Reviewers at DVDVerdict too kind

[Bug]

It seems that very few films reviewed at this site garner anything less that 80 percent. If they do they are usually regarded as abysmal by everyone. This is somewhat frustrating, it is as if the reviewers are playing to fans of any particular film instead of providing it with a rigorous and original critique (instead of the softly-softly approach favoured here).

Why does something like "Hairspray" get an overall assessment of 94%? Because fans will be angry if it gets the (all things considered) 50% that it deserves. DVDVerdict's reviewers are so worried about hurting anyone's feelings that their reviews are, by and large, irrelevant.

[ppritchard]

Hi Bug,

I've only just been taken on as a Judge on this site (you can see me on the Judges page, see that limey? that's me!) so my comments are certainly not representative of the site. I've only got one review up so far with three more either in editing or being written.

One thing that I really don't like doing is giving a movie a score, it's something I've always had difficulty with when reading reviews on other sites or publications. I mean, we don't give pieces of art a score so why do we feel compelled to do the same with movies, video games and music? Should I not watch a movie that I was previously interested in because so-and-so gave it 70%? Of course not.

Generally I think the best bet is to read the review to see where the reviewer is coming from. This way you may be able to gauge whether or not they came into the review as a fan of the film already. See what good and bad points they argue as I feel that is where you should ultimately see their feelings on the movie reflected in a clearer way than simply looking at a score.

As for being "too kind", well the other thing to remember is that all reviews are opinions and nothing more. Hopefully the reviewer can give you some guidance as to the quality of the movie, allowing you to decide if it's worth your time or not.

There's certainly no directive to give glowing reviews to everything that comes in and I've personally read a number of reviews recently that had slated movies.

Hope my comments help.

Paul

[HGervais]

It seems that very few films reviewed at this site garner anything less that 80 percent. If they do they are usually regarded as abysmal by everyone. This is somewhat frustrating, it is as if the reviewers are playing to fans of any particular film instead of providing it with a rigorous and original critique (instead of the softly-softly approach favoured here).

Why does something like "Hairspray" get an overall assessment of 94%? Because fans will be angry if it gets the (all things considered) 50% that it deserves. DVDVerdict's reviewers are so worried about hurting anyone's feelings that their reviews are, by and large, irrelevant.

To be fair, you need to read the review, not just look at the number. If numbers are what you are looking for you might want to give Rotten Tomatoes or imdb a look. And further, that 94% represents all the aspects of the DVD....picture, sound, extras, movie. And it is more than possible that you simply have a different opinion of the film than did the reviewer. Also worth noting that reviewers very often request specific movies to review so those choices reflect a personal preference from the get-go. People aren't going to ask for movies they think they are going to dislike or hate. Anyway, food for thought. Thanks for the feedback.

[Bug]

In retrospect I usually can detect whether a film review contains a view that is "generally positive," "positive with some misgivings," "negative with positive aspects" or "generally negative" despite the overall score for the film.

Thanks, and apologies.

[call]

Have you checked the "Bottom 100" selection? I can assure you that there are plenty of reviews on this site that are negative (just look under "Studios" for "Lionsgate"

[BrettCullum]

I'm going to reiterate Harold, here... but it bears repeating.

We review the entire DVD, and sometimes the DVD is authored well while the movie is not or vice versa. While I gave CATWOMAN a 55 for story, it got a 95 for video and audio because the DVD looked and sounded amazing at the time it was released compared to others. So there's one reason for you, the DVD can be better than the movie and BOTH experiences factor in to the scores.

Secondly, our process is based on our own requests. Judges actually say what they want to review, and rarely do we ask for a film we hate unless we can think of something amusing to say about it. But even then, chances are it will be assigned to a judge who likes or is at least interested in it. With so many of us on staff chances are someone here will like it... if not, we usually send it to Dave Johnson.

[Erick Harper]

As a retired Judge, I'll chime in as well - not everyone uses the same scale, but I tended to use a 90-80-70-60 rating system similar to school grades, i.e. 100-90 is in the A range, 90-80 is a B, 80-70 is a C, 70-60 is a D, and <60 is an F. So, while a disc getting a 70 or so might seem like a high score, in the grand scheme it was getting fairly low marks.

[Bryan Pope]

As a retired Judge, I'll chime in as well - not everyone uses the same scale, but I tended to use a 90-80-70-60 rating system similar to school grades, i.e. 100-90 is in the A range, 90-80 is a B, 80-70 is a C, 70-60 is a D, and <60 is an F. So, while a disc getting a 70 or so might seem like a high score, in the grand scheme it was getting fairly low marks.

That's my approach as well, which is why so few of the discs I review score below a 60.

[HGervais]

As a retired Judge, I'll chime in as well - not everyone uses the same scale, but I tended to use a 90-80-70-60 rating system similar to school grades, i.e. 100-90 is in the A range, 90-80 is a B, 80-70 is a C, 70-60 is a D, and <60 is an F. So, while a disc getting a 70 or so might seem like a high score, in the grand scheme it was getting fairly low marks.

