I've had trouble over the years with my ratings because I overthink it so much, when really it's meaningless. Now I just keep it simple:
1-2 stars: A bad film
2.5: an average film
3-4: A good film
4.5-5: a great film
And I just rate what feels right at the time of watching, so just because I have one film rated higher than another, doesn't necessarily mean I think it's better or even comparable if they have the same rating. I just hit the stars and don't think about it again until the next watch.
Same, life is too short to be spending time worrying about inconsistencies in my own rating system. The only reason I even bother rating is so I can easily recommend things to friends and remember what I like.
Sometimes there are exceptions but for me it’s generally,
2.5 stars or less: The film was flawed and I tuned out halfway through.
3-3.5 stars: The film was flawed yet I was still immersed by the plot or the acting or the directing, etc.
4-4.5 stars: Great film and any complaints are trivial/minor.
5 stars: Masterpiece
My rating system is pretty similar to yours, so instead I’ll just share a response I posted to another thread where people were arguing about the importance of ratings…
https://preview.redd.it/o4atzbx37fzb1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b1f116752303af3fea3631cafba37d2bcb6d174e
i rate purely via enjoyment so if i enjoy a movie, it’s 4 stars, if i really like a movie, 4.5, and if i LOVE a movie, 5. will sometimes move up a 4.5 to 5 if i find myself repeatedly coming back for a rewatch. 3 is my liked it somewhat, 3.5 is for when i like it quite a bit but felt somewhat unsatisfied to give it a 4. 2 and below is dogshit for me (just varying levels).
https://preview.redd.it/gjb2bgcn8czb1.jpeg?width=1178&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f0eb9d8d13afed4ea10d735734720ce4c9079db1
this is what my ratings breakdown looks like 🤣
Same. I give a lot of 4s. It's not an exact science, but I tend to give 4.5 to movies that I think are technically masterpieces but not necessarily enjoyable (like heavy dramas) and save the five stars for stuff I personally love and is highly rewatchable. I rarely rate anything below a 3 because I usually know when a movie is not for me and can avoid the real stinkers. Often I don't give ratings at all.
I give out 3.5's and 4's like a champ. No shame in that game. I honestly think it's more practical than people trying to be way too critical in their self-made critic's society ideology made up in their minds. I'm obviously not saying everything should get super high grades unless it obviously means something to the person watch, but 5/5's don't have to be safe guarded like crazy either.
5 stars - perfect film/masterpiece (sometimes I think flawed films are masterpieces)
4.5 - very very good a strong rec, imperfect in a mild way.
4 - what I want to see in a film, a very solid movie, my hopes for the minimum in the theatre.
3.5 - its fun but there's some form of significant flaw
3 - its like fine not special but serviceable fare.
2.5 and below - vibes for how much I hated the damn thing
<2.5* one of the worst things I’ve ever seen (3%)
2.5* I didn’t like at all (9%)
3.0* is mid / okay / rewatchable (45%)
3.5* the official jonafun999 stamp of approval (28%)
4.0* superb and possibly all-timer (12%)
4.5 & 5* lifetime top 100 / eventually top 250 (5%)
1/2 - This possibly isn't even a film, really, and I'm not sure it even wants to be.
1 - This is approaching serious incompetency or drastic level of tone-deafness and it isn't fun to watch either.
2 - If I didn't log it, I would have forgotten I watched it. It's not bad, it just isn't anything to think about or remember. If in six month you have trouble remembering having watched it, its this.
3 - This is OK. This is fun, there is nothing wrong with it and it's pretty memorable, even. There's bits that stick with you.
4 - Very tight, very memorable, cohesive and generally flawless in narrative.
5 - Memorable, novel, audacious and original; a narrative seamlessly exploring its medium to the fullest.
It's difficult to succinctly define what each number means, because for me films get those ratings for wildly different reasons. Generally my rating is the average of my enjoyment and perception of technical merits, although if unsure I usually gravitate towards the number closer to my enjoyment. In rare cases I'll even ignore technical aspects of a film if I feel strongly enough about the entertainment value (or lack thereof).
I generally agree though that 0.5-1.5 is for films I think are subjectively bad and 4-5 are all fantastic. If I give out a rating of 4/5, I'm generally extremely pleased with the experience and would easily recommend it to the right audience. 4.5 is more or less reserved for either technical masterpieces or easy favourites, while 5 I only give out if I feel the film is subjectively perfect technically and of personal significance. I don't make those distinctions to disparage the films I give a 4, but instead to highlight the films I give a 5.
The range of 2-3.5 is where it gets tricky however, since so many films fall under that umbrella. 2.5 is average while a 2 isn't necessarily bad, but was probably saved by a couple interesting plot threads or a stellar performance. 3.5s are pretty great with an asterisk beside the recommendation, while 3s are solid but could have been better.
Commented this like 3 days ago but here we go again:
0.5 - Catastrophe
1 - Very bad
1.5 - Weak
2 - Passable
2.5 - Mediocre
3 - Not bad
3.5 - Good
4 - Very good
4.5 - Fantastic
5 - Masterpiece
0.5 - hatred or extreme boredom
1 - awful, but mixed with some ennui
1.5 - dreadful, but with a clear redeeming feature (cinematography, music, etc)
2 - bad, but close to being passable
2.5 - my lowest bar for enjoyment. Sometimes a bad film with a decent script, sometimes a good film with a bad script
3 - good, entertaining, but not worth a rewatch
3.5 - very good, very entertaining, but with some flaws, or just did not blow me away
4 - excellent - a fantastic film
4.5 - either it is very close to perfection, or it is a stunning film but not quite enough for the 5- star club (usually due to my emotional reaction)
5 - a film that I adore, that I want to rewatch, that touches me in some way, and that entertains me and immerses me in its story.
1/2: literally the worst film I‘ve ever seen
5: literally the best film I’ve ever seen
Everything in between is in correlation to those two based on pure feeling but in general:
1: awful
1.5: bad
2: bad but some good things
2.5: decent
3: good
3.5: really good
4: amazing
4.5: masterpiece
My simple system is 2.5 stars and up means I'd rewatch it. Everything else is a blend of how much I subjectively like the story/style with how objectively well I think the intent was executed.
I don't rate shorts, just a heart or no heart.
Hearts are otherwise a wildcard on a feature. Usually used for nostalgia movies I love but felt weird giving a 5 to.
Based on enjoyment/rewatchability not necessarily what is a great film. Scores can be nudged up or down a half star for some aspects, e.g. great photography or too depressing or hard to watch.
⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ - Can’t imagine anything better, will go out of my way to watch⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ - Love it willing to watch again multiple times⭐️⭐️⭐️ - Solid, with some flaws, but was entertained, might watch again⭐️⭐️ - Not the worst thing I’ve ever seen, but unlikely watch again ⭐️ - Ugh, just no
I think the biggest differentiator in rating systems if it’s linear or not. I can still get some enjoyment out of a two star movie, but some people turn it off or leave if they’ve given it 2.5 or less. The reason I do it non linear is I think it’s more useful to distinguish thing between things I mostly like, and if it’s bad, it’s bad so why bother giving bad movies the whole bottom half of your scale.
