HOW TO REVIEW part II: Rating

Presenting an evaluation of a piece of entertainment is not an exact science, but some traditional guidelines have formed for good reasons not least of which the rating scores.  Many things need to be addressed in order to give the reader a complete picture on what the prose novel, graphic novel, film, or video game entails.  But generally the most demanded part and biggest takeaway from a review is the overall rating.  It never takes the place of a full review but rather a conclusion.  It’s been said that in an essay like a review the structure normally goes a) tell them what you’re going to tell them, b) tell them what you want to, and c) tell them what you told them.  It’s a funny way of saying to introduce and end your argument in a way that summarizes it.  The rating is the concluding summary, and it’s important to communicate it consistently and effectively through all of your reviews.  I personally call it

The Verdict

 But first here some ways NOT to do it

My biggest pet peeve in reviews is the non-sensical rating system that some reviewers use.

The 10 Point System

In a 10 point review system, a 5 is a terrible movie and typically the first 5 points rarely get used.  Anything below 6 is merely to evaluate how awful the movie is.  That’s partly because users think it equivalent to school grades where below 60% is “F” for failure.  A 1-10 score rarely mean the same things to the same people.  The scale is too large.

 Additionally, systems with precise scores that include decimal points only serve to compare individual media, and over time reviewers are likely to accidentally rate a better piece .1 or .2 less in value than a slightly inferior piece of work.  Fractions in scores are difficult to keep track of, and no reader needs to know your score that precisely to understand what you think about it.

 Letter Grade System

Letter systems do not translate, and if you were/are an overachiever where a B+ in school is beyond horrible, you understand why.  Lettered grades do not mean the same thing to everyone.  Typically in school, an “A” is earned if you did everything correctly.  Only in weighted university courses does an “A” actually show how much better than others you are, and even when you do earn one, you aren’t necessarily perfect.  And media is seldom perfect.

4 Star System

 Most people confuse a 4 star system for a 5 star system and there is not enough room for critical evaluation.  Like the “thumbs up” system, there’s not enough room to accurately represent the media.  It sort of faces the opposite problem as the 1-10 system.  Is a 3 star movie great but not perfect or only just above okay?  It just does not flow.

 This brings me to the system that should be used:

5-star system with half star options

(It doesn’t have to be stars)

In order to give readers of this article good examples, I only present pieces of art where acclaim is largely consistent i.e. not controversial.  Also, pay attention to the words I use next to each star rating.  Using them in your review is tantamount to scoring them with the corresponding number.

5 stars – Masterpiece–

This is the highest echelon of praise and nothing but the best should be awarded such an honor.  Every 5 star awarded movie belongs in the best picture conversation for its entertainment value and elevated level of presentation executed with the utmost precision.  Every element involved from music to character complexity to special effects must be heavily scrutinized before being credited as 5 out of 5.  If a reviewer gives away 5 star ratings to undeserving art pieces, their opinion will not only be dismissed, but the greatest works will not stand out as such.  However, if never used, the reviewer’s opinion will be just as scoffed at.  For movies specifically, there is typically only one and sometimes two 5 star worthy film(s) a year.

 

Well known examples of 5 star works throughout media: To Kill a Mockingbird (prose), Kingdom Come (graphic), Schindler’s List (film), Princess Monoke (animated), and The Last of Us (video game).

4.5 stars –Exemplary–

4 stars –Outstanding–

A piece awarded a 4 out of 5 rating has everything that can be reasonably expected of a particular work, but comes with a flaw or two.  This work executes its intentions well and leaves the viewer, gamer, or reader with an undoubtedly positive impression.  It is a worthy ambassador for its genre, but not the best.  A movie with 4 out of 5 may still be nominated for Best Picture and may win if there is no better competition.  There are evident problems that do not overshadow the greatness of the work, but such issues must be expressed in any descent review.

Well known examples of 4 star works throughout media: Animal Farm (prose), Identity Crisis (graphic), Little Miss Sunshine (film), How to Train Your Dragon (animation), Diablo (video game).

3.5 stars –Great–

3 stars –Good–

Any work awarded 3 out of 5 is good, but still leaves much to be desired.  There are a considerable number of gripes concerning the piece in question that weight it down.  The disclaimer “overall” must be added when talking about the positive nature of its quality.  It is still worth watching, reading, or playing, though perhaps not always for the money it costs depending on the interests of the consumer.  This rating may bring down a highly anticipated work without insulting it.  To less hyped piece, a 3 star rating may deem it a pleasantly good surprise without overstating how good it is.

