Proof that this is popular…
350k ratings on IMDb, 5k reviews. Anyone who says otherwise is a pathetic loser!
share350k ratings on IMDb, 5k reviews. Anyone who says otherwise is a pathetic loser!
shareAmazon owns IMDB, it is really just a matter of finger moving and typing, reviews these days can even be created by AI.
I remember the IMDB comment section of this show was frozen for weeks, due to the rapid downward spiral of ratings.
I was an IMDB member for more than 10 years, but since Amazon took over 2 of my reviews were not rejected (they can't seem to find the excuses), but not approved either, just left there for months, until I finally had enough and deleted my account.
I tried TMDB, which was supposed to be independent, not much better.
Let's face it, those sites either controlled by or take money from movie studios, otherwise how do they make money at all?
So what do you say to the people actually believing those numbers?
I tried TMDB, which was supposed to be independent, not much better.
I wrote reviews on TMDB, weren't approved or denied for weeks.
After that I deleted my account.
That's what you said about IMDB above. Are you saying the same thing happened on tmdb - i.e. rejected reviews? I thought the reviews just went live there...
shareNo, apparently it does not, at least it did not in my case.
If my reviews were rejected because I said something offensive I would have accepted that, but no. They were not rejected.
And you might have read my reviews before, I don't think they could find excuses to reject them, they just don't approve them.
That happened in the exactly same way on both IMDB and TMDB.
I'm surprised by that - I thought tmdb was all just user based self service.
Mind you, I never put any reviews on there. I did used to put occasional edits to shows / films to improve descriptions. They went live right away but what annoyed me was that these users - chasing points for whatever reason - would come along afterwards and change them again. That annoyed me so I gave up on that...
Who pays for the servers? who pays for upgrades for browser compatibilities? Who pays for new features? They are not .org kind of non-profit organisation, they have to make/take money from somewhere.
The fact organisations using volunteers or asking donations does not mean they are not for profits.
I looked into charities before that I wanted to donate, was kind of an eye opener, so far I haven't found any honest ones.
FUN FACT: If you buy juices labeled "Cranberry Juice", it does not mean it contains any cranberry. If you buy chicken nuggets, it does not mean they contain any chicken meat, at all.
Can't remember who took it over.
I didn't say it was a charity or non profit but as far as the work went there was one guy - Travis something? - who set it all up.
I haven't really spent much time on there for a long time now but when IMDb first went tits up, I do remember him having a thread on there saying someone had invested and he was going to be able to work on it full time.
But it's more used for media tagging and an API for open source guys. The message boards were incredibly quiet and I'm not sure many people would even see reviews there. Hence my surprise at the bureaucracy around it...
I just did some quick research and there is a discussion on TMDB on who owns it: https://www.themoviedb.org/talk/58c2e078c3a36812090009eb
So far it is clear that it was created in 2008, and sold to Fan TV in 2010, according to its wikipedia page: https://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Movie_Database
Fan TV was bought by Rovi, along with TiVo Inc., and Rovi renamed itself TiVo Corporation in around 2016.
In 2019 TiVo merged with Xperi, and it's wikipedia page also confirmed the ownership of TMDB: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xperi
According to the wikipedia page in 2022 Xperi Holdings Corporation spun-off its product technology operations as Xperi Inc. (NYSE: XPER), and renamed the intellectual property licensing business Adeia Inc. (Nasdaq: ADEA). I have no idea which one owns TMDB now.
But it has been in corporate ownership for some years that is for sure. So I am not surprised with all the bureaucracy.
They are as for profit as Amazon owned IMDB that is also for sure, but they are not producing shows themselves, so I think they take money from all the major movie studios.
Good research!
I think that was probably the same thread I remembered from years ago!
Just thought I'd share a wee update:-
After talking about your tmdb review problems I basically just copy and pasted something I'd written on the message boards and submitted it as a review.
As I was saying above, I've never done any reviews there before and, as you said, it didn't go live right away but just looked again just now and 24 hours or so later it is live!
They didn't send an email or anything to confirm it had gone live, I just saw it was there. So maybe same thing happened with yours but you just didn't see them...
I think if it were for commercial reasons, which I suspect it was, they probably only not passing the negative reviews during the critical period, like the first 4 ~ 6 weeks, for the movies they took money, when well written reviews could make or break a movie.
Not all movies or studios pay them money, probably mostly the block busters.
