Lord of the Rings TV Series Purchased by Amazon

[s_bushido]

The good solution is to stop putting stock in stupid numbers, I guess.

The numbers on sites like this will probably settle into what they "should" be (a more accurate representation of its quality) after a while...as more people vote, and those vote-bombing have blown their load.

As some have said, I really hope The Stranger doesn't turn out to be Gandalf. It's just way too obvious this is the direction they're going so far. I hope they are deliberatively trying to deceive us somehow.

I think they made an obvious reference with the way he was "talking" to the fireflies. But I think what happened in that scene is a pretty good indication that it's not going to be him.

[Triceron]

It’s manipulating the rating.

You have two sides manipulating the rating.

Extremist fans who are review bombing.
Corporate PR damage control who are purging any and all bad reviews.

This only hurts the people who are legitimately reviewing.

No one is arguing that they aren't manipulating. Both sides are doing it, you preaching to the crowd girl. The best solution at this point is dump the aggregate system completely, but of course since these sites depend on this system and the ad revenue/corporate deals that are tied to the high volume of people who come solely for the numbers, they can't dump it.

It's a lose-lose system. And I doubt you were ever a fan of IMDB anyways so why pretend to be angry?

[Universalgirl]

Reviewing it as 0/10 or 1/10 in bad faith is also manipulating the rating. What would your solution to that be? They're trying to purge "fake" reviews, but obviously trying to apply an objective lens to what's a fake review vs. a genuine one is impossible, so they have to pick a number to purge from. And because this has happened before, trolls have given slightly higher scores, like a 2/10, to get past these purges. It's an arms race to try and reflect the reality of the reviews. I think purging 5 and lower is probably a bridge too far, but there's no good solution.

Or, since you agree with the deliberate tanking of the rating, do you find those valid?

„Censorship“ vs „Trolls“

Everyone talks about 1/10 Trolls.

Nobody about 10/10 Trolls.

When you erase so called 1/10 Trolls what’s about the 10/10 Trolls?

Why at all we are silencing Voices?

I want to hear the whole spectrum

I would do nothing let nature be nature!

When people want vote 10/10 it’s ok
When people want vore 1/10 it’s ok.

Than we get a real result , a result of human opinion

[bledgor]

You're just being pedantic at this point. Care to be specific about the costumes / sets? Because I think they look great and very authentic and more handcrafted than the hobbit films.

Because I disagree I am being pedantic? fucking lol. Part of it is them being a bit to clean, not WoT bad but yes, the Harfoots costumes look plan bad, I don't care for the whole put shit in your hair shtick, it comes off terrible to me. The Elven armor looks too much like mans armor, and the armor from the trailer for the Numenoreans look plastic/fake. To be fair the dwarfs looked good in the trailer (I will have the time to watch episode 2 tomorrow) but they are the stand out so far. As for the Hobbit films I didn't mention them as I acknowledge they aren't as good as the LoTR, the certain aspects (like the elf ears) looked better still.

Does Tolkien ever describe her as NOT good at warring or fighting? Do any of those qualities you described preclude that? Elves live for thousands of years - I find it hard to believe that one as powerful and renowned as Galadriel, who has been so involved in much of Middle Earth's history, was not an exceptional fighter.

He never ever describes as such, but as a leader, as someone wise, who guides others, who helps them to figure out what to do (as seen in the trilogy). She was never a fighter at any point, most females weren't which is why Eowen was such a big moment in the Return of the King. Just because you live thousands of years doesn't automatically make you an expert in many things, there are humans who live 100 years that are barely competent in one thing. To make her a warrior and a military leader is fanfic, you can like it, but it still remains fanfic.

[s_bushido]

Than we get a real result , a result of human opinion

lol...no. Voting a 10 is just a stupid as voting a 1.

[Biomega]

„Censorship“ vs „Trolls“

Everyone talks about 1/10 Trolls.

Nobody about 10/10 Trolls.

