Movie Ratings (updated)
As the year goes on and I'm 60+ films deep (and I look back at last year's 100+ ratings), it's dawned on me that I rate far too many films as 7 or 8 out of 10 and very few films 5/10 (I don't think I've ever given below a 4/10).
It skews my ratings artificially high and devalues the top ratings for those films that deserve it. Conversely, the stinkers don't get singled out either. To demonstrate this, my Letterboxd ratings are were* a mess. A different approach is needed.
*Letterboxd ratings now amended!
This was my old scale:
10 • Masterpiece 9 • Amazing 8 • Great 7 • Good 6 • Okay 5 • Mediocre 4 • Poor 3 • Bad 2 • Awful 1 • Unwatchable
I made it too complicated with so many choices; the idea was to provide nuance by using a scale out of ten, but it's not worked out as intended.
I'm switching back to the tried-and-tested 5★ rating, with an added 4½★ option available for those films that deserve special mention but don't quite hit masterpiece status.
This will now be my guide:
5★ (Masterpiece) → 1–2% of films Only the very best across all my watching life. The “desert island” films. Generally, if I'm giving more than one or two 5★ in a year for new releases, I'm probably being too generous. → “Blew me away. I loved every minute. I’d watch it again tomorrow. This is among the best films I’ve ever seen.”
4½★ (Amazing) → 5–10% of films Films I absolutely loved, nearly flawless. If I see 100 films in a year, maybe up to 10 earn this. → “I really loved it. Nearly perfect for me. I’d recommend it without hesitation, though maybe not one of the all-time greats.”
4★ (Great) → 15–20% of films Memorable, rewatchable, strong. These are the ones I'd recommend to friends. → “I had a really good time. I’d gladly watch it again. Strong, memorable, but doesn’t quite reach personal favourite status.”
3★ (Good/Decent) → 35–40% of films The largest category. Fun enough, competent, but not a standout. This is where most decent cinema lands — the backbone of my watch list. → “Enjoyable. Solid. Glad I watched it, but I probably won’t revisit it often.”
2★ (Okay/Meh) → 20–25% of films Didn’t do much for me, but not outright painful. Forgettable. → “Meh. Didn’t grab me. I wouldn’t recommend it, but it wasn’t a total waste.”
1★ (Bad) → 5–10% of films Rare, but I should actually use it. This is my dumping ground for the duds. → “If I had known how it would be, I wouldn’t have watched it. I’d warn others away.”
This should produce more of a bell curve distribution and force me to be more measured. It should stop the 4★ inflation and keep the top ratings rare, so they mean something special when they're used. I don't need the fine slicing at the bottom end either as I never use them; one bucket of “not good” is enough.
I also need to remind myself that I'm no film critic and that my ratings largely reflect my personal enjoyment (so a fluffy but fun film could get 4★) rather than being solely a critical judgement of the filmmaking (where even if I enjoyed a film, if it’s technically weak it gets 2–3★). It does play a small part however, so ratings should in theory be based on an approx. 80/20 split of these factors.
So, when I start giving a lot more ★★★ ratings in future, it doesn't mean they're not good; in fact it actively means they are good. IMHO.