I'm not trying to be contrarian here, but, like, it should be intuitively obvious that they'd have a minimum threshold. They can't just stick a movie only one person has seen at #1 because that one person gave it a 10. There has to be a threshold of some sort to keep the list from being student films seen solely by their own directors, and whatever number they choose is necessarily going to be somewhat arbitrary. You decrease the minimum threshold, and sure some good movies are going to make the list that otherwise wouldn't, but only by kicking off some (presumably also pretty good) movies that already are on the list. You can't have 289 movies on your top 250 list. Some quick googling is showing me 9 million users for Letterboxd vs. 83 million for IMDB as of last year, so IMDB having 5x the minimum threshold seems reasonable enough to me.
You're also overlooking the fact, which completely undermines his entire analysis, that ratings always decline as they accumulate. The movies he mentions are unlikely to maintain their ratings once they exceed 100,000 votes. Therefore, it would be entirely misplaced to include them on the same list as other movies that have the same rating but a million votes. A rating of 8.3 based on 20,000 votes is not the same as a rating of 8.3 subjected to a million votes. The stupidity in this video is astronomical.
I honestly don't think 25k is too high. I mean, there are movies on that list with over a million ratings, so you can't really put those on the same list as a movie with like 5k ratings. In addition, there is an IMDb list that doesn't account for the number of ratings, which you can pretty easily find
You're also overlooking the fact, which completely undermines his entire analysis, that ratings always decline as they accumulate. The movies he mentions are unlikely to maintain their ratings once they exceed 100,000 votes. Therefore, it would be entirely misplaced to include them on the same list as other movies that have the same rating but a million votes. A rating of 8.3 based on 20,000 votes is not the same as a rating of 8.3 subjected to a million votes. The stupidity in this video is astronomical.
Apart from the threshold, IMDb uses a weighted rating formula to determine a movie's rating for the list. The more votes a movie has, the closer its weighted rating will be to its actual rating. The formula currently used isn't publicly available, but one can find the old one on IMDb's Wikipedia page.
lmao the current weighted rating is basically a tool for IMDB to manipulate ratings for woke movies. That's why they are scared to reveal it, they act like the woke also didn't manipulate ratings
I worked on a system similar to this, my solution was to give each movie a score which comprised of the rating, number of votes, release date, etc. The end result was that it would take the 250 movies with the highest "score", then sort them by rating. I feel like that system would work better
Interesting that both Green Book and Moonlight focus on racial topics and both show the greatest disparities. I know that Moonlight was very critically lauded for its complex portrayal while Green Book... Not quite as much.
I watched both movies and remember not liking Moonlight for how boring I find it but enjoying Green Book a lot. So I guess I am more like the IMDb community 😅
IMDb just has higher standards obviously with the higher threshold. You don’t want it to be the exact same as letterboxd, otherwise there’d be no difference between the lists! The lists are designed for different sorts of audiences
I assumed they used some sort of algorithm that weighed views against ratings, like maybe one film isn't rated quite as high but has been rated higher by more people or something.
I think the star rating system is outdated. I mean on IMDb why even have 1 to 3 stars, it all means the movie was terrible. And everybody judges differently what a 6 or 7 is. I think something in line like emojis that represen how you felt while watching a movie is more relatable and then in addition you can give it the badge of favourite movie or guilty pleasure. And then when you look for movies you can organise them by rating or by how many people marked them as favourite.
There's different levels of bad, just like there's different levels of good. Saying 1 to 3 is all terrible is saying 8 to 10 is all great, technically true, but there's still some gap in quality. The only issue is, many people don't understand how to use the rating scale properly, but that's only their problem
I do think this is the best list we're going to get that has input from fans. It just bugs me to see popular movies listed above perfect films. And to see classics usurp movies that stood rhe test of time when we don't know if a film will be good even a few years later.
Film snob website? I mean there's a ton of people who write joke reviews on there, and rate five stars movies like Mean Girls, so that's like the opposite of snobs
I don't agree with letterbox being better because it has more diversity in its movies. Most people dont care that a movie was directed by a woman, I dont even know who the director of a movie is 95% of the time. These lists are supposed to be a meritocracy, I'm not going to think any less of IMDB for not putting in bollywood movies because they suck.
When a show is pure trash deserving of negative votes it is not "review bombing" . Thats just the natural rating for the show. The fact that they try to label it as some sort of coordinated hate thing is laughable. I mean is anyone on the planet dumb enough to think rings of power is a legit 7.0 show?
