I often struggle with how to accurately score movies. This topic is part of a series dealing with voting-related problems, challenges, phenomenons and paradoxes — all as part of a quest whose end-goal is to correctly reflect my appreciation of movies when rating them:
- • On what basis do you rate films ?
- • The rock/paper/scissors paradox: ranking A>B and B>C but C>A ?
- • Do you change your ratings ?
- • How to deal with our changing taste over time ?
- • How do you rate movies seen long ago ?
- • How do you rate movies you have abandoned halfway through ?
- • How granular are your ratings ?
- • Do you rate ridiculously bad movies 0 or >0 ?
- • RULES that help you decide how to vote
- • How do you account for the novelty factor and the chronological order in which you watched your movies ?
- • How do you handle the observer effect ?
Physicists have to deal with the observer effect:
In the world of movies, we encounter a similar effect sometimes:https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Observer_effect_(physics) wrote:In physics, the observer effect is the theory that the mere observation of a phenomenon inevitably changes that phenomenon.
Even good movies can be watched to death:SpikyCactus @ viewtopic.php?f=6&t=7815#p68771 wrote:if I've watched a film before (and can remember anything about it), then the fact I've seen it before will colour how good I think it is on the second or subsequent viewings. Some movies can be seen again and again without really seeming to be better or worse, whilst others lose a lot of their impact after the first time, or actually get better on repeated viewings.
chmul_cr0n @ viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5506#p67076 wrote:they became stale, because they weren't meant to be watched 30 million times...
Even watching a film only for a second time may give considerably different results:
livelove @ viewtopic.php?f=6&t=5506#p52354 wrote:because you already know some spoilers, so for the category of movies that rely heavily on suspense, you won't be that excited any more the second time you watch it, since you already know what happens, including the movie's major twists and turns. […] the excitement of seeing something completely new, fresh and never-seen-before is gone (almost by definition) the 2nd time you see it. So IMO rating a movie on second sight is bound to yield a distorted rating.
The bottom line is:
The number of viewings might have an impact on the film's score.
Our film list consists of films seen only once and films seen multiple times.
The latter's scores may differ significantly from their score on first viewing.
So it's hardly a fair and balanced comparison.
It's more like comparing movies seen on a big cinema screen with movies watched on your mobile phone ...
Any good ideas how to handle this ?