017, 07:41 AM Post #5 |
|
Bark! Go away
|
PRO(+) - A masterpiece where I got a little carried away with emotion. PRO - Greatest. Film. Ever. I think this comprises about 75%-80% of my ratings PRO(-) - One of the greatest ever films where I begrudgingly sympathize with some of its detractors. pro(+) - A PRO film, that had the misfortune of being rated by me during those times when I feel like I've been handing out too many PRO's pro - A very good film that I must have watched on a day when I was in a bad mood. pro(-) - A great film that just wasn't weird enough. mixed(+) - A film that simply didn't try hard enough to be PRO. mixed - By definition, at least half of it was PRO. mixed(-) - A film that aspires to receive a pro (-) rating, and I think you see where I'm going with this. con(+) - Plus's indicate that there must have been something remotely PRO about it. con - A film that pisses me off, usually because it showed a hint of PRO potential. con(-) - Nothing PRO-worthy to see here, move along... CON - Almost PRO-worthy in its wretchedness. CON(-) - One of Karim's favorites...KIDDING..I keed, I keed. |
![]() |
|
| Gabe L | Jan 29 2017, 07:53 AM Post #6 |
|
Back in action!
|
This is a great thread. Mr. J, just tell me what I need to do to earn your trust back. Short of groveling, I'm in. :) I am also one of the easier graders; probably similar-ish to Yancy... PRO (+) -- masterpiece, personal favorite. FIVE STARS ON LETTERBOXD. I am not as picky on this as some, but I'm obviously very selective with this. PRO -- terrific to fantastic, in some cases, could move up to + with another viewing, though that's not the norm at all. This rating probably has the widest variance, though in all cases, I thought it was really great. FOUR TO FOUR AND A HALF STARS ON LETTERBOXD. PRO (-) -- terrific but with a few small gripes that knock it down just a touch. FOUR STARS ON LETTERBOXD, though I might give something right on the pro+/PRO- spectrum ***1/2. pro (+) -- very, very good, but something's missing that keeps it from PRO territory. THREE AND A HALF STARS ON LETTERBOXD. pro -- good picture, solid, enjoyed it, would recommend it, but not something that truly wowed me. THREE STARS ON LETTERBOXD. pro (-) -- similar to pro, but with more substantive reservations and clear flaws...but enough solid positives to keep it in the black. THREE STARS ON LETTERBOXD, but like PRO-, could maybe do **1/2 in some borderline cases. mixed (+) -- here, for me, is where it becomes much more of a, well, mixed bag. There are things I like and admire, but if you were to ask me for my overall opinion, it would be full of caveats, but with enough merit/good traits to cautiously recommend it in most cases. There are also movies here, like INHERENT VICE recently, that I respect more than love. TWO AND A HALF STARS ON LETTERBOXD. mixed -- just what it seems like, totally average stuff. TWO AND A HALF STARS ON LETTERBOXD. mixed (-) -- this usually is where the negatives begin to outweigh the positives by a pretty significant margin. There will be some aspects I like or admire, but definitely not as much as as my problems. TWO STARS ON LETTERBOXD. con (+) -- a few strengths save it from a worse rating, but my feelings are mostly negative. TWO STARS ON LETTERBOXD. con -- mostly negative without true hatred. ONE AND A HALF STARS ON LETTERBOXD con (-) -- I couldn't quite bring myself to go CON, maybe for one positive trait or blandness rather than revulsion or hatred, but yeah, skip it or enter at your own risk. ONE AND A HALF STARS ON LETTERBOXD. The three CON's mean I think it's truly terrible, and they just vary in how much! ONE STAR ON LETTERBOXD. |
![]() |
|
| Guy | Jan 29 2017, 09:35 AM Post #7 |
|
________________________
|
I must be the easiest grader around, partly because, like Conty, I am subject to excesses of enthusiasm in the hours immediately after a viewing, and I like to rate movies right after I see them so I won't forget to do it; partly because I always want to find something to enjoy or appreciate in a movie and I’m sometimes too respectful of good intentions; partly because I (now even more than earlier in my life) just avoid movies I think I won’t like, and even those that I think might be all right, but I’d really rather just read or listen to music or watch tv. And my ratings are not internally consistent, but the repair project is exhausting to even think about. I also have difficulties aligning my cddb ratings with my Letterboxd ratings, so Gabe’s post is helpful. So here’s what I’d like my ratings to mean: PRO+ = All time masterpiece. I should only give this to older films, and would be very reluctant to award this to a new release without a substantial cooling off period and perhaps another viewing. PRO = Excellent, great, fantastic. PRO- = Excellent, but some minor aspect or a few moments disappointed for some reason. pro+ = A very good movie. pro = a good movie. pro- = a good movie, but some minor aspect or a few moments disappointed for some reason. mixed+ = Just ok, but some aspect is better than that. (I think I award this rating a lot to an okay movie with a great performance, or with one or two highly satisfying scenes.) mixed = just okay. (Or sometimes, a “mix” of good and bad and I just can’t decide.) mixed - = just okay, but on the bubble of not good. con+ = Not good, but with some redeeming aspect (e.g., a performance or good scene.) con = Not good. con- = Really not good. CON+/CON/CON- = I really hated this! |
![]() |
|
| Kevin Harvey | Jan 29 2017, 09:51 AM Post #8 |
|
Another deserter....
