|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Oct 17, 2017 6:14:45 GMT
WW ain't gonna get nominated for anything outside of technical areas, if at all.
|
|
|
Post by DC-Fan on Oct 17, 2017 6:17:58 GMT
WW ain't gonna get nominated for anything outside of technical areas, if at all. Wonder Woman has a good chance to get nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Like I said before, it depends on the Golden Globes. 41 of the last 46 movies that were nominated for a Golden Globe for the "Best Motion Picture – Drama" category were also nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. (The Golden Globes last year did nominate a CBM for the 1st time ever for Best Motion Picture ( Deadpool) but that was in the Musical or Comedy category, and only 13 of the last 45 Golden Globe nominees in the Musical or Comedy category were nominated for a Best Picture Oscar so Deadpool wasn't nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.) So if the Golden Globes nominates Wonder Woman for Best Motion Picture in the Drama category, then it's highly likely that the Academy will also nominate Wonder Woman for a Best Picture Oscar.
|
|
|
Post by justanaveragejoe on Oct 17, 2017 6:24:11 GMT
WW ain't gonna get nominated for anything outside of technical areas, if at all. Wonder Woman has a good chance to get nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Like I said before, it depends on the Golden Globes. 41 of the last 46 movies that were nominated for a Golden Globe for the "Best Motion Picture – Drama" category were also nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. (The Golden Globes last year did nominate a CBM for the 1st time ever for Best Motion Picture ( Deadpool) but that was in the Musical or Comedy category, and only 13 of the last 45 Golden Globe nominees in the Musical or Comedy category were nominated for a Best Picture Oscar so Deadpool wasn't nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.) So if the Golden Globes nominates Wonder Woman for Best Motion Picture in the Drama category, then it's highly likely that the Academy will also nominate Wonder Woman for a Best Picture Oscar. But what if the Golden Globes shuts Wonder Woman out?
|
|
|
Post by JudgeJuryDredd on Oct 17, 2017 6:45:35 GMT
WW ain't gonna get nominated for anything outside of technical areas, if at all. Wonder Woman has a good chance to get nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. Like I said before, it depends on the Golden Globes. 41 of the last 46 movies that were nominated for a Golden Globe for the "Best Motion Picture – Drama" category were also nominated for a Best Picture Oscar. (The Golden Globes last year did nominate a CBM for the 1st time ever for Best Motion Picture ( Deadpool) but that was in the Musical or Comedy category, and only 13 of the last 45 Golden Globe nominees in the Musical or Comedy category were nominated for a Best Picture Oscar so Deadpool wasn't nominated for a Best Picture Oscar.) So if the Golden Globes nominates Wonder Woman for Best Motion Picture in the Drama category, then it's highly likely that the Academy will also nominate Wonder Woman for a Best Picture Oscar. It is not going to be nominated for Best Picture, either at the Golden Globes or The Oscars. I saw the movie again recently and while very good it is not Best Picture worthy. I can name other films from this year that are far more deserving of being nominated for Best Picture than Wonder Woman.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 17, 2017 7:02:24 GMT
Wonder Woman isn't rated highest you pleb, only by RT's opinion piece you love flashing around which is meaningless crap, based on the multitude of reviews both in terms of overall positive reviews and in terms of combined actual scoring Logan scores higher, it's only in that 1 piece you quote repeatedly which ignores these facts and applies bs justifiers to WW's score that it tops the list. RT has WW at 92% fresh with an average rating of 7.6, Logan is at 93% fresh and 7.9 rating, or in terms of fan scoring Logan = 90% fresh and 4.4/5 whilst WW is 89% and 4.3/5, Logan is clearly the higher rated film Nope, Wonder Woman is rated higher than Logan and every other superhero movie: 50 Best Superhero Movies of All TimeAnd that rating isn't BS. That rating is based on an adjusted score (similar to how IMDb uses a weighted average instead of just a raw average) and is more accurate than just a raw score. stop trying to claim WW is the best CBM ever because it's fucking bullshit you look like a prat repeatedly claiming it especially when using a single bias article Nope, its not bullshit and it isn't biased. For the past decade, MCU fans have treated RT as gospel and have bragged about MCU movies always getting high RT scores. So it's hypocrisy for you MCU fans to claim RT is biased now that RT rates Wonder Woman as the best superhero movie of all time. WW is not the highest rated Yes, it is: 50 Best Superhero Movies of All TimeYou are such a prat.
Firstly you do realise using such a weighted method is used for imdb for a good reason, it stops numb nuts like yourself who give 10's to brands they like before ever seeing the sodding films and 0 or 1 to those you assume you will hate less value, this isn't needed for RT because RT accumulates and tallies the scores of certified critics who generally don't judge based on preconceived notions, and who themselves will rarely give such extreme scores.
Using it for RT is such an idiotic notion because it assumes those who rank films higher will do so ignorantly but they are vetted professionals who do it for a living, even those who favour specific genre's don't throw out 9 or 10's willy nilly, those scores don't go to just really fun or entertaining movies but extraordinary films, pro critics like those RT collects the scores from will knock off marks because they dislike the lighting or sound design things that 99.99% of other people ignore, hence why critical scores are lower than fan scores.
Also I said stop using that 1 editorial to make your claim and your response is to say nope WW better see and post that fucking link, you are mentally challenged my friend, you cant even form your own thoughts which is clearly why you keep posting this link as though it will dissuade anyone, it wont because most of us form our own opinion and arguments for ourselves, we don't need someone else telling us what to think you bloody muppet.