Why is 25k minimum ratings too much ? Also why are you pointing to the fact that letterbox has more women directed movies in its toplist? Does that somehow make them better movies? I thought this was a best movies list not a buzzfeed article. Your video reeks of being sponsored by letterbox.
Statingin the title it's a lie and then within the first few seconds of your video stating it's partially a lit, is bs clickbate, as usual . Do better"
@@danielom8446 But people also hate the movie because of it being racist. I agree that there were many people that were just plain racist towards the race itself but for people like me, we disliked the replacement of the character's race like. We can agree that being racist under the guise of criticism and race swapping are both very unhinged form of racism. Both of them have an agenda and they are both side of the same coin. I am not a westerner so my views might seem odd but our reason for disliking the movie here was not because us being racist. A lot of us saw the original and even for those who hadn't, the character was popular to the point where she was in the cover of textbooks we bought alongside barbie. Those crowd of people tried to hate on the barbie movie too but they were drowned out by pretty much everyone else. I can't say the same if they race swapped it. I just can't think of why they would do that to the little mermaid except racism. I would love to see princess tina on live screen.
I don't agree with your point of view. It's very strange when on the same line there will be a film with a million ratings and a film with 10 thousand ratings, don't you think that this is absolutely unfair? Therefore, it is definitely not worth lowering the rating bar. But you are right about the fact that there are quite a lot of excellent films with good ratings but not reaching the top 250. And so my proposal is to create, in addition to the top 250, an additional selection of films with a rating higher than 8.1, and here you can use the Letterbox system and add films from 5 thousand ratings.
I agree, and stranegely enough without even viewing the comments, I noticed yours after I posted. Don't forget to downvote and not watch the video util the end. Perhaps these 'content creators' will then learn.
Their list sucks. Titanic, the fugitive, little miss sunshine, gone with the wind, fiddle on the roof among many great movies not on the list that should be. I can't remember seeing field of dreams there either. Shit list. How the hell is Spiderman at 28 too, that's way too high on the list
Titanic comes from far, at one moment it was rated 6.5 on imdb between 2000-2010, now it is 7.9, so Titanic had a kind of redemption on IMDB and now we know that this movie has passed the test of time as an undisputed classic of cinema.
No. I EXTREMELY DISAGREE. Why? Because this list is so damn good (I'm like about 10 movies left from completion), and I hope it doesn't change. Granted, the removal of Stalker and other russian movies are unjustified, but that doesn't matter because this list needs to exist for beginner movie-goers. This list is what got me into cinema and I've discovered SO MANY GOOD MOVIES through this list that even going through it gives me so much nostalgia and good memories. Let Letterboxd's List be for advanced cinema-goers, and IMDB for beginner-cinema-goers. IMDB's list should not have Satantango nor Jeanne Dielmann(despite being exceptional films). Also here are some EXTREME GEMS from IMDB 250(even tho 85% of this list is FIRE): 1. Best Years of Our Lives. 2. 3 Idiots. 3. A Seperation. 4. In the Name of the Father. 5. Unforgiven. 6. Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri 7. La Haine 8. The Sound of Music 9. Amores Perros
@xx99Username99xx wow and I thought my user name was complicated. Anyway this user is correct. You need some reasonable number of votes to be in the IMDB top 1000 never mind the top 250.
I'm not trying to be contrarian here, but, like, it should be intuitively obvious that they'd have a minimum threshold. They can't just stick a movie only one person has seen at #1 because that one person gave it a 10.
There has to be a threshold of some sort to keep the list from being student films seen solely by their own directors, and whatever number they choose is necessarily going to be somewhat arbitrary. You decrease the minimum threshold, and sure some good movies are going to make the list that otherwise wouldn't, but only by kicking off some (presumably also pretty good) movies that already are on the list. You can't have 289 movies on your top 250 list.
Some quick googling is showing me 9 million users for Letterboxd vs. 83 million for IMDB as of last year, so IMDB having 5x the minimum threshold seems reasonable enough to me.
You're also overlooking the fact, which completely undermines his entire analysis, that ratings always decline as they accumulate. The movies he mentions are unlikely to maintain their ratings once they exceed 100,000 votes. Therefore, it would be entirely misplaced to include them on the same list as other movies that have the same rating but a million votes. A rating of 8.3 based on 20,000 votes is not the same as a rating of 8.3 subjected to a million votes. The stupidity in this video is astronomical.
I was on board until you used the phrase "some quick googling".
@@ryanmpfeiffer In this case it's not like he can go to library to research imdb's userbase or something.
@ryanmpfeiffer why?
