Really, the Lady Gaga episode was awful. And not only because it was a very obvious 22 minute advertisement. It was just plain bad, very bad. I absolutely agree that it's the worst Simpsons episode I've watched.
The individual ratings may not be very "accurate" (well, they're going to be subjective no matter what. My favourite episode is near the bottom of its season), but the trends are interesting. The fact that the floor of seasons 1-9 is above the ceiling of season 14 and onwards (save a few outliers) reflects quite well what many fans think.
The distribution is a result of the low number of ratings. Look at the number of ratings for each episode. For all those early 7.3-7.4 episodes it's about 600 ratings, the higher rated episodes have more ratings. Then from about season 12 there's a drop in number of ratings to about 300-400 for most episodes.
Compare this to the Game of Thrones ratings[1], where each episode has about 3000 ratings.
I think with regards to the Simpsons it's just that it was better quality pre-2000 or whatever. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0096697/reviews?ref_=tt_urv you can read through the reviews and see several good points about it.
I just worked by way through TNG and DS9. TNG took a while to get it's legs...in today's environment it wouldn't have lasted past season 2. But then it became great television for the rest of the run.
DS9 started pretty solid, and became one of the best written pieces of sci-fi TV quickly for a long time.
DS9? Yeah, it starts pretty soap opera-ish. That never really goes away (they're kind of stuck on the station for the most part), but the stakes get higher and higher and the various players and factions involved become pretty interesting. Not quite Game of Thrones, but way out of character for a Trek show.
Your Enterprise link goes to TNG again. And somehow I was sure Andromeda kept going for 7 seasons, it was just so bad I wasn't even keeping track anymore.
Andromeda really only had five seasons. I think it went episodic in Season 3 or 4 after blowing its load on the major story arc (putting together the federation^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h commonwealth again). It was never a great show, but fine to put on in the background while I was doing other stuff. But then it got really really bad and I don't even think I ended up finishing it.
In general an alternate IMDB algorithm probably would give a truer image if you clip of the extreme ratings 1 and 10 before averaging, thereby getting rid of most fanboy/rage votes.
OP here, I'd really love to include viewership data if anyone knows how to get their hands on some. I was looking at the Nielsen site but saw no easy way of acquiring or requesting data.
You know, I actually liked the last season. No, it was not as good as the other seasons, but when I add the handicap for it basically being the first season of a new show, it held up ok. I would have kept watching had it been renewed.
But I understand where people are coming from when they compare it poorly to the other ones. The original Scrubs was a growing up story about JD (and comrades to a lesser extent). The last season was more straight sitcom, less story arc. It wasn't attempting to be as meaningful.
This graph of The Simpsons illustrates (for me at least) that IMDB is more reflective of the viewing community's weird quirks and biases.
Honestly: is "Homer the Smithers" the best episode of The Simpsons? I doubt anyone would truly put it on their "best ever" list. It's really more "solid" than great. Most importantly: it doesn't rub anyone the wrong way.
Is "Saddlesore Galactica" one of the worst episodes ever? No. It's extremely funny and the story is structured well. It gets lots of very low votes from viewers who favor realism over humor (the episode is implausible with the horse racing then gets silly/fantasy). The episode's score reflects a community desire rather than an objective opinion.
> The episode's score reflects a community desire rather than an objective opinion.
I don't really understand your point. You think it's biased for audience members to rate an episode poorly because they didn't enjoy it and didn't think it was funny?
People that disliked something are more likely to vote on that episode to voice their dislike.
For example if the episode makes fun of christians you may have a heavy amount of christians vote the episode down even though it was a good episode. The people that thought it was good aren't as motivated to vote as the people offended.
This is also common with service providers and internet reviews. If the service is good there is no need to go online and post a review. If it's bad you are much more likely to take the time.
>Is "Saddlesore Galactica" one of the worst episodes ever?
No, and the graph in no way show that. From around season nine, episodes are mostly rated between 6.5-7.3, with a fair amount lying considerably lower than that and only a few outliers in the other direction.
But as a 6.5'er, "Saddlesore Galactica" is a solid "poor" episode, like many, many others. But there are a substantial amount of episodes well below that one, and they are also scoring considerably lower.
The clip shows are the truly "worst", despite having all the best punchlines. So one could argue that objectively they are the best. But that is also a poor argument.
It's a great hack that uses lousy data. IMDB ratings are best perhaps with films, a lot less reliable with individual episode scores. Also, if a show goes south do viewers keep watching it and rating it? That phenomena alone sort of spoils the fun for me.
Glad to see "Lisa Goes Gaga" as the lowest rated episode. I used to watch the Simpsons religiously but I stopped ~5 years ago. I turned on FOX the other day and happened to catch that episode ... really glad that's the exception and not the rule because it was unwatchable.
This is a great example of how to lie with statistics, or what someone can claim by applying just college-level statistics. Those trend lines are completely worthless.
See the trend lines for Futurama: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0149460
The difference between all the episodes make having a "trend" very doubtful. Especially season 5 is a wildly varying season where if you take one episode away the line would completely flip.
Much the same can be said for The Next Generation http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0092455 where you have basically clouds where seemingly at random a line is drawn through it.
Yes, I know there are statistical methods for determining trends, but without data on their accuracy they are pretty much worthless. And you really should use a threshold for those accuracies if you're presenting this kind of data to a very wide audience.
54 comments
[ 4.4 ms ] story [ 141 ms ] threadHere's a few interesting ones I've come across:
* The Wire (http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0306414)
Known for being a slow starting show, this is visible with the season trend lines.
