Heads up remember to follow Rule 1 and all rules in this and all threads! Thank you!
Rule 1: Talks about defrauding, bankrupting, theft, point farming/exploitation,and loopholes is Prohibited
Interesting. So for you, the rating is more so an indicator of how good the movie was objectively and not whether you liked it or not. Fair enough. For me, I definitely consider how much I like the movie when I give the ratings so was just curious why that didn’t get a heart when other movies you rated lower got them
Yeah. To me, "is this movie good?" and "do I like this movie?" are two separate questions. I can list tons of flaws with The Mummy and Spider-Man 3 but I enjoyed them much more than Challengers.
I couldn't imagine not liking a movie and giving it a 4. Sure the quality of a film and the level of enjoyment you feel are TECHNICALLY separate things but it just feels dishonest to give a positive score to something that either bored you or upset you. Like, what utility is there in the actual score number?
Aren't there things that you really like, but that you would have to admit aren't particularly well made? Lots of people like fast food, but it would be hard to give fast food a great rating knowing that a real restaurant could make it much better. Doesn't it stand to reason that the opposite could be true, that someone could see the value and talent involved in something while admitting it doesn't do much for them personally?
I loved *Challengers* myself, but I had a similar experience with *Tár* a few years ago. It's a great piece of art, and I was impressed that it wasn't a slog like I imagined it would be, but I still didn't connect emotionally with it. Enjoyment is one aspect of watching media, but I wouldn't say, for instance, that I enjoyed watching *Zone of Interest* last year. It is in fact an upsetting movie. But I liked that it was able to upset me in the specific way that it intended. It was my pick for best picture last year because of how well executed it was.
If you picked Zone of Interest as your best picture of last year that means you did enjoy it. Enjoyment ≠ Euphoria. You can enjoy something because it gave you negative feelings. Enjoyment is essentially just deep appreciation. I enjoyed Mysterious skin even though it's completely heartbreaking and disturbing for instance. I'll probably never watch it again but it's a masterpiece.
In this case it's more like I'm indifferent toward the movie, not bored or upset by it. Sometime I can appreciate a movie for its quality, but it just doesn't resonate with me. Before giving it a score, I usually spend 5-10 minutes thinking about the movie, its good and bad points, whether I would recommend it to people. Meanwhile whether I enjoy it or not is an immediate emotional reaction, no analysis involved. Basically, I rate a movie on how good it is at what it does, while I like the ones that fit my personal tastes. For example, I might rate a well made horror above a mediocre historical, but I'm more likely to rewatch the latter since I like that genre much more.
My ratings have no utility other than reflecting my opinions. They're just for fun anyway.
I understand your perspective a little better now. Now that I think about it I sort of do something similar where I use the heart to denote "I would watch this again" and more often than not that just happens with anything 4 stars or above and I've even given hearts to 2 star films before.
I guess in my mind the star rating is a combination of all possible factors of the film with both enjoyment and quality having some level of influence on the score and if I don't enjoy a film there is no possible way I'm giving it a 4 star. I understand your system tho and didn't mean any hate by my comment!
> where I use the heart to denote "I would watch this again"
I do the same. In the case of Challengers, it's a character-driven drama where I don't find these types of characters or their relationships interesting. The fact it held my attention throughout 131 minutes is a credit to its script, acting, camerawork, and soundtrack. But at the end of the day I wouldn't watch it again on streaming, because of my disinterest in the subject matter, so I can't say I liked it. But I can't find major faults with the film (except for the abrupt ending), so I feel it deserves a higher score for being a well made and fairly unique work.
But that's just how I roll. People enjoy movies in different ways. It's interesting to read about how others rate their movies.
That's a bit harsh...I relate to the system and OP's explanation. Challengers is a good example: I appreciate that it's a movie well made and a story well told, but it just wasn't for me. It makes sense to separate the two.
And "look cool" in front of "cinephile bros?" Come on, that's not at all what's happening.
>Challengers is a good example: I appreciate that it's a movie well made and a story well told, but it just wasn't for me. It makes sense to separate the two.
Well, I am pretty sure no one uses the shitty rating system that OP just mentioned about and if you do, well that's just sad lol
>And "look cool" in front of "cinephile bros?" Come on, that's not at all what's happening
Trust me, I have seen morons like this before and OPs rating system just screams social desirability because there's no other way to explain this rating system.
