Only a Statistic
This is one of those days when I regret setting my site up so that each entry has a title. Not because I have anything about titles themselves, but some days just go without.
I saw Oldboy tonight. I think I chewed through my knuckles. I won't spoil anything, but be prepared to cover your eyes a bit on that one.
It's an example of an interesting IMDB phenomenon — the paradoxical ratings effect. Apparently all the people who initially saw the film over-hyped it to such a degree (as evidenced by the 8.4 rating, at least for now) that everyone else who's felt motivated to write a review for the past couple of weeks has completely trashed the movie to compensate. All in all, yes it's a flawed movie, but very interesting and engaging, and probably worth seeing at least once (if you're into the plot-twisty Asian thriller kind of thing). Not sure how well it would do on repeat viewings. So yeah, people, quit arguing whether it's a 10 or a 1, and just give the dam thing a 6.5 or 7 or something.
A buddy of mine ran into the same sort of thing on an apartment guide website, where people are encouraged to provide ratings and comments on apartment complexes, with the aim of helping future apartment denizens with some background information when hunting for a new home. Problem is, when was the last time you thought, "Huh, I think I'll do a web search to see if there's actually a website where I can waste 15 minutes writing a review for this place I don't really care that much one way or the other about?" As you might guess, ratings are pretty much either N/A (for the people who couldn't care less), or 30% satisfaction or less.
People and their messed up statistics. Can we say "self-selected sample?!?" Thank you.
I saw Oldboy tonight. I think I chewed through my knuckles. I won't spoil anything, but be prepared to cover your eyes a bit on that one.
It's an example of an interesting IMDB phenomenon — the paradoxical ratings effect. Apparently all the people who initially saw the film over-hyped it to such a degree (as evidenced by the 8.4 rating, at least for now) that everyone else who's felt motivated to write a review for the past couple of weeks has completely trashed the movie to compensate. All in all, yes it's a flawed movie, but very interesting and engaging, and probably worth seeing at least once (if you're into the plot-twisty Asian thriller kind of thing). Not sure how well it would do on repeat viewings. So yeah, people, quit arguing whether it's a 10 or a 1, and just give the dam thing a 6.5 or 7 or something.
A buddy of mine ran into the same sort of thing on an apartment guide website, where people are encouraged to provide ratings and comments on apartment complexes, with the aim of helping future apartment denizens with some background information when hunting for a new home. Problem is, when was the last time you thought, "Huh, I think I'll do a web search to see if there's actually a website where I can waste 15 minutes writing a review for this place I don't really care that much one way or the other about?" As you might guess, ratings are pretty much either N/A (for the people who couldn't care less), or 30% satisfaction or less.
People and their messed up statistics. Can we say "self-selected sample?!?" Thank you.