What you experienced shows they have the man power, so the reviews neither passed nor rejected for long period of time have to be for some other reasons. The commercial reason is the only one I could think of.
at least we got moviechat - aside from a few trolls, I've not spotted any bots here yet
shareIDK. We could say it's infamous. 350 K votes is impressive yes, but it is well known it's 7 score is manipulated. It was scoring about 4.2 but then amazon stepped in and deleted negative votes and reviews. Still if you look around on other sites to see the reception of the series, people mostly say negative things about it.
shareYep, I remember when the comment section was locked, all the comments with rating below 6 were gone.
shareHonestly I am surprised it only has a 7! Based on the show quality I would have expected an 8 or more. The visuals, the original music, the atmosphere, it is incredibly well rendered. The only thing I dislike about the show is the half-foot scenes. Other than that, I am really enjoying the dwarves and the elves, especially Elrond's character and unbending morality. It is refreshing to see a show where a wonderful man (elf) holds the moral high ground and for once the brash woman character is not the hero.
Suppressing review scores when they all originate from the same IP address doesn't seem that bad honestly. My only reproach with Amazon is that they don't catch those same IP reviews before they are published and have to do post-corrections. That's why they get so much beef. They handled this poorly. But at least now the ratings reflect or almost reflect how good the show is especially in season 2.
You can tell that the show is better than the review score when you look at individual episode ratings! They are a better reflection of reality, with episodes above 8.0.
Yup even the reviewers who watched the entirety of season 2 in advance said the hobbit storyline is quite bad and very boring.
shareT were added to build connection to Frodo but weren't necessary. I guess it does explain Galdalf's fondness with Hobbits later in the chronology, but they could have made something more interesting happen or just focus on the encounter with the stranger instead of giving us so much of their back story and people where nothing much happens.
shareIn what universe? If it was popular, how come they lost 60% of their audience in the first season alone?
shareLOTR is popular, this show only tries to capitalize on original LOTR's popularity, on its own it is just trash
shareI disagree, this show actually sets the foundation for LotR trilogy, it is fascinating in its own right, in particular how Sauron is able to bottom feed his way back to life like Voldemort did, starting as an inform shape and then slowly regenerating and amassing power. The way it was portrayed gave me chills. Also incredible to see the birth of the Istari's and how their power manifests and to learn more about the dark wizard and his acolytes. Of course we know Sauron is the master of deception but Gandalf's ring gives him the power to make others see the truth, so he is most dangerous to Sauron's plans! It is setting up to be drama of epic proportions. The visuals are even more stunning as the original film, the variety of landscapes in particular, and the attention to detail inside the cities. The musical score has nothing to envy on the film triology. And the corruption of the rings is rendered very convincingly. It shows how evil is able to use compassion and laudable goals to pervert power. The script is extremely accurate in how it depicts the typical gaslighting of sociopaths, how it preys on the desires and needs of others. It is more psychological than in the film trilogy, which I absolutely love. It really tests the psyche of the rings bearers, since it is their infancy, so it is not solely the rings that corrupt but the manipulation of Sauron, which makes for a more interesting if less mystical story. Overall I enjoy the fact that it is a psychological drama as much as it is a game of thrones in season 2. And as we know the epic part is coming big time in season 2, so the action level will also match the film trilogy!
shareThere are things I can't describe to you if you don't grasp the aesthetics of LOTR before it became a movie. Wheat you watch in that show is not high fantasy, it's a soap opera, If you don't understand this I can't explain it to you in this post, I wish but I can't. You are probably a different era kid, too young or too old
shareno I am exactly right. and I can't explain to you why you should like this style, since probably you are too young and did grow up without a film representation in your mind. Joking. We just have different representations, even within fantasy there are different subgenres, and even within those subgenres different authors have a different feel, and even with the same authors, different people read and picture it differently!
shareYou're the one gas lighting.
Wiffing the smell of your own farts around. I've never read so much rubbish.
>I enjoy the fact that it is a psychological drama as much as it is a game of thrones in season 2
Ha ha Rings of Power only reaches the heights of Game of Thrones Season 8.
Psychological drama, what a flowery picture you paint.
>this show actually sets the foundation for LotR trilogy
Trashes on it and condenses 1000 years into a couple of weeks. Gandalf and Saruman weren't even alive then and shoehorned in for the purpose of MEMBERBERRIES. The writers could have used the other wizards alive at the time and built something "new" in the cinematic universe. But no, we needed MEMBERBERRIES.
This show has been denounced by fans. It's reviled.
It's called review bombing.
share"Popular"...interesting way to describe the biggest failure in television history.
share