What kind of grade is that, for real?

This thread will serve as a central hub for any posts where people feel the need to get confused by someone else's movie rating scales—and the inevitable debates that follow.

It’s not meant for active discussion and will be locked—it's simply a way to group those specific posts together in one place.

coastaljackal2 said:I didn't really vibe with the movie, but honestly, I'd give it like a 7.5/10.

Oh, boza. I swear, I am never going to wrap my head around logic like that! Like, seriously, if I don't enjoy a movie, there is no way in hell I'm giving it anything higher than a 2/10.

cosmiclynx57 said:Oh, boza. I swear, I am never going to wrap my head around logic like that! Like, seriously, if I don't enjoy a movie, there is no way in hell I'm giving it anything higher than a 2/10.

That’s what you call being an objective critic, I guess.

What's all the fuss about, you geniuses?

I simply said I didn't enjoy the movie, and in my opinion, it certainly doesn't earn a perfect 10/10 rating...
Just because a film didn't resonate with me personally, it doesn't mean it's actually a 2/10...

coastaljackal2 said:What's all the fuss about, you geniuses?

I simply said I didn't enjoy the movie, and in my opinion, it certainly doesn't earn a perfect 10/10 rating...
Just because a film didn't resonate with me personally, it doesn't mean it's actually a 2/10...

Are you actually being serious right now, or are you just playing dumb? Like, seriously, are you blind? I mean, what is even the point of having a rating system if you’re out here handing out a 7 to a movie you didn't even like? It makes zero sense, right? 😕

Honestly, saying a 7 is too high for a movie you didn't vibe with? Man, that's a bold take! If you’re tossing out a 7 just because it wasn't your cup of tea, then what on earth are you actually giving the stuff you genuinely love? Like, if a flick actually hits the spot for you, are we talking a solid 12/10? And don't even get me started on your absolute masterpieces—are those going up to a 15/10 or what? 🤷😂🙂

coastaljackal2 said:What's all the fuss about, you geniuses?

I simply said I didn't enjoy the movie, and in my opinion, it certainly doesn't earn a perfect 10/10 rating...
Just because a film didn't resonate with me personally, it doesn't mean it's actually a 2/10...

Exactly. That's what I'm talking about!

Honestly, he should just stick to a simple 1 to 5 star rating system, don't you think? Because right now, his scores—like giving a 6, then a 5, then a 4, 3, 2, or 1—are basically useless when he ends up handing a 7 to some movie he didn't even actually like! It makes zero sense, right?

coastaljackal2 said:What's all the fuss about, you geniuses?

I simply said I didn't enjoy the movie, and in my opinion, it certainly doesn't earn a perfect 10/10 rating...
Just because a film didn't resonate with me personally, it doesn't mean it's actually a 2/10...

Why the plural? 🤷 I mean, I totally get where you're coming from—I wasn't exactly thrilled with it either—but if I had to be objective (as much as that’s even possible, I guess), I’d probably give it a solid 7/10.

cosmiclynx57, you're just talking nonsense.

cosmiclynx57 said:Are you actually being serious right now, or are you just playing dumb? Like, seriously, are you blind? I mean, what is even the point of having a rating system if you’re out here handing out a 7 to a movie you didn't even like? It makes zero sense, right? 😕

Honestly, saying a 7 is too high for a movie you didn't vibe with? Man, that's a bold take! If you’re tossing out a 7 just because it wasn't your cup of tea, then what on earth are you actually giving the stuff you genuinely love? Like, if a flick actually hits the spot for you, are we talking a solid 12/10? And don't even get me started on your absolute masterpieces—are those going up to a 15/10 or what? 🤷😂🙂

Exactly. That's what I'm talking about!

Honestly, he should just stick to a simple 1 to 5 star rating system, don't you think? Because right now, his scores—like giving a 6, then a 5, then a 4, 3, 2, or 1—are basically useless when he ends up handing a 7 to some movie he didn't even actually like! It makes zero sense, right?

First of all, go tell that nonsense to someone else... stop pretending to be thick-headed.
It’s pretty obvious you’re just obsessing over this one movie...
I went with a 7.5 because I feel like that's a more realistic score for it, and I don't think it's total junk (even if it didn't wow me and isn't really my style).
Look, it has an 8.6 on IMDb, but I'm saying in my opinion, it deserves a 7.5.

Megan Edwards4 said:Why the plural? 🤷 I mean, I totally get where you're coming from—I wasn't exactly thrilled with it either—but if I had to be objective (as much as that’s even possible, I guess), I’d probably give it a solid 7/10.

cosmiclynx57, you're just talking nonsense.

I was actually referring to the posts above yours 😉.

So you write this absolute masterpiece and then give it a 9/10?

mary89 said:First Night of Quiet (1972)
A substitute teacher named Daniel (Alain Delon) falls head over heels for his student, Vanina (Sonia Petrovna). The whole mess is complicated because the teacher is stuck in a miserable marriage, and the girl is already seeing this total thug who happens to be part of some nasty gang.
It’s not a terrible movie by any means, but I just didn't find it super engaging, so I probably wouldn't suggest it—the characters felt kind of flat and the plot felt pretty recycled with an ending you can see coming from a mile away.
5/10

So why the low score? 😲 I mean, if we were talking about a movie made after the year 2000, I might get where you're coming from, but for a classic like this? 😕

Wild Horses said:"Give IT a Year" - an American romantic comedy about a young married couple who realizes pretty quickly that tying the knot might have been a massive mistake... Honestly, this movie caught me off guard in the best way. I was expecting some cookie-cutter rom-com, but it’s way more than that. The humor lands perfectly, and the plot manages to dodge most of those tired genre clichés. Plus, the ending is one of the wildest things I've seen in a movie like this.