|
:lol: :like:
Co-signed.
Yes, well....
I haven't the foggiest idea, which is mostly why I stopped inputting. I mean, I usually have some idea how I feel, after the fact, but it's always really subject to change, and I'm never wholly sure, and if I start to focus too long on how to rate, then things usually become blurry and unclear (or it distracts me from the viewing experience in the moment), so I try not to think about it. (This is also why I find the yearly polls so difficult.) And since most of my very favourites are ones I didn't like that much to start (usually because they challenged me in some unexpected way and I had to work my way towards them), I'm reticent to assign ratings too quickly. It's all just way too confusing. :) I mean, doesn't PRO just mean "personally aligned with the perspective and values of the filmmakers", with a little "top notch craft", thrown in? Or at our worst, maybe, "Not at all aligned with the filmmakers, but easily manipulated by characters and situations for which I have the utmost sympathy", with a dash of "and OMG those production values, amirite"? Most of us would like to think we never fall victim to the latter impulse, but I'm sure our sympathies still outweigh our good sense, often enough. I'm no fun, I know, and this is all a lot of strained navel-gazing, but I just don't know what to make of ratings, most of the time. Gabe says: "masterpiece, personal favorite. FIVE STARS ON LETTERBOXD", and I'm like, you've just listed a series of equivalencies with no outside point of reference, so what does that mean? "I am not as picky on this as some, but I'm obviously very selective with this." And isn't this just a contradiction in terms? Not picky, but obviously selective? (Not to single you out, Gabe -- you were just the latest to reply. :) ) (*edit: Well, until Guy got here.) Sharon is admirably subjective (or not, if you rarely agree with her), always going straight with the gut and rarely second guessing (or so it seems). Very Kael-esque. Certainty in subjectivity. And I'm perfectly aware that objectivity is impossible (and even if it were, what bloody fun would that be?), but I'm nowhere near as confident, given the changeability of feeling, to imitate this powerhouse-of-certainty approach. Guy's outline actually seems a nice balance of subjectivity and self-awareness (probably why we all admire him), but then, really, aren't we all just making it up as we go along? So congrats, all, for the heroic effort to find meaning! (You too, Gabe. :) ) |
![]() |
|
| vornporn | Jan 29 2017, 11:32 AM Post #9 |
|
A Ryan Seacrest type.
|
Almost all movies are either pro- or mixed+, but I'll play along... PRO+ - Not sure if I went back updated all my PRO ratings that needed a bump, but this rating is for my 50 or so favorite movies of all-time. PRO - Loved it w/o reservation. When I was younger and less jaded, a few movies a year would get this rating. Nowadays, we're lucky if even one does. PRO- - Loved it with minor, almost petty reservations. This is generally where I've been maxing out on ratings lately. Best of the year, etc. pro+ - Really liked it, would strongly recommend. Something about it makes it fall short of greatness. pro - Solid recommendation. The stuff that fills out the back-end of a yearly top 20 list. Most good movies have stuff that bothers me or aspects I wish were different, but on balance these are enjoyable or enriching films. pro- - Soft recommendation. Liked it, but not going to the mat for it. Often there is some strong aspect in the direction, cinematography, writing or acting that makes the film of interest, otherwise it would be a shrug. mixed+ - It's a movie. I like movies. Maybe there's an interesting scene or aspect to these, but mostly it's ho-hum. mixed - Eh, kind of blah. Hope I learned something. mixed- - Mediocre. Worth watching only if you're a completest for a certain director/actor/genre. Usually dull. con+ - Risible dramas, unfunny comedies. There is usually something of note (maybe a welcome angle of weirdness) that kept from really disliking it too much though. con - Didn't like at all. Recommend avoiding. Nothing to vouch for. con- - Bad in nearly all aspects, but not meretricious enough to raise my ire. CON+ - This is movie is pretty stupid, in my opinion. CON - I hated this movie. CON- - I hated this movie, and now I hate you. I hate the world. Fuck. |
![]() |
|
| Maxime G. | Jan 29 2017, 12:25 PM Post #10 |
|
Afro Sheen
|
