RSS Feeds
communicate
FlixPulse Rates Movies by Twitter Consensus
Posted by Kevin Purdy at 12:00 AM on June 8, 2008
Web-based movie review index FlixPulse might not provide the voice of rationed wisdom on how good a movie is, but it's a nifty way to see what the uber-connected Twitter community has to say on it. Real humans scan through film mentions across the short-messaging community, then group them into good, bad, or indifferent piles to compile a percentage. Of course, most people aren't going to Twitter about movies they found only reasonably good, but it's a great conversation starter and, occasionally, a refreshing dip in the schadenfreude pond.
Comments (AU Comments · US Comments)
There are currently no AU comments for this post.
Torley
Posted 12:11 AM 8/6/08
Holy moly, Kung-Fu Panda is rockin' the charts @ 99%! I wouldn't have expected that.
I wonder how they do the opinion-aggregating. Seems like a manual and tedious process (even with brief tweets) if a machine isn't helping to automate.
Torley
rvandervort
Posted 1:23 AM 8/6/08
wow, everything in the green. I was a little skeptical whether Hollywood released only high-quality entertainment. Now I'm convinced.
rvandervort
kyanos
Posted 1:54 AM 8/6/08
Zohan clocks in at 71% positive, and every single movie listed on the front page is in the green, so I'd have to say that their analysis is a little flawed.
kyanos
iceman7
Posted 2:12 AM 8/6/08
Indiana Jones sucked.
iceman7
da5id_nz
Posted 4:32 PM 8/6/08
I always just check out the meter at Rotten Tomatoes. (Once you've done a search and found the movie you're looking for it shows a meter based on reviews).
Not that it's always right, of course....
da5id_nz
geoffcbassett
Posted 11:45 PM 8/6/08
@rvandervort: I think they purposly skew it, less than 70% they count as below average. If you compare scores to one another they make sense. I mean INdy 4 is still ranked really low comparatively, and that's what it deserves.
geoffcbassett
ZanipoloHizer
Posted 2:41 AM 8/6/08
Yo, this is Chad (creator of FlixPulse). By far the biggest "complaint" is that the scores skew positive and that "everything is in the green." Well, I just tweaked the algorithm a bit to give the movies a grade from A-F based on standard test scoring. Now the movies are *not* all in the green. Only a couple have A's, most have B's or C's, Indiana Jones clocks in at a D, and The Strangers has a big fat F. Hopefully this will assuage those that have thought the rating system was too nice. There are many other psychological factors that could explain why the scores from "average people" are higher than those of critics. For one, critics are paid to be cynical, and average movie-goers just want to have a good time for their $10 ticket.
ZanipoloHizer