And, just to be clear, I understand how IMDb ratings work. Perhaps you don't understand that these threads are for debating the merits of, and/or commenting on films? If you like aggregate ratings, that's fine, but in my opinion, stupid people ruin democracies. Art vs. entertainment.
So, you're perfectly within your rights to dislike my opinion, but that's all it is; an opinion.
Tell us why you like Léon so much, rather than arguing the inherent good of aggregate ratings.
As for reaching a larger audience; if that were the only standard by which movies were critiqued, Avatar and Transformers would be #1 and #2 respectively. But, the fact of the matter is, the vast majority of the population does not belong to IMDb (thank god), or else these ratings would be far more skewed than they already are (if that's a good thing in your mind, you're entitled to your opinion, once again).
But, I think one of the major problems with modern society is that most people seem to be more than willing to disregard expert opinion in favor of consensus. And not only will they disregard expert opinion, but they'll mock it as if someone who dedicated their lives to a particular profession is no more qualified to speak on the subject than they are. That's a slippery slope, IMO.
We can be relativistic about it, but I'd much rather read an expert opinion than an uninformed one. Go ahead and call me a hypocrite (being that I'm not an expert myself, and am voicing my own opinions on IMDb), but then again, I'd be the first one to direct someone to the AFI rankings, before IMDb's (that's not to say AFI's rankings are the end-all, be-all. But they are much more coherent than IMDb's).
Anyone can critique the operation of the Large Hadron Collider, for example, but if they're not physicists, their opinions won't carry nearly as much weight as a physicist's. See what I'm getting at? And yes, I understand art is subjective, whereas physics is (mostly) not, but there is a big difference between "informed" and "uninformed". And no, I don't always agree with the experts either, but I can respect their opinions (which is not always the case with consensus).
The point of my original post was this: if you go by IMDb's rankings, you might be disappointed. And that's what I observed in this particular case. Perhaps, I'm wrong, but that's the impression I got. Had the original poster watched Léon without any expectations, he/she might not have been so disappointed. That's all I was trying to say. I wasn't trying to bash the film. I was just pointing out the inconsistencies in this rating system (which is inherently flawed, given its simple format. For example, I wanted to rate Léon a 7.1, but had to settle on a 7, due to the lack of decimal points... not very precise).
reply
share
DFC-2
12 years ago
As for reaching a larger audience; if that were the only standard by which movies were critiqued, Avatar and Transformers would be #1 and #2 respectively.
Funny, I don't see either film anywhere on the IMDb 250 list, much less as one and two. You would think that if the general audience you despise loved those films as much as you thought, their collective voice would make a showing. All I do see is someone with an inflated self image who despises the lower orders he is forced to endure on the same planet.
Tell us why you like Léon so much, rather than arguing the inherent good of aggregate ratings.
Here you go:
http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0110413/board/thread/2406531The point of my original post was this: ...
What you claimed and what i jumped on was that the film was overrated, which is a childish and ridiculous statement. The rating is what it is.
But, I think one of the major problems with modern society is that most people seem to be more than willing to disregard expert opinion in favor of consensus. And not only will they disregard expert opinion, but they'll mock it as if someone who dedicated their lives to a particular profession is no more qualified to speak on the subject than they are. That's a slippery slope, IMO.
I would agree with you if we were talking science. The idea of the wisdom of crowds was precisely different experts from different fields analyzing the same problem from different perspectives.
However, the appreciation of art, (especially for a complex entertainment art form like film with input from so many different kinds of artists) is not a science and cannot be tested as a science. It is impossible to have an expert judgment, just an educated palate that is as likely to enjoy asian martial arts films as Jean Luc Godard or to fully despise both. Many despise
Apocalypse Now. Only ignorance and arrogance combined with a complete lack of humility and perspective assumes otherwise. That is why I, politely, gave you the long-winded option 3.
It wouldn't have mattered what forum for any film I had read such a claim, even if I hated the film. The rating is simply what it is. It is not over or under or in between. Of course, I have no problem with you parsing your personal rating with some system to which you ascribe great logic. I might not like it, but it would not be overrated or underrated, it would simply be the rating you gave it.
reply
share
d-adrian-williams
9 years ago
well jasmith90s i agree with the rating in fact i give it a 9, it has action it has emotion and those two dont come hand in hand and the story was original, never seen a film like this since or probably never will, ive seen loads of films that make me say thats trying to be die hard, or thats trying to be this or that, you cant say that with this, its original and when people rate it highly its because they regard it highly as do i, and your point about EXPERT opinions, movies came BEFORE movie critics, remember that if i didnt watch any movie a critic panned then there are certain movies i would never have got to enjoy, critics are human they are us, just because someone went to film critic school all that means is they can tell you what panoramic shots are or baboozle you with idiotic words that make themselves feel important, when u watch a film be human dont be a robot.
reply
share