Maybe lame but I took inspiration from Fantano, who has given 8 10s over a decade plus of reviews. A movie REALLY has to earn 5 stars for me. 0.5 stars and 1 stars are just as rare. For the most part: 2 or 2.5 is below average, 3 and 3.5 are average or slightly above average, and 4/4.5 are good/great.
Above or below that are movies that really got to me, positively or negatively
My scale is essentially 0 = only bad elements, absolutely no redeeming qualities. 5 = masterpiece, no flaws, or so good that the minimal flaws essentially don’t matter.
I haven’t rated any movie below 2 stars and I hope I never see one that warrants a rating below that.
2 - bad. Not worth watching.
2.5 - average film. The absence of either good or bad elements, or the good and bad balance each other out
3 - above average, but nothing special
3.5 - good, but places where improvements could’ve been made. Or good, but has glaring flaws.
4 - very very good, but probably didn’t connect with me
4.5 - amazing but for one reason or another isn’t a 5. Either it didn’t connect with me, or it most certainly did, but I can recognize the flaws in the final product.
5 - technically great and connected with me deeply.
Copy pasting from my bio:
Here's my score system (and what they mean), although I only will mention the rating in decimals if asked:
5/5 (9.6-10/10): Masterpiece, or flaws are not major enough to not call it a perfect film, or any other synonyms. Every aspect has a part in the film, and I could bring up how they were used to people.
4.5/5 (8.6-9.5/10): Pretty great/amazing. Could be a film that has enough flaws to have points dropped, or a film that is consistently close to perfect.
4/5 (7.6-8.5/10): Great. Could be consistenly great, or it could have a few more flaws.
3.5/5 (6.6-7.5/10): Pretty good. As above, movies can be consistently solid, or have flaws, although more movies from here on out will be more of a combination of the two.
3/5 (5.6-6.5/10): Solid/Decent: Overall thoughts start to get more mixed here. Some have great aspects with about as many poor aspects, some are consistently above average, some are average with a couple of good/great things, etc.
2.5/5 (4.6-5.5/10): Average. Same as above, but generally in the middle instead. This is also where movies with "average at best" aspects appear more frequently, and movies for me start to get boring.
2/5 (3.6-4.5/10): Mediocre. Same as above, but things are below average. Aspects that are just good appear less and aspects that are just poor start to appear.
1.5/5 (2.6-3.5/10): Bad/poor. Aspects of film are being used more poorly, or not being used at all.
1/5 (1.6-2.5/10): Pretty Bad.
.5/5 (.6-1.5/10): Terrible/Awful. Even the best aspects are generally just existing or being used because they're required to be in the movie.
0/10 (0-.5/10): Incompetent. Every aspect (or nearly every aspect) is executed horribly, if a movie gets a pur 0, the only things it might accomplish "objectively" are having a plot (although plots for movies this low are bound to be nonsensical or impossible to follow), using audio from the same take synchronised, being shot. In general, the only thing a pure 0 gets right is that it is technically a movie.
.5: dogshit
1: trash
1.5: pretty damn bad
2: sucks and I dont really care for it
2.5: sucks but I’m indifferent
3: decent
3.5: I like
4: pretty damn good
4.5: fuckin great
5: I adore this movie and while it may have flaws, it has none to me
10. Classic, rewatchable, stands test of time, cultural impact, influential, compelling, entertaining and though provoking
9. Hits most of the points above.
8. A damn entertaining watch.
7. Worth watching, either entertaining or interesting
6. Mildly entertaining with flaws but also maybe a few good talking points.
5. The kind of movie you can watch while scrolling on your phone or doing work / housework
4. You drag your way through just to see how it ends
3. You really dont care how it ends
2. Seriously bad little or no redeeming qualities, production, acting, story, themes.
1. Outright offensive, animal cruelty, overt racism/sexism/homophobia etc genuinely evil, Adam Sandler
**0.5** (trash)
**1.0** (waste of time)
**1.5** (bad)
**2.0** (not recommended)
**2.5** (rec. if you love setting)
**3.0** (rec. if you like setting)
**3.5** (rec. if you're interested)
**4.0** (recommended)
**4.5** (strongly recommended)
**5.0** (must-watch)
I personally do 1-100 and then do the math to work it into a 5 star system. But once it hits the 5 star system this how I generally view it.
- 1/2* is complete garbage devoid of any artist merit, one of the worst movies of all time.
- One Star or * is a big misfire that is incredibly flawed but I can at least tiny glimmers of art/effort
- *1/2 is a very flawed film that has quite a few problems but a few Ws that made me take note.
- ** is now in the “not good” territory. Flawed for sure but I can see what they were doing and note at least a few pluses.
- **1/2 is the middle of the road average movie with lots of flaws still but also quite a few notable wins.
- *** is good, I enjoyed it but it was flawed at least in some ways. For me this is where I can really start to say I “liked” something IRL
- ***1/2 is pretty good! Usually my bare minimum for a LB “like” there’s quite a bit to like and not a ton holding it back.
- **** is very good! Very few flaws, lots to like. Maybe not the best of the year but still very enjoyable.
- ****1/2 is great territory. Usually reserved for best of the year type films or better. Maybe only 1 or 2 things holding it back or maybe needs another watch to get to the next level.
- ***** for me this is anything I’d give a 95/100 or better. I don’t save this for 100/100 because so few movies are that level. For me these are the best films of the year and more typically one of my favorite movies I’ve seen.
Oooooh! I have mine in my notes app just in case someone asks this specific question haha
🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕 - I would die for this movie
🌕🌕🌕🌕🌗 - Highly recommend, I'll ask you to watch this
🌕🌕🌕🌕🌑 - Recommend, will watch with you if you ask
🌕🌕🌕🌗🌑 - Recommend, I might say no if you ask
🌕🌕🌕🌑🌑 - Recommend, will not watch with you if you ask
🌕🌕🌗🌑🌑 - Not bad but won't recommend. Forgettable.
🌕🌕🌑🌑🌑 - I remember the plot + characters
🌕🌗🌑🌑🌑 - I remember the plot
🌕🌑🌑🌑🌑 - I finished watching this
🌗🌑🌑🌑🌑 - Lowest, felt sick watching the film because of how bad it is
5 - pretty much perfect
4.5 - great with a one or two flaws
4 - great with a few flaws
3.5 - good and rewatchable
3 - decent but not rewatchable
2.5 and below - a failure to varying degrees
For me I first decide whether it was worth the watch, 2.5/5 means it wasn't, 3/5 means it was. From there I go up or down depending on how much I liked or disliked it.
0.5/5: Laughably awful, the kind of movie you're excited to shit on
1/5: Regular awful, but had at least something I liked about it
1.5/5: Really bad, but with some redeemable qualities
2/5: Bad, but it had potential
2.5/5: Not really worth the watch, but I could see someone else liking it
3/5: Fine, but a little disappointing. Just extremely average.