Well known examples of 3 star works throughout media: A Farewell to Arms (prose), Persepolis (graphic), Moulin Rouge (film), Titan A.E. (animation), Dynasty Warriors (video game).

2.5 stars – Mediocre–

2 stars –Inferior–

When a work is 2 out of 5, the problems outweigh what it does right.  However, it is not a complete waste.  It has some redeeming value, but the overall impression is of something second-rate.  Such a project is not a good representation of the genre and may depend on clichés, gimmicks, or niche desires without artistic value.  The majority of works should be valued at 2, 2.5, and 3 where 3 rates as somewhat positive and a 2 rating is somewhat negative.  Designating something widely liked as a 2 may make readers question the reviewer’s judgment, fair or not.

Well Known examples of 2 star works throughout media: The Giver (prose), Transformers 2: Revenge of the Fallen (film), Shrek the Third (Animation), Batman Forever –Sega Genesis (video game)

1.5 stars –Bad–

1 Star –Awful–

These are the pieces everyone hates, and they get uniform revilement from the community.  Media this far gone very rarely gets the “so bad it’s good” label attached.  It is difficult to sit through an entire viewing, but such a task can at least be done.  Though they’re not, they are often considered to be the worst such-and-such of all time.  Production value may be there or not.  If it is, then it is not executed well.  They can also damage a franchise, and the ones below this rating definitely do. Going below 1 star is not done on many platforms since anything at or below this rating is insulting.

There are not many well-known examples except for films and video games as these pieces often fade into obscurity.  Modern parody movies fall here most of the time.  I have personally seen stoners walk out of the theater during Meet the Spartans (film) calling it stupid.  I have not played it, but E.T. (video game) also has such a reputation.

0.5 stars –Abomination–

Example: The Last Airbender (film).

0.0 Stars –Worthless–

The actual worst of the worst. There is zero redeeming value, and it is physically painful to watch.  You have not heard of them, and it’s remarkable when they ever get off the ground as a project.

Concluding Thoughts:

Don’t reference Rotten Tomatoes (and others) when giving reviews.  Your opinion should not be influenced by what others think.  Do not compare.  There is no winning if you refer to them.  Either you’re a copy-cat or “wrong.”  Only reference Rotten Tomatoes when writing articles other than reviews.  You must build trust with your audience.  Do not reference IMDB.  It has no worth.

A number is finite, so take your time until you know how to rank it.  Reading your own words may help you make up your mind in that case.

Ranking the Best Picture Nominees 2015

Part of the thrill of watching the Oscars ceremony every year is rooting for your favorite movie to win Best Picture.  For many, a reason to view the awards or even look at the list of nominees is to be informed on what movies (often overlooked by general audiences) to watch.  I’m telling you that this year all of them are worth your time.  It’s a great year for Best Picture nominations, snubbing very few movies in the category without great debate.

Not many of us have seen all the nominees and often only cheer on the one or two we have seen.  When a movie we haven’t seen gets the win, we don’t know how to feel about it since we don’t actually know whether the right choice was made or not.  Often people will assume the topic of the movie or pretentiousness gave one film the edge over the bigger blockbuster we all saw.  If you’d like to know how they really do stack up against each other from someone who has seen them all and can comment on them with critical evaluation without prejudice or pretension, read on.  It’s a good list to know even if you have no intentions of watching the event.  So here they are in ascending order.

8. The Imitation Game

It says something about 2014’s movies when The Imitation Game is the weakest of the candidates for Best Picture.  It’s based on the remarkable true story of Alan Turning, a British cryptanalyst, who played a large role in inventing a machine in order to break the Nazi “Enigma” code in World War II and became the father of computer science.  This movie explores various cerebral concepts such as how we define intelligence.  The conversation is pertinent in our modern day world as we approach the reality of artificial intelligence.  It also explores the differences in the way human minds think and what they mean to our existence.  Much of this movie’s power comes from Turning’s tragic end after being exposed as a homosexual and is chemically castrated.  While the movie comes close to achieving a high level of insight, it ultimately fails short of the mark.  The transparent deviations from history made to increase the tension and fit a movie format more concisely run the film afoul.  While liberties with historical fact run rampant in movies as a whole and are not sins in themselves, easily spotted changes and cliches are unacceptable.  The visuals are also so glaringly poor that they’re worth noting.  Benedict Cumberbatch plays Turning and received a Best Actor in a Leading Role nomination for his part, but is essentially another version of his Sherlock Holmes character in the BBC series.

