Well I agree, which is why I didn't do it in the first place. It's rather ironic you say this too considering the fact that you just got through ignoring the data point(s) of repeat viewership.
Sorry I didn't ignore it but there is no way to really track it except by inference. Much like the way scientists detect particles that are too small to see with the naked eye.
So lets go through those steps.
1) There were a finite number of viewings for this movie.
2) The movie did NOT make money which means it did not have enough total viewings.
3) It had a ~50% popularity drop in the 2nd week of its release. Which means 1 of 2 things. (Think of each thing as either a Y axis point or an X axis point)
a) people continued to come to see it for the first time and there were no repeat views.
b) hardly anyone came to watch it for the first time and all subsequent views were repeats from a much smaller percentage of the global audience.
(Side note a 50% popularity drop in the 2nd week would not favor the position of repeat views being significant)
The truth of course is somewhere in between. This is where we come to personal experience.
I don't know about you, but I, and most of the people I know, only repeat view at the theater a movie that I personally (or they) rate between a 9 or 10 out of 10. (Because seriously are you going to go back and re-watch a movie you didn't like all that well?) Even at that I don't go back and re-watch every movie I rate a 10. (In my personal experience I only re-watch at the theater 5% of the movies I feel are a 10).
This comes back to those slippery user reviews that you don't like.
If we assume that a significant number of the 1's are fakes then by the same token we must assume that a significant number of the 10s are also fakes.
We can't factor them out because we don't really know, so for the sake of argument, lets assume for this that all the 1s are fakes and all the 10s are true and that only people who rated the movie 10 are repeat views at my 5% rate. I think we can agree that should provide a more balanced view point.
With these things in mind we find that .25 *.05 or 1.25% of people that saw the movie at the theater went to see it more than once. That is (statistically speaking) insignificant.
Even if I am wrong and more people saw it more than 1 time all that means is that the movie (and we know this because of the finite number of movies views based on box office and ticket prices) had an even lower number of initial views meaning even fewer people thought that the movie was of high enough quality to view even one time.
reply
share