Hollywood Career-O-Meter by NewOldBrownCoat

GENERAL DISCUSSIONS

Hollywood Career-O-Meter

scan this with your smart phone to obtain URL for this page

POSTED BY: NEWOLDBROWNCOAT
UPDATED: Wednesday, June 8, 2011 08:12
SHORT URL: http://bit.ly/k28vLr
VIEWED: 3289
PAGE 1 of 1

Tuesday, June 7, 2011 2:57 AM

NEWOLDBROWNCOAT

http://www.slate.com/id/2296070/

based on Rotten Tomatoes ratings- read the whole article on Slate for a detailed explanation of how and why.

But check out some of our BDHs- according to them, Adam Baldwin is in a slump, Nathan is doing pretty well, and I couldn't get Joss to come up at all. or check out your other faves and crushes...

Maybe only deals with Movie work, not TV ? I'm not sure, and there are a lot of qualifiers about quantity of work, so maybe Joss hasn't done enough movies to qualify?

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2011 3:55 AM

THESOMNAMBULIST

Wow! Alan is off the scale with Tucker and Dale... ?!!!!

Cartoons - http://cirqusartsandmusic.blogspot.com

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2011 11:44 AM

DREAMTROVE

Nifty little app. Then I thought about it, and Rotten Tomatoes is evil. It's not facebook, but if you look, you will see a problem right away. Why the zigzags? I've seen a lot of movies with Johnny Depp in them, they don't tend to suck. Some are better than others. Then it hit me. "Critics." Remember Critics? Those useless media head agenda driven jerk offs that told you what you should and shouldn't see? That's the number they're pulling form Rotten Tomatoes because that's what comes up first. I'm sorry, the success of any piece of fiction is not judged by what the lamestream mediaheads think of it.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Tuesday, June 7, 2011 4:02 PM

HAKEN

Likes to mess with stuffs.

Interesting. No Joss Whedon.

http://about.me/haken

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 8, 2011 12:20 AM

LWAVES

Quote:
Originally posted by dreamtrove:
Nifty little app. Then I thought about it, and Rotten Tomatoes is evil. It's not facebook, but if you look, you will see a problem right away. Why the zigzags? I've seen a lot of movies with Johnny Depp in them, they don't tend to suck. Some are better than others. Then it hit me. "Critics." Remember Critics? Those useless media head agenda driven jerk offs that told you what you should and shouldn't see? That's the number they're pulling form Rotten Tomatoes because that's what comes up first. I'm sorry, the success of any piece of fiction is not judged by what the lamestream mediaheads think of it.

I agree with you DT - it is a nice app, or at least it could be if it took it's info from a wider and more varied range of sources.

A critic is just one person with their own opinion who just has the opportunity to state that opinion to a large number of people through TV, magazine, newspaper, internet review site or wherever. It doesn't make their POV any more or less viable than anyone in the film watching public. Yet somehow they still get perceived as something greater, that they should be listened to. And just because a film may not be very good doesn't mean the actor/actress wasn't very good.

Taking Nathan's graph as an example then Slither is higher rated than Serenity. Really? Slither is a great fun film but a quick look at public opinion would put Serenity on top. Using IMDB (as another popular source) shows Serenity scoring 7.9 and Slither a 6.6. Then they don't have his small role in Saving Private Ryan listed but they do list Alan's small role in Knocked Up. Animations and voice work seem to be acceptable (even though it's a different type of acting) but TV shows don't get counted. The whole thing is very biased and completely mis-representative of anything worthwhile.
There's a surprise.

"The greatest invention ever is not the wheel. It's the second wheel." - Rich Hall

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

Wednesday, June 8, 2011 8:12 AM

DREAMTROVE

It hails from our flawed concept of "expert" culture. We rely on experts to tell us what to do, a really outdated concept.

When I was a kid movies were about about the same dollar price they are now, but then it was a fair amount of money, and you paid for the whole thing whether you watched it or not. Now, it's not a lot of money, which is to say, the opportunity cost in wages of watching the film is more than the cost of a film. Additionally, you can watch it on demand, and so there's no reason not to quit right away when it sucks, and watch something else. Finally, we have the aggregate data, as you say, IMDb and other viewer rated sites. The only thing that would make this better would be to have targetted aggregate data like 75% of moviegoers liked serenity, 90% of scifi fans, 85% of western fans, if your favorite film is "sideways" maybe this isn't your cup of tea, etc. Reverting to a media elite system is not the answer.

That's what a ship is, you know - it's not just a keel and a hull and a deck and sails, that's what a ship needs.

NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | TOP | HOME

YOUR OPTIONS

SHARE THREAD

NEW POSTS TODAY

USER	POST DATE

USER

POST DATE