Commander Shipp’s New-ish Scoring System and Other Thoughts on Reviewing Movies

Because picking numbers or stars is so 2023…

It’s Commander Shipp here, and today I want to break down the new review system I’ve been rolling out for my movie reviews in 2024. This idea has been bouncing around in my head for a while…but I’ve been hesitant to use it for several reasons, which I’m going to talk about in a sec. But first, I should explain what my issue is with the current system.

So up until now, I was using a 1-10 scale and have even busted out decimals occasionally if I felt a distinction needed to be made, usually when it’s resting somewhere between 7-10.

However, since the internet has decided to aggregate everyone’s score together, it’s caused quite a few problems. If I score a film at a 5 or 6, does that indicate how much I really enjoy other elements of that film? For example, my friends and audience know how much I enjoy the Godzilla series despite the franchise’s clunkier elements. So…if I score one film with a 5, it may seem like I really didn’t like it when, in reality, I might have enjoyed the carnage but been annoyed that it took 17 cuts to put together a single punch or gratuitous building destruction. Or better still, while I can appreciate the film craft involved with Martin Scorsese’s latest film, Killers of the Flower Moon, it doesn’t change the fact that I hated the perspective and time given to DiCaprio and DeNiro’s characters versus Lily Gladstone. How does me scoring it with, say, an 8 or a 9 help convey that?

Now, the obvious answer would be, “Hey, just read my review, and you’ll get that nuance,” – and that’s honestly what I’m hoping people will do as I increase my review count this year. Reading the review would help you understand the context that I’m delivering the score with, but even then, it may not be obvious what elements went into creating that score or how much weight I’m giving to the soundtrack, the cinematography, performances, etc.

Then, there’s the context of my score being scraped by some AI bot or various aggregator to fuel their sites – where my control of the number and how it’s perceived, however weak or imaginary that was, to begin with, is irrevocably changed. If and/or when folks come back to this site to read the review, part of my hope is that the nuance I’m creating with this new system makes them more likely to respect and quickly understand my scoring reasons, despite how deep they get into the actual written or video review.

Lastly – and this point is one I’ve been watching, researching, and debating for a while – the scoring systems online have become seriously broken between reviewers and audiences, with a third player entering the fray the past decade: influencers. Many reviewers have become entrenched in their spaces, even more elitist than before, and refuse to budge on various review points or ideas. Audiences have definitely tuned us out and are going to watch whatever they want with no regard to the overall review buzz surrounding a film, which leads to some mediocre or trash-laden films squeezing the public for dollars. Some influencers and other prominent fans of a property attempt to put on the “Reviewer” hat but only heap praise or hate onto a project, with no critical eye or analysis to be seen. Subsequently, viewers flock to their respective ideological corners to be fed something they were already going to agree with, not something that would challenge them.

I’m explaining these issues in a very quick, down-and-dirty way, but the topic deserves its own video and discussion and dissection. However, the singular point to take away before moving forward is this: the audience / critic model has fallen apart and likely can’t be put back together as it was.

So, how can we attempt to fix it?

My first thought is that attempting to be more transparent on what goes into my reviews or which areas were most important to me helps build trust and understanding. Again, while the thoughts will certainly be contained within the text of the review, I don’t think there’s any harm in expounding or highlighting those areas into a more digestible way. Hence, I came up with a new test that will hopefully aid in that goal.

3 Factor Test

On any given film, if I actually sat down and rated every factor or category, while it may be a “more accurate” review, it’s a level of work and scale that isn’t necessary. For some movies, their cinematography may be good enough, but there’s other glaring issues or areas they excelled at. It may be more prudent to rate the film or break down those other areas rather than force a score on cinematography that did its job.

Besides, the point is to create a quick breakdown to see what stood out; adding more math and categories – even if they were considered – doesn’t really amount to a better review, I think it would just clutter up the process. To give you an idea of this in action, here’s an example from my review of Trần Anh Hùng’s The Taste of Things (2024):

You can read these three categories effectively as: cinematography, performances, and editing. After each factor gets a score, my overall score is the mean of those scores. It still makes for a score between the 1-10 range, but the additional context is there to make it more meaningful.