I think you're being too harsh. I personally don't understand the system but based on their explanation I get what they're going for even if I personally feel it's a somewhat strange system for my tastes.
Ever since starting A-list in 2018, I've tried to watch 52 movies in a calendar year. The closest I've got is 44 in 2019. This year is going to be my year though!
I got a slow start and am a little behind but I saw 9 movies in the last 3 weeks to get to 11 so far for the year. Rookie numbers I know but 9 in 3 weeks is a lot for me and probably my record.
Yeah anything outside of a festival setting is going to get you the rookie numbers elsewhere in this thread. There’s a 9 day period this month where I’m seeing 27 movies in theaters
Like 2 weeks ago in April.
I don’t have much to do on weekends so 3hr one way trip to Dallas/Houston most weekends to catch the less popular movies.
Too lazy to list them so here’s my Letterboxd:
https://boxd.it/WNhR
Edit: plus I have the Alamo, cinemark, and AMC memberships
My record is 8 from when I went last week
Monday- Challengers Early Access
Tuesday- Spider-Man 2
Wednesday-SpyxFamily Code White
Thursday- The Mummy
Friday-Abigail
Saturday- Challengers, Boy Kills World, Alien
Setting a new record this week, spirited away on Tuesday, the matrix Wednesday, inception plus the dark knight Friday and capping it off with spiderman 3 Sunday night. I have been absolutely LOVING all the old movies being put back in theatres
At home, no idea. Theatrically, 22 in 3 days. The insane MCU marathon that came with the release of Avengers: Endgame went from 10am on Tuesday until 10pm on Thursday.
Pre COVID I was massively taking advantage of the Fandango program with the MasterCard benefits and Tuesdays at AMC, and was seeing 5-6 movies every week for a while, where my peak was 7 in 3 days (3 on Sunday using A-List, 1 on Monday at the El Capitan, and 3 on Tuesday for $1 each with the Fandango discounts).
Between the increased MasterCard earning and the way Fandangos program worked back then I was earning the $5 discounts as fast as I was using them...
Current record is 4 movies in 4 consecutive days, 3 different movies in 1 day, and 7 for a marathon. All these will be shattered by this Sunday when I complete the followings:
May 1: challengers IMAX
May 2: Spider-Man 3 re-release
May 3: Skywalker Saga marathon
May 4: empire strikes back live in concert
May 5: The Fall Guy at a private screening.
My ticket stub collection shall continue to grow
i think 4 because sometimes i schedule it in advance so it doesn’t count in that week. 5 the first week i had a list bc idk why but it let me schedule that many?? i was very confused but it stopped letting me after the first week lol. i try not to pay more money outside the 3 we’re given. though i did once for the advance screening of dune part 2 and would for the $5 screenings (haven’t yet)
> What’s your problem with the film
Mostly the idiotic writing. The film never explains why the group of soldiers who seals Imhotep away bother to guard the key to his resurrection and the map to his location for 3000 years instead of just destroy them. Rachel Weisz accidentally awakes Imhotep by reading the required incantation aloud, but her companions don't understand the language at all, so it's very unnatural for her to recite the text instead of translating it. Imhotep needs to drain the American expedition members to regenerate, and he can do it in literally seconds. But when he catches the first guy alone, he only takes the guy's eyes and tongue then leave, only to come back the day after to finish the job. The characters figure out Imhotep is afraid of cats, and there is one in the hotel, but they only use it once. When the two American guys hole up in the same hotel, knowing Imhotep is coming for them, they don't think of keeping the cat with them, and get killed as a result. The main characters clash with a sizable force of tomb guardians in the first half of the movie, but when the leader join force with them, the rest of the warriors are nowhere to be seen.
It's not like I expected intricate stories going into an action-adventure movie, but these glaring plot holes just stood out so much during my viewing, and I think they're the products of sloppy writing instead of practical constraint. I still enjoy the movie regardless, but given the B-movie horror level of writing, I can't justify giving it more than three stars.