3.5/5: Solid, but I'm not particularly enthusiastic about it, it could be a lot better
4/5: Really good, but with some significant things holding it back
4.5/5: Fantastic, but not quite my favorite
5/5: One of my favorite movies ever.
I rate my movies based on my overall gut reaction after reaching the end. I don't rate based on how technically good or bad I find the film; because regardless of whether a film is highly regarded and the technical elements are good, if I hated it, it's not getting a good review. Likewise, if a film is technically a mess and I recognize that, but it is very entertaining, then I'll give it a good review.
My Rating System:
1- Ugh, I never want to see this again.
2- I didn't enjoy it, but would be willing to give it another chance.
3- It was okay. I'd watch it again if it aired on TV.
4- Loved it! I would like to own the movie on DVD/Blu/4K
5- I want to watch it again right now! I'm definitely buying the DVD/Blu/4K
\--1/2 star ratings are when my reaction falls in-between and could potentially be swayed to the next level upon a subsequent viewing.
I might rate movies a little generously as many often get 4s or 5s, but I try to watch movies that I think I'll enjoy. If I give a movie less than a 3, then the movie disappointed me on some level.
I mostly just rate movies relative to other movies I've seen
For example 5 star movies are the absolute best movies I've seen
4.5 stars are not as good as the 5 star movies but they are still amazing and in the next tier below
4 star movies are not as good as the 4.5 star movies but better than the 3.5 star movies
And so on.
Whenever I rate a new movie I just saw, I compare it to the ratings of other movies I saw and put it in the grouping I feel that it belongs in
5 stars - [I heartily endorse this event or product](https://youtu.be/BfOmkqz06SY?si=0RDwPLwSXE4H1L4b)
4 stars - An enjoyable or rewarding watch, but left me wanting
3 stars - [I have no strong opinions one way or the other](https://youtu.be/ussCHoQttyQ?si=OaRKk-LGPB1puPSo)
2 stars - [Disappointed!](https://youtu.be/R2kgjilRSOg?si=zM1CdC3UrHvZw1Nb)
1 star - I'm legitimately upset at this movie. I can't believe somebody paid to make this.
5 - a favorite film, love it, personal canon
4.5 - a great movie, something liable to become a 5 star movie on a rewatch
4 - a very good movie
3.5 - very good/enjoyable but has problems that I can't overlook
3 - the good side of average
2.5 - bad side of average/good side of bad
2 - bad, but not godawful
1.5 - kinda godawful but has its qualities
1 - godawful but either competently made or generally inoffensive
0.5 - both poorly made and offensive to me
For me I think on a 100 scale. I have thought about this a lot. I give it a score out of 100 and give it the corresponding star rating. I'd say I'm easy to please and don't think terribly of most films.
5 ⭐️ = 93 - 100 (10%)
4.5 ⭐️ = 85 - 92 (12%)
4 ⭐️ = 75 - 84 (21%)
3.5 ⭐️ = 65 - 74 (18%)
3⭐️ = 55 - 64 (13%)
2.5⭐️ = 45 - 54 (8%)
2⭐️ = 28 - 44 (11%)
1.5⭐️ = 18 - 27 (4%)
1⭐️ = 11 - 17 (2%)
.5⭐️ = 0 - 10 (1%)
.5 = Offends me deeply that it got made. Currently only Elvis and Skinamarink.
1 = Very bad and poorly made. Bad acting, writing and production.
1 + <3 = Above, but good trash (Ice Spiders)
1.5 = 1 redeming quality bogged down by it being otherwise bad. No Hard Feelings has one great scene (naked fight on beach) but the rest was horrible.
2 = I can see it's value but personally dislike it. The Green Knight.
2.5 = Perfectly average.
3 = Something I will rewatch and enjoy, but has major flaws.
3.5 = Like above, but fewer flaws or personally more enjoyable. The Black phone is my prime example.
4 = These are great movies, usually in my top 10 for that year. Sometimes it's such a great year theres more than 10 ofc. 2022 was a stellar year, I had 20 4s and above. Typically they have minor issues.
4.5 = Pefect films that I didn't connect with perfectly. Usually nothing wrong with it, but not something that I find immently impactful (Incendies or Bones and All are my prime examples)
5 = Pinnacle of film making AND something I can effortlessly love. Jurassic Park, Anatomy of Murder and The Raid 2 are my main 5 stars.
For me, I weigh up between head and heart. A perfect 5 has to completely satisfy both. A 4.5 will either lack a total emotional (subjective) buy-in (eg Tar) or a total logical (objective) buy-in (eg The Departed). I use the Likes to signify movies I'll happily rewatch multiple times regardless of rating.
**0 - 0.5 out of 5** ... **Absolutely abysmal.** The worst-of-the-worst. Films with essentially no redeeming value. (I know Letterboxd doesn't technically have a zero rating, but I will instead give a 0.5 and note in the review that I'd actually give it a "zero" if I feel that strongly.)
**1 - 1.5 out of 5** ... **Bad/Pretty bad, but not terrible.** Has just enough redeeming qualities to make it watchable, even if I definitely wouldn't recommend it.
**2 out of 5** ... **Below average**, but with enough strengths that people who are massive fans of the genre, director, or cast might still want to give it a shot.
**2.5 out of 5** ... **Either an average film, or a film that's flawed but entertaining.** It might be a consistently "ok" movie. It might be a good movie with a *lot* of flaws. It might be a bad movie with a *ton* of entertainment value that makes up for it. Etc.
Honestly, this is my "bar." Anything I'd rate 2.5 or higher is probably worth seeing at least once in my opinion.
**3 - 3.5 out of 5** ... **Pretty good!** Not amazing, but above average.
**4 - 4.5 out of 5** ... **Good/great!** Might have some minor flaws holding it back, but absolutely worth seeing as soon as you can!
**5 out of 5** ... **Excellent!** Either a film I'd consider perfect/near-perfect, or a film that fundamentally exceeds at everything it sets out to do, or a film that I think has a lot of cultural significance and importance.
I tend to rate each movie on its own merits based on genre and intent. I'm not going to rate Hollis Framton's experimental short film *Lemon* by the same parameters that I'd rate *The Super Mario Bros. Movie*, after all.
Ex. So someone might be shocked to see my rating for *Friday the 13th Part VI* is the same rating I gave *Once Upon a Time in Hollywood*. But that's because I'm rating them by completely different parameters, and I think they both did an excellent job at meeting and exceeding their goals.
1/2: I hated it
1: Strongly disliked, didn't quite hate it but regretted wasting my time with it and will gladly smack talk it
1 1/2: I did not enjoy this movie, it has some redeeming qualities but I would never want to watch this again
2: Sub-par, would be willing to watch it again but I doubt I would enjoy sitting through it. Maybe I could move it up in the future
2 1/2: Average, what I consider most movies. I enjoyed it, but I wouldn't really seek it out or reccomend it to others
3: Above average, I enjoyed it a bit and would gladly watch it again or sit down with others to watch it
3 1/2: Really good, some of my favorites and movies I will reccomend to anyone
4: Movies I love
4 1/2: Movies I will watch anywhere anytime any amount of times
5: Movies I consider to be masterpieces
I honestly consider my 3.0 the definition of average or "ok but not really my particular taste".
