SeekUYoda 0 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 There's just nothing like the sound of the LSO brass in that era. 5! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
222max 1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I gave it 4.5 stars because it just CAN'T be a five star score. Why? Because I consider The Empire Strikes Back the greatest score John Williams ever did and Raiders isn't as good. I have to look at this in the context of other real 5-star scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Parker 3,040 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 You just raised the inherent issue with any kind of rating system. When something is given "top marks", is it in context with other "top" items, or is it given its rating for its own merits? I personally agree with the latter. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 This is so good I think it deserves six stars. So I voted for a 5, and then used my alter ego to vote for the other 1 star.There's nothing wrong with that, is there? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I gave it 4.5 stars because it just CAN'T be a five star score. Why? Because I consider The Empire Strikes Back the greatest score John Williams ever did and Raiders isn't as good. I have to look at this in the context of other real 5-star scores.Or you could judge it on it's own merits instead of comparing it something else. Just a thought. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Even if you feel it's a 4.750000000000000000001 star score, based on Peter B's rating scale, you've either got to round up to a 5.0, or deny it that 0.250000000000000000001 star that you think it deserves, by gipping it for a 4.5.Your choice, however. Polls are like opinions: subjective until a select few here put you in your place... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
222max 1 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 I gave it 4.5 stars because it just CAN'T be a five star score. Why? Because I consider The Empire Strikes Back the greatest score John Williams ever did and Raiders isn't as good. I have to look at this in the context of other real 5-star scores.Or you could judge it on it's own merits instead of comparing it something else. Just a thought.Then what's the point? Ratings systems are MEANT to be a relative scale of quality. If I had never heard The Empire Strikes back then Raiders just might be a score I could give the highest rating to. But I have heard it so I can't. The problem with these things is that there is never a context so almost everything gets the highest rating. Like yeah, Stepmom is a 5-star score and so is ET. But we all know better than that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hitch 57 Posted February 16, 2009 Share Posted February 16, 2009 Two 1 star ratings!!! How could anyone be so cruel? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ray Barnsbury 8 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 5 stars! This is as good as Williams gets. It's compelling and purposeful from start to finish, and the "triumvirate" of themes, as Datamaster put it, play off one another brilliantly throughout the score. I'd probably say I like this every bit as much as, or more than, the Star Wars scores. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Red 75 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Then what's the point? Ratings systems are MEANT to be a relative scale of quality. If I had never heard The Empire Strikes back then Raiders just might be a score I could give the highest rating to. But I have heard it so I can't. The problem with these things is that there is never a context so almost everything gets the highest rating. Like yeah, Stepmom is a 5-star score and so is ET. But we all know better than that.The poll does not ask "how would rate this compared to Empire Strikes Back". If you think Raiders is a five-star score then ESB shouldn't even enter the equation, it just is what it is. Giving it and ESB a five is not calling either one better than the other, only that they are basically on the same level (which they are). What does it matter if someone rated Stepmom and E.T. a five? It's their opinion that both of those (yes, on their own) deserve the highest accolade. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datameister 2,042 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Regardless of our personal opinions, I think we can agree on this: if we cannot give the same number of stars to two scores with slightly different entertainment values, we're gonna need a LOT more than 5 stars with 0.5-star increments. For example, let's say I enjoy ESB a little more than Raiders, Raiders a little more than Jurassic Park, Jurassic Park a little more than HP:SS, and HP:SS a little more than TOD. (I'm being slightly arbitrary here, but not too much.) I would be forced to rate them as follows:ESB: 5Raiders: 4.5Jurassic Park: 4HP:SS 3.5TOD: 3And so on and so forth. But TOD is most definitely not a 3-star score to me. And if I were to throw TLC in there, it'd have to get a 2.5, which it most definitely doesn't deserve. Is that really the most practical way of voting on these things?EDIT: Re-reading my post, I'm realizing it sounds like I'm actually suggesting using dozens of stars. That's not what I meant! I was simply siding with red rabbit and others. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Why should you feel forced to give every score different ratings? We're delving into insane troll logic here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datameister 2,042 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Why should you feel forced to give every score different ratings? We're delving into insane troll logic here.I hope that comment wasn't directed at me, but if it was and if you wrote it before I edited my post, I wouldn't blame you (much) - in which case you ought to read my addendum at the end of the post. Again, for clarification, I was NOT trying to say that every score deserves a different rating. Indeed, I was pointing out how impractical it is to try give each score a different rating. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Yeah, I only saw your original post. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I don't see why anyone would take an arbitrary measure of opinion so seriously. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