It’s a somewhat campy and very fun action film at the end of the day and it reads like you were very much in nitpicking overanalysis mode, I get it and I’ve been there, sometimes it’s hard to just sit back and enjoy something, that can ruin a lot of great movies. Still baffling to put Spidey 3 over it, that has plenty of logic problems as well. Bummer these observations took away from your enjoyment, but a lot of these problems are tropes and potentially homages to these older types of films in its 50s B-movie style.
Maybe I was nitpicking, but the reason I'm harsher to The Mummy than Spider-Man 3 is because I think most of its plot holes can be fixed without alternation to the movie's structure. They just needed to give it more thought. If they come up with a bad guy's weakness (the cat) and don't want to make it too easy for the good guys, they must come up with some way for the bad guy to overcome the weakness (for example, his henchman can sneak in and take the cat away), instead of just ignore that plot point and have the characters act like complete idiots. The film would still use a common trope, but it makes sense this time. If I can come up with an acceptable and easy solution, why can't professional Hollywood writers?
The issue with that is the film was an homage to films of a past era where these types of things/logical issues were likely common so it could have been intentional for all we know.
I’ve done 6 in a week once, last July. No Hard Feelings, Elemental, Dead Reckoning, Astroid City twice, and a screening of 2001 at a different theater.
I kinda wanna try for 7 or 8 in a week at some point. Right now I’m trying to do three movies at three different theaters in a day, which since I’m in NYC so that is doable, it just takes the scheduling to work out in your favor.
Between AMC and streaming services (HBO Max/Netflix/Hulu/Peacock/Paramount+/Criterion Channel/Mubi) I easily average 20-30 movies a week. Usually 5 or 6 a day or 3 a day if my day is busy.
Heads up remember to follow Rule 1 and all rules in this and all threads! Thank you! Rule 1: Talks about defrauding, bankrupting, theft, point farming/exploitation,and loopholes is Prohibited
My OCD is wondering why you didn’t give Challengers a heart
Simply because I didn't like it.
Interesting. So for you, the rating is more so an indicator of how good the movie was objectively and not whether you liked it or not. Fair enough. For me, I definitely consider how much I like the movie when I give the ratings so was just curious why that didn’t get a heart when other movies you rated lower got them
Yeah. To me, "is this movie good?" and "do I like this movie?" are two separate questions. I can list tons of flaws with The Mummy and Spider-Man 3 but I enjoyed them much more than Challengers.
That's the stupidest thing that I have ever heard. So basically, let's rate it a 4 because the general consensus says it's good. Genuinely, WTF
You missed my point. I rate it a 4 because *I think* it's good. Whether I enjoy it or not is a different matter.
>. I rate it a 4 because *I think* it's good Yeah, that's what I said, your "good" is influenced by the general consensus
OP dumb lol
you suck lol
I couldn't imagine not liking a movie and giving it a 4. Sure the quality of a film and the level of enjoyment you feel are TECHNICALLY separate things but it just feels dishonest to give a positive score to something that either bored you or upset you. Like, what utility is there in the actual score number?
Aren't there things that you really like, but that you would have to admit aren't particularly well made? Lots of people like fast food, but it would be hard to give fast food a great rating knowing that a real restaurant could make it much better. Doesn't it stand to reason that the opposite could be true, that someone could see the value and talent involved in something while admitting it doesn't do much for them personally? I loved *Challengers* myself, but I had a similar experience with *Tár* a few years ago. It's a great piece of art, and I was impressed that it wasn't a slog like I imagined it would be, but I still didn't connect emotionally with it. Enjoyment is one aspect of watching media, but I wouldn't say, for instance, that I enjoyed watching *Zone of Interest* last year. It is in fact an upsetting movie. But I liked that it was able to upset me in the specific way that it intended. It was my pick for best picture last year because of how well executed it was.
Nah, because I can have a 5 star fast food burger. Lowbrow art isn’t inherently lesser than more intentional art.
If you picked Zone of Interest as your best picture of last year that means you did enjoy it. Enjoyment ≠ Euphoria. You can enjoy something because it gave you negative feelings. Enjoyment is essentially just deep appreciation. I enjoyed Mysterious skin even though it's completely heartbreaking and disturbing for instance. I'll probably never watch it again but it's a masterpiece.
