Report Card: Movies of 2009 Get a 2.15 G.P.A. So Far
69 reviews and counting as I take a look back...
I was recently prompted to take a look back at my reviews of 2009, average out the grades and see how things shaped up. However, once I got done with that I began wondering how this year stacked up to earlier years and my first days reviewing films back in 2003. Of course, I dreaded the prospect.
For those of you that are either new to the site or don't read all of my posts, you may not know how I feel about my early movie reviews back when I started RopeofSilicon.com. Perhaps you think I am awful right now, and if that's the case, I cringe at the thought of what you would think of my writing back then.
As for this little experiment, I have listed the overall grade point average for my reviews on a per-year basis, the total number of reviews, the best and worst reviewed movies of each year and a little explanation of where I was in terms of the site and my idea of where this whole thing was going to go. Hopefully it gives you a better idea of where the site has been and what the future may hold. Readers like you have become such an integral part of RopeofSilicon's future, and I think this is great way to give you a look back at where it all started and how I have changed as the years have passed.
This is probably also a good time to tell you how I approach the actual grading of a movie. Personally, I hate grades, which actually makes this entire article quite ironic, but everyone loves to look at them as the quick decider before reading the words of a review and occasionally they make for good conversation. So what can you do? The way I use grades is to look at a "C" grade just as it is looked upon in grade school. A "C" means average. So often people see me giving a movie a "C+" and think this is some kind of horrible grade, especially since a "C+" is considered "rotten" at RottenTomatoes. Well, I don't submit to RottenTomatoes so I don't really think about that too often. A "C+", in my mind, means a film is above average and considering the number of films I see in a year, above average isn't all that bad.
The number of films one sees is also a very important statistic in my opinion and looking at a "C" as average plays heavily into that. I think we can all agree most films are either average or just below or above. Considering the number of films there are out there, it is actually probably more like the majority are below average, but that's for another conversation. So, when I personally hand out a "B" or a "B+" I think that means a lot. Granted, back when I started doing this I didn't look at it this closely. It was only when I realized this was going to be my career did I begin thinking about how important these grades may be down the line. Tossing out a bunch of "A+" grades would soon mean an "A+" meant very little. So I set myself the "C-is-average" standard and have lived by it ever since.
I hope that makes sense, and with that… Let's get started and see what we find…
Ahhhh, the first year. Back when I thought this was just going to be a short hobby until it actually started to grow.
In March of 2003 I was invited to screen my first movie, The Hunted starring Benicio Del Toro and Tommy Lee Jones. I hated the movie and didn't even end up writing a review. Strangely enough, it wouldn't be until May that I would post my first official review for The Matrix Reloaded. At that time I was still paying my way into screenings for the majority of studios and having to catch a matinee directly after work on Fridays in an effort to get the reviews up as early as possible. Obviously, not the ideal way to look at and review a movie, but what did I know of ideals?
It wasn't until September of 2003 that all of the studios were inviting me to screenings, which was when Focus invited me to review Lost in Translation… I loved it and slowly the PR reps got to know me and I got to understand how things worked. However, I was still very green when it came to reviewing movies. I didn't know what people wanted to read, how much plot to reveal and so forth. Some of the reviews went on forever and others read as if I was searching for more things to say.
As a result you get the films at the top and bottom of my reviewing year that you see below, but some of the more memorable titles not listed below include the likes of Finding Nemo, Pirates of the Caribbean and Master and Commander.
BEST REVIEWED
- Kill Bill: Volume One
- The Last Samurai
- The Lord of the Rings: The Return of the King
WORST REVIEWED
- Duplex
- In the Cut
- Johnny English
Looking back at 2004 I don't have any huge complaints about the grades I handed out, but a few of them have moved up and down since then. For instance, Before Sunset and Collateral are two of my all-time favorite films, they received an "A-" and "A" respectively, while the three listed below were given an "A+". Emotional attachment is one thing a grade certainly cannot reflect.
I reviewed 101 movies that year, making it my second highest number of reviews in one year and at that time I was still working a full-time job as well as trying to catch as many films as I could and stay on top of all the daily news updates and build the backend database for the site. My writing was still extremely weak as I went for quantity and not quality, but I was starting to get the hang of it when 2005 happened…
BEST REVIEWED
- The Passion of the Christ
- Kill Bill: Volume Two
- Million Dollar Baby
WORST REVIEWED
- Against the Ropes
- The Reckoning
- Van Helsing
- THX 1138: The Director's Cut
- Alexander
On July 29, 2005 Columbia Pictures released Stealth. To that point I was beginning to get burned out big time and Stealth was the film that almost made me quit. Awful movies were starting to weigh me down, but destiny brought me a savior of sorts in the form of Laremy Legel, the man most of you now know as the weekend box-office oracle here at RopeofSilicon.com.
