How do you rate movies?

[Cameron262]

This might sound like a stupidly simple question but how do people rate movies on here? I mean do you follow a certain rule as to how to decide on what rating you'll give a movie?

After about 50 ratings on here last year they all seemed to lean towards the number 75 and I'm not sure why, but it ended up being a very bad scale, with a clump of average films in the middle so I decided to rerank them all and try and choose 5 for tier 10 (90-100), 5 for tier 9.. etc.

However I seem to be back in the same position, it's not quite as bad but there are definitely some major clumps.

How do you decide what you'd rate a film without ending up with these irritating clumps?

[Ryan Lueders]

I rate my movies on a 10 point scale each. Sort of like grades in school.

100-90 is an A
89-80 is a B
79-70 is a C
69-60 is a D
59-0 is an F

I have the tiers of ten labeled different things 60 and lower such as time wasted all the way to kill me now.

I still get big clumps in the 70's because I try to watch films that are at least a little good. I avoid movies that are terrible, but sometimes I'm tricked into seeing them. You can never expect that The Devil Inside can be as bad as it is...

[ShogunRua]

I rate on two different scales. One for pure entertainment movies (mindless comedies, martial arts) and the other for films that are genuine art.

Each interval of scores has a specific meaning for me, and having a rough idea of where a movie is, I compare it mentally to other pictures I have rated there.

For instance, I might find a picture decent and enjoyable, but nothing special, and having a few flaws. That's in the 60-69 range. I think of other pictures I have rated similarly and then compare it to them.

A score of 80 means an "all-time great" film, and 85 is a "masterpiece". Past those scores, I'm trying to establish an order for pictures that I feel are perfect or near-perfect in many instances.

[CMonster]

I kinda do the school grade thing as well just because that's been bashed into my head for so many years but I did tweak it a little so I would give a 51-65 a D and 66-79 a C just because I enjoy movies and am willing to give lots of mediocre films a pass just because I enjoy films. I also have 50 saved for "so bad they're good" films just because those really do need a special place. I've noticed a lot of clumping of my score in high 60's to low 80's but I don't really see it as a problem because I do enjoy watching movies and I'm ok with my scores reflecting that instead of trying to get a perfect curve of all the films I've seen.

[afx237vi]

80-100: Great. Some of my favourite films.
60-75: Good. Not perfect, but worth a watch.
40-55: Average. Some good points, some not so good points.
20-35: Bad. Not a total write-off, but generally worth avoiding.
0-15: Terrible. Avoid at all costs.

Although this is somewhat problematic, I admit, because sometimes watching an average movie - ie one that is competently made, with good acting and decent production values - can be more of a chore than watching a bad movie. Bad movies at least have curiosity value, or moments of unintentional humour, whereas average movies are usually just boring.

[ayall]

I rate my movies on a 10 point scale each. Sort of like grades in school.

100-90 is an A
89-80 is a B
79-70 is a C
69-60 is a D
59-0 is an F

This is not a good way of doing it.

I tried this method and after a while, things I thought were C's (Average) showed a Tier of 4 or even less.

After 1,500+ films, i don't want to go and re-do it.

What I think would be ideal is for Criticker to just give the option to pick the tier listed;
Tier 10 - Awesome!
Tier 9 - Awesome!
Tier 8 - Great
Tier 7 - Good
Tier 6 - Decent
Tier 5 - Alright
Tier 4 - Not That Hot
Tier 3 - Not Good
Tier 2 - Bad
Tier 1 - Terrible


Instead, it calculates the standard distribution and assigns tiers accordingly.

I do find the standard distribution interesting, but my entire rating system now seems bunk (i.e. movies i thought were "Decent" or "Alright" sometimes show up as "Not Good" or even "Bad").

You could conclude that these movies are in-fact Bad relative to other movies I've watched, but I'd say the curve then needs to be more bell-shaped. Additionally, I try to avoid truly awful crap movies, yet i don't come and give said movies a rating of 0 because i think they are awful and won't watch them.

[snallygaster]

This topic comes up periodically, it seems.
Some people just don't get along with Criticker's tier-based system. The tiers are just a simple statistical analysis of your ratings. Thinking in terms of tiers when you're rating movies is just going to mess you up. You don't choose your films' tiers, you choose their ratings, and then Criticker tells you what the tiers are. Complaining about Criticker because too many of your movies are in low tiers is like complaining about school because 50% of graduates finish in the bottom half of their class. If there's one problem with how Criticker implements the tier system, it's the way it assigns quips like "awesome" and "terrible" to them by default, which almost ensures misunderstanding.
Anyway, I rate my movies by skimming my ratings list to find movies that are about the same quality, and then looking closer to find a spot I'm comfortable placing the movie (a bit better than X, but not quite as good as adjacent movie Y). I don't sweat about the absurdity of rating movie X 3 points higher than movie Y but 7 points lower than movie Z, or whatever.
I basically choose my rating simply based on how much I liked the movie, in a broad sense. I don't understand people who say things like "personally, I like movie X more, but objectively speaking movie Y is better even though I didn't personally like it much, so of course movie Y should get a higher rating." Criticker is about finding movies you like. Accept that it's an inherently subjective endeavour, and have confidence in your opinions!
I am aware, however, of some factors that run through my mind when I'm rating a movie. Did the movie do anything that impressed/wowed me? Did it affect me emotionally? Did it show any artistry? Did I continue thinking about it well after it was over? Do I want/need to watch it again? These kinds of things are going to influence the movie's rating even if I don't specifically consider them as discrete criteria for a good rating.

[SirStuckey]

I go by divisions of 5, and I also rate movies on IMDB so if I give it an 8 on IMDB I will give it either an 85, 80, or 75 here.

Everything over 55 are movies I enjoyed. I would recommend them to most people.

55, 50, 45 - Movies I'm either on the fence about, didn't really care about, are well made but not my cup of tea (A Clockwork Orange), or aren't really well made yet I still kind of liked it for inexplicable reasons (Fever Pitch). I might recommend these movies to people but there is generally a caveat involved with the recommendation.

Anything under a 45 are movies I didn't like. Would not recommend them to anyone.

[djross]

x

[MmzHrrdb]

I rate my movies on a 10 point scale each. Sort of like grades in school.

100-90 is an A
89-80 is a B
79-70 is a C
69-60 is a D
59-0 is an F

This is not a good way of doing it.

I tried this method and after a while, things I thought were C's (Average) showed a Tier of 4 or even less.

After 1,500+ films, i don't want to go and re-do it.

What I think would be ideal is for Criticker to just give the option to pick the tier listed;
Tier 10 - Awesome!
Tier 9 - Awesome!
Tier 8 - Great
Tier 7 - Good
Tier 6 - Decent
Tier 5 - Alright
Tier 4 - Not That Hot
Tier 3 - Not Good
Tier 2 - Bad
Tier 1 - Terrible


Instead, it calculates the standard distribution and assigns tiers accordingly.

I do find the standard distribution interesting, but my entire rating system now seems bunk (i.e. movies i thought were "Decent" or "Alright" sometimes show up as "Not Good" or even "Bad")

Then rate on a scale of 1 to 10 and assign quips for yourself, then. No confusion there and tiers become irrelevant.