Do People Give 10/10 too easily? Yes! Is the Answer

I've read many reviews and ratings, especially from sites like imdb, and it seems too many people are not being very wise with their ratings.

For instance, I've read people say they think a film is 'okay' but then go on to give a rating of 7 or 8. Surely, an 'average' film would reflect a commonsensical score: a 5!

Then when I do see a score of 5, the comments tend to be 'this is a poor film and one of the director's worst to date'.

Idiots!

That kind of comment should be rated a 3 or lower then!

I've also seen people rate a film 10/10 and then say 'it's not exactly perfect but it is still really good'.

Surely you'd vote it about a 7 then!

I think people need to vote more wisely when they vote on films or they should simply not bother at all.

I'd only give something a 10/10 if it is truly epic. I can honestly say only about 5 or so films (that come to mind) can honestly be given a 10.

If I think a film is average, I'll give it a 5. Common sense.

Lukewarm? a 4 will do.

If I think it's poor, a 2 or 3 will suffice.

Terrible, a 1 or 0.

It's similar to when teachers hand out A stars too easily. They should only give the most talented students an A*. It seems everyone these days get's these massive grades comared to the olden days. If anything, more people are less intelligent than they once were, so I have a hard time believing all these A* grades. More like C's if you ask me.

I've come to the conclusion that most people don't know how to rate films properly and I think that before they submit a rating, they should write informed, essay-style critiques of a given film before they even THINK about their final score. That way, more accurate ratings will occur.

a 10 would be perfect? whats the 10's that come to your mind..

__________________

The Birds (1963)
The Godfather (parts 1 and 2)
Lord of the Rings Trilogy (2001-2003)
There Will Be Blood (2007)
The Changeling (1980)

Those are the top 5 films I think a 10 should be given.

To each his own..

I don't think i would consider many movies 10/10. But I would rate these as 10/10, I think.

Apocalypse Now
2001: A Space Odyssey
Planet of the Apes


I am sure many won't agree with them... but like I said earlier, To each his own.

their your opinions.. not really my type of movie.
but no matter what movie.
i dont believe theirs a PERFECT 10 made yet.

Guys, with all due respect, you're not really understanding my original post!

I'm saying people are NOT thinking their ratings through. Go and look through the many ratings on films and see if my post applies. I think you will find that it does!

I will agree somewhat with this - my ratings system has slowly gotten harsher over the years. Nowadays, anything that gets more than is extremely rare, but old posts show I gave it away quite frequently back in the day. Nowadays I look back on my old "high" ratings and think that I'd probably lower most of them.

With all due respect Godfather is a great film, but it will never get 10/10 from me.
So am I one of those people who don't think through the ratings??

IMDB has various kind of people voting, most of them haven't seen that many films to judge them appropriately.. But still I think one can decide on their own which film deserves 10/10 according to them.

IMDB is all about popularities.. Just coz it makes it to the Top 100 doesn't mean it's a perfect film.. an idea of a perfect film may differ from person to person...

Twilight has 5.6/10 out of 117,251 votes .. That's not bad. I hate the film, but am glad it's not above 7.

Sure, people don't always think they're ratings through, but you seem to be assuming that they take them seriously. Many don't, as you say, but why should they? Obviously, here, the majority of us taking films pretty seriously and may actually spend a fair bit of time deciding whether to give something a or a , but if you watched movies only as casual entertainment, would you? Heck, should you? For most people, it's not worth the tmie to get too specific, or make much distinction between 9 out of 10 and 10 out of 10.

I don't think any film is really perfect, and I wouldn't expect them to be to get 5 out of 5, or 10 out of 10, or what have you. But if they come a lot closer than we have much right to expect them to, then I think it makes sense. I doubt most people go through this thought process, but there are philosophies of film rating that could justify a fairly high number of perfect scores, I think.

I give 10/10 if I really love a film. It has nothing to do with how good the film is. Even if a film is brilliant, a true classic, etc but I don't love it, I'll give it 9/10 or maybe 9.5/10 but not a 10.

I'm generally pretty harsh with reviewing films.

__________________
You cannot have it both ways. A dancer who relies upon the doubtful comforts of human love can never be a great dancer. Never. (The Red Shoes, 1948)

10s are for no facepalm moments or slight discomforts.