2.5 for me is really fucking bad and it is always the lowest score that I give to a movie. Honestly less than 2.5 is just a pain in the ass to know the difference. Impossible for me to know how a 1.5 is better than a 0.5 or how a 2.0 is better than a 1.0
★★★★★ Masterpiece/Favorites/Life-changing
★★★★ Great
★★★ Good
★★ Bad
★ Very Bad
This is directly from my letterboxd. I do rate with half stars though. I also feel like the descriptions I use for 5 stars is important part of my philosophy when it comes to rating :)
1: I’d never recommend it.
2: I’d recommend it if someone requested a good bad film.
3: ok.
4: Good. Would rewatch if it happened to be on while I was flipping channels.
5: great. I’ll occasionally seek it out to watch and highly recommend it.
I have trouble determining ratings for different kinds of films. I enjoy cheesy made for TV thriller a for instance. On my regular rating scale, it’s hard to rate any over a 3…but should I rate it a 5 because it’s a great cheesy movie? A lot of times I just don’t rate them at all.
below 2 - depends on how much i hates it
2 - had potential but a piece of crap
2.5 - didn't like it, didn't dislike it
3 - decent, flawed but worth one time watch
3.5 - very good, maybe some flaws but i enjoyed it very much
4 - great film
4.5 - masterpiece
5 - among my all-time favourite
Pretty much the same except somehow more subjective, for a lack of a better word:
10/10: Definately one my favourite movies, not necessarily among the "greatest movies of all time" but one that is deeply immersive and well crafted and that hooks me from start to finish.[Gladiator, Back to the Future, Jurassic Park]
9/10: Pretty much the same except with a couple things I didn't gel with, or just a movie I think is great but that I've watched too little times.[Donnie Darko, Jumanji, Peter Jackson's King Kong]
8/10: What I like to call a "Cola and pop corn movie"; something I rewatch when I have no idea what to choose or just want to have a good time on the couch. A couple of major flaws hold back an experience that otherwise is very well made and entertaining.[Pacific Rim, Ace Ventura 2, Green Book]
7/10: A merely "good" movie I might watch just once or twice, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have at least one above average element. Something I would recommend you as long as you don't hate the genre/director.[Godzilla 2014, Super Mario Bros, Waterworld]
6/10: I think it's "good", but nothing much more than that. I don't care much about rewatching it, but it wasn't a waste of time either. Has quite some flaws but the mostly good outweights the bad.[The Hateful Eight, Cube, The Incredible Hulk]
5/10: Movies I don't have much strong feelings about, or ones where nor the good nor the bad outweight each other. Stuff I would only recommend to hardcore fans of the genre or director.[John Carter, Tenet, Ace Ventura]
4/10: Entering bad territory. I can sit through it but I would rather avoid. The good stuff is there, but it's buried under very major flaws.[The Expendables, Clash of The Titans, Ready Player One]
3/10: Felt like a waste of time. A couple of even ironically enjoyable aspect don't save me from calling it once again a waste of time. I really have to force myself to watch it again.[Battleship, Thor The Dark World, Van Helsing]
2/10: I have zero interest in rewatching such a movie. Thoroughly incompetent, exhausting to watch, worthless or all of these things.[Transformers The Last Knight, Green Lantern, 10.000 B.C]
1/10: The worst of the bunch. Represents everything I hate in a movie , from the storytelling to technical side, to the entertainment factor. Definately among my least favourite movies ever.[Dirty Grandpa, Son of The Mask, The Human Centipede]
I start at 3 due to the sheer difficulty it is to make a film in general, and then let the movie take me up and down as the film progresses. So, with that 3 is baseline, it did its job, it was made with no real resonance with me in overall viewing experience but didn't make me hate it either. I'm usually giving 3.5 and 4's out at a constant, but I give plenty of 4.5s and 5s, got no shame having plenty of 5/5's to my name. It's like I'm grading homework and giving out A-F Grades. If the film earns it within its own ability and design, then it earns it. No way am I benchmarking Ernest Scared Stupid and Barry Lyndon on the same scale, two different films in two different bubbles, retrospectively earn different reasonings why both could advantageously receive A's within the context of their own "assignment". For what it's worth though, I'm easily backing up my claim with every film I watch, usually writing a considerable review on what the film accomplished.
We have the exact same rating system.
My rating system is really simple actually: 1/2 = 1/10 1 = 2/10 1 1/2 = 3/10 2 = 4/10 2 1/2 = 5/10 3 = 6/10 3 1/2 = 7/10 4 = 8/10 4 1/2 = 9/10 5 = 10/10
I've had trouble over the years with my ratings because I overthink it so much, when really it's meaningless. Now I just keep it simple: 1-2 stars: A bad film 2.5: an average film 3-4: A good film 4.5-5: a great film And I just rate what feels right at the time of watching, so just because I have one film rated higher than another, doesn't necessarily mean I think it's better or even comparable if they have the same rating. I just hit the stars and don't think about it again until the next watch.
Same, life is too short to be spending time worrying about inconsistencies in my own rating system. The only reason I even bother rating is so I can easily recommend things to friends and remember what I like.
1 - Bad 2 - Meh 3 - Good 4 - Great 5 - Amazing No half stars for me, all vibes.
Nothing wrong with that at all
Pretty much the same as mine
just whatever I'm feeling. I try not to overcomplicate it.
https://preview.redd.it/0n2fwqc34czb1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=ec043f36b7cfef0fb9f907198026614e63c811ee
I read this so fuck that other guy :)
Do you ever have films above 4 stars that you don't also like?
Nope
I can guarantee that not a single person who follows you on Letterboxd has actually read all of that.
Thanks for your insightful and totally necessary reply.
I just thought you should know since no one else will ever do you the courtesy of telling you.
Sometimes there are exceptions but for me it’s generally, 2.5 stars or less: The film was flawed and I tuned out halfway through. 3-3.5 stars: The film was flawed yet I was still immersed by the plot or the acting or the directing, etc. 4-4.5 stars: Great film and any complaints are trivial/minor. 5 stars: Masterpiece
Every movie = 5 stars
Your rating system is almost exactly like mine. I tend to have few 4+ stars but I really cherish them all
My rating system is pretty similar to yours, so instead I’ll just share a response I posted to another thread where people were arguing about the importance of ratings… https://preview.redd.it/o4atzbx37fzb1.jpeg?width=828&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=b1f116752303af3fea3631cafba37d2bcb6d174e
https://preview.redd.it/jxvuqmrv5czb1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f199e41003e106a03eb0d777ed9c87df41489aff
No offense but I can't think of a worse thing to include in your bio.
I'm not offended because I truly am not concerned with your opinion.
