The reviews on this site

It's also worth bearing in mind that the reviewers are inundated with screeners...since they can't review everything, I'd imagine they understandably review the titles that are of the most interest to them, which is likely to skew positive. (That's not meant as any sort of attack on the HTF's reviews; I review as a hobby, and I also pick screeners that look interesting to me.)

I divided up the reviews after a skim through the most recent ones listed on the front page:

HIGHLY RECOMMENDED
Days of Wine and Roses
The Wind and the Lion
The Postman Always Rings Twice (1946)
Six Feet Under - The Complete First Season
On Golden Pond

RECOMMENDED
American Wedding: Extended Unrated Party Edition
Green Acres: The Complete First Season
Stanley & Iris
The Best of Mr. Ed: Volume One
Adventures of Captain Marvel
Hangin' With The Homeboys
Anything Else
The Enforcer (Bogart; highly recommended movie, DVD comments more tepid)

AMBIVALENT
S.W.A.T.
Crime Spree
The Pawnbroker (positive re: movie, negative re: DVD)

I'd expect most of a site's reviews to either be 'ambivalent' or 'recommended', and that seems to be the case here. Maybe more 'recommended' than I'd expect, but that depends on how you interpret the 'recommended' label.

I think we're all just used to Ron being the sole reviewer.

When it was only him, Highly recommended came once in a while, as you reserve it for something really great. I think we still have this, but since there are multiple people doing reviews, we have multiple perspectives on the Highly recommended tag.

There are no orders of gradation here. One reviewer might slip "recommended" in the title, while another may type "highly recommended" and pretty much mean the same thing. The point is, there's no official rating system here. One reviewer's "recommended" might be another's total pan. And each of these guys has his own style and way of putting things.

Yeah, maybe they feel all these release are of the "highly recommended" calibre. That's the thing with reviews, it's all up to the individual's tastes.

Something I wonder is are we seeing more reviews posted now that we have multiple reviewers? If it is substantially more, that would also account for more "highly recommended" titles.

And also, thanks to all the reviewers and the immence amount of time they put into this. We all appreciate it.

I personally disagree. I'm not a fan of summary ratings in general, but if there is to be one, I'd like to it encompass the entire product, both content and presentation. The comments (and, depending on the reviewer, grades and star ratings) for each portion of the review should be sufficient for readers interested only in those individual elements. "Leprechaun: Back 2 Da Hood" may have a great visual presentation, a nice soundtrack, and a healthy smattering of extras, but if the reviewer intensely disliked the movie, I don't think a title like "HTF REVIEW: Leprechaun: Back 2 Da Hood (HIGHLY RECOMMENDED!)" really sums up his or her thoughts.

For my reviews, I consider the entire package before giving a Highly Recommended tag (which, without looking back through my reviews, I think I've only done about three times (a few more for simply Recommended)). Both the content and the presentation have to be of quality to get a strong recommendation. My one oddball exception was my review of Star Trek Deep Space Nine, Season 7. Previous DS9 reviews didn't get a RECOMMENDED tag in the title, but were recommended in my final thoughts. I feel the series, as a whole, was so outstanding that I gave my final review of the series a Highly Recommended tag, even though the DVD presentation (while good) could have been better quality.

I also dislike star / number ratings, but that is a personal preference. Boiling down all the aspects of a presentation to a number just doesn't seem fair. I'd rather people read the comments and make their own decision.

The fact is, there is no fair way to standardize reviews. Every reviewer sees things through his own eyes, and has to write the review based on his own perceptions.

And, it is also true (for me, anyway) that the content I review is skewed toward product that interests me. I don't review very much that I'm not interested in. If I were to review every title that Paramount releases, I'd have to quit my day job. But, my tastes are very ecclectic - so I do manage to review some niche and foreign titles.

That's my $.02...

-Scott

I suppose I should add a few comments as well seeing how I'm responsible for many of the Highly Recommended tags that have been submitted.

Without getting into an extremely complex response (you know, thought processes and all that stuff), I agree with much of what has been discussed so far in this thread - in fact, I'm almost glad to discuss it. Being able to offer a few thoughts on how and why we are doing things, can only be beneficial.

Like Scott, I'm not a fan of a number/star rating system. I would rather an attempt at an explanation as to why I feel the way I do about a certain area. Suffice it to say, the artistic content of the disc is every bit as important (if not more so) than the presentation itself. Otherwise, films like The Haunting DTS and Dreamcatcher would be the only type of films to see Highly Recommended tags - Hopefully, you know where I'm going with that... I try to break up the review in three parts; 1. Artistic content, 2. Video quality, 3. Audio quality. Personally, I view extras as just that. While good quality extras may have some influence on my review, I will not hold back a great movie with a superb A/V presentation due to a lack of extras.

Scott is also spot on with his comment of there being a need to pick and choose certain titles. And Adam is correct with his comment that many of the titles we choose are going to appeal to us perhaps more than others. Every title sent, quite simply, can't be reviewed. So I make an attempt to choose titles that I think the majority of members will appreciate. Obviously, this isn't going to please everybody.

I have been involved with this format from day one. I remember walking into local B&M's when they had their proverbial 4 or 5 discs locked in a glass cabinet at the front of the store like fine jewelry. I recall reading the hundreds of threads pertaining to the crappy releases by the various studios during the format's infancy. Just a week or so before Christmas I ordered about a dozen or so discs from an on-line retailer. Five of them (from three various studios) were MAR'd titles. My point...? We still have a long way to go. But shouldn't studios who do things right with quality presentations of outstanding titles be positively acknowledged?

Just a quick list from memory of titles I have been fortunate enough to cover over the past couple of months include: the four recent Bogart titles, Looney Tunes Golden Collection, The Warner Legends Set and most recently the AOL poll winners. From my perspective, the format has never looked better. Recognition should be granted when warranted. To hold back a title based on a mathematical quota is unfair and unreasonable. Each title should be reviewed and evaluated on its own merits.

I also want to say THANK YOU to those who commented and appreciate the reviews. That's what makes this all worthwhile.

Herb.

And could someone outline the difference between "Highly Recommended," "Totally Recommended," and "Extremely Recommended."

Just wait till I have a chance to use the "ULTRA Recommended" banner

On a serious note, I think long and hard about that "Recommended" status before I type it in the header. For me as with the other reviewers who've posted, it applies to the overall package which includes the film's aesthetic quality as well as technical merit and doesn't pertain to just the mastering of the DVD iteself (that's what picture and sound quality evaluation are for IMO). I know that I discovered may movie "gems" that I never would have experienced because Ron had given a DVD a "recommended" or "highly recommended" banner and I want to make certain that if I encounter a film that really surprises me with its overall quality that I do the same.

However, as the Eric pointed out, there needs to be some balance. I think that in general Adam has deduced what's going on...when we get many screeners we're more likely to sift through and review the discs/movies that we think are most deserving--hence what may often seem like a shift towards so many "recommended" titles being reviewed.

Now that the holidays are over, I've got a pile of some less high-profile titles that I'm looking forward to screening and reviewing (it's been slow from BV lately) so maybe that will help shift the balance of "recommended" to a better mid-point at least as far as my own reviews are concerned...