Laremy came to the site in 2005 after introducing himself just before The Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy and emailing me a multi-page diatribe on how he hated The Notebook — I sympathized. He reviewed movies for me from 2005-2007. While I still saw damn near every single movie released in theaters I wasn't reviewing them on a regular basis any longer and getting the design and database for the site built up was priority #1, such as adding the award show histories and so forth. I mean, how else would Sin City be one of my best reviewed movies of the year? Sure, I like that movie, but an "A"?
BEST REVIEWED
- Cinderella Man
- Sin City
WORST REVIEWED
- Madagascar
- Stealth
Only 39 reviews and while I still remain one of the select few that loves M. Night Shyamalan's Lady in the Water, my "C" review of The Fountain is the one film that has definitely risen the highest in my favor over the years. The biggest problem with this year was the fact I didn't review enough films to even gauge what I was thinking.
BEST REVIEWED
- Lady in the Water
- The Descent
- The Queen
WORST REVIEWED
- The Omen
- Annapolis
- The Protector
- The Guardian
Laremy was still reviewing movies for me in 2007, but toward the tail-end of the year I began getting back into things as Laremy became the box-office guy and I returned to my role of reviewer.
The site was now my full-time job and the design and back-end work was starting to get locked up allowing me time to focus my attention on the actual task of movie discussion and not website maintenance. While the G.P.A. for 2007 isn't necessarily all that high, I still look back at that year fondly as you can tell as it has the highest list of "Best Reviewed" films in this retrospective.
BEST REVIEWED
- Things We Lost in the Fire
- Atonement
- Hairspray
- The Bourne Ultimatum
- The Assassination of Jesse James by the Coward Robert Ford
- Michael Clayton
- Sweeney Todd: The Demon Barber Of Fleet Street
WORST REVIEWED
- Are We Done Yet?
- Goya's Ghosts
Full-time and 138 reviews. I felt 2008 was the turning point for the site in terms of my writing and dedication toward reviewing movies. Granted, it wasn't a spectacular year for movies, but it had a lot to like and I thought my reviews were beginning to finally improve… or at least they were legible.
BEST REVIEWED
- 4 Months, 3 Weeks and 2 Days
- WALL•E
- The Dark Knight
WORST REVIEWED
- Over Her Dead Body
- 88 Minutes
- What Happens in Vegas
- Mamma Mia!
2009, a year I think we will look back on as "The Year that Suffered Due to the Writers' Strike." We haven't had a lot to celebrate this year and it carries the worst G.P.A. of the lot. Only one "A+" review (In the Loop) and not a single review with the grade of an "A" as The Hangover and The Hurt Locker earned an "A-" from me. I do know the film that will be getting the first "A" of the year will be An Education once I get that review online, and both Inglourious Basterds and District 9 will be getting favorable opinions, but not sure either will crack the "A-" mark.
There is still plenty more to look forward to as the second half of every year always offers the better films so I expect that G.P.A. to improve.
BEST REVIEWED
- In the Loop
- The Hangover
- The Hurt Locker
WORST REVIEWED
- Fanboys
- The Last House on the Left
- I Love You Beth Cooper
Links from Other Sites You May Like
Showing 22 Comments
~ PLEASE NOTE ~
If, in any way, your comment is an attack on the author of this post or a previous commenter, your comment will be deleted without question.
Add a New Comment |
Click to Read Our Commenting Rules & Guidelines
Now, hold on! I thought you said "grades don't matter. I only grade films because people expect me to" when The Watchmen came out…now your using your admittedly fake grades to grade years by movie?
You can't have it both ways.
Really interesting reading, Brad. And I'm very glad I'm not the only one who loved "Lady in the Water".
Sorry if I appear a bit dense here but what do the numbers and the GPA acronym stand for?
Grade Point Average which is represented on a 1 to 5 scale. 1 = F, 5 = A
@Brian: Grade Point Average
It's a mechanism used by high schools and universities to turn letter grades into numbers. A/A+ is 4.0, A- is 3.667, B+ is 3.333, B is 3.000, and so forth.
So a 2.15 corresponds to between a C and a C+
This is wonderful, makes me feel like I know you better. I only started on the Rope as of this year, stumbled upon it really, but find it irreplaceable. I check it regularly every day.
