Some notes on rating films |
My scale operates on the principle that I need more ratings to show how well I liked a film, and far fewer to show how much I did not like it. And really I need few rating distinctions at all: my thoughts & emotional response count for more. Almost all ratings are positive.
Exceptional: Essential viewing. [9-10/10]An example of what I consider the best/most rewarding cinematic experience. Masterpiece or near-masterpiece.
Great: Highly recommended. [7.5-9/10]
Not quite the staggering, mind-blowing experience of a
-rated film, but great cinema nonetheless. I never expect a film to be better than this.
Good: Recommended. [6-7/10]
A perfectly solid film. Not everyone will love it, but it is a fine example of its time/genre/&c. I appreciate it without being wild about it. I would recommend
s and up to anyone.
Of interest: Recommended with caution. [5-6/10]
Some problematic aspects, but people with an interest in the genre/movement/director/&c should definitely check this out. Could be good but unremarkable, an interesting failure, or a quality film that does not resonate with me.
Mediocre: Not recommended. [4-5/10]
Bland or uninspired filmmaking, not very rewarding, but a decent way to pass the time.
Bad: Recommended against. [1-3/10]
This is my only negative rating. I watch so few bad films. They all deserve to be lumped together. There is no degree of badness. Bad is bad. Don’t bother with these!
Ie: NO STARS for bad films. ANY stars indicates some worth.
No Comments »
No comments yet. RSS feed for comments on this post. TrackBack URILeave a comment
Line and paragraph breaks automatic, e-mail address never displayed, HTML allowed:<a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>










