The New York Times Magazine posted an interesting look into the public race ($1M prize, tech geeks!) to improve Netflix’s Cinematch recommendation software and the fascinating conundrum that all the civilian programmers working on it now are facing: we call it the “Napoleon Dynamite” Effect.
To summarize the Cinematch software and this contest: Netflix offered up a giant cash prize to anyone who can improve the recommendation software by 10%. Sounds small but every time the software is improved even a tenth of a percentage point it recommends more overall and more accurately to users, who then rent more movies. Since customers are paying on average $16.99 a month for a subscription it is key that Netflix keep them engaged and checking out movies or else the value of the subscription plummets and customers cancel. This 10% increase is hugely valuable to Netflix. Meanwhile the geeks stumbling through code and algorithms have hit a wall – they can’t seem to quite get to this 10% mark because of the effect of a the ratings on a certain subset of indie movies, the flash point of which is “Napoleon Dynamite.”
The other polarizing indie-minded gems the programmers have noticed this same glitch with are: “Fahrenheit 9/11,” “I Heart Huckabees,” “Lost in Translation,” “Kill Bill: Volume 1” (note, not volume 2!), “Sideways,” and “The Life Aquatic with Steve Zissou.”
It’s fascinating because, later in the article, one programmer talks about his recommendation algorithm taking on a life of it’s own and spitting out things he’s completely unable to explain, like a correlation between “Joan of Arc,” “W.W.E.: Summer Slam 2004,” Charles Dickens’ “Bleak House,” and the comedy film “It Had to Be You” – weird but it can be traced by the same algorithms that predict those who love “Sex and the City” do not give a crap about “Star Trek.” However, the above mentioned little group of 7 indies is throwing the entire recommendation system out of whack to the tune of 1.2 stars on average! Which is huge considering everything else has a margin of error of around .4 stars at the highest.
The theory as to why which we most agree with is: these films are all movies that got buzz or would have been recommended by other humans but your average movie watcher might not actually enjoy the snarkiness of “Napoleon Dynamite.” Hell, your average Wes Anderson fan might not have enjoyed the off-the-rails craziness of ‘The Life Aquatic.’ In the end they were all films that were so talked about that people felt they had to watch them to participate in the general public discourse about pop culture. The reactions to them, however, vary so wildly that it’s apparently not even something a computer can track.
In summary: your opinion of “Napoleon Dynamite,” be it positive of negative, is conclusive proof of your very humanity.
So in the meantime…would the smart money be to go into my account and delete any ranking I have for those movies? My recommendations have been straight BULLshit lately.
Only on the user end, fool. That doesn’t do jack for these programmers. They have to crack this ‘Napoleon’ thing in order to get above 10% on bettering the overall recommendation system.
netflix should just pay the playlist $1 million/year to tell people what movies they should and should not be watching.
Just consult us. We’ll tell you what to not bother with. 😉
They actually discuss that in the NYT article – they’re thinking of hiring film critics/reviewers to watch all 100,000 movies Netflix offer and assign keywords to them for an alternate recommendation system. So you could still get your bid in to do that. However, they also say friends and family recommendations have been not impactful at all since they introduced them.
oh the hilarity
Anyone who even think Napoleon Dynamite is halfway decent needs serious Netflix assistance.
My netflix only recommends me foreign films, I don’t think I’ve seen a US recommendation in months.
Netflix should just display an emoticon that mimics the snooty video store clerk’s look of utter contempt (contempticon?) each time somebody adds a movie like Miss Congeniality to their queue. That kind of peer pressure would resolve a lot of these algorithm issues.
Whatever Alex, no one asked you to go see ‘Shopaholic.’ Why’s it always a chick flick that you dudes have to call sucky? Clearly “Death to Smoochy” would be an equally sucky go-to. Sexists.
Don’t forget how racist Netflix is too. Just because I enjoyed Stomp the Yard, it recommended me Roots!
…and I nominate Mickey for best comment on this post.
Oh. How sweet of you to say.
You’re right. I should have said CRASH. I die a little on the inside everytime I see that’s still #1 on the Netflix Top 100.
Crash has been #1 on Netflix forever now. I think those people are the same people who voted for Bush.
It’s interesting that such a shit film has such an amazing moment in that Thandie Newton car-crash scene.
But yes, otherwise, it’s fucking ham-fisted.
I’ve never seen the point of Netflix’s Top 100, ! Mr. and Mrs. Smith is still on there. Wow
A surprisingly decent film though the Smith one.
Only if you’re on Team Angelina. Those of us who support Team Jennifer find it cringe worthy.
Some of us don’t factor in outside bullshit. It’s a solid film and super entertaining.
Some of us do and since some of us wrote this article then we’ll say whatever we want to about Angelina Jolie. And that movie was terrible. SO THERE.
This post officially has a ridic number of comments.
I know I am just attributing to the insanity that has become this comment board, but I must chime in and concur to say that Mr. and Mrs. Smith is indeed awful.
It’s decent, but it’s no Stomp the Yard.