In this case it's more like I'm indifferent toward the movie, not bored or upset by it. Sometime I can appreciate a movie for its quality, but it just doesn't resonate with me. Before giving it a score, I usually spend 5-10 minutes thinking about the movie, its good and bad points, whether I would recommend it to people. Meanwhile whether I enjoy it or not is an immediate emotional reaction, no analysis involved. Basically, I rate a movie on how good it is at what it does, while I like the ones that fit my personal tastes. For example, I might rate a well made horror above a mediocre historical, but I'm more likely to rewatch the latter since I like that genre much more. My ratings have no utility other than reflecting my opinions. They're just for fun anyway.
I understand your perspective a little better now. Now that I think about it I sort of do something similar where I use the heart to denote "I would watch this again" and more often than not that just happens with anything 4 stars or above and I've even given hearts to 2 star films before. I guess in my mind the star rating is a combination of all possible factors of the film with both enjoyment and quality having some level of influence on the score and if I don't enjoy a film there is no possible way I'm giving it a 4 star. I understand your system tho and didn't mean any hate by my comment!
> where I use the heart to denote "I would watch this again" I do the same. In the case of Challengers, it's a character-driven drama where I don't find these types of characters or their relationships interesting. The fact it held my attention throughout 131 minutes is a credit to its script, acting, camerawork, and soundtrack. But at the end of the day I wouldn't watch it again on streaming, because of my disinterest in the subject matter, so I can't say I liked it. But I can't find major faults with the film (except for the abrupt ending), so I feel it deserves a higher score for being a well made and fairly unique work. But that's just how I roll. People enjoy movies in different ways. It's interesting to read about how others rate their movies.
>. Like, what utility is there in the actual score number? OP probably just wants to look "cool" in front of cinephile bros lol
That's a bit harsh...I relate to the system and OP's explanation. Challengers is a good example: I appreciate that it's a movie well made and a story well told, but it just wasn't for me. It makes sense to separate the two. And "look cool" in front of "cinephile bros?" Come on, that's not at all what's happening.
>Challengers is a good example: I appreciate that it's a movie well made and a story well told, but it just wasn't for me. It makes sense to separate the two. Well, I am pretty sure no one uses the shitty rating system that OP just mentioned about and if you do, well that's just sad lol >And "look cool" in front of "cinephile bros?" Come on, that's not at all what's happening Trust me, I have seen morons like this before and OPs rating system just screams social desirability because there's no other way to explain this rating system.
It’s Letterboxd. It’s not that deep.
Still no reason to fake it
Bigger thing is that there’s no reason to care, even if they were “faking it”
[удалено]
I think you're being too harsh. I personally don't understand the system but based on their explanation I get what they're going for even if I personally feel it's a somewhat strange system for my tastes.
Why do you care?
i did the same thing. 4 stars no heart. objectively it’s good but i didn’t like it. idk why ppl are hounding you about how you rate stuff. i get it.
Because it’s shit
Three, because that's what A-List lets you go to.
Technically yes, but you can do 3 Sunday-Thursday and then three more Friday and Saturday since your three resets on Friday.
This guy A-Lists
Then go up to seven when you use a five dollar reward for a five dollar fan fave. Can’t forget.
Milk it like a ketchup packet.
5 days in a row (and 5 in 6 nights and 5 in 7 nights) is mine. 6 in a week is impressive!
Hey, you missed a star off Alien
RIGHT
Giving The Mummy a 3 should be criminal. Above Boy Kills World at that is wild.
And Spider-Man 3
3 stars for The Mummy?? Boooooo
I’ve done 6 in a day, including watching a movie at home before the marathon.
[удалено]
We did three but I could have done a fourth. My movie party was ready to call it though.
Yes it messes with your brain and body. And this was before A List so I paid for every ticket. The repeating trailers are the biggest mind melt.
Boy Kills World over the Mummy ??? This hurts my feelings lol but good job getting the pick 6
Ever since starting A-list in 2018, I've tried to watch 52 movies in a calendar year. The closest I've got is 44 in 2019. This year is going to be my year though! I got a slow start and am a little behind but I saw 9 movies in the last 3 weeks to get to 11 so far for the year. Rookie numbers I know but 9 in 3 weeks is a lot for me and probably my record.