"Samsara" - a documentary without a single word of dialogue about... well, everything and nothing at the same time (now I'm just rambling). It’s just a series of shots showing nature, human lives, activities, and man-made structures. Those shots are stunningly filmed—they actually build a narrative rather than just being random clips thrown together. There were moments where I felt a bit lost, wondering what exactly I was looking at, but Ron Fricki (who basically made a career out of this style) decided to keep us in the dark.

Can you give it a rating, or am I asking too much? I can't really wrap my head around it—is it bad, good, great, or just plain weird? It's pretty hard to pin down.🤷

Based on that description, you still haven't figured out if his movies actually hold up, have you?

ne

This movie was more than pleasantly surprising. I expected some sort of generic romantic comedy, but this turned out to be so much more than that. The dry American wit hits the mark perfectly, and the plot successfully avoids falling into genre clichés. The ending is one of the craziest things I've seen in movies like this.

"Samsara" is a documentary without a single spoken word about... well, what? About nothing and everything at once (now I'm just rambling). It cuts between shots of nature and scenes of human life, activities, and man-made structures. Those shots are spectacularly filmed and even weave together a narrative; they aren't just thrown together randomly. While I felt like I needed an explanation for what exactly I was watching at certain points, Ron Fricki (who specializes in this style) decided to keep us in the dark.

Do I really need to spell it out for you?

mary89 said:Leon (1994)
It’s a fairly predictable movie, but I still found it charming, emotional, and engaging. Even though the characters aren't entirely original and feel a bit familiar, they work together so well as a team that it gives the whole film its soul.
While the movie is great and practically flawless, I think the rating on IMDb is actually a bit too high.
7/10

I wonder how they arrived at such a score..

~*MiSs-AnDy*~ said:Into the Storm (2014)
The cast features Lori from The Walking Dead, Thorin from the Hobbit, and Peter Pan. Then, out of nowhere, some totally random character pops up—honestly, I didn't even catch who they were until just now. The acting was pretty mid, which really just mirrored the movie itself. As for the special effects, they weren't terrible, but let's be real, nothing spectacular there either; they're just fine. You aren't missing out on anything if you decide to skip this one.
5/10

Look, the movie is garbage; I have no idea what you were watching. First you call it mediocre, then you say people can just skip it entirely, yet you still hand it a 5/10? Just pick a side already.

btw, The Walking Dead? Hobbit? Peter Pan? What are we even talking about here?

casualtrucker3 said:Look, the movie is garbage; I have no idea what you were watching. First you call it mediocre, then you say people can just skip it entirely, yet you still hand it a 5/10? Just pick a side already.

btw, The Walking Dead? Hobbit? Peter Pan? What are we even talking about here?

I didn't catch the film myself, but I suppose what she said makes perfect sense. She calls it mediocre and gives it a 5/10, which is right in the middle—if we aren't going to bring a bell curve into this 😁—and finally suggests it can be bypassed, simply because there is an endless supply of mediocre movies out there. So, why not?

Steven Smith16 said:I didn't catch the film myself, but I suppose what she said makes perfect sense. She calls it mediocre and gives it a 5/10, which is right in the middle—if we aren't going to bring a bell curve into this 😁—and finally suggests it can be bypassed, simply because there is an endless supply of mediocre movies out there. So, why not?

In my book, a 5/10 isn't "average"—it's actually below average. If I were grading something as truly mid-range, I'd probably be looking at a 6/10.

Sure, there are average movies out there, but they aren't exactly flooding the market. A recent example I'd personally label as the definition of "average" would be "A Most Wanted Man," which I'd give a 6/10. Even though those types of films exist, they certainly aren't as common as people make them out to be. They just aren't!

She—and now you, too—really needs to sort out her perspective. Either you possess such an incredibly precious, elite taste in cinema that you refuse to let your palate be tainted by anything even remotely mediocre, or you're just being dramatic, considering the sheer volume of actual garbage produced compared to the rare "average" film.🙏

casualtrucker3 said:In my book, a 5/10 isn't "average"—it's actually below average. If I were grading something as truly mid-range, I'd probably be looking at a 6/10.

Sure, there are average movies out there, but they aren't exactly flooding the market. A recent example I'd personally label as the definition of "average" would be "A Most Wanted Man," which I'd give a 6/10. Even though those types of films exist, they certainly aren't as common as people make them out to be. They just aren't!

She—and now you, too—really needs to sort out her perspective. Either you possess such an incredibly precious, elite taste in cinema that you refuse to let your palate be tainted by anything even remotely mediocre, or you're just being dramatic, considering the sheer volume of actual garbage produced compared to the rare "average" film.🙏

I disagree. I would argue the average sits closer to 5.7.

I don't think I need to rethink anything; as I mentioned, I haven't even seen the movie. And I'm not a fan of those blockbusters either; they seem to rely far too heavily on special effects to mask thin plots. I much prefer trashy cinema.

It seems you've been mistaken so far. About everything, really. And I've only read two posts from you. Now I'm tempted to go through everyone else's comments just to calculate a real average.

But wait, isn't an "average" basically the same thing as the "midpoint"? Like, if you have 10, the middle is 5.🤔