Only a 5.7?
-
Archived from the IMDb Discussion Forums — HouseSitter
firemandan72 — 16 years ago(May 06, 2009 08:00 AM)
Ok it's not the best comedy in the world and a little contrived with a twee ending but surely it deserves more than a 5.7 ?
It's Steve Martin at his best (17 years ago mind you) and he is on similar form to his 80's classics and almost improv comedy from Dirty Rotten Scoundrels.
Just puzzled how all it got was 5.7. -
Logic404 — 16 years ago(February 17, 2010 12:41 AM)
If we start listening to IMDb to our go to guide for quality movies then we have lost. I rated this a 7 and if you look at the voting breakdown a lot of people also gave this a 7. As an average a 5.7 isn't too bad.
There are alot of people that don't even watch a movie and just rate it a 1 for spite. Maybe they don't like an actor or there's an issue with something trivial in the film and BOOM! - a rating of 1.
I strongly believe 1's and 10's shouldn't be thrown around with ease. I rate a 1 ONLY on the worst of the worst and a 10 on the best of the best. In my voting history I barely have any 1's and 10's as ratings because simply put - most movies don't deserve these extremes.
On just about every board on IMDb there is a question of why a movie is rated so high or so low. The real reason behind this is because 50% or so of people that rate movies aren't rating them properly or are too young to have seen enough movies to have a well rounded opinion.