Agreed. I was the same way. The numerical score was the last thing on my mind when I wrote a review and if I had had my way, it is something we would have dumped because it invites threads such as this one and general confusion.

[Dan Mancini]

Also as a retired judge, what Brett said with healthy doses of what Erick and Harold said. In the good ol' days, you might come across a DVD with a crappy movie and a horrible transfer. Authoring has gotten so much better in these waning days of DVD, though, that you're far more likely to experience Catwoman syndrome: cruddy movie, great looking/sounding DVD. That's bound to skew the overall score.

Secondly, our process is based on our own requests. Judges actually say what they want to review, and rarely do we ask for a film we hate unless we can think of something amusing to say about it.

You guys really should devote a portion of your requests to "surprise me" (on a voluntary basis). It helps Michael to avoid being buried in old, broke-down product and it makes for better reviews. I always thought it was kinda fun getting a package in the mail and not knowing what horror (or gem) it might contain along with my other requests.

[mavrach]

You guys really should devote a portion of your requests to "surprise me" (on a voluntary basis). It helps Michael to avoid being buried in old, broke-down product and it makes for better reviews. I always thought it was kinda fun getting a package in the mail and not knowing what horror (or gem) it might contain along with my other requests.

That really is a great point that you should consider. I've noticed that many of the movies here get positive reviews (not that they aren't informative and well written), and it's definitely connected to a lot of them getting reviewed by Judges who like the movies. I know the Judges are doing this all in their spare time for no pay, so they certainly deserve a choice in what they review, however at least making a percentage of their reviews to be absolutely assigned discs would benefit the site greatly.

An element that's always irked me in the Jury Room is that you can't ask for the JR's opinion on a given movie without offending a Judge or Moderator, and you get the obligatory "ahem, don't you see that we have a review on that movie here?" However looking up that review often runs you into a positive review written by a fan of the movie who requested it.

Again, I'm not questioning the quality of the reviews, but mixing it up could greatly benefit the site.

[BrettCullum]

We actually do mix it up quite a bit, but they are not the super popular films. Most of the Judges ask for a "surprise" choice on a routine basis but that usually means something that would fall through the cracks. The thing is Michael is not going to assign me a blind pick like The Lord of the Rings when 20 other judges who are fans are clamoring for it. Why would you give a popular title to someone who hates it, or even worse could care less one way or the other? We usually find the person who has the most passion for a film, and I think that only benefits the readers.

As readers and Jury Room members you'd have to defend us if we rip something to shreds, because I can tell you with the length and depth of our reviews a sour 5,000 words is tedious both to read and write. It has been my experience that all movies no matter how bad have fans, and you get hate mail any time a dissenting verdict is delivered. Truth is we get more complaints in that scenario than "Thank you, I too thought it was overrated."

[Erick Harper]

You guys really should devote a portion of your requests to "surprise me" (on a voluntary basis). It helps Michael to avoid being buried in old, broke-down product and it makes for better reviews. I always thought it was kinda fun getting a package in the mail and not knowing what horror (or gem) it might contain along with my other requests.

Back in the old old days, when Sean McGinnis ran the site, that was how all of our assignments were - purely random, with minimal input from the writers. We might drop a hint or subtly lobby for a given title, but for the most part it was a crap shoot. It might not have been the ideal system, but it did lead to some pleasant (as well as unpleasant) surprises that we would not have picked for ourselves.

[Dan Mancini]

Back in the old old days, when Sean McGinnis ran the site, that was how all of our assignments were - purely random, with minimal input from the writers.

Yep. The Sean McGinnis days are before my time, but I'm veteran enough to remember the Patrick Naugle days of surprise mailings. And hazing of new hires with "Naugle doesn't even want to touch these titles with his nutsack" mailings.

These whipper-snappers have it easy.

Get off my lawn!

[call]

The "Did we give XYZ a fair trial?" option on the bottom should probably be changed to "Did we piss you off because we dumped on a movie you like?". Because that's pretty much what they get used for, in my experience.

[Adam Arseneau]

Me, I just make @#$% up.

I kid, I kid.

[Dave Ryan]

Thought this was kind of relevant, sort of, to this thread:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/rumor/gamespot ... 328244.php

I guarantee that we here at DVDV are 100% not on the take. Or else you owe me money, Stailey!!!!!

[Jim_Thomas]

With regard to the original complaint, that we're too kind...

I dunno. I've watched a lot of movies over the years, and most of them have something to commend them; you really have to look to find a true stinker (If you're interested in one, let me suggest either Tara Reid in The Incubus, or most SciFi Channel made for TV movies). House of Usher, one of the first reviews I did, really isn't that good a movie, and I made that pretty clear. But at the same time, it did a lot of good things in a lost cause, and that can prop up the final score a bit.

Regarding the grading scale--One of my English professors at Alabama used a slightly different scale:

0-20 F
21-40 D
41-60 C
61-80 B
81-100 A

And you had to earn EVERY. FREAKING. POINT.

I still have flashbacks about his finals. One of the best teachers I had, though.