7. The Grand Budapest Hotel

Director Wes Anderson’s fingerprints are all over every frame of this witty comedy.  That means symmetry, bright colors, and unorthodox but effective moments of characters pausing.  If you have seen and liked any of his previous films, you will enjoy this one as well.  Superb acting, charmingly painted facades, and likeable characters give plenty of reason to see Wes Anderson’s great piece of filmmaking.  While his earlier films can be seen as courageous for risk taking, this style is more of the same as before.  Therefore, all that separates this film from his others is the plot.  It follows three characters: an author listening to an elderly hotel owner narrate the majority of the movie, the narrator as a lobby boy, and the concierge the lobby boy worked for referred to as Monsieur Gustave H.  Gustave is a charmingly candid and civil man trying to prove his innocence after his is framed for the murder of the hotel’s owner, Madame D, who leaves him a priceless painting.  It’s hilarious and is absolutely worth a watch for those than appreciate alternative filmmaking styles.

6. Whiplash

While certainly the smallest picture in the list, it is not lacking in great moments.  Andrew Neyman (Miles Teller) is a jazz drummer in a prestigious music school vying for the respect of a ruthless and physically abusive teacher Terrence Fletcher (J.K. Simmons).  Fletcher demands the best, and Neyman is determined to excel.  The film boasts the unhinged performance of J.K. Simmons who earned a nomination for his part.  Music plays a tremendous part in this movie.  By the end you, the viewer, are able to hear the difference between good and great.  The movie stops and starts repeatedly in the way of music-then-dialogue with actors’ well done expressions making the audience care about both parts.  It is not for those whose attention easily drifts when watching movies as each moment is crucial to gaining a completely experience.

5. Boyhood

Twelve years in the making, this film takes a grownup view of a fictional character’s path from child to young adult.  It showcases believable characters and situations going through life troubles.  It jumps from year to year without announcement and blends stages of adolescent life well.  The film is short on plot beyond what happens in a particular year but heavy on theme.  Vision and preparation helped make the movie what it is today.  While an impressive feat of filmmaking, the story is not quite enough to warrant a higher place on the list.

4. The Theory of Everything

Another biopic, this film follows the life of renowned theoretical physicist Stephen Hawking from his time at Cambridge University when just meeting his first wife (before his onset of ALS) to after their separation, the release of A Brief History of Time (which he authored), and to the loss of most of his muscle use.  The portrayal of the scientist by Eddie Redmayne is heartbreakingly realistic and is more than worthy of this year’s Oscar for Best Actor in a Leading Role.  He performs the various stages of motor-neuron disease so well that it pulls moviegoers in believing it completely.  Stephen and his first wife, Jane, are sympathetic and human in this piece.  In it, they are coping under debilitating circumstances while Stephen continues to excel in the field of science and earns status as a celebrity.  What is done with the story is so creative and beautiful without at all compromising the integrity of reality.  This is a must-see.

3. Birdman (or the Unexpected Virtue of Ignorance)

This film may lose moviegoers in the first couple minutes with the immediately identifiable pretentious alternative title and opening credits.  Indeed the beginning moments of action are questionable.  But as the movie gets going, it reveals itself to go deeply into criticism and desire of acceptance.  The movie is in part a commentary on pretension.  Michael Keaton plays an actor who used to play a superhero called “Birdman” and creates a play to gain respect from critics who have long ridiculed him for his blockbuster past.  The reality of Keaton having played Batman adds a little something to it.  Those in the art community or any other exclusive field can directly relate to Keaton’s struggle, but his character takes it to a mentally unhealthy level.  The movie follows one continuous shot that jumps in time until the climax when it suddenly abandons the style.  Unfortunately, the ending seconds are non-sensical and are the point of some debate.  The cast is phenomenal throughout and could carry the movie on their own if they had to.  This film is best enjoyed by those that like to intensely think while watching.