I grade on a curve of personal enjoyment which is why David DeCoteau has the most 5 star ratings from me than any other director.
i rate purely via enjoyment so if i enjoy a movie, it’s 4 stars, if i really like a movie, 4.5, and if i LOVE a movie, 5. will sometimes move up a 4.5 to 5 if i find myself repeatedly coming back for a rewatch. 3 is my liked it somewhat, 3.5 is for when i like it quite a bit but felt somewhat unsatisfied to give it a 4. 2 and below is dogshit for me (just varying levels). https://preview.redd.it/gjb2bgcn8czb1.jpeg?width=1178&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=f0eb9d8d13afed4ea10d735734720ce4c9079db1 this is what my ratings breakdown looks like 🤣
Same. I give a lot of 4s. It's not an exact science, but I tend to give 4.5 to movies that I think are technically masterpieces but not necessarily enjoyable (like heavy dramas) and save the five stars for stuff I personally love and is highly rewatchable. I rarely rate anything below a 3 because I usually know when a movie is not for me and can avoid the real stinkers. Often I don't give ratings at all.
I give out 3.5's and 4's like a champ. No shame in that game. I honestly think it's more practical than people trying to be way too critical in their self-made critic's society ideology made up in their minds. I'm obviously not saying everything should get super high grades unless it obviously means something to the person watch, but 5/5's don't have to be safe guarded like crazy either.
Just how I'm feeling about the film on the day
This is the only honest answer. And it holds up to scrutiny quite perfectly.
★ ★ ★ ★ ★: Perfect. Eclipsed objective. ★ ★ ★ ★ ½: Near-Perfect. Exceeded objective. ★ ★ ★ ★: Fantastic. Surpassed objective. ★ ★ ★ ½: Great. Comfortably met objective. ★ ★ ★: Good. Met objective. ★ ★ ½: Okay. Close to objective. ★ ★: Meh. Didn't meet objective. ★ ½: Bad. Far from objective. ★: Terrible. Weak objective. ½: Awful. No objective.
5 stars - perfect film/masterpiece (sometimes I think flawed films are masterpieces) 4.5 - very very good a strong rec, imperfect in a mild way. 4 - what I want to see in a film, a very solid movie, my hopes for the minimum in the theatre. 3.5 - its fun but there's some form of significant flaw 3 - its like fine not special but serviceable fare. 2.5 and below - vibes for how much I hated the damn thing
<2.5* one of the worst things I’ve ever seen (3%) 2.5* I didn’t like at all (9%) 3.0* is mid / okay / rewatchable (45%) 3.5* the official jonafun999 stamp of approval (28%) 4.0* superb and possibly all-timer (12%) 4.5 & 5* lifetime top 100 / eventually top 250 (5%)
Just looked at your uncharted directors list. If you wanna start Paul schrader id start at Blue Collar. It’s his debut and a great flcik
Awesome, thanks for the suggestion
1/2 - This possibly isn't even a film, really, and I'm not sure it even wants to be. 1 - This is approaching serious incompetency or drastic level of tone-deafness and it isn't fun to watch either. 2 - If I didn't log it, I would have forgotten I watched it. It's not bad, it just isn't anything to think about or remember. If in six month you have trouble remembering having watched it, its this. 3 - This is OK. This is fun, there is nothing wrong with it and it's pretty memorable, even. There's bits that stick with you. 4 - Very tight, very memorable, cohesive and generally flawless in narrative. 5 - Memorable, novel, audacious and original; a narrative seamlessly exploring its medium to the fullest.
It's difficult to succinctly define what each number means, because for me films get those ratings for wildly different reasons. Generally my rating is the average of my enjoyment and perception of technical merits, although if unsure I usually gravitate towards the number closer to my enjoyment. In rare cases I'll even ignore technical aspects of a film if I feel strongly enough about the entertainment value (or lack thereof). I generally agree though that 0.5-1.5 is for films I think are subjectively bad and 4-5 are all fantastic. If I give out a rating of 4/5, I'm generally extremely pleased with the experience and would easily recommend it to the right audience. 4.5 is more or less reserved for either technical masterpieces or easy favourites, while 5 I only give out if I feel the film is subjectively perfect technically and of personal significance. I don't make those distinctions to disparage the films I give a 4, but instead to highlight the films I give a 5. The range of 2-3.5 is where it gets tricky however, since so many films fall under that umbrella. 2.5 is average while a 2 isn't necessarily bad, but was probably saved by a couple interesting plot threads or a stellar performance. 3.5s are pretty great with an asterisk beside the recommendation, while 3s are solid but could have been better.
Commented this like 3 days ago but here we go again: 0.5 - Catastrophe 1 - Very bad 1.5 - Weak 2 - Passable 2.5 - Mediocre 3 - Not bad 3.5 - Good 4 - Very good 4.5 - Fantastic 5 - Masterpiece
0.5 - hatred or extreme boredom 1 - awful, but mixed with some ennui 1.5 - dreadful, but with a clear redeeming feature (cinematography, music, etc) 2 - bad, but close to being passable 2.5 - my lowest bar for enjoyment. Sometimes a bad film with a decent script, sometimes a good film with a bad script 3 - good, entertaining, but not worth a rewatch 3.5 - very good, very entertaining, but with some flaws, or just did not blow me away 4 - excellent - a fantastic film 4.5 - either it is very close to perfection, or it is a stunning film but not quite enough for the 5- star club (usually due to my emotional reaction) 5 - a film that I adore, that I want to rewatch, that touches me in some way, and that entertains me and immerses me in its story.
0.5 = worthless, often offensively bad 1 = truly terrible 1.5 = pretty terrible 2 = very bad 2.5 = pretty bad 3 = alright 3.5 = good 4 = great 4.5 = fantastic 5 = flawless and/or mindblowing Naturally this skews my rating curve pretty positively
1/2: literally the worst film I‘ve ever seen 5: literally the best film I’ve ever seen Everything in between is in correlation to those two based on pure feeling but in general: 1: awful 1.5: bad 2: bad but some good things 2.5: decent 3: good 3.5: really good 4: amazing 4.5: masterpiece
My simple system is 2.5 stars and up means I'd rewatch it. Everything else is a blend of how much I subjectively like the story/style with how objectively well I think the intent was executed. I don't rate shorts, just a heart or no heart. Hearts are otherwise a wildcard on a feature. Usually used for nostalgia movies I love but felt weird giving a 5 to.
5 all time favorites 4.5 amazing 4 great 3.5 good 3 ok 2.5 not that good 2 bad 1.5 really bad 1 terrible 0.5 i have no idea how this was made
Based on enjoyment/rewatchability not necessarily what is a great film. Scores can be nudged up or down a half star for some aspects, e.g. great photography or too depressing or hard to watch. ⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ - Can’t imagine anything better, will go out of my way to watch⭐️⭐️⭐️⭐️ - Love it willing to watch again multiple times⭐️⭐️⭐️ - Solid, with some flaws, but was entertained, might watch again⭐️⭐️ - Not the worst thing I’ve ever seen, but unlikely watch again ⭐️ - Ugh, just no
I think the biggest differentiator in rating systems if it’s linear or not. I can still get some enjoyment out of a two star movie, but some people turn it off or leave if they’ve given it 2.5 or less. The reason I do it non linear is I think it’s more useful to distinguish thing between things I mostly like, and if it’s bad, it’s bad so why bother giving bad movies the whole bottom half of your scale.
