Spoilers First Reviews
- Thread starter Tuskin38
- Start date
I would have liked it to look like a starship bridge.
Also, did you know a cadet swallowed a comm badge?
They wasted time on that.
the joke fell flat. Starfleet DOES only accept the best cadets, right? Those people don't swallow combadges.I'm fine with YA...when it's well written. Wednesday, Titans, Stranger Things. Those were better written, certainly.
This was not. Explosions, scenery chewing space baddie from the past, chaotic...what about all of that was new?
I stand by my Five vote for S1 E1.
The thing is — the one time I actually was a hater (Section 31), I felt no need or desire to dissect anything about it: as I saw it, it was dreadful, so what point would there be in going over the details? For me, dissection only makes sense for productions I basically like or at least find interesting, and therefore want to discuss.
See, I’d imagine the one-cadet-per-planet thing is centuries gone. After the Burn, what’s left of Starfleet probably needs anyone it can get.They wasted time on that.
As pilots go, I put it right up there next to Emissary and Broken Bow.
How does it compare to The 100? That's the last science fiction show I watched with "kids."
Never watched it.
That's been gone since the Dominion War.
After that Starfleet started putting up recruitment booths.
Jessie nailed it in her analysis.
Imdb score is 4.9. Thats very very low. Likely some review bombing going on but scanning and reading some of the reviews, many seem legitimate to me based on the content and wording. I think what's happening here is that this show is VERY divisive. Many like it, many do not. And since people online tend to favor those who are complaining about something, that dominates.
Almost 35% of the votes are "ones". Yeeeeahhhh, it's far more than just "likely" that there's review bombing going on.
This is a textbook example of review bombing and shouldn't be taken as any kind of actual indicator of the show's quality or popularity.
Ok, lets do some mathifying here.
The ones are clearly troll votes, so lets eliminate them and see what we get.
Removing the ones give us these approximate totals given the available information...
But, lets be fair and eliminate the tens as well, framed as 1-8 with 8 being best...
Honestly, i still consider the 1s (formerly 2s) to be bombing, but we can settle upon this, which is a much more balanced representation of things
The ones are clearly troll votes, so lets eliminate them and see what we get.
Removing the ones give us these approximate totals given the available information...
| 10 | 1,235 | 27.4% |
| 9 | 483 | 10.7% |
| 8 | 773 | 17.2% |
| 7 | 511 | 11.4% |
| 6 | 248 | 5.5% |
| 5 | 179 | 4.0% |
| 4 | 193 | 4.3% |
| 3 | 324 | 7.2% |
| 2 | 559 | 12.4% |
But, lets be fair and eliminate the tens as well, framed as 1-8 with 8 being best...
| 8 | 483 | 14.8% |
| 7 | 773 | 23.7% |
| 6 | 511 | 15.7% |
| 5 | 248 | 7.6% |
| 4 | 179 | 5.5% |
| 3 | 193 | 5.9% |
| 2 | 324 | 9.9% |
| 1 | 559 | 17.1% |
Honestly, i still consider the 1s (formerly 2s) to be bombing, but we can settle upon this, which is a much more balanced representation of things
Looks like you're going to have to wait this one out. Maybe by the end of the season, there will be a more reliable distribution. Of course, if the viewing numbers are good, the show will get renewed, so that would be a good sign to assuming that it hasn't already been renewed.
I think removing the 10s ( and 1s) is fair. That eliminates the review bombing AND any "corporate shill" reviews.
But I do not necessarily think *all* 1 scores are review bombing. Or at least not all co-ordinated with people who didn't even watch it, fake accounts etc. Some are ignorant , rigid viewed people that still deserve to cast their vote. Not all 10s are Production employee shills either of course. I have personally rated things super low or super high if it calls for it.
But what you did is a fair and a representation of more realistic numbers.
Last edited:
Nor were all 10 scores corporate shill scores.
ETA: in fact, the phrase "corporate shill" would be totally inaccurate, because let's face it-- nobody at the corporate level cares about IMDB or rotten tomato scores. But I do allow for overzealous fans overcompensating.
ETA: in fact, the phrase "corporate shill" would be totally inaccurate, because let's face it-- nobody at the corporate level cares about IMDB or rotten tomato scores. But I do allow for overzealous fans overcompensating.
We can debate about whether corporate shill reviews are happening in Hollywood but it's a thing . Thats why many retail reviews contains "Verified shopper" tags
But hotel reviews, food service etc definitely have fake positive reviews . Personally I think it does happen in Hollywood . The extent can be debated
I voted 10 because ive dealt with two close family bereavements in three months and spent the past month dealing with anxiety and panic attacks, and it was the first tike in six months ive felt fully excited for something.
Both 10s and 1s are valid votes IMO if you seen it and have that opinion. All I'm saying is that 1 and 10s are full of people voting without seeing it and /or with an agenda . And eliminating the 10s and 1s cuts through that with a more accurate representation of real world consensus
But, just like voting in politics , we should be free to vote ANY score for any reason .
But, just like voting in politics , we should be free to vote ANY score for any reason .
Last edited:
Yup.
Sadly you often have to do stuff like that in statistics to get an accurate representation of general sentiment.
Voting is rather meaningless to me with entertainment.
