MovieChat Forums > The Frame (2014) Discussion > dam you 1 and 2 Star bandits

dam you 1 and 2 Star bandits

posted 9 years ago by BCunited
19 replies | jump to latest

Would love to talk with those 4 people on here who rated The Frame either 1-Star or 2-Stars. Can't tell if they are just being jerks or worse, but I feel the 4 people who did so fit into one of these categories:

1)Went into the movie not knowing what it was/the director/etc.
The film has only been out in very VERY few theaters. Only a few hundred people AT MOST have seen it. Most naturally have been Winans superfans who knew about the film's release. IMO, these 1 and 2 star bandits were those who went to their local theater one night, looking for an average romantic comedy or some other low key film, and randomly found themselves in The Frame, a film way WAY over their heads.

2)Typical Trolls
Again, VERY few people have seen the film other than big fans who have been following the film's progression on facebook and Twitter. I don't think the 4 raters even watched it.

3)Simply didn't understand the film.
Ever watch a Jamin Winans movie just once? Of course you didn't, you couldn't. 2 to 3 viewings are a minimum for anyone who wishes to understand/appreciate the work of Jamin Winans. There are very few people who at the very least don't appreciate Jamin's hard work to bring a film to screen with his own money and resources.

4)No matter what, 1 and 2 stars is silly for almost any movie guys.
I personally would rate a 'subpar movie' around 6, even a 'bad movie' I put a 4 or 5 on it. THAT is bad for me. 1 or 2? That's just silly. Giving a movie a 1 or 2 Star pretty much means that the movie should never have even been made. That it's a complete trainwreck, that people should be fired over it, and there is nothing redeeming in it at all. That's foolish. For an indy director like Jamin Winans, who won't have the hundreds of thousands of IMDB rating reviews like Nolan or Spielberg, every little review counts.

If you are one of the 1 or 2 Star bandits, I'm just asking for honesty guy. I'd love to have an honest conversation with you. Why did you not like it? 1 and 2 Stars, with no explanation, come'on guys? LIsten, I've watched some dreadful movies, films I turned off and even walked out of. I despised for example, everything about Michael Bay's Transformers. Hated it! You know what score I gave it, a 5. A 5 sucks. 1 or 2 is just silly tho, just silly.

[–] Particle_Accelerator 9 years ago

I didn't rate this movie, nor did I see it, but I don't mind the few silly low ratings as much as you do. They counterbalance the large number of equally silly 10 that almost every single lesser-known movie receives from the people who have worked on it and their Facebook friends. A rating of 7 or better simply can't be trusted unless at least a thousand people have voted. I could see myself giving a 1 to an objectively mediocre movie if I see that the rating is unreasonably high.

[–] BCunited 9 years ago

Your obviously right Particle, and your cooler head certainly prevails. And alas, I'm not as much the 'enraged forum poster' as I probably come across, lol.

It just aggravates me from the standpoint that this kind of movie IS an independent film. Unlike say the Nolan and Pixar films, The Frame won't have the thousands and thousands of votes to counter the 1-star bandits who don't realize that ratings do matter to some people who are on the fence to watch an independent film or not. Why? Because movies like the Frame don't have the Redbox, the theaters, or the OnDemand, etc, etc. Right now for example the only way you can see the Frame is to actually 'buy' it from the director's website. 20-bucks ain't much, but how many people buy DVDs before watching movies, or possibly have the money to shell out 20 dollars for every independent movie that comes out?

