IMDB ratings are of pretty dubious quality. They also fall victim to a recency bias - looking at their Top 250 list, Avengers Endgame is currently listed as the number nine best film ever made, which... come on.
IMDB ratings are of pretty dubious quality. They also fall victim to a recency bias - looking at their Top 250 list, Avengers Endgame is currently listed as the number nine best film ever made, which... come on.
Luckily, I haven't really seen this with books yet (at least on Goodreads), but I am sure it has just as much potential to be hit in a similar way.
Yes Socrates, let's consult the mob.
[1] https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-story-behind-the-wo...
That being said I was about to complain that Chernobyl didn't deal with the most interesting part, how the explosion happened in the first place, but the last episode did exactly that. I agree that it is an excellent mini-series.
Though the explantion in the tv show pretty much mirror the wikipedia article.
I usually use http://themoviedb.org to have an at least slightly more reliable idea of how a film is - not perfect but I can usually get an idea if I compare the rating of the candidate movie against other films which I liked and disliked in the past.
P.S.: the guys of tmdb have (or at least they used to have) as well a nice API to download stuff (ratings, posters/images, etc... if I remember correctly when I programmed a simple media player looong time back).
Edit - link to API docs: https://developers.themoviedb.org/3/getting-started/introduc...
Endgame is the final piece in a 22-film story arc. The people paying to watch it in the cinema, reviewing it are already fans before they've seen it. It won't be until home release where more moderate voices step in.
I'm not sure you can really level the same claims against Chernobyl though. These are people who had an HBO subscription, and that really only suggests they like Game of Thrones.
You can also argue these sorts of willing-audience reviews are actually a good thing, if you align with the reviewing audience. IMDb does make basic demographics available on their reviews.
The main downside of it is that it discounts recent (past 5+ years) movies. This is partly due to the infrequent updates, and partly because films take a while to appear in the data sources the site uses for its statistical analysis.
(I am not affiliated with that site. I'm just a long-time, satisfied user of it)
Also, I'm not sure you could make that argument for IMDB's top 250 TV series [1], but maybe that's just my own preferences speaking.
It's less of a recency bias (the trend is mostly flat by year of movie release), but both ends of the spectrum are more extreme for movies in the last decade.