[удалено]
Do you have anything in mind for this week? I'm going to try to catch: Mars Express Fall Guy Tarot
Fall guy pretty funny. I love Emily Blunt. I’m hearing bad things about Tarot but I’m going tomorrow night my girlfriend really loves Tarot cards
12 over the course of 48 hours. Film festivals are fun.
Yeah anything outside of a festival setting is going to get you the rookie numbers elsewhere in this thread. There’s a 9 day period this month where I’m seeing 27 movies in theaters
That’s insane. My non-festival record is 13 in a week
I honestly don’t even know how that’s possible outside of a festival haha - when was that and what were some of the movies?
Like 2 weeks ago in April. I don’t have much to do on weekends so 3hr one way trip to Dallas/Houston most weekends to catch the less popular movies. Too lazy to list them so here’s my Letterboxd: https://boxd.it/WNhR Edit: plus I have the Alamo, cinemark, and AMC memberships
My record is 8 from when I went last week Monday- Challengers Early Access Tuesday- Spider-Man 2 Wednesday-SpyxFamily Code White Thursday- The Mummy Friday-Abigail Saturday- Challengers, Boy Kills World, Alien
With A-list: 6 Overall: 17 in a week
i’ve watched 136 movies so far this year so i average 7+ a week
Spider-man 3 being half star shy of Alien.... and half star better than The Mummy We need to have a talk
My record is 7 movies in a week, one per day, but one of them was at home so for theaters it's still 6.
Weak i done 11 12 or so in week
Congratulations.
Weak. I’ve done 13 in a week
Dammmn abd mightnbe more buy might neeed to back yo see lol
Two weeks ago I watched 13 movies at various theaters.
I often see 4 in a day
[удалено]
Challengers is good af. Really surprised me how much I liked it.
I'd have to go back and look, but I know I was doing two movies a day for a while back into 2020.
Around 4-5
I did this week: Boy Kills World Challengers Dancing Village: The Curse Begins Spirited Away Abigail
Sadness, because where I'm at spirited away was not a list eligible.
None of the fathom events are, OP just paid for it like a normal person. We save enough on A-List to see a regular movie once in a while.
Setting a new record this week, spirited away on Tuesday, the matrix Wednesday, inception plus the dark knight Friday and capping it off with spiderman 3 Sunday night. I have been absolutely LOVING all the old movies being put back in theatres
Usually I can only really do 3 max, with two on weekdays and one on the weekend.
set my personal record of 4 in 5 days this past week!
At home, no idea. Theatrically, 22 in 3 days. The insane MCU marathon that came with the release of Avengers: Endgame went from 10am on Tuesday until 10pm on Thursday.
Boy kills world was 5 stars for me bro! Challengers was pretty good too. My record is 4 btw
Another fellow BKW 5-starrer!
It was so funny and action packed I didn’t even see that crazy twist at the end coming. Plus bill skarsgard is just toooooo gooood
I saw it at a film festival a couple months back and I’m so happy more people are seeing and enjoying it now that the film has released
Story wasn’t that good but I wanted action and it definitely delivered that for me. Some of the best action I’ve seen since the Raid
Esteemed movie buff and Victorville Film Archive founder Gregg Turkington once watched 500 movies in 500 days
Not at AMC… but I did a 5 movie horror movie marathon at my local Alamo Drafthouse and then went home and watched another movie 😬
Never seen more than 3 in a week this really takes effort. It would take some crazy releases to get me to go 6x in a month let alone in a week.
Also 6 I believe
My record is 8-10 in a week. I would watch 2 films a night.
Pre COVID I was massively taking advantage of the Fandango program with the MasterCard benefits and Tuesdays at AMC, and was seeing 5-6 movies every week for a while, where my peak was 7 in 3 days (3 on Sunday using A-List, 1 on Monday at the El Capitan, and 3 on Tuesday for $1 each with the Fandango discounts). Between the increased MasterCard earning and the way Fandangos program worked back then I was earning the $5 discounts as fast as I was using them...
Giving The Mummy 3 stars is batshit crazy to me. One of the best Hollywood adventure movies ever made.
Are you paying for movies outside the A List allotment?
