This film was decent in all departments and was wrapped up in a nice little bow with a good message...
5.9 is rediculous, I must admit I let the IMDB score set the benchmark for most things I watch...(Which I have heard many times is dumb anyway)..But never again will I let that silly rating prevent me from seeing some good little films like this one.
Yep, a very enjoyable movie. 8/10.
shareGlad you all like it. I wanted to see it in the theaters but my wife said neh". Looking forward to seeing it now. Right about the marketing, they didn't lure many people into the film.
Yeah, I follow the stupid ratings too much also. People feel the need to bash everything, they can't wait to do it.
Yes, 5.9 seems low. My hypothesis: those who rate on IMDB are 99.99% city boys and girls who could not correctly name, if a gun were held to their head, 3 animals including birds that live within a 1000 mile radius of their city.
shareActually, I'm 100% a city girl, wouldn't be able to name more than three birds in the world and HATE being surrounded by nature - BUT I LOVED THIS FILM. Go figure.
The film didn't leave me with the slightest desire to go birding. It left me feeling... just BETTER about life in general. I wish there were more movies as simple and heartfelt as this one. It was life-affirming, and I gave it 8/10. (9 and 10 are reserved for true masterpieces in my books. An eight means I've thoroughly enjoyed a film and would definitely recommend it to everyone who wants to listen.)
The main problem with ratings is that kids and teenagers get to vote as well. Kids live in a binary world, either something is awesome or it sucks.
Another problem, as arrogant as this may sound, is the sad fact that most people are simply dumb, which is why catering to the lowest denominator, not straying from the well established path, is the most profitable. If it's wrapped in great effects and shiny colors (Avatar), you can sell even the shallowest cliches and people will love it. Challenge them intellectually and the majority will be bored.
[deleted]
[deleted]
It's ironic but probably most of the people complaining about this film's lowerish rating are actually part of the main reason for it. Why? Well, did you like the film? If posting in this thread you probably did. Did you give it a ten? Probably not. There you go.
In my opinion, the most logical way to rate films on imdb is the following:
1) If you particularly liked a film, if there was 'something about it', just give it a ten - it doesn't have to be a masterpiece.
2) If you don't have a particular opinion about a film, just don't rate it.
3) If you think a film is horrible and want to warn other people not to watch it or make some kind of point, then go ahead and give it a low rating, 1-3 depending on how bad you think it is.
Simple as that. Of course, people will always do whatever they want but if you want to contribute to making imdb ratings a little 'better' (that's the reason you're reading this thread, isn't it?) then following those three steps would go a long way. Some people take rating films on imdb too seriously, way too seriously. It's not a job, you're not a critic, you don't have to do it.
i agree. there was something refreshing about it. it reminded me of the way nearly every movie used to be. call me nuts, but i kept thinking about city slickers during the whole thing. city slickers is the better movie, but i thought they both had a similar vibe.
I'm not surprised that The Big Year got such a low rating on here. I watched TBY on a return flight and enjoyed it immensely. I saw The Descendants on my way to my destination and liked TBY much more than that snooze-fest, which of course, has a 7.5 rating.