When you erase so called 1/10 Trolls what’s about the 10/10 Trolls?

Why at all we are silencing Voices?

I want to hear the whole spectrum

I would do nothing let nature be nature!

When people want vote 10/10 it’s ok
When people want vore 1/10 it’s ok.

Than we get a real result , a result of human opinion

While you're technically right that 10/10 review "bombing" absolutely happens, the two are not in equal proportion. In fact for most such public opinion polls, negative trolling on the whole tends to vastly outnumber positive trolling. Sure the 10/10s do happen, but there's FAR fewer people going around spamming 10/10 than there are people spamming 0/10 (or whatever equivalents).

That's why people focus on the negative more - it also happens a lot more. I totally agree we shouldn't forget that things do also swing the other way and that does have an impact, but let's not pretend that the two forces are equal here, in any appreciable capacity.

[Universalgirl]

lol...no. Voting a 10 is just a stupid as voting a 1.

So you deny humans to hate or be utterly disappointed with 1/10 and you deny them to love or loose mind with 10/10?

Because you think nothing deserves 1 or 10.

[eschatological]

This show in particular doesn't deserve a 1 or 10....

...but I will say there's a natural inclination of fans to rate things 10 out of blind love of a thing instead of a particular malice, so, in addition to the number of 10/10 brigaders being lower, I'd also argue there are some "genuine" 10/10s (who just happen to have bad taste and are blinded by fandom). This is why the scale generally skews 7-10 in the first place, because fans have blinders on. So purging 10/10s has an even bigger difficulty in separating fake vs. genuine (but in bad taste) reviews.

I'm sure there's some 10/10s for the Star Wars prequels out there, purely out of love for Star Wars.

[s_bushido]

So you deny humans to hate or be utterly disappointed with 1/10 and you deny them to love or loose mind with 10/10?

Because you think nothing deserves 1 or 10.

Neither score is indicative of someone actually thinking objectively. I'd be just as fine with them purging "10/10 best show ever!" reviews as the "1/10 this show murdered my dog and raped my wife!" bullshit

[Universalgirl]

While you're technically right that 10/10 review "bombing" absolutely happens, the two are not in equal proportion. In fact for most such public opinion polls, negative trolling on the whole tends to vastly outnumber positive trolling. Sure the 10/10s do happen, but there's FAR fewer people going around spamming 10/10 than there are people spamming 0/10 (or whatever equivalents).

That's why people focus on the negative more - it also happens a lot more. I totally agree we shouldn't forget that things do also swing the other way and that does have an impact, but let's not pretend that the two forces are equal here, in any appreciable capacity.

What’s happening here? It’s completely the opposite.

10/10 is Leading, not the story you try to sell 1/10 vastly outnumbering 10/10 votes

Interesting that according to you a miracle is happening right now?

[s_bushido]

What’s happening here? It’s completely the opposite.

10/10 is Leading, not the story you try to sell 1/10 vastly outnumbering 10/10 votes

Please.

Look at any other show and 10s will basically always have the most votes.



Even Wheel of Time, which if these forums are to be believed was one of the worst shows ever put to film, has more 10s than the others. Even if just barely.



So yes, compared to other shows, the percentage of 1s that Rings of Power is getting is a result of brigading. It's basically indisputable.

[Triceron]

Neither score is indicative of someone actually thinking objectively. I'd be just as fine with them purging "10/10 best show ever!" reviews as the "1/10 this show murdered my dog and raped my wife!" bullshit

Yeah but they profit off the show getting higher ratings. As said, IMDB is owned by Amazon. And Rings of Power is a flagship series, at least in terms of how much money they've poured into it. Should be obvious that they're not going to shoot themselves in the foot.

Even Wheel of Time, which if these forums are to be believed was one of the worst shows ever put to film, has more 10s than the others. Even if just barely.

... Wouldn't that be supporting the argument that 10/10s are also leading?

[bledgor]

Please.

