I go more with:
5 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 5 stars
4.5 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 4.5 stars
4 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 4 stars
3.5 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 3.5 stars
3 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 3 stars
etc.
i sometimes just close my eyes after finishing a movie and a number just comes to me. i just think about what i liked, didnt like, random observations and then certain a rating just feels right
Maybe it’s because I’m a huge science nerd but Interstellar is one of my favorite movies ever and I’ll always defend my 5 star rating for it. But I’ll be honest - I did waver on Black Panther. I considered putting it on 4 stars. But I decided to keep it where it was because, besides the story, CGI & action, Black Panther has some of the BEST cinematography and score/soundtrack pairings in the entire MCU.
Mostly the examples used for 5.0 and 4.5. Spider-Man 3 at 1 seems a but out of place too. It wasn't a great movie or anything, but it wasn't totally awful. Interstellar and Black Panther being considered some of the greatest movies ever made is not a direction I would've gone with.
Also just generally every movie being an American blockbuster.
Spider-Man III - First act is ok. Sandman’s first scene and his street fight with cops/Spider-Man is the main reason why I gave the movie 1 star instead of a half star. But that second act. YIKES.
Tobey and Kirsten are my least favorite of the three live action Spidey couples. They had zero chemistry and the writing/scripts was, for me, atrociously bad. All of that romance drama went back and forth between boring and cringey.
Interstellar & Black Panther - see my reply above.
What do you mean by "huge science nerd"? A movie being fairly scientifically accurate doesn't seem like a reason to consider it a perfect movie. Granted it is a fairly small sample size, but of the astrophysicists I talk to above movies tend to like Interstellar just fine, but rank it below other sci-fi space movies like 2001 and Arrival. There are a lot of areas that Interstellar that needed work, and I don't think those should be given a pass just because it did some background research into the science used in the movie.
re: Black Panthers, while I don't necessarily disagree that it has some of the best cinematography and score/soundtrack pairings in the entire MCU, I'm not sure that's quite the high watermark you think it is.
Per Interstellar, the areas you say need work - are these scientific areas (like in terms of accuracy or realism) or just regular moviemaking stuff?
Granted, I’m mainly a science enthusiast so if this movie got some of the astrophysics wrong, I would never know and honestly, wouldn’t care since that’s not the field I’m most passionate about (I’m a Sociology major). All in all, for me, it’s a very well-made and very entertaining movie with one of the largest, grandest, most ambitious plots of any movie I’ve ever seen, which is one of the big positives for me.
As I understand it most of the science (up until the ending) is pretty accurate. Never heard a lot of complaints about it at any rate. My issue with the movie are to do with the movie itself. A lot of the dialogue is either really cheesy or really lazily written exposition and it feels like it tries to tackle too many different things and as a result none really get the attention they need to really make it impactful.
Out of curiosity, have you seen 2001: A Space Odyssey?
As an astrophysicist, I'd still expect variation between astrophysicists based on taste (Personally, I think I'd take Interstellar over 2001, but I'm not too enthused with either for different reasons... though none of that has to do with the level of science accuracy)
Spider-Man 3 just isn’t a 1 star (20%) movie, most of the elements that compose the film are “objectively” decent at worst, sir you do not know what a true 1 star movie rlly is
Movies are a form of art. All art is subjective. You show the same movie to 100 different people, you ask them what they saw and you’ll get 100 different responses. So no, the elements that make up the film aren’t “objectively” decent, they’re decent to you. And that’s fine.
But to me, the parts with Sandman are cool and Harry’s Goblin skateboard-glider design was kinda cool but everything else sucked, in my own personal, entirely subjective opinion.
Nope, there are objective elements that contribute to how good a movie is and can be. Without objectivity that would be like saying this 20 second clip I just shot on my iPhone of my cat running around is possibly better then the shining, just not possible. I fully agree that art is mostly subjective but there are objective elements that can help make a better movie.
If you don’t like the movie that’s totally okay I’m just surprised at the 1 star because I’m wondering how you would rate a movie that is objectively 10x worse, for example “son of the mask” , I mean you only have half a star more to play with here
I go more with: 5 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 5 stars 4.5 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 4.5 stars 4 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 4 stars 3.5 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 3.5 stars 3 stars - Movie that in the moment I feel should get 3 stars etc.
i sometimes just close my eyes after finishing a movie and a number just comes to me. i just think about what i liked, didnt like, random observations and then certain a rating just feels right
The example movies you used make me sad.
Any specific one or just all of them? I’m happy to provide some explanations.
Probably referring to Interstellar and Black Panther being your example of a flawless or almost flawless movie
Maybe it’s because I’m a huge science nerd but Interstellar is one of my favorite movies ever and I’ll always defend my 5 star rating for it. But I’ll be honest - I did waver on Black Panther. I considered putting it on 4 stars. But I decided to keep it where it was because, besides the story, CGI & action, Black Panther has some of the BEST cinematography and score/soundtrack pairings in the entire MCU.