2. American Sniper

Those who revile this movie outright fail the litmus test.  To say that the film is pro-war and dehumanizing is to admit the inability to view movies without prejudice.  This is perhaps Clint Eastwood’s greatest masterpiece.  It follows the life of the most lethal sniper in United States history, Chris Kyle.  From the opening scene during the Middle Eastern war we understand exactly what we’re getting into with Kyle’s dilemma on killing a woman and child who seem to have a grenade  ready to use against American troops in an evacuated zone.  Snapping back to Kyle’s childhood, a lecture by his father about sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs sets viewers up to understand Kyle’s mindset throughout the remainder of the movie.  Bradley Cooper completely immerses himself into the role of Chris Kyle physically and mentally.  Through him, any slightly insightful moviegoer should understand the difference between what Kyle says and really feels.  (Unfortunately, some don’t understand and either rally like mindless bigots or crucify him.)  While the people of the Middle East are NOT savages, there is nothing not-savage about Al Qaeda or what they do.  Sometimes the soldiers half-heartedly view the people and terrorists as the same.  The movie very much follows his particular experiences and in doing so shows us a small window into the war unique to him.  Being so specific is a tactic taking by many recent movies in their story telling.  One example is in Lincoln (2012) showing the struggle in passing the 13^th amendment rather than the whole of the president’s life.  It works quite effectively.  The reason American Sniper is not the number one movie of the year is due to its unsatisfying ending.  The real life Chris Kyle was tragically killed by a fellow veteran that he was trying to help through post-war stress.  The movie chooses to end as Kyle gets into the car of that man while his wife looks out through the window.  Here it begins to serve as a memorial to the soldier rather than portraying a narrative.  The way it happened took away emotional impact.  Had the film ended five minutes earlier or later, the piece would be much stronger.  The producers did not want to give the killer “glorified” screen-time or graphically show such a thing when his children would see it.

1. Selma

The fourth and final biopic of the Best Picture nominees, Selma follows Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. during the civil rights movement in Selma, Alabama.  Like Lincoln (2012), it follows our central character in a specific time and place.  Like American Sniper, it is also criticized most by those that haven’t seen it.  Selma is absolutely the best film of the year.  It courageously takes a graphic view of police brutality and citizen violence against King and his compatriots.  It manages to show all major figures in this piece as both flawed humans and as we remember them –not least of all MLK and Lyndon Johnson.  The relationship between the two characters is the main controversy surrounding this film.  LBJ is not the shining white night many reminisce in this picture.  He is a politician and someone with multiple priorities.  However, nothing in the film goes outside the realm of believability.  In the end, LBJ does in fact choose to be a hero and serves a critical role in passing needed legislation.  (I find it curious that people suddenly care about this film’s so-called historical inaccuracies while they glaze over other movies.  Accuracy has never been a sticking point for the Academy.  Just ask Gladiator (2000).)  It becomes shocking when depicting known acts committed by law enforcement in one of the most racially divided states in US history.  Many moviegoers may have adverse reactions to it and rebuttal subconsciously by calling it a black point of view.  While some can arguably say that about the recent events in Ferguson due to essential facts being truly unknown, the need for the civil rights movement to reach Selma of 1965 was real and the struggle was indeed painful.  Director Ava DuVernay deserved to be at least nominated for Best Director.  It also boasts by far the best ending of all nominated pictures.  Everything about this film is precise and well done.

Would The Dark Knight have been Nominated for Best Picture under Current Rules?

The Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences (AMPAS) recognizes movies every year for filmmaking excellence through Oscar nominations for Best Picture, but some of the best are still ignored.  Such a film is The Dark Knight (2008), which earned practical universal acclaim.  The news of not being nominated arguably received greater attention than the 81^st Academy Awards themselves from audiences and critics alike.  When remembering which films did earn a slot in 2008, it’s easier to recall “not The Dark Knight,” than any of the nominees that year.

In 2009, the Academy expanded the number of films that could be eligible beyond five for the first time since 1943 up to 10.  In 2011, the Academy again changed the Best Picture nomination rules to make it so that movies required 5% or more of first place votes in order to be nominated with a minimum of 5 and maximum of 10 slots filled.  The question remains: Would The Dark Knight have been nominated for Best Picture in 2008 if current rules were applied?

Many, including myself, maintain that the reason for the 2009 rule change is due to The Dark Knight’s epic snub.  In Time Magazine’s list of “Top Ten Oscar-Nomination Snubs,” the article maintains the same sentiment, and deadline.com agrees.  While this move seems to insinuate The Dark Knight’s would-have-been nomination, this would mean breaking the superhero/ comic book movie barrier into the Oscar’s most prized category.  Surely many of the Academy’s pretentious members would be against it, perceiving smaller films as more artistic than successful action movies.  With another potentially exemplary superhero film coming out this summer in Man of Steel, the question of whether such a barrier is permeable becomes increasingly relevant.