Look at any other show and 10s will basically always have the most votes.



Even Wheel of Time, which if these forums are to be believed was one of the worst shows ever put to film, has more 10s than the others. Even if just barely.



So yes, compared to other shows, the percentage of 1s that Rings of Power is getting is a result of brigading. It's basically indisputable.

Naw anyone that voted WoT as a 10 is for sure getting paid, that show was terrible and it had a fuck awful season finale.

[s_bushido]

... Wouldn't that be supporting the argument that 10/10s are also leading?

It supports the argument that idiots constantly shitting on a show are rarely representative of the general audience, and my assertion that 10s are always leading on that website.

[Universalgirl]

How big forced woke is a thing?

[Biomega]

It supports the argument that idiots constantly shitting on a show are rarely representative of the general audience, and my assertion that 10s are always leading on that website.

Of course they are. They're purging low votes a lot more than high votes.

Make no mistake, 10/10 is absolutely as ridiculous as 1/10 for most cases, but they prefer erring on the side of high votes because that's what studios like to see. High ratings attract more viewers. Low ratings generally... don't do anything positive.

That doesn't mean high votes happen more, it just means they get to stay around more when curation is applied. Look at unmoderated polls that get bombed - it's almost always in a negative way (depending on what constitutes "negative" in the respective context, of course). It's the same with upvote/downvote systems; you think YT removed the visibility of dislikes because they happened just as much as likes?

[Myradin]

It's not a bad show, but it's not Tolkien. They took names and places familiar to people from the movies and made their own story.

They probably would have been better served not calling this Tolkien and making their own property, but I doubt they would have gotten the funding without the name recognition.

I think this is mostly how I feel.

Its okay generic fantasy, but it just feels kind of bland. We sort of feel like we're shoved partway into a plot with Galadriel, and everyone else is just on random side quests. Even game of thrones had a single starting event which everything spiraled out from, this just has things that are happening.

The Elves look particularly underwhelming. Their hair all looks way too normal. Though I do like how they delve more into their unique viewpoint and nature in a way the other films never got in to.

I feel like parts of the show expect you to have book knowledge to understand whats going on though, which is weird due to how much it also deviates. I feel like we'd have been better off either focused on a harfoot, human, or like Galadrial's child she's supposed to have, to ease us into the setting.

[Triceron]

It supports the argument that idiots constantly shitting on a show are rarely representative of the general audience, and my assertion that 10s are always leading on that website.

Right, but the point was that idiots equally support a show with 10/10s, and you bring up an example of this exact thing happening to other shows. WoT is definitely not a good example of a show that should be leading with 10/10s, especially if you take a look at user ratings on other aggregates.

Either way, the 'idiotic' extremes are problematic. What's being pointed out is the bias in only purging the negative reviews, while not addressing them equally on both ends.

[eschatological]

I don't think people equally support it with false 10s. Positivity isn't a driving force to fake review from audience critics. What drives people to bombard something, to actually organize it, is negativity. People who don't actually think it's good but want to prop it up are few and far between - no one goes out of their way to blow smoke up the ass of someone unless they're really blind-faith type of fans. In other words, 10/10s tend have a higher proportion of good faith to bad faith than 1/10s.

It's why Twitter isn't a reflection of real life.

It's why YouTube comments aren't a reflection of how people feel about a video generally.

Usually the negative stuff outweighs the "false" positive.

[s_bushido]

What's being pointed out is the bias in only purging the negative reviews, while not addressing them equally on both ends.

Yes, and the premise of those bringing this up as if it matters is flawed to start with. People don't brigade these systems with 10s...unless the contention is that literally every movie or show on the site is being positively brigaded with 10s. Good luck with that.

Either way, this argument is pointless. I've already said multiple times that I think voting 1s and 10s are both stupid. About as stupid as relying on the number on a website (that you already believe is susceptible to manipulation) to be the determining factor of either the quality of the production, or whether or not you're going to watch it.