And what I say is real, because it happened to me with Jamin Winans' last film.
Jamin Winan's former feature "Ink" is one of my favorite films I've ever watched(perhaps my very favorite). But I'll be honest Particle, and I'm not proud of this, but it took me literally months before I actually dropped the 20-bucks to buy the INK DVD a few years ago. Why? Because I'd never heard of Jamin Winans 4 years ago. And I'd only learned of "Ink" after looking for good music on youtube and accidently stumbling upon the Ink Soundtrack. The movie sounded great, but I'm not gonna pay 20 dollars for a movie I haven't seen. It was ONLY after literally months of reading review after review on here and Amazon and other places of people who literally claimed it was the best film they'd ever seen, that I actually did it. Something I never thought I'd do. I actually bought a DVD of a movie I'd never watched, I shelled out 20-bucks to an independent film I'd never heard of, from a director I'd never watched before. If for no other reason than that it's reviews were 'too good to be true'. But guess what, they were true, Ink was personally the greatest single film I've ever watched. It's also the only truly independent film(under 1-million dollars) I've ever bought without watching ahead of time.

In other words, if Ink's ratings/reviews hadn't been literally silly through the roof, I would've obviously passed. Nolan movies are everywhere, Pixar films are too. Even if it's 1-stars across the board, I still might hit up the theater with my wife to enjoy a date night out. Can't do that with Independent films. Movies like the Frame have to be good enough that you jump some hurdles. Buy the DVD before watching, download it on your laptop and watch it without the theater sound and movie popcorn, etc. No trailers during the Superbowl, no reviews on the major movie websites. Reviewers and Raters of independent films need to think a little more(be a bit more considerate) before clicking that button IMHO.

For me, 4-6 is for bad movies, 7-9 are for good to great films. 1 and 2s personally tell me more about the reviewer than the movie.

*none of this tho is to actually disagree with your original response Particle, it was both well-stated and well-taken. Just saying this to clarify my point from 'angry forum poster' to 'guy who actually has a point to drive home'. lol ;)

[–] hrounds 9 years ago

The only movie I would give a 1 to is Ishtar, the worst movie I have ever seen! The Frame was excellent.

[–] beersandshots 9 years ago

I personally would rate a 'subpar movie' around 6, even a 'bad movie' I put a 4 or 5 on it. THAT is bad for me.

So what you're saying is that basically you don't get the 1-10 rating scale?

Giving a movie a 1 or 2 Star pretty much means that the movie should never have even been made. That it's a complete trainwreck, that people should be fired over it, and there is nothing redeeming in it at all.

Well, evidently you get it, but if someone feels that strongly about something that you happen to like, then they're trolls or didn't get it. Wow.

I despised for example, everything about Michael Bay's Transformers. Hated it! You know what score I gave it, a 5. A 5 sucks. 1 or 2 is just silly tho, just silly.

So we're back to you not getting the 1-10 rating system.

And as far as "The Frame" goes, I watched it because of "Ink"- I saw that, and loved it enough to have to own it; but this left too many ambiguities for me at the end credits to put it in the same class as "Ink", hence a solid 7.

"In a time of universal deceit,
telling the truth is a revolutionary act."
George Orwell

[–] BCunited 9 years ago

You're right Beers, you are. I think I just rate movies on a more thoughtful level than some. With no "zero" or "negative numbers" on the rating scale, I consider 1s and 2s as almost "hallowedly bad", lol. Only to be used on the rarest and worst of occassions, if y'know what I mean?
If I were rating humans on 1-10 rating scale, Hitler would be a 1 for me. Does that make sense? My mother-in-law, who I can't stand, she'd be a 4 or a 5. I think that's strong enough for people to get that I really don't like her. If it were 'things' on a 1-10 scale, Cancer would be a 1, War would be a 1. Because "1" on a 1-10 scale is basically zero. It's the worst, meanest possible thing I can say about something, a movie or otherwise.

And so I do think you're right Beers(and I mean that honestly). I do think I use the 1-10 rating scale differently than most(perhaps than even the majority). And I'm okay admitting I'm the more sentimental one(for better or worse), lol. And thus, I only speak of 'trolls' or that people 'didn't get it', because if I ever put a '1' rating on anything, I personally would prolly just be trolling myself. Or if I slapped a '1' on an admittedly difficult film that was asking profoundly philosophical questions and demanded multiple viewings to get it right, it would probably be because I didn't understand it.