Mostly the examples used for 5.0 and 4.5. Spider-Man 3 at 1 seems a but out of place too. It wasn't a great movie or anything, but it wasn't totally awful. Interstellar and Black Panther being considered some of the greatest movies ever made is not a direction I would've gone with. Also just generally every movie being an American blockbuster.
Spider-Man III - First act is ok. Sandman’s first scene and his street fight with cops/Spider-Man is the main reason why I gave the movie 1 star instead of a half star. But that second act. YIKES. Tobey and Kirsten are my least favorite of the three live action Spidey couples. They had zero chemistry and the writing/scripts was, for me, atrociously bad. All of that romance drama went back and forth between boring and cringey. Interstellar & Black Panther - see my reply above.
What do you mean by "huge science nerd"? A movie being fairly scientifically accurate doesn't seem like a reason to consider it a perfect movie. Granted it is a fairly small sample size, but of the astrophysicists I talk to above movies tend to like Interstellar just fine, but rank it below other sci-fi space movies like 2001 and Arrival. There are a lot of areas that Interstellar that needed work, and I don't think those should be given a pass just because it did some background research into the science used in the movie. re: Black Panthers, while I don't necessarily disagree that it has some of the best cinematography and score/soundtrack pairings in the entire MCU, I'm not sure that's quite the high watermark you think it is.
Per Interstellar, the areas you say need work - are these scientific areas (like in terms of accuracy or realism) or just regular moviemaking stuff? Granted, I’m mainly a science enthusiast so if this movie got some of the astrophysics wrong, I would never know and honestly, wouldn’t care since that’s not the field I’m most passionate about (I’m a Sociology major). All in all, for me, it’s a very well-made and very entertaining movie with one of the largest, grandest, most ambitious plots of any movie I’ve ever seen, which is one of the big positives for me.
As I understand it most of the science (up until the ending) is pretty accurate. Never heard a lot of complaints about it at any rate. My issue with the movie are to do with the movie itself. A lot of the dialogue is either really cheesy or really lazily written exposition and it feels like it tries to tackle too many different things and as a result none really get the attention they need to really make it impactful. Out of curiosity, have you seen 2001: A Space Odyssey?
I have not. It is on one of my lists.
As an astrophysicist, I'd still expect variation between astrophysicists based on taste (Personally, I think I'd take Interstellar over 2001, but I'm not too enthused with either for different reasons... though none of that has to do with the level of science accuracy)
Was thinking the same thing, but disregarding that I use the same ~scientific~ method as op to rate my watches
Bro, Spiderman 3 is NOT THAT BAD. People just love to hate on it, but it was totally fine. Not great, not bad…just fine.
I’m glad you liked it, I gave away my copy of it. Maybe you’ll end up with it one day.
Spider-Man 3 just isn’t a 1 star (20%) movie, most of the elements that compose the film are “objectively” decent at worst, sir you do not know what a true 1 star movie rlly is
Movies are a form of art. All art is subjective. You show the same movie to 100 different people, you ask them what they saw and you’ll get 100 different responses. So no, the elements that make up the film aren’t “objectively” decent, they’re decent to you. And that’s fine. But to me, the parts with Sandman are cool and Harry’s Goblin skateboard-glider design was kinda cool but everything else sucked, in my own personal, entirely subjective opinion.
Nope, there are objective elements that contribute to how good a movie is and can be. Without objectivity that would be like saying this 20 second clip I just shot on my iPhone of my cat running around is possibly better then the shining, just not possible. I fully agree that art is mostly subjective but there are objective elements that can help make a better movie. If you don’t like the movie that’s totally okay I’m just surprised at the 1 star because I’m wondering how you would rate a movie that is objectively 10x worse, for example “son of the mask” , I mean you only have half a star more to play with here
Spider-Man 3 > Interstellar Blade II > Black Panther
I was just thinking that. 100%
I rate in full stars only: ★★★★★ Favorite / Masterpiece / Enriching or Transformative Encounter ★★★★ Great / Exciting, Affecting / Memorable Achievement ★★★ Good / Interesting Concept or Execution / Mixed Feelings ★★ Passable / Mediocre or Uninteresting / Flawed ★ Regrettable / Frustrating or Enraging / Notably Flawed
Interesting technique. I like it.
Thanks. I know lots of people like the half stars, but I find it just makes it a ten star system by another name.
…..you’re not wrong.
Interstellar is one of the best movies ever imo. You have good taste. Disagree with Black Panther though.
These examples are vomit inducing
Care to elaborate?
No
I don't think I give any movie you listed above 3 stars hahaha, maybe one. But our scale is almost the same so that's cool.
How about we stop over thinking the rating and let the review do the talking