I rated Fubar II a 3/5, and the TIFF volunteer was looking at me like a small town girl looking at a stranded over-caffeinated New Yorker. If 37 of you have noticed, I’ve never really rated my movies until this year’s festival. Instead I aim to focus on the performances, what elements the director/crew used while making the film, what I can make fun of. In other words, to me it’s more important to eloquently articulate what I just saw instead of putting it within a good-to-bad spectrum.
I also like to think that my perception of ratings are weird. Three our of five for me is a diplomatic mark, four is a diplomatic three, two is a diplomatic one, five is something that I give out on impulse. Reading a three star review is enough for me to see a movie. But then other people think that 3/5 is in the C range in letter grades, and receiving C’s in university have made me doubt my purpose in life. There have also been movies that I like but I can’t help but nitpick, and movies that I dislike but I’m looking at one or two things because I realize that these people, shortsighted as they might be, thought hard on specific aspects of their work. There are movies that I hate now that I used to like when I was in high school. There are also my best movies (Touch of Evil) and my favourite ones (Clueless), my emotional attachment to one or other will upset my rating system. And I guess all this means that I’m not too confident about my tastes, because most people who are too confident with their tastes are stubborn, unctuous dicks.
I’ve written about some movies lately where all I do is talk about screen-caps or scene studies.
I’ve blogged for seven months now, and it still feels like walking blindfolded. I wonder whoever is out there, if it gets easier or not, or if I should actually put a rating for the movies I talk about.