MovieChat Forums > Pocket Ninjas (1997) Discussion > Kid's and immature people suck.

Kid's and immature people suck.

posted 15 years ago by ComfortablySad
16 replies | jump to latest

There's nothing funnier than giving a terrible movie a 10 (96 of them for this movie now). Like, OMG, like, like, that would be totally hilarious and mega cool to give like, the worst rated movie a 10, like.

This site should have 2 sets of ratings. One created by paying members only, the other a mix of everyone. That way when little Billy in his skidmarked underpants gives Manos, Zombie Nation, etc, a perfect 10 BECAUSE THAT'S SO *beep* COOL, it won't effect the ratings.

[–] hormellover 15 years ago

Maybe the filmmakers have finally found their Money niche? The hundreds of attempts have finally, FINALLY paid off in that they've stubled upon their sweet-spot demographic! No longer will they have to ponder whether they should market it to the pre-teen girl market or the 29-54 demographic.

Even so, this movie is so horribly baseless and inane, it can't be considered or campy

[–] ImpotentBoy2 15 years ago

*beep* like this really only happens on movies nobodies seen. deal with it before you start throat punching little kids

[–] padddy5 15 years ago

To OP: Yes, because only rich people's opinions count. Look, there's always going to be people who rate films wildly low or high. But most people don't. And that's freedom, baby.

An idiot: Someone who thinks Hitchcock is an STD.

[–] marloweisdead 15 years ago

I don't believe he mentioned rich people - paying a subscription doesn't mean you're rich, it means you're more likely to take something seriously.

[–] FuzzyWzhe 11 years ago

I'm sure marketing executives will take it seriously, by creating thousands of accounts.

It's already a problem now. This site used to be very good in the late 1990s. Look at the top 250 films today. It's just a bunch of heavily promoted garbage because all the ballot boxes are now stuffed.

[–] ghiaguy1974 15 years ago

padddy5: <To OP: Yes, because only rich people's opinions count. Look, there's always going to be people who rate films wildly low or high. But most people don't. And that's freedom, baby.>

The question of a reviewer's wealth was not at all the issue, neither was freedom of speech as you insinuate. It may be true that there will always be people giving uninformed reviews, but their opinions are not entitled. It just so happens this site allows it and imdb has slowly been leaking credibility in recent months because of it.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Rube2124 15 years ago

who versus?

[–] overninethousand 14 years ago

241 now.

(sighs)

[–] spywaremagnet1001 14 years ago

But I enjoyed this movie enough to give it a 10, while I don't enjoy most of the top 10 films

geez

[–] EcnoTheNeato 14 years ago

I'm okay with however anyone's voting strategies as long as they're consistent. I rate "unintentionally awesome" movies like Street Fighter pretty low (around 3 or 4), but my friend rates them mostly for entertainment value, so she rates it a 9. So for this movie, I'd probably be brutal, but if I watched it with my friend, she'may be one of those infamous "10" votes you mention!

As long as people are consistent with their voting I'm okay with it ^_^
(and doesn't IMDb have this mysteriously mystical "weighted average" system? No idea how it works, but hey, maybe it doesn't count a bunch of those silly-people who disagree with you in their voting!)

[–] karsultimate 14 years ago

That's right, and I don't think it works quite the way IMDb intented all that often.

====
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5w04uHPfnik
DANCE MUTHA****A! DANCE, DANCE, DANCE!

[–] renonemontanez 14 years ago

The line," Your a Fat Republican," is like saying," Your a skinny democrat." Horrible use of insults.