Criticker.com Forums

Re: Tag list search function tweak

Quicky — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 22:02:56 +0000

Please note that I am not suggesting to make movies that have already been added . I'm merely suggesting to them for the user's information along with the three first results that still be added.

Re: Alternate Names for People (Actors/Directors etc.)

KGB — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:43:31 +0000

This is also true for israeli directors, more than once I had to consider every possible spelling to find a person. If anything I think the spelling, as in the original language (Russian, Hebrew, Arab, etc.) should be considered.

Re: Alternate Names for People (Actors/Directors etc.)

iceblox — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 17:27:15 +0000

Thanks.

Re: Alternate Names for People (Actors/Directors etc.)

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 16:19:49 +0000

That does make sense. I've written it down as an enhancement, as "Allow alternate names for people". Given the length of our to-do list, of course, I won't make any promises as to when we might get to it... but it's on the record!

Re: Movie Images

iceblox — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:49:06 +0000

[quote="mpowell"][quote="iceblox"]You sure? Even after clearing the cache, I am still seeing the same image.

Hmm... weird, I guess it didn't work at first! I've copied the image again, so please give it another go
The new image shows up now, thanks!

Re: Movie Images

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 15:09:15 +0000

[quote="iceblox"]You sure? Even after clearing the cache, I am still seeing the same image.

Hmm... weird, I guess it didn't work at first! I've copied the image again, so please give it another go

Re: Movie Images

iceblox — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:55:25 +0000

You sure? Even after clearing the cache, I am still seeing the same image.

Re: Adult Films

iceblox — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:48:22 +0000

iMDB is a big fat database of all things movie-related, while Criticker isn't that. In iMDB, it would be fairly difficult to come across adult movies or performers, unless you are specifically looking for them (iMDB doesn't have any adult movies in any new/forthcoming lists, at least AFAIK). But Criticker is more open about it's movie content - you have your daily added movies RSS feed (if an adult movie is newly added, wouldn't it show up in the list too?), and more over you have people's movie rankings openly accessible. You may be innocently browsing through someone's movie rankings when you may stumble upon a few adult movies he/she has ranked. Here a person has been exposed to those adult movies, even though he/she wasn't looking for them. That's not fair.

If a ton of restrictions/filters can be put in place, which would filter out all the porn content, then I guess it's OK, but is it really worth all the hassle? I mean, I am certainly not looking for adult film "recommendations" when using Criticker, nor am I looking to see if someone else has watched the same porn movies as me. If there are some adult films which are more of actual movies, than the pornographic content in them, then I am sure there are only a handful of them, and can be added on a case-to-case basis, if at all needed.

Otherwise, let's keep this site clean.

Re: Tag list search function tweak

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:36:49 +0000

That's an interesting point. We figured that taking already-tagged matches out of the results would make things easier (and prevent duplicate tags), but I agree that given the way you describe, it can also make things harder.We've written this down... thanks for the suggestion!

Re: Movie Images

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:25:47 +0000

that image has been added (you might have ctrl+refresh to clear out the cache and see the new image)

Re: Adult Films

Yoshiking — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 14:02:46 +0000

Yeah, I can totally agree with that. On the other hand there are some adult films that warrant a mention simply because they are good filmmaking (as in, they're made for the purpose of making an actual film rather than just the pornographic aspect of it). It just seems a shame that these can't be included. I can see that it would be very difficult to draw a line though, because some adult films just wouldn't have a place here at all.

As I said though, IMDb successfully makes adult films fairly inaccessible unless you're specifically looking for them. You wouldn't be uncomfortable showing your nieces IMDb, right? And again, Criticker wouldn't really be carrying any adult content itself.. Perhaps films with names of a certain level of vulgarity should be excluded or something.. Dunno. Just try to open this subject for debate to see if other people as well feel that some adult films have a place here. If everyone disagrees with me, that's fine.

Re: Adult Films

iceblox — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:41:19 +0000

I like Criticker the way it is - family friendly. I haven't seen anything here yet, which suggests otherwise - the reason I invited my two nieces to join Criticker the other day. I wouldn't be comfortable inviting any of my family members or friends here, or even using it myself, if Criticker is going to be flooded with movies like "Chicks with Dicks Part 23".

Re: Adult Films

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 12:14:12 +0000

Our current policy is that anything that IMDB has classified as an Adult Film doesn't get added to Criticker. I agree that a lot of the films in Criticker probably should fall into the Adult category, but as with so many judgment calls, it's useful to have a line in the sand. IMDB's Adult category serves as our line in the sand, even if a few things improperly classified. We don't have the resources to make case-by-case judgments.

Whether Criticker one day expands to Adult films... that's another question We've thought about it, and could definitely see it happening, but for right now, we would rather leave it alone.

Re: Help me name that movie

Siltem — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 11:00:02 +0000

[quote="Yoshiking"]The second one I remember less of. I think the plot was basically a woman graduating from college and wanting to "explore the world" (I think her goal was actually to have sex with people all around the world). I remember she went to some middle-eastern (or thereabouts) country and there was some guy licking honey off her at some point. The only reason this film was remotely memorable was that the guy actually fell asleep in the process of licking the honey off her body, and it was freaking hilarious.
Sounds like Bolero: http://www.criticker.com/?f=22436

Re: Ghost Discussions

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 09:15:46 +0000

Hmm... yeah, there must be something off in the searching algorithms that are being used.We'll take a look into it soon... thanks for reporting the bug!