It might not be a bad idea to standardize our scorings system, though:

96-100 Your collection is a joke without this title.
85-95 Definitely worth owning
70-84 Good rental, possibly own if you like that kind of movie.
55-70 Well, I've got a rent one get one free, so what the hell.
40-54 Hand me that DVD, will ya, the table wobbles...
0-39 You gave me this? I thought you were my friend!

[Erick Harper]

Regarding the grading scale--One of my English professors at Alabama used a slightly different scale:

0-20 F
21-40 D
41-60 C
61-80 B
81-100 A

So, you could get a 21% and still get a passing grade? That's insanely easy.

[Jim_Thomas]

Regarding the grading scale--One of my English professors at Alabama used a slightly different scale:

0-20 F
21-40 D
41-60 C
61-80 B
81-100 A

So, you could get a 21% and still get a passing grade? That's insanely easy.

Trust me, you wouldn't say that if you had ever taken one of his exams. You had to earn every freaking point.

[HGervais]

Funny how almost 10 years later and my position is the same. Dump any kind of numerically based rating, even as a sidebar and let people read the reviews for themselves. If the writer is good enough there should not be any confusion as to what the opinions are as they relate to the film itself & the DVD presentaion. The system has always invited confusion.

[Dimwitted]

Oh the irony. I've never looked at the ratings. Don't need them. If the review is good, I look at the reviewer to see whether I have the same sort of tastes. I'm wondering if most of the readers are the same.

[TemporalWisdom]

Same here. I never look at the numbers.

[call]

I like the numerical rating. Frankly, if a DVD is ranked 75 or 80, I'll probably skip reading it, unless I'm very interested in the particular film. This kind of ranking suggests it's a solid entry, good features, etc. However, if a rating is in the 30s or 40s or into the high 90s, it's probably something special that I'd like to read. It's a nice indicator as to the nature of the review.

[Steve T Power]

There are numbers now?

[BrettCullum]

The numerical scores assigned to each verdict is only there to give a snapshot. Most all the judges use the letter grading system, and accordingly fit the numbers for each category. All you can tell from these are in a nutshell what is good, bad, and ugly about a given DVD. It's very handy for those who want just a quick idea of the disc. You'll know - how good the extras are, what the transfer is like, and if the story and acting is good or not. In some cases that may be useful. You can even see how a given judge varies from the established norms for DVDs if you look on their profile and get an idea if they are "too easy" or "not easily impressed".

I don't see these numerical scores as good or bad, simply another tool. Like anything you may or may not find that useful for your purpose, but it's there!

Also these scores help determine our highest rated DVDs and our lowest as well. Those are fun to puruse. Without the scores you'd never be able to do that.

[Gabriel Girard]

I really agree about the snapshot idea. Especially if the movie is a double-dip. But then you can also scroll to the section of the review that interest you. I also don't get fooled by the final score and always check the story/acting ratings. I also agree that it's fun to know more about how the judge rates the movie, and to make better/worse lists.

But yeah the best thing is always to read the review- if the movie is bad at least you can enjoy the review, especially if Dave Johnson reviews it.

Which reminds me:

Dave what's up with the three Doodlebops reviews, are you a sucker for punishment?,

[Dave Johnson]

Dave what's up with the three Doodlebops reviews, are you a sucker for punishment?

It's one of those "car-wrecks-but-you-can't-look-away" things. Only a lot more gruesome and surreal. Like a clown-car wreck.

[Steve T Power]

Dave what's up with the three Doodlebops reviews, are you a sucker for punishment?

It's one of those "car-wrecks-but-you-can't-look-away" things. Only a lot more gruesome and surreal. Like a clown-car wreck.

Lets get on the bus!

hey don'cha know!

Lets get on the bus!

It's time to go!

Lets get on the bus

Go here to there!

Lets get on the bus

Go EVERYWHERE!!!

Bus Driver Bob kicks ass dammit! Love the tie dye.

[Dan Mancini]

Dave what's up with the three Doodlebops reviews, are you a sucker for punishment?

It's one of those "car-wrecks-but-you-can't-look-away" things. Only a lot more gruesome and surreal. Like a clown-car wreck.

Bus Driver Bob kicks ass dammit! Love the tie dye.

You're a sick man, CWAB. The Doodlebops are pure evil. We haven't let Luke see even a second of the show on the off chance that he might dig it -- we don't need that kind of horror in our day-to-day lives.

[Steve T Power]

Dave what's up with the three Doodlebops reviews, are you a sucker for punishment?

It's one of those "car-wrecks-but-you-can't-look-away" things. Only a lot more gruesome and surreal. Like a clown-car wreck.

Bus Driver Bob kicks ass dammit! Love the tie dye.

You're a sick man, CWAB. The Doodlebops are pure evil. We haven't let Luke see even a second of the show on the off chance that he might dig it -- we don't need that kind of horror in our day-to-day lives.

It's the lesser of two Weebles.

[Jim_Thomas]

The Doodlebops are the result of a genetics experiment gone horribly wrong--crossing The Wiggles with KISS.

[Jon Mercer]

The Doodlebops are the result of a genetics experiment gone horribly wrong--crossing The Wiggles with KISS.

KISS need a preschool TV show. I think it's the only commercial venue that Gene Simmons hasn't exploited yet.