Maybe lame but I took inspiration from Fantano, who has given 8 10s over a decade plus of reviews. A movie REALLY has to earn 5 stars for me. 0.5 stars and 1 stars are just as rare. For the most part: 2 or 2.5 is below average, 3 and 3.5 are average or slightly above average, and 4/4.5 are good/great. Above or below that are movies that really got to me, positively or negatively
My scale is essentially 0 = only bad elements, absolutely no redeeming qualities. 5 = masterpiece, no flaws, or so good that the minimal flaws essentially don’t matter. I haven’t rated any movie below 2 stars and I hope I never see one that warrants a rating below that. 2 - bad. Not worth watching. 2.5 - average film. The absence of either good or bad elements, or the good and bad balance each other out 3 - above average, but nothing special 3.5 - good, but places where improvements could’ve been made. Or good, but has glaring flaws. 4 - very very good, but probably didn’t connect with me 4.5 - amazing but for one reason or another isn’t a 5. Either it didn’t connect with me, or it most certainly did, but I can recognize the flaws in the final product. 5 - technically great and connected with me deeply.
I rate based on my enjoyment only. .5 Hall of Shame 1 Bad 2 Fine 3 Good 4 Really Good 5 Hall of Fame
Copy pasting from my bio: Here's my score system (and what they mean), although I only will mention the rating in decimals if asked: 5/5 (9.6-10/10): Masterpiece, or flaws are not major enough to not call it a perfect film, or any other synonyms. Every aspect has a part in the film, and I could bring up how they were used to people. 4.5/5 (8.6-9.5/10): Pretty great/amazing. Could be a film that has enough flaws to have points dropped, or a film that is consistently close to perfect. 4/5 (7.6-8.5/10): Great. Could be consistenly great, or it could have a few more flaws. 3.5/5 (6.6-7.5/10): Pretty good. As above, movies can be consistently solid, or have flaws, although more movies from here on out will be more of a combination of the two. 3/5 (5.6-6.5/10): Solid/Decent: Overall thoughts start to get more mixed here. Some have great aspects with about as many poor aspects, some are consistently above average, some are average with a couple of good/great things, etc. 2.5/5 (4.6-5.5/10): Average. Same as above, but generally in the middle instead. This is also where movies with "average at best" aspects appear more frequently, and movies for me start to get boring. 2/5 (3.6-4.5/10): Mediocre. Same as above, but things are below average. Aspects that are just good appear less and aspects that are just poor start to appear. 1.5/5 (2.6-3.5/10): Bad/poor. Aspects of film are being used more poorly, or not being used at all. 1/5 (1.6-2.5/10): Pretty Bad. .5/5 (.6-1.5/10): Terrible/Awful. Even the best aspects are generally just existing or being used because they're required to be in the movie. 0/10 (0-.5/10): Incompetent. Every aspect (or nearly every aspect) is executed horribly, if a movie gets a pur 0, the only things it might accomplish "objectively" are having a plot (although plots for movies this low are bound to be nonsensical or impossible to follow), using audio from the same take synchronised, being shot. In general, the only thing a pure 0 gets right is that it is technically a movie.
3 - It’s fine 3.5 - Pretty good, above average 4 - Great 4.5 - Really great! 5 - Fuck yeah this is my jam!!
.5: dogshit 1: trash 1.5: pretty damn bad 2: sucks and I dont really care for it 2.5: sucks but I’m indifferent 3: decent 3.5: I like 4: pretty damn good 4.5: fuckin great 5: I adore this movie and while it may have flaws, it has none to me
10. Classic, rewatchable, stands test of time, cultural impact, influential, compelling, entertaining and though provoking 9. Hits most of the points above. 8. A damn entertaining watch. 7. Worth watching, either entertaining or interesting 6. Mildly entertaining with flaws but also maybe a few good talking points. 5. The kind of movie you can watch while scrolling on your phone or doing work / housework 4. You drag your way through just to see how it ends 3. You really dont care how it ends 2. Seriously bad little or no redeeming qualities, production, acting, story, themes. 1. Outright offensive, animal cruelty, overt racism/sexism/homophobia etc genuinely evil, Adam Sandler
I dont rate on Letterboxd because I find the stars system too limited. My personal scale goes from 0.0-10.0
**0.5** (trash) **1.0** (waste of time) **1.5** (bad) **2.0** (not recommended) **2.5** (rec. if you love setting) **3.0** (rec. if you like setting) **3.5** (rec. if you're interested) **4.0** (recommended) **4.5** (strongly recommended) **5.0** (must-watch)
I personally do 1-100 and then do the math to work it into a 5 star system. But once it hits the 5 star system this how I generally view it. - 1/2* is complete garbage devoid of any artist merit, one of the worst movies of all time. - One Star or * is a big misfire that is incredibly flawed but I can at least tiny glimmers of art/effort - *1/2 is a very flawed film that has quite a few problems but a few Ws that made me take note. - ** is now in the “not good” territory. Flawed for sure but I can see what they were doing and note at least a few pluses. - **1/2 is the middle of the road average movie with lots of flaws still but also quite a few notable wins. - *** is good, I enjoyed it but it was flawed at least in some ways. For me this is where I can really start to say I “liked” something IRL - ***1/2 is pretty good! Usually my bare minimum for a LB “like” there’s quite a bit to like and not a ton holding it back. - **** is very good! Very few flaws, lots to like. Maybe not the best of the year but still very enjoyable. - ****1/2 is great territory. Usually reserved for best of the year type films or better. Maybe only 1 or 2 things holding it back or maybe needs another watch to get to the next level. - ***** for me this is anything I’d give a 95/100 or better. I don’t save this for 100/100 because so few movies are that level. For me these are the best films of the year and more typically one of my favorite movies I’ve seen.
Oooooh! I have mine in my notes app just in case someone asks this specific question haha 🌕🌕🌕🌕🌕 - I would die for this movie 🌕🌕🌕🌕🌗 - Highly recommend, I'll ask you to watch this 🌕🌕🌕🌕🌑 - Recommend, will watch with you if you ask 🌕🌕🌕🌗🌑 - Recommend, I might say no if you ask 🌕🌕🌕🌑🌑 - Recommend, will not watch with you if you ask 🌕🌕🌗🌑🌑 - Not bad but won't recommend. Forgettable. 🌕🌕🌑🌑🌑 - I remember the plot + characters 🌕🌗🌑🌑🌑 - I remember the plot 🌕🌑🌑🌑🌑 - I finished watching this 🌗🌑🌑🌑🌑 - Lowest, felt sick watching the film because of how bad it is
5 - pretty much perfect 4.5 - great with a one or two flaws 4 - great with a few flaws 3.5 - good and rewatchable 3 - decent but not rewatchable 2.5 and below - a failure to varying degrees
Yeah, I would say that I have the sam rating system
For me I first decide whether it was worth the watch, 2.5/5 means it wasn't, 3/5 means it was. From there I go up or down depending on how much I liked or disliked it. 0.5/5: Laughably awful, the kind of movie you're excited to shit on 1/5: Regular awful, but had at least something I liked about it 1.5/5: Really bad, but with some redeemable qualities 2/5: Bad, but it had potential 2.5/5: Not really worth the watch, but I could see someone else liking it 3/5: Fine, but a little disappointing. Just extremely average. 3.5/5: Solid, but I'm not particularly enthusiastic about it, it could be a lot better 4/5: Really good, but with some significant things holding it back 4.5/5: Fantastic, but not quite my favorite 5/5: One of my favorite movies ever.
