I just noticed the rating of Suburbicon was very low... 4.7 is pretty disastrous.
Now, I didn't see the film and I'm not even reacting as someone who cares about it, but from what I read, while it isn't as good as it was anticipated, it wasn't that bad, we all know IMDb and many "bad" movies end up with something between 5 or 6.5. IMDb would be dedicating a spotlight on a movie rated 4.7 by users?
Well, maybe the film IS a turkey but I trust the majority of critics who generally gave it something like a C or three stars. Now,.what I know is that we've had cases of users just stuffing movies with votes to push it high or down without any consideration for its quality. Recently, many of us complained about the relatively unknown Iranian, Turkish but especially Hindi movies that were featured on the Top 250 although no one outside their countries ever heard about them (not Farhadi, Nair or Ray's masterpieces but really local comedies that were stuffed with 10 ratings for the kicks of it).
I'm not Clooney's number one fan but I know he's not the most apolitical actor out there and he's pretty polarizing. Seriously, is there a possibility that some users would have pushed the film down just because it happens to be a Clooney film without even watching it. Now, I won't drop names, but people can get very passionate when it comes to politics, but a movie shouldn't suffer from it, and one should rate it because he liked it or hated it.
If Suburbicon was rated 6.2 or 5.8, it would have been okay, but I've been on IMDb for 13 years and I know a film should be really really really awful to deserve a 4.7, I'm sure at least Suburbicon tried to be good enough to deserve a 6.
I think it's a very important question because IMDb is a vast cinematic platform and other websites check the ratings on IMDb just like Metacritic Scores or Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb shouldn't lose its credibility on that level and the engineers should find a way to filter the votes, I don't know how but they should.
Now, I didn't see the film and I'm not even reacting as someone who cares about it, but from what I read, while it isn't as good as it was anticipated, it wasn't that bad, we all know IMDb and many "bad" movies end up with something between 5 or 6.5. IMDb would be dedicating a spotlight on a movie rated 4.7 by users?
Well, maybe the film IS a turkey but I trust the majority of critics who generally gave it something like a C or three stars. Now,.what I know is that we've had cases of users just stuffing movies with votes to push it high or down without any consideration for its quality. Recently, many of us complained about the relatively unknown Iranian, Turkish but especially Hindi movies that were featured on the Top 250 although no one outside their countries ever heard about them (not Farhadi, Nair or Ray's masterpieces but really local comedies that were stuffed with 10 ratings for the kicks of it).
I'm not Clooney's number one fan but I know he's not the most apolitical actor out there and he's pretty polarizing. Seriously, is there a possibility that some users would have pushed the film down just because it happens to be a Clooney film without even watching it. Now, I won't drop names, but people can get very passionate when it comes to politics, but a movie shouldn't suffer from it, and one should rate it because he liked it or hated it.
If Suburbicon was rated 6.2 or 5.8, it would have been okay, but I've been on IMDb for 13 years and I know a film should be really really really awful to deserve a 4.7, I'm sure at least Suburbicon tried to be good enough to deserve a 6.
I think it's a very important question because IMDb is a vast cinematic platform and other websites check the ratings on IMDb just like Metacritic Scores or Rotten Tomatoes, IMDb shouldn't lose its credibility on that level and the engineers should find a way to filter the votes, I don't know how but they should.
Posted 3 years ago
Steve Crook, Champion
Col Needham, Official Rep
Please also see http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?votestopfaq (and there are links off there which may further help).
Thanks for sharing the link, I'm half through it.
I know there's not much to do, it's the sum of people's opinions, some try to rate a movie lower, some higher but in this case, I don't think the balance is kept because the film didn't garner positive reactions, so there are more people trying to lower the rating than inflating it.
Many other forums use IMDb ratings as indicators but it's only for this movie that I read a few comments about the polarizing image of Clooney and the way it created a negative bias against the film, even from people who didn't watch it.
I know there's not much to do, it's the sum of people's opinions, some try to rate a movie lower, some higher but in this case, I don't think the balance is kept because the film didn't garner positive reactions, so there are more people trying to lower the rating than inflating it.
Many other forums use IMDb ratings as indicators but it's only for this movie that I read a few comments about the polarizing image of Clooney and the way it created a negative bias against the film, even from people who didn't watch it.
Adrian, Champion
SDK,
You do realize that the Metascore for this movie is right in line with IMDb's rating? Meta has a 4.3 to IMDb's 4.7. Also, IMDb's Top 1000 (the top 1000 voters) also rate it at 4.7. It would almost be impossible to get into that group to try and negatively influence a movie's rating.
You do realize that the Metascore for this movie is right in line with IMDb's rating? Meta has a 4.3 to IMDb's 4.7. Also, IMDb's Top 1000 (the top 1000 voters) also rate it at 4.7. It would almost be impossible to get into that group to try and negatively influence a movie's rating.
Well, I stand corrected then.
gromit82, Champion
Looking at RottenTomatoes.com, it appears that Suburbicon was not particularly well-received by either critics or audiences. Only 27% of the critics gave it a "fresh" rating, and in the audience score, only 25% liked it. So regardless of whether anyone is voting the film down without seeing it, there doesn't seem to be a large number of enthusiasts to vote the film up. There have only been 446 "1" ratings cast so far.
Well, we'll see once the film gets mainstream, it'll probably reach an equilibrium, maybe between 5 and 6 or slightly above 6. I was just surprised because it's not as if the film was panned by the critics.
15yearsIMDber aka ElMo
I don't know, I'm perplex...