* The Shield (http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0286486)
Season 4 is such a massive outlier.
* Seinfeld (http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0098904)
Held very steady until the last season.
'Sopranos' has the same 'Season 4' problem as 'Shield':
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0141842
The massive drop in Twin Peaks after the murderer is revealed:
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0098936
The awful last season of 'Dexter':
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0773262
And that's how you do a last season (Six feet under):
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0248654
The individual ratings may not be very "accurate" (well, they're going to be subjective no matter what. My favourite episode is near the bottom of its season), but the trends are interesting. The fact that the floor of seasons 1-9 is above the ceiling of season 14 and onwards (save a few outliers) reflects quite well what many fans think.
I can't think of why that would be the case, or how it makes sense.
Compare this to the Game of Thrones ratings[1], where each episode has about 3000 ratings.
[1] http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0944947
I sometimes feel this way about TV in general (early stuff is better).
Example (circa 1967-1968):
http://www.dailymotion.com/video/x12sekq_the-prisoner-arriva...
BTW, I was born in '84 and not 1884. ;-)
DS9 started pretty solid, and became one of the best written pieces of sci-fi TV quickly for a long time.
The 4th episode of True Detective was 9.8. http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt2356777
Check out this outlier on Dexter's last season lol http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0773262
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0903747
Star Trek: TNG http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0092455
Deep Space 9: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0106145
Enterprise: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0244365
Or in each season
Game of Thrones: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0944947
Or took a while to hit their stride, then left right after the peak Seinfeld: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0098904
Had a story arc: B5 http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0105946
Or were clearly failing:
Andromeda: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0213327
Sliders: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0112167
Futureama: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0149460
Or are experiencing a revival
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0121955
I wish this could be correlated against ratings data.
And or course: Dr. Who http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0056751
edit:
Also Law & Order http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0098844
and Law & Order SVU http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0203259
and Law & Order CI http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0275140
and the Stargate series
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0118480
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0374455
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt1286039
and Battlestar Galactica
(1978) http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0076984
recent http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0407362
caprica http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0799862
Andromeda really only had five seasons. I think it went episodic in Season 3 or 4 after blowing its load on the major story arc (putting together the federation^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h^h commonwealth again). It was never a great show, but fine to put on in the background while I was doing other stuff. But then it got really really bad and I don't even think I ended up finishing it.
Overall kinda consistent, but very scattered if you look at the episodes individually.
Sorkin co-wrote the first four seasons. I was expecting the dip in S05 but I did not expect such a dramatic upturn in S07.
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt2861424
Notice how first and last episode of season 2 are way up there.
11% 1 star ratings with a pretty remarkable demographic distribution. http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2966850/ratings
In general an alternate IMDB algorithm probably would give a truer image if you clip of the extreme ratings 1 and 10 before averaging, thereby getting rid of most fanboy/rage votes.
http://www.imdb.com/help/show_leaf?ratingsexplanation
http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0285403
But I understand where people are coming from when they compare it poorly to the other ones. The original Scrubs was a growing up story about JD (and comrades to a lesser extent). The last season was more straight sitcom, less story arc. It wasn't attempting to be as meaningful.
Honestly: is "Homer the Smithers" the best episode of The Simpsons? I doubt anyone would truly put it on their "best ever" list. It's really more "solid" than great. Most importantly: it doesn't rub anyone the wrong way.
Is "Saddlesore Galactica" one of the worst episodes ever? No. It's extremely funny and the story is structured well. It gets lots of very low votes from viewers who favor realism over humor (the episode is implausible with the horse racing then gets silly/fantasy). The episode's score reflects a community desire rather than an objective opinion.
I don't really understand your point. You think it's biased for audience members to rate an episode poorly because they didn't enjoy it and didn't think it was funny?
For example if the episode makes fun of christians you may have a heavy amount of christians vote the episode down even though it was a good episode. The people that thought it was good aren't as motivated to vote as the people offended.
This is also common with service providers and internet reviews. If the service is good there is no need to go online and post a review. If it's bad you are much more likely to take the time.
No, and the graph in no way show that. From around season nine, episodes are mostly rated between 6.5-7.3, with a fair amount lying considerably lower than that and only a few outliers in the other direction.
But as a 6.5'er, "Saddlesore Galactica" is a solid "poor" episode, like many, many others. But there are a substantial amount of episodes well below that one, and they are also scoring considerably lower.
The clip shows are the truly "worst", despite having all the best punchlines. So one could argue that objectively they are the best. But that is also a poor argument.
http://deadhomersociety.com/zombiesimpsons/
Here's proof that IMDb is bullshit: Simpson Tide is very highly rated. That episode is one of the absolute worst.
Here's a rough overview:
S1: terrible!
S2: promise!
S3: very good!
S3-S8: the absolute best!
S9-S10: still very good—but not as good
S11: definite decline
S12: yep.
S13-17: ok wow this is pretty bad.
S18-19: a little better
S20-21: definitely better
S22-25: actually pretty good!
The series has been extremely underrated since Season 20 or so when it came out of the slump that began with Season 11. It's not the
See the trend lines for Futurama: http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0149460 The difference between all the episodes make having a "trend" very doubtful. Especially season 5 is a wildly varying season where if you take one episode away the line would completely flip.
Much the same can be said for The Next Generation http://graphtv.kevinformatics.com/tt0092455 where you have basically clouds where seemingly at random a line is drawn through it.
Yes, I know there are statistical methods for determining trends, but without data on their accuracy they are pretty much worthless. And you really should use a threshold for those accuracies if you're presenting this kind of data to a very wide audience.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1j2Duy_xzEA