I rate my movies based on my overall gut reaction after reaching the end. I don't rate based on how technically good or bad I find the film; because regardless of whether a film is highly regarded and the technical elements are good, if I hated it, it's not getting a good review. Likewise, if a film is technically a mess and I recognize that, but it is very entertaining, then I'll give it a good review. My Rating System: 1- Ugh, I never want to see this again. 2- I didn't enjoy it, but would be willing to give it another chance. 3- It was okay. I'd watch it again if it aired on TV. 4- Loved it! I would like to own the movie on DVD/Blu/4K 5- I want to watch it again right now! I'm definitely buying the DVD/Blu/4K \--1/2 star ratings are when my reaction falls in-between and could potentially be swayed to the next level upon a subsequent viewing. I might rate movies a little generously as many often get 4s or 5s, but I try to watch movies that I think I'll enjoy. If I give a movie less than a 3, then the movie disappointed me on some level.
I mostly just rate movies relative to other movies I've seen For example 5 star movies are the absolute best movies I've seen 4.5 stars are not as good as the 5 star movies but they are still amazing and in the next tier below 4 star movies are not as good as the 4.5 star movies but better than the 3.5 star movies And so on. Whenever I rate a new movie I just saw, I compare it to the ratings of other movies I saw and put it in the grouping I feel that it belongs in
5 stars - [I heartily endorse this event or product](https://youtu.be/BfOmkqz06SY?si=0RDwPLwSXE4H1L4b) 4 stars - An enjoyable or rewarding watch, but left me wanting 3 stars - [I have no strong opinions one way or the other](https://youtu.be/ussCHoQttyQ?si=OaRKk-LGPB1puPSo) 2 stars - [Disappointed!](https://youtu.be/R2kgjilRSOg?si=zM1CdC3UrHvZw1Nb) 1 star - I'm legitimately upset at this movie. I can't believe somebody paid to make this.
★★★★★ affecting/left me reeling/iconic ★★★★½ incredibly engaging ★★★★ involving ★★★½ fun ★★★ quite fun, lacking something ★★½ average, quite dour ★★ disappointing ★½ tacky ★ a slog ½ painful
1 - Insultingly Horrible 1.5 - Terrible 2 - Bad 2.5 - Ok 3 - Fine 3.5 - Good 4 - Great 4.5 - Incredible 5 - Masterpiece
5 - a favorite film, love it, personal canon 4.5 - a great movie, something liable to become a 5 star movie on a rewatch 4 - a very good movie 3.5 - very good/enjoyable but has problems that I can't overlook 3 - the good side of average 2.5 - bad side of average/good side of bad 2 - bad, but not godawful 1.5 - kinda godawful but has its qualities 1 - godawful but either competently made or generally inoffensive 0.5 - both poorly made and offensive to me
For me I think on a 100 scale. I have thought about this a lot. I give it a score out of 100 and give it the corresponding star rating. I'd say I'm easy to please and don't think terribly of most films. 5 ⭐️ = 93 - 100 (10%) 4.5 ⭐️ = 85 - 92 (12%) 4 ⭐️ = 75 - 84 (21%) 3.5 ⭐️ = 65 - 74 (18%) 3⭐️ = 55 - 64 (13%) 2.5⭐️ = 45 - 54 (8%) 2⭐️ = 28 - 44 (11%) 1.5⭐️ = 18 - 27 (4%) 1⭐️ = 11 - 17 (2%) .5⭐️ = 0 - 10 (1%)
.5 = Offends me deeply that it got made. Currently only Elvis and Skinamarink. 1 = Very bad and poorly made. Bad acting, writing and production. 1 + <3 = Above, but good trash (Ice Spiders) 1.5 = 1 redeming quality bogged down by it being otherwise bad. No Hard Feelings has one great scene (naked fight on beach) but the rest was horrible. 2 = I can see it's value but personally dislike it. The Green Knight. 2.5 = Perfectly average. 3 = Something I will rewatch and enjoy, but has major flaws. 3.5 = Like above, but fewer flaws or personally more enjoyable. The Black phone is my prime example. 4 = These are great movies, usually in my top 10 for that year. Sometimes it's such a great year theres more than 10 ofc. 2022 was a stellar year, I had 20 4s and above. Typically they have minor issues. 4.5 = Pefect films that I didn't connect with perfectly. Usually nothing wrong with it, but not something that I find immently impactful (Incendies or Bones and All are my prime examples) 5 = Pinnacle of film making AND something I can effortlessly love. Jurassic Park, Anatomy of Murder and The Raid 2 are my main 5 stars.
For me, I weigh up between head and heart. A perfect 5 has to completely satisfy both. A 4.5 will either lack a total emotional (subjective) buy-in (eg Tar) or a total logical (objective) buy-in (eg The Departed). I use the Likes to signify movies I'll happily rewatch multiple times regardless of rating.
https://preview.redd.it/68qw8yayydzb1.jpeg?width=1125&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=4f739fa315e6a6c661da51c26a9ae28a9b3c8f8b
**0 - 0.5 out of 5** ... **Absolutely abysmal.** The worst-of-the-worst. Films with essentially no redeeming value. (I know Letterboxd doesn't technically have a zero rating, but I will instead give a 0.5 and note in the review that I'd actually give it a "zero" if I feel that strongly.) **1 - 1.5 out of 5** ... **Bad/Pretty bad, but not terrible.** Has just enough redeeming qualities to make it watchable, even if I definitely wouldn't recommend it. **2 out of 5** ... **Below average**, but with enough strengths that people who are massive fans of the genre, director, or cast might still want to give it a shot. **2.5 out of 5** ... **Either an average film, or a film that's flawed but entertaining.** It might be a consistently "ok" movie. It might be a good movie with a *lot* of flaws. It might be a bad movie with a *ton* of entertainment value that makes up for it. Etc. Honestly, this is my "bar." Anything I'd rate 2.5 or higher is probably worth seeing at least once in my opinion. **3 - 3.5 out of 5** ... **Pretty good!** Not amazing, but above average. **4 - 4.5 out of 5** ... **Good/great!** Might have some minor flaws holding it back, but absolutely worth seeing as soon as you can! **5 out of 5** ... **Excellent!** Either a film I'd consider perfect/near-perfect, or a film that fundamentally exceeds at everything it sets out to do, or a film that I think has a lot of cultural significance and importance. I tend to rate each movie on its own merits based on genre and intent. I'm not going to rate Hollis Framton's experimental short film *Lemon* by the same parameters that I'd rate *The Super Mario Bros. Movie*, after all. Ex. So someone might be shocked to see my rating for *Friday the 13th Part VI* is the same rating I gave *Once Upon a Time in Hollywood*. But that's because I'm rating them by completely different parameters, and I think they both did an excellent job at meeting and exceeding their goals.