While many say that it should have been nominated for Best Picture because in 2008 it earned the 2^nd most all-time in the box office, large financial gain has made little difference in films’ chances to be nominated for the last couple decades –while it seems to have made a difference in the past.  At first look, there does tend to be the requirement of a wide-release, which means that the movie would earn more money.  However, most of the time, it has to do with eligibility.  Of the domestic all-time earners adjusting for inflation, the highest ranked movie not be nominated for Best Picture that is neither animated or a Star Wars sequel/prequel is Jurassic Park (1993) at #20.   However, of the top 20 earners, only 4 are newer than Jurassic Park with one being a Star Wars prequel and another being animated.  Of the unadjusted domestic all-time top 20, 13 of the 15 made since 2000 were not nominated for Best Picture.  While this makes it apparent that The Dark Knight’s financial success does not help its chances there are several other patterns to consider.

One the things to consider when determining if The Dark Knight would have been nominated is acclaim.  It seems inherently obvious that great reviews from critics should be prerequisites for the highest honor in film.  The Dark Knight earned a 94% Rotten Tomatoes Critics score & 96% with Audiences, 4/4 from Roger Ebert of the Chicago Sun-Times, 10/10 with IGN, and currently sits as the #7 Movie of All time (formerly #1) in the Internet Movie Database (IMDb).  6 of the top 20 on the list of IMDb were not nominated for Best Picture.  The Dark Knight earned a higher Rotten Tomatoes quotient than every 2008 Best Picture nominee, beaten only by WALL-E overall among wide-releases that year.  However, a good Rotten Tomato aggregate score does not directly equate to the Best Picture category.  Since 2000, 16 films nominated in the category received scores less than 80%, including winners, with the lowest of all being 47%.  2 of these low rated nominees came in 2008 with The Reader (61%) and The Curious Case of Benjamin Button (73%).  When taking these facts into consideration, it is clear that the Academy already ignored the difference in critical acclaim in 2008, so The Dark Knight’s reviews cannot confidently indicate if it would have nominated for Best Picture under the current rules.

Buzz makes a huge difference in the movie awards scene.  The Oscar buzz surrounding The Dark Knight was immense, especially surrounding the late Heath Ledger.  When the time came, even many Hollywood insiders were surprised that The Reader earned the 5^th nomination over The Dark Knight at the 81^st Academy Awards according to Michael London, producer of Milk (LA Times 2009).  However, the buzz for the Oscars tends to follow the nominations for the Golden Globes –which The Dark Knight did not earn.  From 2000-2008, the Golden Globes did not nominate the eventual Academy’s nominees for Best Picture in their Best Motion Picture –Drama, Comedy or Musical, or Foreign Language categories a total of 4 times.  Since 2009, 20 of the 21 films nominated in the Globe’s Drama category have been nominated for Best Picture.  Under current 2011 rules, only 2 of the 18 Best Picture nominees were not nominated for a Best Motion Picture Golden Globe.

Though 9 films were nominated for Best Picture for both 2011 and 2012, the Academy’s press release on dealine.com says “If this system had been in effect from 2001 to 2008 (before the expansion to a slate of 10), there would have been years that yielded 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 nominees,” (2011).  To determine if The Dark Knight would have been nominated, the competition must also be examined.  Other likely nominees include WALL-E (when observing Toy Story 3 and Up’s nominations in 2009 and 2010) and Revolutionary Road –the only Golden Globe Best Motion Picture –Drama nominee not be nominated for Best Picture that year.  It is also possible for some of the Globe’s nominees in the Comedy or Musical category to earn a nod, such as Vicky Christina Barcelona, Burn After Reading, and Mamma Mia! and possibly edge out The Dark Knight.  However, the nominations of quality popular successes District 9 (2009) and Inception (2010) suggest that after satisfying the thirst for small “artistic” movies, the Academy can make room for such content.  Therefore, there is no doubt that under 2009-2010 rules, The Dark Knight would have been nominated for Best Picture in 2008.

With 2011 rules, The Dark Knight would have required 5% of first place votes.  For some perspective the eventual winner has averaged 20.5%.  Its financial success would have made no difference since it is a recent film, and its critical acclaim has already been ignored.  While it had massive buzz, the Golden Globe snub may have doomed it.  However, the push and eventual change to a system allowing up to 10 nominees after The Dark Knight’s epic snub gives reason to think its would-be-nomination is implied.  Since 2008 was such a weak year, it may be possible that The Dark Knight received 5% of first place votes despite the prejudice against it.  The only way to know for sure is to have the nomination voting results.  My guess is yes, and it more than deserved it.

What do you think?  Sound off in the comments below.