May 5, 2015

What Kind of Cinephile Are You? Let Pretentious-O-Meter Gauge Your Taste in Films

There are many types of cinephiles out there, and now there's a way to find out which kind you are.

Introducing Pretentious-O-Meter, a website developed by Computer Scientist Niall Beard that gauges how "pretentious" or "mass market" different movies are by calculating the difference between their public ratings and critic ratings on IMDb and Rotten Tomatoes.

Essentially, if a film gets high ratings from critics, but low ones from audiences, like Sideways, it's considered "pretentious". Alternately, if a film gets high ratings from audiences and low ones from critics, like Half Baked, it's considered "mass market".

So -- okay. For all of those out there who might be a little peeved to find that your taste in movies is considered pretentious, take it easy. Obviously this thing isn't meant to be taken too seriously. Just have some good old fashioned fun with it, or enjoy it for its interesting comparison between the opinions of critics and the public.

Where do your favorite films land on the pretentious/mass market spectrum? Let us know down in the comments!      

Your Comment

18 Comments

My list: 1. Pulp Fiction 2. Clockwork Orange 3. Fargo 4. Pans Labyrinth

May 6, 2015 at 12:40AM, Edited May 6, 12:40AM

0
Reply

I'm surprised by some of the results. Some films I consider pretentious are mass market and vice versa. It's surprisingly had to find films that land in the middle.

May 6, 2015 at 4:41AM

0
Reply
avatar
Matt Carter
VFX Artist / Director / Producer / DP / Writer / Composer
572

Matt, which movies did you find flip-flopped?

I suspect while some movies might be considered pretentious in the states, for their intended local markets they may in fact be more mass market for their region by design.

I don't find the naming convention for the two poles to be as helpful as other words.
It worked better for me by replacing the words w/ Popcorn vs Artistry.

It would be cool if they added a vertical line for budget.

May 6, 2015 at 2:21PM, Edited May 6, 2:36PM

0
Reply
avatar
Daniel Reed
Hat Collector & Shi no kōshō-sha
1399

Lars von Trier's Antichrist is considered 65% mass market.
David Lynch's Inland Empire: 40% mass market (Quote from site: "Probably a touch predictable")
Takashi Miike's Ichi the Killer: 79% mass market!

This system is broken for cult films.

May 6, 2015 at 4:34PM

6
Reply
Jacob Floyd
Writer / Videographer
968

This is hilarious. Inland Empire as mass market. Can't stop laughing.

May 8, 2015 at 12:50PM

0
Reply
avatar
Jan Becker
Director Producer DP
136

A garbage site and waste of time looking at.

Since when did critics like Matrix more than the public?? Bollocks.

May 6, 2015 at 5:40AM

0
Reply

This might be bitter but wtf! Fuck this site it used to be helpful and relevant, no film school, who in the fuck does this help!

May 6, 2015 at 7:56AM

0
Reply

Dear Thought-induced reader:

Have you ever learned anything useful from this site?
What did No Film School charge you for this useful information the gave you?
Do you think you'll be able to survive if they make occasional lighthearted posts like this one when maybe they have a lack of more engaging content?
Do you think you and all the other whiney, self-entitled commenters can chill the fuck out and realize you're on a nice free blog that provides lots of useful information?

Thanks!

May 6, 2015 at 11:09AM

0
Reply
David Roberts
Video Producer, Cinematographer, Photographer
69

I have to agree with thought induced reader. And as for it being free they make money from us reading it, views, link sales etc. We pay with our time and I value my tiny amount of free time.

At lease this article wasn't another bloody Kubrick article that seems to be a monthly thing. Now thats pretentious. Birdman NOT pretentious.

May 6, 2015 at 11:35PM, Edited May 6, 11:35PM

0
Reply

Meanwhile, back on earth...

May 6, 2015 at 10:45PM

0
Reply
avatar
Dennis Brooks
Writer/Director
161

I like V's content, and I even think this is relevant beyond just cheap amusement. Commercial versus critical appeal is something filmmakers contemplate, or should anyway.

Further, for anyone who couldn't tell from the headline exactly what sort of post this was, it was plain as day. Please don't blame V or this site for you not managing your time better.

May 7, 2015 at 4:28AM

9
Reply

Thank You.

May 7, 2015 at 1:12PM

0
Reply

So apparently Satantango is mass-market...

May 7, 2015 at 6:45AM

8
Reply
Alex Belinski
Director/DP/Writer
91

Here is a definition of pretentious "attempting to impress by affecting greater importance, talent, culture, etc., than is actually possessed."
Is the creator of this scale assuming that all critics are pretentious and that anything they like is pretentious by definition. Or is he assuming that people only like critically acclaimed films because they are pretentious?
You could make the same argument for popular films. People like the film only because the majority(not critics) like the film. Therefore they are pretentious. The definition is circular.

May 7, 2015 at 10:10AM

0
Reply
d shay
206

It is not accurate. It's says it uses data from rotten tomatoes and IMDb but the RT percentages don't match sometimes. Look at Vertigo for example.

May 7, 2015 at 4:04PM, Edited May 7, 4:04PM

4
Reply
Detzey
157

It's clear that the people who made this don't know what the definition of the word pretentious is. The movies that jive with critics but not with audiences aren't necessarily "pretending" to be anything they're not or trying to seem smarter than they are. And when a movie is full of BS, I feel like the mass market is often less privy to that than reviewers.

May 7, 2015 at 5:17PM

0
Reply

Absolutely. And Americans and Canadians don't seem to know what ironic means too. Alanis "Rain on your wedding day" is not irony, its just unfortunate or lucky depending on who you listen to. And basically every other example of irony in her song is not irony also.

May 7, 2015 at 8:20PM, Edited May 7, 8:20PM

3
Reply

Hah! Repo Man 87% Pretentious. :P

May 9, 2015 at 2:02PM

0
Reply