Also, remember these aren’t fixed: one review may be about performances, CGI, and soundtracks or another focuses on one specific scene that drags down the film when other categories were great. The overall hope is that by breaking it out like this, you can quickly see how you want to relate to the film. For example, if you’re looking for an enjoyable film despite its flaws, then you may pick a film that I gave a large enjoyment score to but rated lower in other areas because you don’t care about the technical issues.

Now, that doesn’t mean we won’t disagree – and I’ve already seen how this system won’t work for everyone. Recently, I was discussing my issues about Argylle (2024) with a co-worker, and we completely disagreed on the enjoyment factor. That conversation revealed how that factor was high for them, whereas it’s an important ingredient for me, not the sole motivating factor. Thus, my lower rating for that category wouldn’t have been useful information for them. However, I would argue it led to a much better outcome in the conversation because now we understood each other, which is more important than my score being all things to all people.

Special Factors

Along with enjoyment, I believe adding in a fourth factor every once in awhile will help when I’m reviewing a Marvel film or other movies that may have some circumstances to consider. For example, if I were to review The Room (2003), it would fail hard on whatever 3 factors I picked because it’s just an abysmally bad film. But if I throw in a fourth category, like cult status or audience troll factor, then it might get a 7 or 8 from me, recognizing the meta impact it’s made for itself. This would be a great way to distinguish the technical failure of a film that may push it into a B or C movie status while recognizing what fun could still be had.

I also think this could be extremely useful when movies get adapted from classic literature or new bestsellers. If you know me, I don’t care much for films adhering so closely to the source material that they become un-filmable. Considering that both mediums are designed to do different things, I give a lot of leeway in this area. But I also recognize seeing something that you and your fellow fans adored for years depicted in a different or spiritually incongruent way can feel insulting. Thus, a fourth category could discuss accuracy: for example, I think Ender’s Game (2013) is a great kids / adolescence sci-fi film…but it’s not a good adaptation of that book series. A fourth score titled “book accuracy” would be a nod to those discrepancies while honoring what the adaptation gets right. This way, if you’re a fan of the series being adapted, you can walk in knowing what to expect.

I also totally intend on having fun with these, so don’t be surprised if I throw in a Nicholas Cage facial expression meter or an Al Pacino-ism counter just for giggles. Those may not matter to you, but believe me, they are fun elements to keep track of, among other things.

I suppose what I’m really getting at with my 3 factors, and even a potential bonus one, is that these are just quick, bite-sized points to discuss the film. I’m not going to rigidly score a film within predetermined categories because I don’t think that’s useful or beneficial and could get us arguing about minutiae that misses the point.

Still Pondering

There’s a few ideas that didn’t make it here but that I’m still processing.

For example, it might be helpful to give you a Streaming vs. Theater nod…so many of us already determine whether we want to watch a film in the theater or “wait until it releases on streaming.” Since COVID-19 threw gasoline onto the issue with HBO Max and Disney+ doing simultaneous releases, it’s broken this type of rating system or ideology wide open. To be fair, it would be an incredibly quick way of understanding how to give or withhold your support towards a production.

But it also feels a bit hollow?

If I’m laying out the case for the film, shouldn’t it be obvious whether to stream or get out of your pajamas and go watch it at the cineplex (though honestly, I don’t believe there’s a pajama policy, so do whatever you want). I’m also not sure I want to support a system that continues to reward studios for their ineptitude by watching it at home versus their bungling of the theater market, which has hurt everyone involved. That doesn’t mean that your preference is bad; if you want or need to stay home, that’s totally fine. But the streaming model, despite the concessions made in the recent WGA / SAG-AFTRA strikes, is a model that is primarily responsible for undermining the indie film market and has disrupted opportunities for small and mid-level filmmakers everywhere. As it stands, I’ll leave the decision on where and when to watch the film up to.

