Who does the reviews and star ratings for Dish?

[Ronald_Jeremy]

I really don't pay attention to them but my brother just got Dish and he says they are pretty FUBAR. He says there are really good movies rated with 3 stars and then really bad movies like Zombie Honeymoon with the same rating! LOL

Who does Dish get the info from?

Anybody know?

 

[KE4EST]

I have often wondered the same thing but do not know.

 

[tigerfan33]

Tribune Media Services do the tv listings. You would think
this and the critique are related somehow.

 

[TNGTony]

The problem is movie "star" ratings are totally subjective. The ratings are a conglomeration of top critics. While a movie that some fine to be excellent others may find boring or contrived. And a horrible monster movie may be some one's idea of cinematic high art! So you get what we get in the "star" department.

I had the same beef with TV guide way back when... before they had cable lisings!

See ya
Tony

 

[darrad]

I personally LOVED Zombie Honeymoon! I always thought that the star ratings came from a summary of evaluating the story line, acting, costumes, scenery, music, directing...etc etc. Some people say that its just their opinion but I believe that its a little more than that. It takes alot of talent to put a good movie together and there are people who can effectively evaluate that talent. Just sayin'.

 

[Yespage]

I was surprised to see Taken (Liam Nielsen) getting a 3 of 4 star rating. Ratings are subjective, though, overall, it does give a decent idea as to what to expect.

 

[SaltiDawg]

... Ratings are subjective, though, overall, it does give a decent idea as to what to expect.

Agree.

I would like to see the Genre included... Comedy, Drama, SciFi, etc.

 

[inazsully]

Can't argue with any of the points here. However, the question hasn't been answered and it seems that one of the Dish guys here can answer the question. Where exactly do the ratings come from and who is responsible for rating stars?

 

[harshness]

Where exactly do the ratings come from and who is responsible for rating stars?

We don't know and I'm betting that DISH Network has absolutely nothing to do with it. Even if we or DISH Network did know, we certainly couldn't fix it.

Rating Film Review Ranking Systems - WSJ.com

 

[ZachS@DISH]

Can't argue with any of the points here. However, the question hasn't been answered and it seems that one of the Dish guys here can answer the question. Where exactly do the ratings come from and who is responsible for rating stars?

Tigerfan33 is correct the ratings(stars) come from Tribune Media Services.

 

[KAB]

As said early in this thread, program info comes from Tribune Media Services. Whether or not they determine the ratings I could not say.

 

[cosmo_kramer]

Can't argue with any of the points here. However, the question hasn't been answered and it seems that one of the Dish guys here can answer the question. Where exactly do the ratings come from and who is responsible for rating stars?

I personally disagree with star ratings I've seen in print ond online most of the time, good or bad. Don't see why this would be any different here....

 

[DishSubLA]

I don't know if it is still true, but for many years Tribune used Leonard Maltin, or more precisely, his move review books (a Tribune property, I believe). It wouldn't surprise me if they are still using Leonard Maltin because the stupid star ratings reflect Leonard's below par movie tastes.

IMHO, I would love it if Tribune would use Roger Ebert, but then Tribune would have to PAY ol Roger. It is fitting that Tribune's adherence to Leonard Maltin also is in line with how poorly the Tribune Co. is run. If it weren't for their only golden egg laying goose of KTLA Ch. 5, Los Angeles (a consistent financial life preserver for the company) Tribune would have ceased to exist a long time ago.

 

[inazsully]

Maltin and Ebert are both movie snobs. They need a couple of regular people with the ability to not require an Oscar type movie to give it a good rating. Most of us just want to be entertained.

 

[gokartergo]

It would be nice if Dish did something like Itunes. Rated on downloads or customers watched..

 

[R0ss]

Never put much stock in those stars in the guide. Netflix is horrible too.
Maybe it is our taste but they usually don't reflect our likes. Prefer a decent description as well as we look for actors we like.
Just an opinion

Ross

Sent from my DROIDX using SatelliteGuys

 

[SaltiDawg]

Never put much stock in those stars in the guide. Netflix is horrible too. ...

Netflix provides two star ratings. If they are horrible it is not anything Netflix overtly does "wrong" as far as their taste. One of the ratings reflects simply the average of all reviews their customers have made of the flick. The other rating is based on some algorithm they use to reflect your reviews of other similar films.

I have found the ratings provided based on my previous ratings to be generally pretty good, but when they are off they miss by a mile.

Also, I assume this algorithm is used by Netflix to recommend movies - and sometimes those recommendations don't seem to make sense.

I just looked at my Netflix account and they are recommending The Ultimate Carson Collection (TV) because I liked "The Shootist," "The Best Years of Our Lives," and "Bambi." It says the average rating for Carson is 3.8 and that is what they also predict for me.

 

[inazsully]

When it comes to rating DVD's I have found Amazon's customer rating to be a pretty good guideline. They actually tell you what they liked/didn't like and why.

 

[KKlare]

I find IMDb to give a user's (1? to 10 in .1 steps) rating vs. the Tribune's critic's (.5 to 4 in .5 steps) rating. IMDb will generally have ratings before Tribune and over a wider set of films. A rough rule is that IMDb is numerically 4 higher than Tribune. They can differ by up to 2 stars, which may reflect the difference of critics and the rest of us. I wish Sundance and the old IFC were in HD and I still have some Vooms.

I search the Dish guide channels 388 down to 300, mostly HD only, for 3 to 4 stars (occasionally 2.5) and then look at IMDb for those above my storage threshold, currently 7.3 or so. I now have 1120 HD, 570 TCM almost-good-enough up-converts, and 260 SD plus many well-rated series. I need to re-record a lot of older MPEG-2 HD to save space. The 2 TB of PBS OTA recordings, not in above, sure could use MPEG-4 re-recording but will they be repeated? I try for under 2300 MB/hr with 6300 MB/hr for OTA.

It may help to read Maltin or Ebert to decide if you want to see the movie. You can get Ebert delivered by calibre for your e-reader--free.

-Ken

 

[DishSubLA]

Maltin and Ebert are both movie snobs. They need a couple of regular people with the ability to not require an Oscar type movie to give it a good rating. Most of us just want to be entertained.

Are you kidding? Roger Ebert loved Smokey and the Bandit (the original), as do I. Gene Siskel was constantly critizing Ebert for falling in love with special effects movies that pleased the masses at the time, and Ebert still seems to have a love for a lot of the new Pixar, etc. animated films that are adored by those who serve Hamburger Helper, Pillsbury biscuits, and great big liter bottles of soda pop to their families as a hearty dinner. Spiderman, Spiderman II, Batman, JAWS, Trading Places, a long list of highly popular plebeian pleasers that Ebert has given a strong thumbs up to over the years.

Unfortunately, Maltin IS a low-brow pleaser who prefer. Maltin, lacks the intellectual depth to appreciate some of the best movies made that don't seem to please the masses. Ebert, while having the brains to understand and articulate why he does like some of the more esoteric films, is far more well-rounded than Maltin. Maltin sometime seems to give an esoteric movie a pass because he might feel he is supposed to. I've never found Maltin articulate.