MovieChat Forums > Coherence (2014) Discussion > Decent film but the ratings are over rat...

Decent film but the ratings are over rated.

posted 8 years ago by disinter
9 replies | jump to latest

As of today (Aug 13 2016) this movie has a 7.2 rating and I find that a little too generous. I'd say this is a 5 or 6 at best. I find that movies like this which are generally unknown at it's official release date usually start out with high ratings but once it becomes "publicly available" to a huge audience, the ratings drop quick. It'll be interesting to see if that's the case here.

I can't complain too much about the movie itself because as I've said in the title, it was a decent film. It kept me entertained and it also made me think which is kind of a rarity these days in the movie biz. One thing I did hate however was the actual ending. It diminished the movie as a whole a little bit. Overall I would actually recommend this movie to others who are fans of "mindfk" movies. I think they'd get a kick out of it just like I did.

[–] Caribbean_Smurf 8 years ago

I don't get it. You liked this movie ('decent') and it kept you entertained, yet you want it to have a 5-6 rating?

In every Western school system outside of the USA and US, a 'sufficient' rating begins at 6. And that is a very meagre result still. A 7 is okay and an 8 and upwards is good. This movie has 7,2 and that seems to fit your opinion perfectly, because you seem to think it should lose some points for its ending but you would still recommend watching it.

If a movie gets a 1 - 5.5 it is basically irrelevant what grade it gets: all of those are ratings that say 'this movie is garbage and not worth watching at all'.

[–] disinter 8 years ago

I'd say out of 1/10, 5 would be about average which this movie was. It was just "good" not bad but not great either.

[–] gotmyorangecrush 8 years ago

5 is most definitely NOT average for IMDB, at least not for films that get 50,000+ votes. I guarantee the average is somewhere between 6-7, with it likely being much close to 7 than 6. I rarely come across films that have a rating below 6.

Still Shooting With Film!

[–] zezslav 7 years ago

That's because many IMDb voters are dumb. The scale is 1-10, thus making 5 average/ok. If you split the scale, 1-5, like e.g. Netflix has, then average/ok is 3. On this scale, simplified:

1= horrible (IMDb scale 1-2)
2= bad (3-4)
3= ok (5-6)
4= good (7-8)
5= excellent (9-10)

This shouldn't be hard, but many many IMDb members don't understand this at all. It's a linear scale, not logarithmic.

I'm so fed up of reading members e.g. bashing a movie, and then they give 7-8 stars. It mind bogglingly stupid.

And don't get me started about series ratings, it's even more stupid, on average those are rated ~2 more points higher than movies. Maybe it's because there are more fans voting than those who stop watching, or watches randomly and don't care about giving votes.. I don't know.. I havent figured it out why even an average US TV shows get 8-9 stars. The quality/entertainment values for a rating in movies, don't match ratings of TV shows.

OR, people who vote "to balance out other reviewers". Sadly there are too many imbeciles who do that.

Anyway, there should be somekind of tutorial for new members about the voting scale, though I still can't believe this is so hard for many people.

[–] zezslav 7 years ago

I forgot to add that I have found out that the Metascore matches about 99% to my votes, sometimes it's about +-1 stars off, but that little discrepancy doesn't matter. Very very rarely there's a movie that i don't agree with Metascore. I don't trust IMDb ratings, for obvious reasons I wrote earlier and experience I have had with them, those are only good for a second opinion after Metascore, if needed at all.

[–] mully1999 7 years ago

"You must be very proud of yourself"

[–] gotmyorangecrush 8 years ago

I am so sick of seeing these kinds of threads, suggesting a film is overrated or underrated. They make absolutely zero sense. Making a post on sites that have a singular critical review and score is one thing as that is a singular review created by a single person, but coming to sites like IMDB or Rotten Tomatoes and suggesting that the user scores are over or underrated makes absolutely NO SENSE. Clearly it isn't overrated as its score was derived from 54,000+ people rating the film. And many films on IMDB have hundreds of thousands of votes. You may disagree with the score, but disagreeing with a score doesn't mean its overrated or underrated.

And the number of people that vote on these movies, on both IMDB and Rotten Tomatoes, is significant. If you know anything about statistics and sample sizes, you would understand that the number of people who vote films on sites like IMDB give you sample sizes that is PLENTY big enough to tell you that you will see similar scores with the rest of the population that has seen the film but hasn't actually voted on IMDB.

So again, disagree with a score all you want. Say you think its much worse than the score suggests or say you think a film is vastly superior than the score suggests, but to look at a score derived by votes from the general population and suggest its overrated or underrated makes absolutely no sense whatsoever.

Still Shooting With Film!

[–] FamousJoe 7 years ago

This comment is underrated.

[–] Ithilfaen 7 years ago

As of today (Aug 13 2016) this movie has a 7.2 rating and I find that a little too generous. I'd say this is a 5 or 6 at best. I find that movies like this which are generally unknown at it's official release date usually start out with high ratings but once it becomes "publicly available" to a huge audience, the ratings drop quick. It'll be interesting to see if that's the case here.

lol dude, this movie has been out for years. You mean "after you seem them"?
Spoiler: you are *not* "a huge audience".

For every lie I unlearn I learn something new - Ani Difranco