I like scoring so that definitely influenced my decision to choose the 3 factors, but I also really loved this format too. It’s possible that I could still use this format when I return to video reviews later this year, as this may be a better conversation starter over on our YouTube channels and subsequent Discord threads. If you really prefer this method, you should let me know, and I’ll consider a switch or another way to weave these thoughts into the scoring section.

My other thought, which is more existential, is whether film critics in our previous form are still needed.

The days of people hanging onto every word of a critic and our opinion shifting how people go to the movies has fundamentally changed. I regularly encounter people who only base their decisions on word of mouth and audience scores across various websites, completely ignoring the critic score. Under that backdrop, plowing ahead thinking that my score actually matters in that landscape would be foolish. So many online-generation critics (critics who never worked for a newspaper) are not doing a great job in this space because we’ve basically just replicated the same issues of print media critics onto our blogs and video reviews. We’ve unwittingly recreated the same high-brow, whitewashed critical attitude with a fresh coat of social media paint, and we’re shocked that no one is listening to us.

And that’s before we get into the other issues, like how movie analysis has been fractured into factions by sites just trying to troll you, rile you up, or appease your side of the aisle. Trying to discuss films with people who have siloed themselves inevitably leads to the occasional blow ups whenever we see a film targeted or propped up by one group failing or doing really well. We need only look at The Marvels (2023) failure last year to see how many trolls came out to write a review about it (when they hadn’t released anything all year) and tear it down while other defenders came out of the woodwork to prop it up. It’s really hard to critique a film’s flaws under those conditions when you know one group is going to either vilify or magnify the sharper elements of your review.

Personally, it took me a while to get back into reviewing after the whole ordeal I faced defending The Last Jedi (2017) and, while things are certainly less intense than they were back then, the same problematic elements still exist. I have no plans of stopping again due to trolls, but in future reviews and building conversation, I’m certainly weary or cautious of how I’m going to engage or create the space for that.

What Do you Think?

I also want to leave you with a thought that one of our former reviewers, Daniel Chaniott, proposed to me a few weeks ago when we were discussing the state of reviewing. He said – regarding various online reviewers or video series like CinemaSins – that many of them are so negative or nitpicky that they don’t make you enjoy cinema more. If anything, they may make you actively dislike the process of filmmaking more. Thus, he said a very simple thought that’s been resonating with me as I’ve been writing and reconsidering my process:

“If a review, video, or conversation about a movie makes you hate or dislike cinema more afterwards, then you’re talking about movies wrong.”

Daniel Chaniott

I think this statement is a strong argument for why reviews and/or how we interact with them need to change. If my reviews lead you to dislike the art of cinema, then I haven’t been doing my job well. If I make a joke that makes you see a director or actor as less than a human being, then I’ve failed at my job. If my score or others like them become the cudgel to be used against one group over another, while it may be outside of my control, I am responsible for examining what I’m saying and how it’s impacting or affecting the folks reading my work.

I still have more thoughts as this change is something happening in real-time, evolving very rapidly for me as I have more conversations with other reviewers and audience goers. So far, however, I really like this as a guiding principle moving forward to make sure I’m doing right by my audience and the cast and crews pouring their energy into these projects. I hope you’ll continue joining me on this journey and hopefully together, we’ll walk away with a greater appreciation for cinema than when we started.

Check Us Out On Patreon

Love Nerd Union? Consider supporting us over on Patreon. You’ll get access to early access articles, commercial-free video essays, online discussions and more. Plus, you will be directly responsible for supporting journalism in a field that’s currently being overwhelmed by clickbait focused sites. Supporting us keeps the lights on but it also sets a standard to sites in our field about fair wage practices, citing sources, debunking unconfirmed sources, and helps us investigate stories better. If you want to hear more about our goals and updated ethical standards as a site, you can check out our Editor’s Letter later this month.

About Author