How do I assign rating numbers? Here's my latest explanation:
Ratings: A rating of 50 is just barely recommendable. In fact, between 50 & 70, I would probably recommend this movie to certain people, based on the kinds of things they like. Under 50, I would not recommend. With a rating of 70-85, I’d recommend unless you hate this “Type” of movie. With a rating of 86 or more, I think this is worth recommending, even to people who might not normally like the genre of film into which this movie falls.
You are free to disagree completely. That's your prerogative!
Stargate SG1: Children of the Gods | 80 | Just a revised version of the pilot – removing nudity and maybe a couple of other cosmetic changes. But it was fun to see again. |
Dr. Seuss’s Horton Hears a Who | 68 | Very pretty – animation is so amazing these days. Fun cast. The story changed some, but it was a good time. I laughed some. |
| 82 | A story I had not heard before from WW2. Somewhat similar to “Schindler’s List” but quite different as well. It’s great to see what some people will do to survive. |
Flash of Genius | 67 | Some stories are well-written and well-acted and still somewhat painful to watch, because the bad things that happen hit so close to home. What would I do? Hard to say, but I think my family’s pain would motivate me more. |
Cloverfield | 71 | This drew me in quite well, and pulled me along through the whole thing. JJ Abrams was involved, and I believe it. OK, so I don’t normally watch “monster movies” but this one was unique in my experience, and well done! |
Original Sin | 40 | Too boring for the most part. I can’t recommend it. Not sure what messed it up. There are twists. The people are attractive. Tension was lacking, and passion. This was not “Body Heat” and it should have been. Maybe Banderas and Jolie don’t have the same skill as Hurt and Turner. |
No comments:
Post a Comment