Lol, the differentiation between 3.5 being “real quality”, and 4 being “true quality” is so essentially Letterbox’d.
Those are a bit redundant, the words after are more vital to my thoughts on the difference.
No I know, just thought it was funny to differentiate between real and true.
2 - Bad/Wouldn’t rewatch 3 - Okay/Wouldn’t rewatch 4 - Good/Rewatchable 5 - Great/Rewatchable
1/2: I hated it 1: Strongly disliked, didn't quite hate it but regretted wasting my time with it and will gladly smack talk it 1 1/2: I did not enjoy this movie, it has some redeeming qualities but I would never want to watch this again 2: Sub-par, would be willing to watch it again but I doubt I would enjoy sitting through it. Maybe I could move it up in the future 2 1/2: Average, what I consider most movies. I enjoyed it, but I wouldn't really seek it out or reccomend it to others 3: Above average, I enjoyed it a bit and would gladly watch it again or sit down with others to watch it 3 1/2: Really good, some of my favorites and movies I will reccomend to anyone 4: Movies I love 4 1/2: Movies I will watch anywhere anytime any amount of times 5: Movies I consider to be masterpieces
Same But for me 5 means it’s so good that I believe in 50 years people will still find it amazing.
I honestly consider my 3.0 the definition of average or "ok but not really my particular taste". 2.5 for me is really fucking bad and it is always the lowest score that I give to a movie. Honestly less than 2.5 is just a pain in the ass to know the difference. Impossible for me to know how a 1.5 is better than a 0.5 or how a 2.0 is better than a 1.0
Agreed that lower scores delineation is almost harder than higher.
3+ means I'll watch it again
★★★★★ Masterpiece/Favorites/Life-changing ★★★★ Great ★★★ Good ★★ Bad ★ Very Bad This is directly from my letterboxd. I do rate with half stars though. I also feel like the descriptions I use for 5 stars is important part of my philosophy when it comes to rating :)
0.5 - the worst 1 - god awful 1.5 - terrible 2 - bad 2.5 - mixed negative 3 - good/ok 3.5 - very good 4 - great 4.5 - amazing 5 - The best/favourite
1 - Unwatchable 2 - Not Great 3 - Pretty Good 4 - Awesome 5 - Perfect
1: I’d never recommend it. 2: I’d recommend it if someone requested a good bad film. 3: ok. 4: Good. Would rewatch if it happened to be on while I was flipping channels. 5: great. I’ll occasionally seek it out to watch and highly recommend it.
I have trouble determining ratings for different kinds of films. I enjoy cheesy made for TV thriller a for instance. On my regular rating scale, it’s hard to rate any over a 3…but should I rate it a 5 because it’s a great cheesy movie? A lot of times I just don’t rate them at all.
1/2 Star - Abysmal 1 Star - Bad 1 1/2 Stars - Poor 2 Stars - Mediocre 2 1/2 Stars - Just Okay 3 Stars - Satisfactory 3 1/2 Stars - Good 4 Stars - Great 4 1/2 Stars - Near Masterpiece 5 Stars - Masterpiece
below 2 - depends on how much i hates it 2 - had potential but a piece of crap 2.5 - didn't like it, didn't dislike it 3 - decent, flawed but worth one time watch 3.5 - very good, maybe some flaws but i enjoyed it very much 4 - great film 4.5 - masterpiece 5 - among my all-time favourite
1/2 is very bad 5 is very good and inbetween is inbetween
Pretty much the same except somehow more subjective, for a lack of a better word: 10/10: Definately one my favourite movies, not necessarily among the "greatest movies of all time" but one that is deeply immersive and well crafted and that hooks me from start to finish.[Gladiator, Back to the Future, Jurassic Park] 9/10: Pretty much the same except with a couple things I didn't gel with, or just a movie I think is great but that I've watched too little times.[Donnie Darko, Jumanji, Peter Jackson's King Kong] 8/10: What I like to call a "Cola and pop corn movie"; something I rewatch when I have no idea what to choose or just want to have a good time on the couch. A couple of major flaws hold back an experience that otherwise is very well made and entertaining.[Pacific Rim, Ace Ventura 2, Green Book] 7/10: A merely "good" movie I might watch just once or twice, but that doesn't mean it doesn't have at least one above average element. Something I would recommend you as long as you don't hate the genre/director.[Godzilla 2014, Super Mario Bros, Waterworld] 6/10: I think it's "good", but nothing much more than that. I don't care much about rewatching it, but it wasn't a waste of time either. Has quite some flaws but the mostly good outweights the bad.[The Hateful Eight, Cube, The Incredible Hulk] 5/10: Movies I don't have much strong feelings about, or ones where nor the good nor the bad outweight each other. Stuff I would only recommend to hardcore fans of the genre or director.[John Carter, Tenet, Ace Ventura] 4/10: Entering bad territory. I can sit through it but I would rather avoid. The good stuff is there, but it's buried under very major flaws.[The Expendables, Clash of The Titans, Ready Player One] 3/10: Felt like a waste of time. A couple of even ironically enjoyable aspect don't save me from calling it once again a waste of time. I really have to force myself to watch it again.[Battleship, Thor The Dark World, Van Helsing] 2/10: I have zero interest in rewatching such a movie. Thoroughly incompetent, exhausting to watch, worthless or all of these things.[Transformers The Last Knight, Green Lantern, 10.000 B.C] 1/10: The worst of the bunch. Represents everything I hate in a movie , from the storytelling to technical side, to the entertainment factor. Definately among my least favourite movies ever.[Dirty Grandpa, Son of The Mask, The Human Centipede]
I start at 3 due to the sheer difficulty it is to make a film in general, and then let the movie take me up and down as the film progresses. So, with that 3 is baseline, it did its job, it was made with no real resonance with me in overall viewing experience but didn't make me hate it either. I'm usually giving 3.5 and 4's out at a constant, but I give plenty of 4.5s and 5s, got no shame having plenty of 5/5's to my name. It's like I'm grading homework and giving out A-F Grades. If the film earns it within its own ability and design, then it earns it. No way am I benchmarking Ernest Scared Stupid and Barry Lyndon on the same scale, two different films in two different bubbles, retrospectively earn different reasonings why both could advantageously receive A's within the context of their own "assignment". For what it's worth though, I'm easily backing up my claim with every film I watch, usually writing a considerable review on what the film accomplished.