10s are also for 8s through 9s with several scenes of incredible cinematic mastery.

10s are also for films that make me bawl like mad.

__________________
"Loves them? They need them, like they need the air."

Agree with the first two sentences, though it does take a LOT to make me cry when watching a film. Only films in recent memory that have done that are Bullet Boy and Fish Tank.

I prefer to use the star criteria rather than the `10 out of 10` thing, even though they more or less represent the same thing. I do agree with the OP in that 5 star films are given to films FAR too easily. I've always felt that a 5 star film should be fairly rare.

I used to be a bit harsher with my ratings. A few years ago I could only name TWO 5 star films, but have now broadened it out to six. People need to think their ratings through more than they should do, specially publications that feel it's ok to give 4 or 5 out of 5 stars to films such as Transformers 2, Tallageda Nights, and Avatar.

I agree that some people give 10 too easily, although I agree with Yoda it's probably more the casual moviegoer than the majority of people on this site. I think it happens more with the /5 star rating system that people use the extremes, giving 1 star or 5 stars, as though it were a simple 'did you like this film, yes or no?' question. Whereas with the /10 rating system, people are sometimes reluctant to go below six, even if they really didn't like it. I think generally you're more likely to use three and four stars because you're less likely to go and see a film you know you're not going to enjoy. And if it's as part of a general poll, people may give higher or lower than they really felt a film deserved in order to skew the overall or average rating the film gets.

Ah, but couldn't a real masterpiece make you feel uncomfortable at times? A great film isn't always easy to watch.

Not for me. Maybe I cry too easily, but a film that cheaply manipulates your emotions through upsetting situations or use of mawkish music is not necessarily a good film.

If you're scoring by some kind of benchmark, you would have to break it down by set criteria, ie, x amount of points for cinematography, originality, acting, mood, etc. Is there a universal set of criteria for these 10 points? Plus, movies being art, much of it is entirely subjective...

__________________
Under-the-radar Movie Awesomeness.
http://earlsmoviepicks.blogspot.com/

I normally start at three stars, which is average, or 'worth watching'. Then I deduct and add stars and then see roughly what it comes out as. To give a film five stars, for me it has to work as a whole. Often I really love many parts of a film but as a whole it doesn't work, or only gets by.

My rough guide to my ratings (although it all depends on how generous I'm feeling at the time):

- One star means 'This is a bad film.' It's not purely personal dislike- I think this film is technically poor and I can't really find anything to recommend it.

- Two star means 'This film didn't really work for me.' This is for films I believe have some small merits but not enough to sit down and watch the whole thing.

- Three stars means 'This is worth watching/not a bad film.' This is for films that you could watch all the way through and enjoy. They may not be critically acclaimed or spectacular but they are not bad films.

- Four star means 'This is a very good film.' This is for films that I think are well made/I personally enjoyed them. These are films I believe it is likely that a lot of people would enjoy them/get something from them and so I'm flagging them up on their behalf.

- Five star, now a rare rating for me, is films that I think are excellent. They work on many levels and they have a genuine claim to being a 'masterpiece' or 'classic'. However even very good or accomplished films may not reach the five star- the film has to resonate with me to gain the coveted fifth star.

I'll go you one better! How many times have you gone to a live play or concert where the performances were only average but at least everyone remembered the words and no one fell off the stage. And then the audience gives them a standing ovation!!! Why reward mendacity?

Here's why!

Is the enjoyment of a movie an intellectual thing or is it visceral? Do you analyze it over an extended period and grade it portion by portion--so much based on individual performances, so much for photography, for background music, for location, for story, for direction? Or do you judge it by the whole way it comes together, by the way it "speaks" to you, grabs you (or doesn't)?

I'm sure there are some out there who'll say, "Oh, you've gotta do all of that" but I don't trust those best-of-all-worlds fence-straddlers. I've got one criteria--did I like the movie or not? Thumbs up or thumbs down--nothing in between, no qualifications or shades of grey. If it turns out to be something I don't feel strongly one way or another, it defaults to thumbs down.

I trust my gut-feelings and I don't need verification. I like what I like.

Did the OP actually say we should WRITE AN ESSAY whenever we feel like rating a film?

Buahahahahahahaha

Yeah, sure....

I will get RIGHT on that....

__________________