Finally I am not a MCU fan I am a CBM fan, I actually have a penchant for DC more so than Marvel, and I prefer MCU over X-Men or Spidey in general, that being said Logan is one of the best CBM's I have ever watched, I didn't see it for ages much like Wonder Woman, both films got heaps of praise so much so it is hard to live up to the hype, WW failed to do so, Logan however exceeded the hype imo, it was moving, exciting, funny, it's a film I will gladly rewatch, WW I saw and had issues with and though not bad it is not something I want or need to rewatch, and not in the more typical Oscar bait style of an important film with an important message in a tough but vital story, that people will say thats one of the best movies I have ever seen...but I never want to rewatch it, but in the case of outside of the lead being a woman and overall gender reversal of the leads it's a forgettable above average film, that doesn't deserve an Oscar nom, a film that can balance the heart, the humor, the violence and the sadness like Logan did however does imo.
Now if you actually have a cogent thought of your own to add to this please do, explain why WW deserves the nom, don't quote some fucking editorial but form your own argument, it doesn't need to be intricate but for the love of god have your own thought for once ffs.
|
|
|
Post by Tristan's Journal on Oct 17, 2017 9:08:32 GMT
You are such a prat.
Firstly you do realise using such a weighted method is used for imdb for a good reason, it stops numb nuts like yourself who give 10's to brands they like before ever seeing the sodding films and 0 or 1 to those you assume you will hate less value, this isn't needed for RT because RT accumulates and tallies the scores of certified critics who generally don't judge based on preconceived notions, and who themselves will rarely give such extreme scores.
Using it for RT is such an idiotic notion because it assumes those who rank films higher will do so ignorantly but they are vetted professionals who do it for a living, even those who favour specific genre's don't throw out 9 or 10's willy nilly, those scores don't go to just really fun or entertaining movies but extraordinary films, pro critics like those RT collects the scores from will knock off marks because they dislike the lighting or sound design things that 99.99% of other people ignore, hence why critical scores are lower than fan scores.
I am afraid you are misunderstanding the purpose and functioning of weighted statistical methods.
The method employed here on RT is Bayesian and it inter alia serves to get a conclusive comparison to validly compare ratings - compensation e.g. for different amounts of reviews per film.
Someone who would compare the aggregate ratings of say a film with 100 reviews with one that has 300 reviews, can with good reason be regarded an ignoramus lacking basic understanding of mathematics and sound comparison mechanisms.
The weighted algorism used on IMDb is something completely different and used for another purpose, apple-oranges.
Thus, DC Fan (and RT btw) is right that WW is the - statistically adjusted - best reviewed CBM on the world's biggest review aggregator site (which still just features below 1% of worldwide reviews). No surprise: RT say so themselves and make the methods used transparent, see link.
|
|
|
Post by dazz on Oct 17, 2017 11:03:26 GMT
You are such a prat.
Firstly you do realise using such a weighted method is used for imdb for a good reason, it stops numb nuts like yourself who give 10's to brands they like before ever seeing the sodding films and 0 or 1 to those you assume you will hate less value, this isn't needed for RT because RT accumulates and tallies the scores of certified critics who generally don't judge based on preconceived notions, and who themselves will rarely give such extreme scores.
Using it for RT is such an idiotic notion because it assumes those who rank films higher will do so ignorantly but they are vetted professionals who do it for a living, even those who favour specific genre's don't throw out 9 or 10's willy nilly, those scores don't go to just really fun or entertaining movies but extraordinary films, pro critics like those RT collects the scores from will knock off marks because they dislike the lighting or sound design things that 99.99% of other people ignore, hence why critical scores are lower than fan scores.
I am afraid you are misunderstanding the purpose and functioning of weighted statistical methods.
The method employed here on RT is Bayesian and it inter alia serves to get a conclusive comparison to validly compare ratings - compensation e.g. for different amounts of reviews per film.
Someone who would compare the aggregate ratings of say a film with 100 reviews with one that has 300 reviews, can with good reason be regarded an ignoramus lacking basic understanding of mathematics and sound comparison mechanisms.
The weighted algorism used on IMDb is something completely different and used for another purpose, apple-oranges.
Thus, DC Fan (and RT btw) is right that WW is the - statistically adjusted - best reviewed CBM on the world's biggest review aggregator site (which still just features below 1% of worldwide reviews). No surprise: RT say so themselves and make the methods used transparent, see link.
DC Fan isn't saying it's the best reviewed he's saying it is factually the best CBM ever based on that, which you just said simply points out what film is the best reviewed and not actually the best film, the fact it only accounts for under 1% of all worldwide reviews makes it a pointless thing to base such an opinion on imo.
Also I assumed the method was the same as IMDB's because that doofus said it was, I was a naïve fool, I allowed myself to be mislead and taken astray by a mad man who is likely right now trying to fornicate with the Blu-ray of the film, so you know, I am admittedly a bit of a divvy but he's an utter plonker, so you know don't go giving him credit for things he's not actually saying, although he'll likely try claiming that what he said is what you infact said now you did dun say what yah said, the mans a nutter I tells yah.
|
|
|
Post by sostie on Mar 4, 2018 19:00:09 GMT
Just saw Professor Marston & the Wonder Women today. Good movie. I rate it 8 out of 10.
It's currently at 87% on Rotten Tomatoes. Not as high as the 92% for Wonder Woman, but still pretty good. This is going to give even more positive R for Wonder Woman, which could help Wonder Woman get the 1st-ever Best Picture Oscar nomination for a CBM. Yup looks like the film's positive response really helped with those nominations. And in return I'm sure Wonder Woman helped it with it's $1.5m less than budget Box Office return.
|
|
|
Post by moviebuffbrad on Mar 4, 2018 23:44:19 GMT
It was okay. Felt a bit tame.
|
|