But, Brad, you should know that only an" A" or "B" counts in grad school. A "C" is considered a failing grade. And let's not even go into the gentleman "A's" that are being passed out in undergraduate school today. It's only grade school and high school that still says that "C" is average…and no one believes that even there.
I'm rather generous when I grade a film. An "A" film is one that I would like to own so that I can see it over and over. A "B" film may be in my collection too even if I admit flaws. A "C" film's flaws begin to outweigh it's good points. And a "D" is a stinker.
For instance, one of my all time favorite films is "The Way of the Gun." I know, sometimes it shocks me too. But that film is so intelligent in its dialog and its character interplay as well as having the funniest opening scene ever shot outside of a comedy. Anyway, it is majorly flawed but still gets top rating from me. I love it. But then I have the luxury of not being a professional film critic.
Brad Brevet, bravo.
Bravo for coming so far since good 'ol 2003.
Also, I'm very pleased to see that perhaps my tastes run closer to yours than I previously thought, as I did not realize that 2005-2007 was primarily a different reviewer. Very excited to see Kill Bill and Lost in Translation among your favorites, and happy to see that you liked the hated Last Samurai. And Hangover, In the Loop, and the Hurt Locker are assuredly my favorites so far of the year.
Finally, I am very, very excited for An Education, and hope that that review hurries online. Hopefully, if all goes according to plan, I will see it at Toronto, but until then I can live vicariously through you.
Keep up the hard work, sir
Aha, but the fall movies aren't here yet. I actually thought 2008 was an unbelievably weak year. 2008 was a year of well-made summer blockbusters, like TDK, Iorn Man, Wall-E, etc., but I know that I won't be showing Benjamin Button (one of the most overrated movies in years) or Slumdog Millionaire to my children 20 years from now.
As for 2009, the summer hasn't been great (Public Enemies was a bit of a letdown, and though I thought Half Blood Prince was well-crafted, others seem to disagree. Only noteworthy movies off the top of my head is Up and Star Trek), but I can honestly say that 2009 is the first time in YEARS that I have been genuinely excited about a number of creative-looking releases in the fall, that don't seem to resemble the usual gritty Oscar-whoring fare. Look at the list below, and tell me these haven't been some of the most original-looking movies we've seen.
Ponyo (Hayao Miyazaki comes to the states!)
Inglourious Basterds
Bright Star*
Where the Wild Things Are
District 9
The Lovely Bones
An Education
The Boat That Rocked
9
Avatar
Nine
Sherlock Holmes
And most of these have gotten some seriously good preview buzz, which is even more impressive.
Dang i just realized I have been reading this site since I was 13.
@oldskool138: Read the fourth paragraph. You don't even have to read the whole thing, the second sentence is what you're looking for.
How were you able to get into screenings before the studios started to invite you?
Greg,
My point is "why do it at all?"
Heck, why not come up with a new easily disseminated ranking system that doesn't rely on a stars or grade system (or "freshness" rating)? Revolutionize movie reviewing and make a boat-load of money.
@Danny: I didn't, I paid for tickets.
@Brad Brevet:
I'm just trying to get this straight because it's a pretty cool story…
Before the studios started to invite, you had to pay for matinee tickets after work on Friday. Then you got invited to your first screening in 2003…What prompted the studios to start inviting you?
@Danny: I asked the PR reps if I could review movies as a member of the press and they said not until I grew the site, gained a readership and put together a presentable product. So that's what I set out to do. You can see previous versions of the site right here. Unfortunately there are about five different versions I don't have screen captures of including the very first one.
Wow…I wonder what it must've been like to balance a full time job and see all the wide releases that came out.
I also agree with you on the grading scale, about how an A+ should be incredibly rare to near impossible. I read a lot of Roger Ebert and when I see a 4 star review of his I think "Okay, another solid film." He gives so many of them (not that it's a bad thing) that it's an interesting contrast to read reviews that are rarely given high marks.
P.S. I also really liked The Last Samurai. It seemed like a bit of an underrated film, I think it's one of the best epics I've seen. Tom Cruise for best actor?
I found out about this website back in 2006 i believe. I was 16 and i was interested in movies. This website and Brad Being a tough reviewer got me more into movies and i myself beggining to critique ones i watch alone and with friends. My friends come to me to know about movies and what i think about them. That all has to do with this website. I will always love movies and Ropeofsilicon made me appreciate them even more than i did before.
I imagine that this year's GPA will only increase with all the Oscar bait still to be released, no?
@Natrix: Unless most of the Oscar bait turns out to be stinkers. I hope not.
You said the descent was one of the best. You no longer have credibility.
Favourable review for Kill Bill?? um no. Interesting read though
lady in water..lol