Let me open with the blanket statement that I don't believe anybody was gaming the system with extreme ratings. Possibly fudging the numbers a little (which I will elaborate below) but the closest to something I would call gaming would be the smirnoff system I mentioned. The one... the only good thing about his departure is that he never rated Inactive directors, because he was always open as preferring modern films to older ones.
Bondo, you took up the banner for 'negative voting' but I know Martin wasn't referring to you. We had spoken in PM about some voting that appeared negative, but I didn't have a problem with it because it was consistent. People whose Ratings tend to run low completed the entire Project to the best of their ability, much like people whose Ratings tend to run high. So what some might see as negative voting, I see as being the other side of someone like Junior who just loves everything (except for George Lucas, Kevin Smith, Rob Zombie and Uwe Boll.)
Looking at the raw data, Bondo's average Rating was 5.67. 7 others averaged between 5.5 and 6. The most generous contributions came from Junior (7.85) and oldkid (7.54)
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"?
I'm going to answer this with my lowest rated Directors.
Uwe Boll - .1 :I know I've seen some of at least 4 different Boll movies, but I've never watched one beginning to end because the level of incompetence is intolerable. He is a director with occasional signs of an ability to learn how to make a movie, but that is all and that's being generous.
Stan Brakhage - .7 :This is an old argument. Brakhage did something unique, but I find most of his work indistinguishable from each other. I don't understand how he decides on the length of his shorts or titles or what the point was in making so many. His longer pieces - Dog Star Man - are just as hard to watch... and so much longer. There are his two standouts - Window Water Baby Moving, The Act of Seeing with One's Own Eyes - but even they are difficult to watch to completion because of Brakhage's technique.
Jean-Luc Godard - 1: I've liked a couple of Godard, but I think his main objective is to experiment on his audience with frustration and 'CINECAST! you' techniques. (I will never forgive myself for watching all of Historie(s) du cinema). And there are people who love him for this. I would say I gamed this one down a little to balance the extreme love, but my hate is genuine, and I honestly couldn't be talked into higher than 1.5
Andrzej Zulawski - 1: Thanks to goodguy, I understand what Zulawski brings to the table, but
thanks to Possession I think he's a menace and I can only watch another of his films with an uneasy feeling.
Zhangke Jia - 1: There is no Director I less understand the love and acclaim for than Zhangke Jia. The filmmaking in Platform erupted aggression against Zhangke and his filmmaking style, but in my post-game I found Platform is in some Top 100s, my comments repeat a lot of what I already
said about Still Life, and that kind of writing about Zhangke comes with an equal and opposite reaction.
Rob Zombie - 1:
Why have I seen so many Rob Zombie films? I like horror, so he always arouses my curiosity. And he has his fans among critics. Usually a pretty smart bunch too. I just don't get it.