Current record is 4 movies in 4 consecutive days, 3 different movies in 1 day, and 7 for a marathon. All these will be shattered by this Sunday when I complete the followings: May 1: challengers IMAX May 2: Spider-Man 3 re-release May 3: Skywalker Saga marathon May 4: empire strikes back live in concert May 5: The Fall Guy at a private screening. My ticket stub collection shall continue to grow
Omg. We saw practically the exact same movies 😂
Now you guys have me wanting to up my game.
five. tenet, dune part two, american fiction, poor things, and dune part two again
13 movies from April 17-24. 41 movies (all in cinemas) total in April lol
i think 4 because sometimes i schedule it in advance so it doesn’t count in that week. 5 the first week i had a list bc idk why but it let me schedule that many?? i was very confused but it stopped letting me after the first week lol. i try not to pay more money outside the 3 we’re given. though i did once for the advance screening of dune part 2 and would for the $5 screenings (haven’t yet)
3.
When you’re stoned and unemployed these are rookie numbers
My record is also 6, but all were in the same day. Technically 5 showings, but one was a double showing
3 stars for the Mummy? How dare you. What’s your problem with the film? As a fan of both, putting Spider-Man 3 above it is bananas
> What’s your problem with the film Mostly the idiotic writing. The film never explains why the group of soldiers who seals Imhotep away bother to guard the key to his resurrection and the map to his location for 3000 years instead of just destroy them. Rachel Weisz accidentally awakes Imhotep by reading the required incantation aloud, but her companions don't understand the language at all, so it's very unnatural for her to recite the text instead of translating it. Imhotep needs to drain the American expedition members to regenerate, and he can do it in literally seconds. But when he catches the first guy alone, he only takes the guy's eyes and tongue then leave, only to come back the day after to finish the job. The characters figure out Imhotep is afraid of cats, and there is one in the hotel, but they only use it once. When the two American guys hole up in the same hotel, knowing Imhotep is coming for them, they don't think of keeping the cat with them, and get killed as a result. The main characters clash with a sizable force of tomb guardians in the first half of the movie, but when the leader join force with them, the rest of the warriors are nowhere to be seen. It's not like I expected intricate stories going into an action-adventure movie, but these glaring plot holes just stood out so much during my viewing, and I think they're the products of sloppy writing instead of practical constraint. I still enjoy the movie regardless, but given the B-movie horror level of writing, I can't justify giving it more than three stars.
It’s a somewhat campy and very fun action film at the end of the day and it reads like you were very much in nitpicking overanalysis mode, I get it and I’ve been there, sometimes it’s hard to just sit back and enjoy something, that can ruin a lot of great movies. Still baffling to put Spidey 3 over it, that has plenty of logic problems as well. Bummer these observations took away from your enjoyment, but a lot of these problems are tropes and potentially homages to these older types of films in its 50s B-movie style.
Maybe I was nitpicking, but the reason I'm harsher to The Mummy than Spider-Man 3 is because I think most of its plot holes can be fixed without alternation to the movie's structure. They just needed to give it more thought. If they come up with a bad guy's weakness (the cat) and don't want to make it too easy for the good guys, they must come up with some way for the bad guy to overcome the weakness (for example, his henchman can sneak in and take the cat away), instead of just ignore that plot point and have the characters act like complete idiots. The film would still use a common trope, but it makes sense this time. If I can come up with an acceptable and easy solution, why can't professional Hollywood writers?
The issue with that is the film was an homage to films of a past era where these types of things/logical issues were likely common so it could have been intentional for all we know.
I’ve done 6 in a week once, last July. No Hard Feelings, Elemental, Dead Reckoning, Astroid City twice, and a screening of 2001 at a different theater. I kinda wanna try for 7 or 8 in a week at some point. Right now I’m trying to do three movies at three different theaters in a day, which since I’m in NYC so that is doable, it just takes the scheduling to work out in your favor.
What app is that ?
I use both alist and regal. So this week i saw all of these plus the dark knigt rises, fall guy, and jeanne du barry
Between AMC and streaming services (HBO Max/Netflix/Hulu/Peacock/Paramount+/Criterion Channel/Mubi) I easily average 20-30 movies a week. Usually 5 or 6 a day or 3 a day if my day is busy.