Ghostbusters (2016)
- Thread starter Borzak
- Start date
Malakriss
Golden Baronet of the Realm
- 12,373
- 11,778
A 6/10 isn't worth a ticket, Nate's got really low standards if a RT fresh score is all it takes to get him to the theaters. But he does bring up a good point. 5x as many men put in reviews on imdb and declared it awful. Maybe alienating half the audience and 86% of a review score isn't a smart thing.
Qhue
Tranny Chaser
- 7,489
- 4,438
I enjoyed the movie a lot. I laughed really hard quite often and while yes there were many in-jokes, cameos, and references to the familiar classic there were also lots of elements that are unique to this telling.
Others may feel differently, but I know the theater I was in cheered at the final post-credits scene and left eager to see more of this rebooted franchise.
Others may feel differently, but I know the theater I was in cheered at the final post-credits scene and left eager to see more of this rebooted franchise.
DickTrickle
Definitely NOT Furor Planedefiler
- 12,977
- 14,880
You repeatedly show you have no idea how the box office works. This is not abnormal. Furthermore, most analysts predicted in this area before the release and definitely did so after the first day numbers. This is very common and weekend estimates after the first (and especially after the second) day rarely have much variation. There is absolutely nothing shady or surprising about this at all.
Lithose
Buzzfeed Editor
- 25,946
- 113,035
I remember that article, the one where he called Angry Video Game Nerd a Misogynistic show--it wasn't a biased article at all.
And then there's "The Angry Video Game Nerd," a misogynistic web show whose sycophantic Wikipedia entry made me pine for hemlock in my coffee. Everybody watches crap. Men, women, everybody.
You should probably read his footnotes, too. (I didn't have time to go through the methodology, but he's using IMDB's weighted averages rather than simply the averages too-since IMDB's methodology is not actually known? Well, yeah. I'd put about as much stock into it as throwing the bones. But the above statement about misogyny clearly proves the person didn't have an agenda, amirite?)
Xevy
Log Wizard
- 8,633
- 3,839
Lithose
Buzzfeed Editor
- 25,946
- 113,035
He was using "data" from the article I quoted.It's linked in the article you posted. The author has a history of ridiculous claims and terrible data in order to confirm their bias which has been, in the past, ludicrously extreme.
But hey, this board are the "extreme" ones right? LOL. Did anyone on this board claim the ghostbusters were misandrist? That the motivation was literally to hate men? This author has claimed that about a fucking video game review show that never talks about anything gender related at all....Chew on that for a moment while you wonder about if the author is ridiculous or the opinions on this board are.
Brahma
Obi-Bro Kenobi-X
- 12,064
- 42,998
Ambiturner
Ssraeszha Raider
- 16,040
- 19,501
Except this article isn't really about that, which is why he asked if you even read the one he linked.
Lithose
Buzzfeed Editor
- 25,946
- 113,035
It's what the majority of the article is about, though. At the end he makes a neutral point about how single score systems suck. (Duh) but the entire article was promoting the idea that men are "ruining" shit for women using these poor score vehicles--it's literally in his opening statements.
(This is from the article he linked).
Most fundamentally, single-number aggregations - like those used by sites such as Rotten Tomatoes, Metacritic and IMDb - are a pitiful way of explaining the diverse views of critics.More specifically, a vocal portion of men on the internet - shall we say - go out of their way to make their voices heard when it comes to judging entertainment aimed at women, and that appears to be happening with the new "Ghostbusters."
But let's back up. Last year, as part of an investigation into the inflated ratings on Fandango's website, I looked at the world of online movie ratings in general. The moral of this story: Each site that aggregates ratings and reviews has its own skew one way or another, and it's up to the user to determine which heuristic most accurately matches what they'd consider an ideal rating. (Also, don't trust always-positive movie reviews from sites trying to use that review to sell you movie tickets. That, too.)
Earlier this year, I also looked at IMDb's user rating skew for television shows. Essentially, male users were more likely to rate television shows with a female-heavy audience lower than female users would rate male-centric television lower.Men were tanking the ratings of shows aimed at womenBut this "Ghostbusters" thing? It lays bare so, so much of what we're investigating when it comes to the provenance and reliability of internet ratings.1 Namely, they're inconsistent, easily manipulated and probably not worth half the stock we put in them.2 Here are a few stats I collected early Thursday for the new "Ghostbusters" movie:
I went back and said his original numbers were bad, his assumptions heavily flawed/biased and the author himself is an ideologue that has made judgements without ever studying what he's judging (IE the AVGN) and instead used his ideology to "fill in the blanks" (He only knew the AVGN because that's right when he said he wouldn't be watching ghostbusters, so this guy assumed he was some kind of MRA or something)
Big Phoenix
Pronouns: zie/zhem/zer
- 44,799
- 93,654
- 18,873
- 67,985
Holy shit. The day it costs me $200 to take my family to the movies is the day we never go to the movies again.
