Learn how to watch and rate movies people (rated for balance only)The people who rated this movie 1-star should get their heads out of their posteriors. Too many movie-goers these days seem to only see movies as either being the best thing ever or the worst thing ever. The only way a movie should get 10 stars is if it would be difficult to improve upon and the only way a movie should get 1 star is if it was absolutely ineptly made on every level, and I assure you this movie doesn't come close to that. Even solely rating on personal taste and ignoring the technical filmmaking and how successfully the movie achieves the filmmakers' apparent intent, this movie could hardly be in the worst 10% of movies for anyone's taste.This movie fails in many respects, but it has some redeeming moments and taken as a movie for small kids, it's not bad. The humor and acting both fall flat or miss the mark about as often as they're on target, but that is a sign of mediocrity, not atrocity.Unfortunately at this point most of the IMDb users seem to think that if they enjoyed a movie they should give it a 10 and if it wasn't all they hoped for they should give it a 1. For instance the Lord of the Rings movies were entertaining, but have no business being rated higher than Citizen Kane or any of the countless classics relegated to lower ranks here. Similarly. Zoom has no business being rated lower than a piece of garbage like I Accuse My Parents which wasn't even watchable when it was skewered on Mystery Science Theater 3000.Remember folks most movies are mediocre. That means a low rating, not the bottom rating. Furthermore, just because a movie is exciting or satisfying doesn't make it a 10. For example, one can love the original Star Wars movies and still realize they have occasional flaws in acting, direction, pacing, or script.Is Zoom a great movie? Absolutely not. Will some children, some parents, and even some adults without children enjoy it? Yes. Will it go down in history for being remarkable in any way? Probably not.
- Last 7 days
-
www.imdb.com www.imdb.com
-
- Mar 2025
-
www.imdb.com www.imdb.com
-
I've never written an IMDB review before but am provoked to do so by the current rating of 5.8,
-
- Sep 2024
-
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
-
Die Fossilindustrie finanziert seit Jahrzehten Universitäten und fördert damit Publikationen in ihrem Interesse, z.B. zu false solutions wie #CCS. Hintergrundbericht anlässlich einer neuen Studie: https://www.theguardian.com/business/article/2024/sep/05/universities-fossil-fuel-funding-green-energy
Studie: https://doi.org/10.1002/wcc.904
Tags
- Princeton University’s Carbon Mitigation Initiative
- disinformation
- MIT Energy Initiative
- Jake Lowe
- Exxon
- Data for Progress
- Jennie Stephens
- climate obstructionism in.higher education
- Geoffrey Supran
- negative emission technologies
- Favourability towards natural gas relates to funding source of university energy centres
- Campus Climate Network
- American Petroleum Institute
- BP
- Emily Eaton
- by: Dharma Noor
- Fossilindustrie
- Fossil fuel industry influence in higher education: A review and a research agenda
- Accountable Allies: The Undue Influence of Fossil Fuel Money in Academia
Annotators
URL
-
- Feb 2024
- Jan 2024
-
www.imdb.com www.imdb.com
-
People on imdb have a bad habit of giving movies they think are overrated 1s, or movies they think are underrated 10s. This movie is an example of the former.
-
- May 2022
-
danallosso.substack.com danallosso.substack.com
-
I returned to another OER Learning Circle and wrote an ebook version of a Modern World History textbook. As I wrote this, I tested it out on my students. I taught them to use the annotation app, Hypothesis, and assigned them to highlight and comment on the chapters each week in preparation for class discussions. This had the dual benefits of engaging them with the content, and also indicating to me which parts of the text were working well and which needed improvement. Since I wasn't telling them what they had to highlight and respond to, I was able to see what elements caught students attention and interest. And possibly more important, I was able to "mind the gaps', and rework parts that were too confusing or too boring to get the attention I thought they deserved.
This is an intriguing off-label use case for Hypothes.is which is within the realm of peer-review use cases.
Dan is essentially using the idea of annotation as engagement within a textbook as a means of proactively improving it. He's mentioned it before in Hypothes.is Social (and Private) Annotation.
Because one can actively see the gaps without readers necessarily being aware of their "review", this may be a far better method than asking for active reviews of materials.
Reviewers are probably not as likely to actively mark sections they don't find engaging. Has anyone done research on this space for better improving texts? Certainly annotation provides a means for helping to do this.
-
- Jul 2021
-
unix.stackexchange.com unix.stackexchange.com
-
+1 to counter the drive-by downvote. I'd still use sed for this, unless you need the power of Perl regular expressions to select the delimiting lines
-
-
bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com bmcpublichealth.biomedcentral.com
-
Drury, John, Guanlan Mao, Ann John, Atiya Kamal, G. James Rubin, Clifford Stott, Tushna Vandrevala, and Theresa M. Marteau. ‘Behavioural Responses to Covid-19 Health Certification: A Rapid Review’. BMC Public Health 21, no. 1 (24 June 2021): 1205. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-021-11166-0.
-