Re: Go to page in tag list and TCIs

prowlergrig — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 08:20:22 +0000

that's great, thanks

Re: Go to page in tag list and TCIs

mpowell — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 06:38:28 +0000

Thanks for the ideas... we do have a bug open for enhanced navigation on the Film List page, and I've added your notes about the Tag List, TCI & Wishlist pages as well... specifically, about easily deleting films from the wishlist, more ordering options from wishlist and "jump to page" in addition to "next & previous page" navigation.

Re: Tags for awards etc.

Spunkie — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:54:46 +0000

Having a few categories for tags is a good idea. Sub Genres, Awards,Topical,Properties(like elegant etc.) and Other for all the tags left are first that I thought at first glance. But only if this won't lead to further complications .

Adult Films

Yoshiking — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:21:10 +0000

When I tried to add Italian Stallion a while back Criticker told me that adult films were not permitted into the database (I've also seen this information at the bottom of the page for adding new films afterwards). This has been nagging in the back of my mind for some time, because I know of certain other films that were added to the database earlier than this (I'm thinking before the layout change, which might be around the time this policy was implemented..) that IMDb would clearly classify as adult.My question is, why the change in policy? I'm a bit curious about this.. IMDb permits adult films, it just has a filter that is by default set not to show them. Why couldn't Criticker do this as well? There are several adult films that I would very much like to have expressed my opinion about on Criticker (Italian Stallion being one of them), and I can't really see why they can't be added to the database, so long as Criticker itself doesn't contain any of the adult material.Criticker has quite a lot of films in its database that are borderline pornographic anyway, which are added without question as far as I can tell.. I'm just curious as to where the line is drawn and why.

Re: Tags for awards etc.

iceblox — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 01:16:07 +0000

Agree too. More like what iMDB has - an "Awards & Nominations" section, which would separate it from the tags describing what the movie is. But till that's in the place, I vote to keep everything the way it is now.

Re: Tags for awards etc.

djross — Mon, 13 Oct 2008 00:10:11 +0000

I agree that would be a good solution.

Re: Tags for awards etc.

Quicky — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 23:55:30 +0000

I think the Empire 500, TSPDT 1000, TIME 100 and other lists are actually a very interesting feature in my opinion, especially since this information is not available on a film-by-film basis anywhere else on the web as far as I'm aware. I believe there are quite a few people out there who watch movies based on these lists. Want to see which movies from the Empire 500 you haven't seen ordered by their PSI? No problem! Click!.

I understand your concern however, but I would suggest instead to separate tags into two different categories which could then be more conveniently separated on the movie info pages. The two categories I would suggest are 1) tags that describe the movie (e.g. 'zombies', 'bollywood', 'film-noir', etc.) and 2) tags that describe what the movie achieved (e.g. 'Oscar: Best Picture', 'Empire 500', 'Box Office Flop', etc.)

Another suggestion could be to introduce a 'Lists' feature that functions completely separate from Tags. For example you could allow lists to be compiled for top lists (1 to 100/500....) and award lists (2008 to 1950/1930...). You could then order these lists by PSI, year (awards), position (top lists) or alphabetically. Furthermore you could then have the normal tags as they are listed on the movie info pages right now, along with a (collapsable?) list of lists in which the movie is mentioned.

In The Godfather's case:

Tags: Mafia, Based On A Book, Gangster, Brothers, New York

This movie is mentioned in the following lists:

Important Awards:

Oscar: Best Picture (1973)
Oscar: Best Actor (1973)
Oscar: Best Writing (adapted/original) (1973)

Top lists:

AFI100 (#3)
Theyshootpictures1000 (#6)
TIME All-Time 100
Empire's 500 Greatest Movies Of All Time (#1)
AFI 100 Years... 100 Thrills (#11)
Sight & Sound: Top10 2002 (#4)

Tags for awards etc.

djross — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 18:01:46 +0000

There are already quite a lot of tags for various awards, as well as numerous tags for lists of such-and-such's views of the top 100, top 500 or top 1000 films. One consequence of this is, for example, that The Godfather: Part II currently has 16 separate tags, 9 of which are from various such awards and lists. I am not opposed to having some of these tags (e.g., Best Picture Oscars, Palme d'Or, etc.), but unless some kind of limit is placed on which ones to have, there is a risk of near-infinite proliferation. How many more such lists or awards might Godfather II have been included on or received? Do we really need all these tags for lists such as the Empire 500 greatest, Theyshootpictures1000, TIME All-Time 100, AFI100, Sight & Sound Top Ten 2002, etcetera etcetera etcetera? In my opinion we don't.

Re: UK TV Film Recommendations 12/10 - Another Ray film

paulofilmo — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 11:58:19 +0000

Updated.

Re: Actors You Hate

ender — Sun, 12 Oct 2008 10:07:05 +0000

I easily hate Nicolas Cage more than any other actor on the planet.That being said, I did like Raising Arizona.But he made up for it by being in the worst movie ever made (besides Starship Troopers), National Treasure. God that thing was awful.And no, I haven't seen the sequel. And yes, I'm sure it sucks.Other terrible actors include:Angelina JolieDavid Spade Brendan Fraser (except for his stint on Scrubs, which was suprisingly good)Samuel L. Jackson (yes, Mr. Jackson is an annoying muthafucka....his schtick is too tired)Kirsten Dunst and Tobey Maguire (specifically in the Spidey flicks...)All the actors in the prequel Star Wars trilogy...And, I'd also like to add that I wish to defend Keanu Reeves.It seems his acting abilities have matured with age.Look at these for proof...ThumbsuckerA Scanner DarklyConstantine (yes it was a bit cheesy, but it was all in fun)