I personally would much rather read a truly thoughtful, 3 or 4 paragraph negative review on here, rather than just see the typical quickie 1-rating with no practical criticism cited or even proof they watched it.
You're point is well-taken though and pardon me if I came across as rude.

[–] MrFilmJunkie 9 years ago

taking a look onto the stats it's notably that almost all of the 1 and 2 star ratings here came from the so called "top 1000" voters. i have the feeling that some imdb user just randomly rate new movies they haven't even seen yet, just so their number of ratings gets high and they become/stay a top 1000 voter. that would explain things!

[–] BCunited 9 years ago

I think you may be right MRfilm. I have wondered sometimes about independent movies like this. What if, say only 20 people rate it, and it's all 10s. Just imagine how many independent films would be in the top 100-rated films on IMDB.

I'm sure there are people(probably the top 1000 voters like you said), who are actually supposed to downgrade some of the smaller films that will only get a few hundred votes, made mostly by fans. Makes sense, and I guess that's just life on IMDB.

[–] sarasaritasara 9 years ago

Don't worry, give it time. I'm sure the stars are going to increase :D I've just watched it and i've given 9 stars. Loved it, and even if i haven't understood all of it, i think the scrip, the music, the performances...are brilliant. And to be honest, i've never heard of this film director before... but now I'm going to watch all of his films. For sure.

[–] BCunited 9 years ago

Holy cow Sara! Go watch Ink RIGHT NOW! lol.
Now be warned, it's not as "crisp" in regards to the filming. I think The Frame was a major step up in filming/location/etc IMO. And Ink is also not as difficult to understand/intricate as The Frame, but it has a twist/story that will blow you away. It packs a major punch. It's personally one of if not my single favorite movie I've ever watched.
Go watch Ink right now! :)

[–] MovieBuffYourMomLoves 9 years ago

Way to try and hype up your own trash, BCunited. You're associated with this movie based on your history.

This movie was 1 hour too long. Alot could have been edited out.

The directing was bad. Hitting record on a DSLR doesn't make you a director. Many odd camera placements and way too many establishing shots.

The acting was subpar.

It was rated low because the movie isn't that good. There are no fans of the director. The people who watched this garbage did so because they downloaded it.

[–] BCunited 9 years ago

Way to try and hype up your own trash, BCunited. You're associated with this movie based on your history.

I actually wasn't expecting anyone would say that, and am actually thrilled I come across as that, but, and it actually makes me honestly sad to have to admit(as one of Jamin Winan's self-appointed biggest superfans) that I have absolutely no real connection to Jamin Winans, his film company, or The Frame :(

I did tho buy Ink DVDs and t-shirts, a Frame DVD and t-shirt, and did donate money to the double-edge website a few months ago, if that counts for anything.
But no, alas, I truly have no connection. And truly believe me Acid, if I did, I would totally admit it, lol. I would LOVE for some of the actual actors, or even lighting guys to come on these boards, divulge some secrets, meanings, etc.
And don't worry, I'm pretty sure my utter lack of insider-connections will be more painfully obvious on these boards as time goes on, seeing how as I am in the middle of decifering/understanding the film's actual meaning myself. A pretty good conversation is going on right now about Sam's Shrink on the other thread on here between me and a guy named hrounds.

Also, I've been a member since 2006(8 years before the Frame came out, lol). I used to post a lot on IMDB back then, stopped for a good 4 or 5 years. Hearing The Frame was coming out, I returned to talk about it, but found that all my previous posts were deleted. I've been here since 2006 tho.

Enough about me tho, I like your criticisms Acid. I find criticism faaaaaar more interesting than fanboys and 'yes-men'. And I do wish more people who disliked the film would talk as honestly as you do. I hate 'arguing', but loooove discussing differing opinions. I'll try to respond to some of your criticisms in my next post. :)

[–] BCunited 9 years ago

This movie was 1 hour too long. Alot could have been edited out.

