Author Topic: Director Ratings Project 2015 - Top 100 Directors + The Bottom 20  (Read 10938 times)

valmz

  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 388
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #90 on: January 11, 2016, 09:41:55 PM »
It's always strange to me to see someone with no 10s score so high. It's like saying, "We, as a group, have agreed that he's the best, even though none of us think so."

Any chance you can figure out who has the highest percentage of 10s?

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 31758
  • Marathon Man
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #91 on: January 11, 2016, 10:09:21 PM »
Of the names coming up one person has four 10s and another has 5.
Spielberg has four, but he also has a 1 among other low scores.

There are 199 Ratings of 10, with twenty-seven of them in the Top 10, and 19 Ratings of 9.5.
The lowest ranked directors with a Rating of 10 are Doug Liman (#352), Curtis Hanson (#378), Mel Gibson (#549) and The Duplass Brothers (#624). All were given a 10 by smirnoff under the system I mentioned above. Excluding smiroff you will find a 10 Rating to James Cameron (#297) and for that you can thank Me. (And all you 3s, 4s and 5s can go suck an egg.)

On the flip side, the highest ranked director with a 0 Rating is Jean-Luc Godard (#266). Spielberg and Tarantino are the only names in the Top 100 with a 1 Rating. After them is Darren Aronofsky (#131)
Must See  |  Should See  |  Good  |  Mixed  |  Bad  | The Worst

chardy999

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3550
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #92 on: January 11, 2016, 10:27:30 PM »
I like the voting system and some of the surprises it is revealing - I have no idea how Spielberg could get a 1 from anyone though.

P.S. My bet for #1 is Miyazaki.
Those are my principles, and if you don't like them... well, I have others.
- Groucho Marx

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 20880
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #93 on: January 12, 2016, 12:57:35 AM »
I was pretty disgusted with the negative voting in this poll.  At times I felt like I was the only one being sane and reasonable.

Negative is another word for "people who disagree with me."

goodguy

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2032
  • Colleen West never liked the first light of day.
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #94 on: January 12, 2016, 03:35:07 AM »
I don't really have a problem with the placement of Kurosawa or Bergman - it's just when someone like Linklater suddenly pops up between those two. I'm sure I contributed to it, though, but when rating them, it didn't seem as bizarre.

On the flip side, the highest ranked director with a 0 Rating is Jean-Luc Godard (#266). Spielberg and Tarantino are the only names in the Top 100 with a 1 Rating. After them is Darren Aronofsky (#131)

Well, that proves I was being reasonable with Spielberg, I didn't rate him 0.

Bondo

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 20880
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #95 on: January 12, 2016, 08:46:14 AM »
I guess the question is, is it "gaming" the results if I rate a director who makes me want to punch things in frustration and annoyance a zero.

1SO

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 31758
  • Marathon Man
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #96 on: January 12, 2016, 09:55:07 AM »
I would like to see people's lists combining Kurosawa, Bergman and Linklater. Linklater may just crack the Top 10, but he'll solidly occupy the middle, unless you've only seen the Easentials of Kurosawa and Bergman.

And to save Martin the time I will reveal he's one who did rate Linklater well below the other two.
Must See  |  Should See  |  Good  |  Mixed  |  Bad  | The Worst

oldkid

  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 18469
  • Hi there! Feed me worlds!
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #97 on: January 12, 2016, 10:26:30 AM »
I've almost completed watching all of Linklater's films, and I'm one who ranked him high.  The way he plays with ideas, and combining those concepts with enjoyable characters and setting is always wonderful, if it may seem simplistic.  He's not usually a great narrator, but given all the other aspects of his films, I don't mind at all.
"It's not art unless it has the potential to be a disaster." Bansky

Jared

  • Elite Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 3492
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #98 on: January 12, 2016, 11:08:02 AM »
I guess the question is, is it "gaming" the results if I rate a director who makes me want to punch things in frustration and annoyance a zero.

That was kind of my thought too...I recognize that many of the people I rated lowly do things well. But if I think it all just adds up to a bunch of shitty movies my score is going to reflect that.

MartinTeller

  • FAB
  • Objectively Awesome
  • *****
  • Posts: 16295
  • martinteller.wordpress.com
    • my movie blog
Re: Director Ratings Project 2015 - RESULTS
« Reply #99 on: January 12, 2016, 11:18:06 AM »
I guess the question is, is it "gaming" the results if I rate a director who makes me want to punch things in frustration and annoyance a zero.

That depends. Does the director have any redeeming qualities? Can you recognize a certain flair for the form, even if his style isn't your cup of tea? Do you have a range of frustration and annoyance, or does it just flip between "I love this!" and "punch things"?

And to save Martin the time I will reveal he's one who did rate Linklater well below the other two.

I didn't give him a zero, though. I don't recall my exact score, but it should be around 7. Wouldn't make my top 50 directors, but a decent score.
« Last Edit: January 12, 2016, 11:21:10 AM by MartinTeller »
Switchboard
Watched 2020

Top 250  |  Great  |  Good  |  Fair  |  PoorCrap