Thoughts on giving films a numerical rating.

Over in the 80's Teen Movie HOF thread, I just shared my thoughts on the Japanese anime film, Akira. Writing about the film has got me thinking about what really goes into giving a film a numerical rating. This is a conflict that I have dealt with for a while now but I have never actually thought about it as something that could well be removed from my way of discussing film. In the past, I have chosen to continue trying to rate films, despite not being satisfied with my own system of rating them, hoping that eventually I would refine my method in doing so and be happy with each rating I attribute to a film. Previously, I would beat myself up, as such, when I would revisit a film to then change my rating of it.

Previously, I would give a film a rating based on a few factors, but that rating would usually come naturally to me. I guess I had thought that our brains kind of break down lots of different variables to determine a value against previous knowledge and experience. However, the more I think about it the more I think rating films is a (mostly) arbitrary experience. I think to give a film a rating can indicate if you think a film is good or not, but can we really say that rating a film on a scale of 1-10 or whatever is an accurate recognition of the quality and/or enjoyability of the film?

Numerical ratings are better than the A-F scale used by a lot of professional critics.
I mean, A-F is like, rating something out of 6.
6.
6!?


I've never ever heard anyone say "Is that thing any good? What would you rate it out of 6?"



0-100%, a 5 star system (or in terms of MoFo, popcorns), or a rating out of 10... either/or, numbers are easier and better than the A-F scale.


But other than numbers or A-F, what other kind of rating would there be though?

__________________

Actually, my thought was the idea to completely forget ratings altogether but to instead simply focus on discussion alone.

Sorry, I probably should have been more clear on what I actually meant.

That'd be an impossibility tbh.


You can discuss a movie at length with someone, and, let's say you like the movie... but just saying "It was good" or "I liked it" just isn't enough for most readers and audiences.

I wouldn't try to overthink the numbers. It's not possible to accurately describe your personal experience in numbers so don't think of the rating as such. It's more like tl;dr tool to give people (both you and others) a general idea how much you liked it.

I was supposed to switch to full stars only this year but in the end decided not to. I didn't see any benefit for that change. If the reviews on the site wouldn't need popcorn ratings I might try mere thumbs up or down as my rating. Not sure if it would be good but surely seems potential and easy.

__________________

Yeah, I totally get that, I know that ratings can give a good indicator of how a film has been received. I just have an issue with the accuracy of a personal rating system. Maybe it is just me, but when I have returned to a rating that I have provided in the past, even not too long after, my own opinion is constantly switching. What 6/10 means to me one day could be completely different the next. I feel a system such as this is too complex. I do feel that ratings can often work as a collective whole to give an indication though.

Dude, I stopped rating movies a while ago. I recently tried ratings again and found I had a really difficult time. I hate it. Rating movies is not for me.

Yeah, I totally get you. I think my issue has been that I have been focusing too much on rating and trying to reflect my personal experience that way.

I too have thought about other ways how I could at least be more accurate when rating films and have also pondered the idea of removing "half-star" ratings and essentially moving from a ?/10 sytem to a ?/5 system to at least be more accurate. But I still feel that this could be quite arbitrary in some situations.

I like that.

I'm in the 80s Teen Hof and if you noticed I never rate a film in an HoF. I do give my thoughts on it but not a rating. Hell most of my movie ratings in my review thread are all or , unless I really hate a movie or really like it. What a person says about the film as opinion. is more interesting than just pure rating numbers. Though I get tired of long synopsis in reviews, because if I seen the movie I don't need a lengthy recap of what the movie was about.

Yeah, I've tried staying clear of rating in the HoF too. My choice of favourite would probably change throughout and a rating kind of gives too much of an indication of the film I would (or should?) choose as my favourite. I don't want ratings to determine my favourite films, or the order I would vote for them if that makes sense? Because my opinion is always changing.

Similarly to yourself, I also see myself giving the same ratings of either a 6 or 7 to most films. You only need to look at my Letterboxd account for that haha!

I have had issues with rating films for a while and I think that the healthiest thing for me could be to simply stop doing it?

There's no wrong way to give films numbers. It's all up to the individual.

__________________
Thanks again, Mr Portridge.

I've been saying this for a while. That's why I don't include ratings in my Movie Log, even though it probably would be read a lot more if I did.

You can't simply put a number on art. I've always loved math and numbers, but art is the only thing that shouldn't be translated into simply a numerical rating. At its best, art is the creative expression of the deepest demons and/or desires of the artist. How can you "rate" that? It's ridiculous.

The rating was invented to make opinions more graspable. It's anti-intellectual in nature. I don't mind if people do it, but I simply can't do it myself anymore. It also always made me feel bad to give a film I really loved merely a just because there are other (often incomparable) films that I believe are even more impressive. It degrades the experience I had while watching that particular film and it's totally unnecessary.

__________________
Cobpyth's Movie Log ~ 2019

I understand your point of view but personally I see things differently. Ratings are nothing more than crude approximations given when you write your review. It's OK to vote against your ratings (I think I've done that at least once) if you feel that way - all it means that your original approximation was little off or your opinion has changed in time between. It all comes down to giving too much significance to rating when it's only purpose is to improve readability.

How is "making something more graspable" anti-intellectual in nature? Does that mean that obfuscating something is intellectual in nature?

Ratings are no more difficult than rankings of any kind. In fact, they are an aid to ranking things. Since the majority of MoFos seem to have an obsession with ranking films and every other form of art, it should be OK to come up with ratings, even if you try to keep them to yourself. That's OK too. I basically keep my thoughts to myself now even though I'm still watching as many films as before and rating all of them.

__________________
It's what you learn after you know it all that counts. - John Wooden
My IMDb page

It may make the opinion more graspable but it destroys its nuance. I thought I made that sentiment clear enough. Hence, it's anti-intellectual.

Ranking films is a toxic addiction. But just like smoking, I'm not ready yet to give up that habit as well.

You're absolutely right that ranking films also implicates that you can rate them, though.

It only destroys the nuance if you believe that the rating is the review, that it's more important than what you wrote. Otherwise it's like saying that writing a summary kills nuance or synopsis of a film is anti-intellectual. Whether you like to use it or not, rating is just a tool that gives certain amount of information on a glance - it doesn't make the review itself more or less intellectual.

I stopped ranking too, recently.

I see your point, but I simply disagree with your last statement. I think a rating does make a review "less intellectual" as a whole.

It's like making a painting and then putting a much worse and simplified painting next to it. The average quality of the two paintings together is less than the quality of the original painting when it stands alone.
It's weird comparing reviews or impressions of a piece of art with paintings, but I don't find a better metaphore right now to explain my sentiment.

Swan, are you seriously telling me if a friend asks you to rank some specific [art] things that you'd reply "I can't" or "I won't"?