I'll actually agree with you for the average viewer. I watched this as a self-proclaimed superfan of Jamin Winans. And so while the length was totally fine for me(great actually), I did wonder for my friends/family whom i hope to show it to soon. I'm not sure how they'll feel sitting through the whole thing. And so you're technically right Acid. I can certainly understand how someone who doesn't like the film itself would think it drags and drags and drags. Kind of like Transformers3 for me. I was tricked into watching it in theaters. Hated all of it, it felt like the movie was 7 hours long. But then I know others who loved all the action who could have watched another 2 hours of it. For me, The Frame could've been another 10 hours, but I imagine many of my friends/family will end up agreeing with you more or less.

Many odd camera placements and way too many establishing shots.

Could you elaborate just a pinch on this. The only gripe I personally had with the actual filming process was that obviously intentional but somewhat jarring zooming in and out, which occurred in the very first scene and again a few times throughout. I've watched the film a few times and still don't really care for it, unless of course there's a deeper and important enough meaning behind it to put it in the film. Having not found it yet, that would be a very simple gripe for me.

The acting was subpar.

Did you watch Ink? Now I say this as a person who thinks Ink was the best film I've ever watched, but I do think the acting was actually a big step up in this film from Jamin Winan's previous work. Obviously he's not working with oscar winners like Nolan has, but coming from 11:59 and Ink, I thought the performances were moving, and the two leads in particular very very charming.

The people who watched this garbage did so because they downloaded it.

I'm actually glad you mentioned the download part. Because I have yet to find anyone who watched it in a theater who disliked it(FYI, I myself didn't get to see it in theaters). That tho was actually the main target audience of my OP. When I wrote this, I wasn't writing towards/against people like you. When I wrote this, the Frame was still and only in like 3 or 4 theaters nationwide(not available for DVD or download), and knowing most if not all who saw it in theaters were the superfans like myself, I was really surprised/even a bit suspicious of a few 1 and 2 stars so soon. And as you know, watching on the laptop is a totally different beast than theater. I wonder if some people would change their opinion of The Frame if they could watch it with the ambience, surround sound, etc that comes in a theater.

[–] diane_berger 9 years ago

I fully agree with you on it, but unfortunately sometimes people coming here and rating movies are not necessarily either adults (those who rated it with one or two stars may have been some teenagers finding it funny to post random ratings to a movie they might have come across sometimes without even viewing it or who didn't get anything out of it since they are the target audiences of movies like Transformers etc)or even average movie viewers (here I'm talking about people who don't understand even Oscar material that is usually more "commercially" conceived than little screen jewels like The Frame).
It's sad that such ratings can cost the image on Imdb of a great independent movie like this.
Well, I'm glad that at least the user comment pertaining to it that is being displayed does justice to this beautiful film.

[–] Uwinator 9 years ago

The problem is, that most people don't try to vote movies authentically/retrospectively.
When I vote a movie, I am kind of using a money-/time-/fun-scale. A vote of 5-6, for instance, would be movies that I kind of feel indifferent about. Like they're on the middle of the scale - "I spent some cash on that movie and it probably was kind of a waste of time, but I would only have been picking my nose otherwise anyway".
That being said, I kind of rate good movies on general enjoyability or how many times I might wanna watch that particular movie again ... and bad movies based on how much I feel that people were deliberately stealing my time.
Elysium, for example, which has been hyped by scores of pseudointellectuals for it's superamazing sococultural themes received a straight 1 by me. Simple because it's the most excruciating piece of garbage I have watched since Power Rangers - and after watching it, I honestly felt visually raped.

And apart from all of that, I tend to base my vote on the current score. If, for example, a movie that I would rate 3-4 has an average rating of 6 or 7, I will most likely decrease the points I give, simply to increase the impact of my vote.
(same thing in reverse, of course: if a movie I find to be rather enjoyable has a rating or e.g. 4, I might increase my vote to rectify its' (in my oppinion) unjustified score)