Philosophical Vegan Forum

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 1:23 pm Only relative scores make sense, though, because they help the consumer decide between one item and another.
There's not such a clear way to objectively give things like movies, games, and attractiveness such percentages. They need to be compared to each other.

Are you sure? People measure something based off of its flaws or strengths. I think that can be good relative measure to other things within the category. For instance, if one movie has a 9, and another one has a 7, I am more likely to see the movie with the 9 (at least first).
It would be a bit difficult comparing everything to each other, since you'd have to know and experience everything for yourself.

And isn't everything already technically compared to one another? New standards are always being set, and if something does not reach or exceed those standards, it is labeled as inferior.

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:32 pm Are you sure? People measure something based off of its flaws or strengths.

Yes, because you can not objectively count flaws in a movie the way you can on a math test.
Ratings end up all over the place. Movie reviewers will give some movies higher scores than others based on the whim of the day, even if they don't believe the movie was actually better. Expectation, and a number of factors can play into it.

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:32 pm It would be a bit difficult comparing everything to each other, since you'd have to know and experience everything for yourself.

Which is the job of movie reviewers. They need to keep track of their shit, and put movies into categories so they can compare them with each other.

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 6:32 pm And isn't everything already technically compared to one another? New standards are always being set, and if something does not reach or exceed those standards, it is labeled as inferior.

Yes, but the point of numerical ratings is to do so with more precision and hopefully accuracy too.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:18 pmYes, because you can not objectively count flaws in a movie the way you can on a math test.
Ratings end up all over the place. Movie reviewers will give some movies higher scores than others based on the whim of the day, even if they don't believe the movie was actually better. Expectation, and a number of factors can play into it.

So they'll give it a good score if they just feel like it?
I think some of those factors include how they are feeling, what kind of movies/games they're into, and in some cases, nostalgia.
But sometimes a consensus does usually say the same thing; like when something gets perfect scores from almost every source.

But I do think there can be some flaws in movies/games such as poor acting, sluggish/quick pacing, or bad storytelling. But for that last one, I've noticed that when something has an overwrought story, it's either a love it or hate it scenario.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:18 pm Which is the job of movie reviewers. They need to keep track of their shit, and put movies into categories so they can compare them with each other.

Do you know how many hours of movie were made in the past 100 years? Hundreds. Literally, hundreds.

Anyways, a 10 would be what they think the greatest movie/game is of all time, and a 0 the worst of all time?

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:18 pm Yes, but the point of numerical ratings is to do so with more precision and hopefully accuracy too.

This sounds smart. I'll start using this system.

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:35 pm But I do think there can be some flaws in movies/games such as poor acting, sluggish/quick pacing, or bad storytelling.

How do you objectively and consistently rate those and subtract points for them?
You can't.

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 8:35 pm Do you know how many hours of movie were made in the past 100 years? Hundreds. Literally, hundreds.

You only have to rate a few dozen movies to start seeing something accurate. The more movies you rate, the better.
Somebody who has rated hundreds of movies will have a pretty good system if he or she compares them.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:38 pm How do you objectively and consistently rate those and subtract points for them?
You can't.

Well, you can arbitrarily do it.

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:41 pm

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:38 pm How do you objectively and consistently rate those and subtract points for them?
You can't.

Well, you can arbitrarily do it.

Which defeats the purpose of a rating system.

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:42 pm

RedAppleGP wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:41 pm

brimstoneSalad wrote: ↑Sat Feb 25, 2017 9:38 pm How do you objectively and consistently rate those and subtract points for them?
You can't.

Well, you can arbitrarily do it.

Which defeats the purpose of a rating system.

Yeah, you ever wonder how a guy arrives at a review score?

RedAppleGP wrote:
But I do think there can be some flaws in movies/games such as poor acting, sluggish/quick pacing, or bad storytelling.

Brimstone wrote: How do you objectively and consistently rate those and subtract points for them?
You can't.

I agree with you, but I was wondering if the same could be said about the 'message' of a film. It's true that the message is part of the package and you can compare it to how it has been expressed in other films, but as a message in itself is something you can judge even without any cinematic knowledge. Isn't it?

DarlBundren wrote: ↑Fri Mar 03, 2017 2:26 pm

RedAppleGP wrote:
But I do think there can be some flaws in movies/games such as poor acting, sluggish/quick pacing, or bad storytelling.

Brimstone wrote: How do you objectively and consistently rate those and subtract points for them?
You can't.

I agree with you, but I was wondering if the same could be said about the 'message' of a film. It's true that the message is part of the package and you can compare it to how it has been expressed in other films, but as a message in itself is something you can judge even without any cinematic knowledge. Isn't it?

You would have to do a study.
We can judge the message on moral grounds of efficacy by conducting surveys of people who watch the film. It's not cheap.

We can judge the message on moral grounds of efficacy by conducting surveys of people who watch the film.

You mean to see how people respond to it? I was more talking about the soundness of the message itself. Suppose we have two equally well-made films, one of which expresses an idea we consider to be incorrect, would it be arbitrary to call it a worse film? If it's not arbitrary, it would be something you can objectively judge even without being a critic.