I honestly don't think 25k is too high. I mean, there are movies on that list with over a million ratings, so you can't really put those on the same list as a movie with like 5k ratings. In addition, there is an IMDb list that doesn't account for the number of ratings, which you can pretty easily find
How do I find that?
You're also overlooking the fact, which completely undermines his entire analysis, that ratings always decline as they accumulate. The movies he mentions are unlikely to maintain their ratings once they exceed 100,000 votes. Therefore, it would be entirely misplaced to include them on the same list as other movies that have the same rating but a million votes. A rating of 8.3 based on 20,000 votes is not the same as a rating of 8.3 subjected to a million votes. The stupidity in this video is astronomical.
IMDb top 250 is much easier to watch than the Letterboxd list as it is much more easygoing while the Letterboxd list[ is much more artsy.
Apart from the threshold, IMDb uses a weighted rating formula to determine a movie's rating for the list. The more votes a movie has, the closer its weighted rating will be to its actual rating. The formula currently used isn't publicly available, but one can find the old one on IMDb's Wikipedia page.
lmao the current weighted rating is basically a tool for IMDB to manipulate ratings for woke movies. That's why they are scared to reveal it, they act like the woke also didn't manipulate ratings
Ngl it’s pretty sad how many films get done dirty by that 25k threshold. Good video
I worked on a system similar to this, my solution was to give each movie a score which comprised of the rating, number of votes, release date, etc. The end result was that it would take the 250 movies with the highest "score", then sort them by rating. I feel like that system would work better
Interesting that both Green Book and Moonlight focus on racial topics and both show the greatest disparities. I know that Moonlight was very critically lauded for its complex portrayal while Green Book... Not quite as much.
I watched both movies and remember not liking Moonlight for how boring I find it but enjoying Green Book a lot. So I guess I am more like the IMDb community 😅
What’s the saying? ‘I’d trust 50 people giving four stars before 5 people giving five stars’
IMDb just has higher standards obviously with the higher threshold. You don’t want it to be the exact same as letterboxd, otherwise there’d be no difference between the lists! The lists are designed for different sorts of audiences
I assumed they used some sort of algorithm that weighed views against ratings, like maybe one film isn't rated quite as high but has been rated higher by more people or something.
I think the star rating system is outdated. I mean on IMDb why even have 1 to 3 stars, it all means the movie was terrible. And everybody judges differently what a 6 or 7 is.
I think something in line like emojis that represen how you felt while watching a movie is more relatable and then in addition you can give it the badge of favourite movie or guilty pleasure. And then when you look for movies you can organise them by rating or by how many people marked them as favourite.
There actually is a list on Letterboxd like this, it's called "Official Top 250 Films with the Most Fans". La La Land is number one.
There's different levels of bad, just like there's different levels of good. Saying 1 to 3 is all terrible is saying 8 to 10 is all great, technically true, but there's still some gap in quality. The only issue is, many people don't understand how to use the rating scale properly, but that's only their problem
I am curious about one question: Why 250 movies though? And not 100 as often used by other websites?
There's a lot of great fucking movies
Because 100 is too fking short when you're consider over a century worth of great movies.
Ok, but 250 isn't?
@@apfelkuchen4399 It isn't because you can see the ratings closing on the 7 star area by the end of the list.
I do think this is the best list we're going to get that has input from fans. It just bugs me to see popular movies listed above perfect films. And to see classics usurp movies that stood rhe test of time when we don't know if a film will be good even a few years later.
Interesting to compare with the Flickchart Top 250 as well.
Im going to compare a generalized movie review site vs. a film snob website... they arent exactly the same.. so it must be wrong! 😂
Film snob website? I mean there's a ton of people who write joke reviews on there, and rate five stars movies like Mean Girls, so that's like the opposite of snobs
I knew about the threshold but maybe its just because im one of the regular voters. Ill try get some of these into the viewer threshold😂
I don't agree with letterbox being better because it has more diversity in its movies. Most people dont care that a movie was directed by a woman, I dont even know who the director of a movie is 95% of the time. These lists are supposed to be a meritocracy, I'm not going to think any less of IMDB for not putting in bollywood movies because they suck.
Found your channel... Great videos
I always wondered about this! Thank you so much for making a video about it.
When a show is pure trash deserving of negative votes it is not "review bombing" . Thats just the natural rating for the show. The fact that they try to label it as some sort of coordinated hate thing is laughable. I mean is anyone on the planet dumb enough to think rings of power is a legit 7.0 show?
Only old movies. Nothing else.