PRO+ I give this once in a while, sometimes on first viewings. Those rare films that leave you awe-struck and won't let your brain convince you it's because you've let your guard down. PRO I'm very enthusiastic about it. Whatever problems I may have with it are overshadowed by its virtues. PRO- I don't give those. Feels like saying "I don't completely love you" instead of "I like you a lot". pro+ Like it a whole lot, but something in the back of my mind tells me it's not everything I'd want it to be. pro I can really get behind this, whatever problems I have with it. pro- Almost there. Want to like it more, am sympathetic to what it's trying to do. mixed+ Why is it not better? It could be! mixed The problems are starting to swallow the virtues. mixed- I don't like it and don't find it particularly interesting. It's not my thing or it's a misfire. The first of the "I don't want to see this again" ratings. con+ No thanks, but it could be worst. con, con-, CON Different shades of ugh! CON- I don't think I've ever went there. |
![]() |
|
| Maxime G. | Jan 29 2017, 12:41 PM Post #11 |
|
Afro Sheen
|
I see this sort of ratings and rankings as a way to organize our tastes in hope to better understand them. Statistics upon which we can reflect to discern certain tangents in our preferences which we could have missed without any record of our initial responses. Writing about those preferences and going in detail about our observations is a lot more useful, but these fun exercises do serve the purpose of marking down the gut reaction. Their complete subjectivity is imperative to their interest, in my opinion. And why not embrace said subjectivity? There is absolutely nothing at stake here. And since we're a community, rating after rating we can see whose tastes ours align with and find a fellow fugee's pro- more enticing than a rave review by a bad film critic. Many lists and ratings have led me to experience great works of art I might have otherwise passed by. |
![]() |
|
| Mister Jiggy, Esq. | Jan 29 2017, 01:44 PM Post #12 |
|
Swingin' on the Flippity-Flop
|
For my wife this would include pro-, pro, pro+ etc. |
![]() |
|
| Kevin Harvey | Jan 30 2017, 07:49 AM Post #13 |
|
Another deserter....
|
A reply most sensible. I am well schooled. |
![]() |
|
| Karim Amir | Jan 30 2017, 08:38 AM Post #14 |
|
blank
|
Ha ha ha, Russ. Mwah. ;) PRO(+): Life-changing. Passing Strange is the first film to come to mind. Oddly, this rating might be the most subjective. I guess that Urgh! A Music War is not technically stellar, but it changed my life and I love it for that. PRO: Exceptional. A movie that keeps coming back to me. Could add the plus with some time. Examples Flight, Whiplash PRO(-): Exceptional, but with some minor flaw(s) pro(+): Like the difference between a B+ and an A-. Excellent, but not exceptional. pro: Solid movie. Good, but not excellent. Here is where I really see a decline in memorability. pro(-): Pro(-) movies tend to be borderline forgettable, but still something to recommend. mixed(+): To use my teacher analogy, the difference between a C+ and a B-. Very similar to a pro(-), but slightly worse. mixed: MEH. mixed(-): Really forgettable, often in an innocuous way. I'm not pissed off yet. con(+): Might have one positive element, often technically, but I can't recommend it. con: Now, you are starting to piss me off... con(-): There's something in the film to keep me from hitting the caps lock... CON of any flavor: Something about this movie really pissed me off. The Theory of Everything offended me to the core. |
![]() |
|
| Gabe L | Jan 30 2017, 10:07 AM Post #15 |
|
Back in action!
|
This. I get a lot of value out of seeing what people whose opinions I deeply respect rate movies at. It's not that I expect exact subjectivity and synergy with my rating patterns: rather, over time, I've come to basically be able to discern what a wide range of ratings mean from different people. For instance, a solid pro from TBickle has a good chance of being pro+ or even PRO- from me, even if our thoughts about the picture are basically aligned. Kevin, in response to your query about how "I'm not as picky as some" with my PRO (+) ratings jibes with "I'm obviously very selective": well, look at vorn's view...he basically never does PRO (+), and even a PRO is once a year or so. I'm not like that. I have no problem going PRO (+) right away if I'm blown away. That said, I won't just slap the (+) on unless I'm REALLY floored. The most recent example is MANCHESTER, which I truly adored and have a PRO (+) rating on Lonergan's MARGARET, but I didn't quite think it hit me with the force level to go (+). I would say most years on my lists have anywhere from 1-4 PRO (+) ratings. A few years have more, and a few have none. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
|
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · Critics Discussion · Next Topic » |
| Track Topic · E-mail Topic |
4:42 PM Jul 10
|