222max 1 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Then what's the point? Ratings systems are MEANT to be a relative scale of quality. If I had never heard The Empire Strikes back then Raiders just might be a score I could give the highest rating to. But I have heard it so I can't. The problem with these things is that there is never a context so almost everything gets the highest rating. Like yeah, Stepmom is a 5-star score and so is ET. But we all know better than that.The poll does not ask "how would rate this compared to Empire Strikes Back". If you think Raiders is a five-star score then ESB shouldn't even enter the equation, it just is what it is. Giving it and ESB a five is not calling either one better than the other, only that they are basically on the same level (which they are). What does it matter if someone rated Stepmom and E.T. a five? It's their opinion that both of those (yes, on their own) deserve the highest accolade.First of all it's MY rating so you can't argue with that. Secondly, the poll doesn't NEED to ask how Raiders rates compares to The Empire Strikes Back. It's a given. When you read a review from Ebert and he gives film "A" 3.5 stars and film "B" 4.5 stars it stands to reason that he thinks film "B" is the better film. You have to have some grounds for your rating otherwise you'd have no idea what the standard is. If Ebert gave 5 stars in almost all his reviews then how could you gauge real quality from his perspective. The guy must either have low standards or just love everything. If I rate Raiders a 5 star score what do I rate others scores which I think are superior? 5.5? 6? The scale doesn't go as high. So you rate according to the scale. Raiders is a good score but I can easily think of 2 dozen more which are better. I'm not going to put Raiders on equal footing with those scores. I never said that others shouldn't rate it to the full If that's the way they see it fine. But give me the freedom to rate it the way I see it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Unlucky Bastard 7,782 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 0.5 of Raiders is trash. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 5 stars. A masterpiece, one of the greatest scores ever written. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I don't see why anyone would take an arbitrary measure of opinion so seriously.Henry, you have been a member of this board since 2004, correct? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Henry B 50 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I don't see why anyone would take an arbitrary measure of opinion so seriously.Henry, you have been a member of this board since 2004, correct?Yes, and after all this time I still don't understand! However, I used to take rating systems pretty seriously (e.g. rating all my songs in iTunes). Then I realized that my tastes are constantly in flux, and it's easier to just kick back and see what music tickles my fancy. Who cares about quantifying greatness? I'm all about the visceral reaction to music. I don't mind throwing numbers around for fun, but when it gets this serious, well! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Two 1 star ratings!!! How could anyone be so cruel? those were probably given for Indiana Jones and the Raiders of the Lost Ark. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Oh dear me, did Mr. Lucas change the music for that movie, too, when he added four little words to the video box cover art? Get a grip. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 Fortunately Ricard has a higher respect for the film than you do Wojo. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
John Crichton 4 Posted February 17, 2009 Share Posted February 17, 2009 I don't see why anyone would take an arbitrary measure of opinion so seriously.Henry, you have been a member of this board since 2004, correct?Yes, and after all this time I still don't understand! However, I used to take rating systems pretty seriously (e.g. rating all my songs in iTunes). Then I realized that my tastes are constantly in flux, and it's easier to just kick back and see what music tickles my fancy. Who cares about quantifying greatness? I'm all about the visceral reaction to music. I don't mind throwing numbers around for fun, but when it gets this serious, well!I used to obsess over rankings, a Williams top 10 and all that. Now I don't care, I like what I like and I have no need to judge great scores against each other. They can just be great. I'm not even using the ratings system in my collection as I slowly digitize after my Walkman purchase. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick Parker 3,040 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 What you are people talking about when you "rate songs on iTunes" or something like that? And what is the point of it, may I also ask? I am curious... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Datameister 2,042 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 What you are people talking about when you "rate songs on iTunes" or something like that? And what is the point of it, may I also ask? I am curious...There's a way to assign ratings to files in your own music library in iTunes. It's a 5-star scale. The only thing it's really good for (that I'm aware of) is organizing the music according to how much you enjoy it, since you can have it sort the music by how many stars you've given it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
indy4 155 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 It's also good for remembering which cues are good and which are bad. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ollie 1,059 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 I see no need to rate each cue or score on iTunes. They all have some listening enjoyment for me or else I wouldn't buy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Fortunately Ricard has a higher respect for the film than you do Wojo.That's right, Joey. I don't respect Raiders of the Lost Ark. I gave George Lucas $45 for the DVD, $20 for the DCC, and another $45 for the Concord just because I had some money that I didn't feel like spending on booze. You are so right that it hurts me to think about it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Of course I'm right wojo, there was never any question about it, why state the obvious. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Wojo 2,453 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
JoeinAR 1,949 Posted February 18, 2009 Share Posted February 18, 2009 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now