Any list that doesn’t have “The Shawshank Redemption” as #1, is wrong.
Agree.
Overrated
@@Gavrik_Korogodskiyyour comment is overrated. Because The Shawshank Redemption is the greatest movie of all time.
@@vitaliyhoncharov3349 7 stars is more than enough for it. So naive and simple. But for crowd it's 10 for sure.
@@Gavrik_Korogodskiy 😂😂😂. Nice joke.
Why is 25k minimum ratings too much ? Also why are you pointing to the fact that letterbox has more women directed movies in its toplist? Does that somehow make them better movies? I thought this was a best movies list not a buzzfeed article.
Your video reeks of being sponsored by letterbox.
Statingin the title it's a lie and then within the first few seconds of your video stating it's partially a lit, is bs clickbate, as usual . Do better"
Using Little Mermaid remake noooot a good example of review boming... the movie was bad and it bombed....
It was bad, sure, but its score was also depressed by review bombing because of racists
@@danielom8446 lmao no, that film is also review praised because of black supremacists celebrating black washing.
@@danielom8446 But people also hate the movie because of it being racist. I agree that there were many people that were just plain racist towards the race itself but for people like me, we disliked the replacement of the character's race like. We can agree that being racist under the guise of criticism and race swapping are both very unhinged form of racism. Both of them have an agenda and they are both side of the same coin. I am not a westerner so my views might seem odd but our reason for disliking the movie here was not because us being racist. A lot of us saw the original and even for those who hadn't, the character was popular to the point where she was in the cover of textbooks we bought alongside barbie. Those crowd of people tried to hate on the barbie movie too but they were drowned out by pretty much everyone else. I can't say the same if they race swapped it. I just can't think of why they would do that to the little mermaid except racism. I would love to see princess tina on live screen.
IMDB top 250 has become a bit silly. Lawrence Of Arabia on no 100 and Spider-Man on no 31. 😂😂😂
I don't agree with your point of view. It's very strange when on the same line there will be a film with a million ratings and a film with 10 thousand ratings, don't you think that this is absolutely unfair? Therefore, it is definitely not worth lowering the rating bar.
But you are right about the fact that there are quite a lot of excellent films with good ratings but not reaching the top 250. And so my proposal is to create, in addition to the top 250, an additional selection of films with a rating higher than 8.1, and here you can use the Letterbox system and add films from 5 thousand ratings.
Moonlight is S H I T
Rate your music has the best list of films
Yes. There’s no contest
I think letterboxd list is fake.)
Great to know!
Next you’re going to tell us that Rotten Tomatoes’ reviews are faked 😅
Title says 'is a lie' then within 25 seconds of the video, then says 'well, partially a lie'. More clickbait BS.
I agree, and stranegely enough without even viewing the comments, I noticed yours after I posted. Don't forget to downvote and not watch the video util the end. Perhaps these 'content creators' will then learn.
Their list sucks. Titanic, the fugitive, little miss sunshine, gone with the wind, fiddle on the roof among many great movies not on the list that should be. I can't remember seeing field of dreams there either. Shit list. How the hell is Spiderman at 28 too, that's way too high on the list
Titanic comes from far, at one moment it was rated 6.5 on imdb between 2000-2010, now it is 7.9, so Titanic had a kind of redemption on IMDB and now we know that this movie has passed the test of time as an undisputed classic of cinema.
what's up with the women directors comparison
No. I EXTREMELY DISAGREE. Why? Because this list is so damn good (I'm like about 10 movies left from completion), and I hope it doesn't change. Granted, the removal of Stalker and other russian movies are unjustified, but that doesn't matter because this list needs to exist for beginner movie-goers. This list is what got me into cinema and I've discovered SO MANY GOOD MOVIES through this list that even going through it gives me so much nostalgia and good memories. Let Letterboxd's List be for advanced cinema-goers, and IMDB for beginner-cinema-goers. IMDB's list should not have Satantango nor Jeanne Dielmann(despite being exceptional films).
Also here are some EXTREME GEMS from IMDB 250(even tho 85% of this list is FIRE):
1. Best Years of Our Lives.
2. 3 Idiots.
3. A Seperation.
4. In the Name of the Father.
5. Unforgiven.
6. Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri
7. La Haine
8. The Sound of Music
9. Amores Perros
The greatest commercial for Letterbox ever done. Bravo.
.
@xx99Username99xx wow and I thought my user name was complicated. Anyway this user is correct. You need some reasonable number of votes to be in the IMDB top 1000 never mind the top 250.