It seems that man of steel could end up has a 3/5 or 3.5/5 star movie
5 = excellent, perfect in almost every way every
4 = great
3 = good
2 = ok
1 = terrible
http://community.flixster.com/forums/topic/267970639
Making Sense of the Rating Scale
or
http://lsrmoviescale.blogspot.com/
____________________________________________
Critiquing Movies: My 4 Star Rating System
If theres one complaint about film critics that I cant disagree with, its the fact that their rating systems seem to differ from critic to critic and from publication to publication. From Gene Siskel and Roger Eberts trademark thumbs to Entertainment Weeklys letter scale (they rank films from A-D), its hard to keep track of which films are worth seeing when you dont understand what each rating means in the first place. Traditionally, films have always been ranked on the 4 star system, a rating scale that I use to review films because I find it to be the easiest system for a reader to figure out 4 stars is perfection while 1 star is a complete dud. However, between the confusing 2½ star rating and the minor differences between 3½ stars and 4 stars, even the traditional 4 star system has its share of confusions and ambiguities. To settle the confusion, Ive decided to spell out the 4 star system as I see it so that were all on the same page by my next film review.
1 Star While some critics such as Rolling Stones Peter Travers are notorious for slapping films with zero stars, the 1 star rating is essentially the same infamous honor. With a 1 star rating, a film is certainly not worth your time as much as its not worth your money, and with poor acting, directing, and screenwriting, a 1 star film is nothing short of an extremely unbearable movie experience. For proof, look no further than the parody films Disaster Movie and Vampires Suck I dare you to watch them and try to make it beyond the 5-minute mark; trust me, its impossible! As soon as you see a 1 star rating, you know to pass without hesitation.
2 Stars Though it has one more star thrown into the mix, the 2 star rating is similar to the 1 star in that it means the respective film should ultimately be skipped. While a 1 star rating means a film is pretty much unbearable, a 2 star film usually has at least one redeeming quality maybe a strong performance, or stylish direction, or a witty screenplay that saves it from being utter trash but still isnt strong enough to make the film worth your time and money. Michael Bays first Transformers film is a good example of a 2 star movie its a bad film thats too long and too loud and that has terrible acting and over the top direction, but its impressive visual effects are enough to make it not a complete waste (theyre only more impressive on a big screen, especially the final hour) but still not a film Id recommend seeing.
2½ stars Of all the film ratings, the 2½ star rating is probably the most confusing; in fact, after my reviews for the films American Reunion and John Carter, many of you came to me asking if 2½ stars meant you should see them or not. For me, 2½ stars is kind of like the word meh in that it defines a film that is not really good but not really bad either. Most often, 2½ star films do things enjoyably right (Carter had great performances and direction, Reunion was solidly funny and worked its characters perfectly), but just arent films that a reviewer thinks are must-sees (Carter was inconsistent, Reunion was nothing original). When critiquing a movie, one must take in all aspects of the movie-going expierence, and when I give a movie 2½ stars, it simply means it was good and theres a chance youll like it (given you enjoy the genre, actors, etc.) but in an age where going to the movies costs upwards of $12, you may want to save your money on something better. Ultimately, 2½ stars leaves it up to the reader if you want to spend your money, youll probably have a descent time, if not, you wont miss out on anything special in any way.
3 Stars 3 star films are solid, enjoyable, worth your time movies, theres really nothing else you can say. With 3 stars, a film may not be winning any great awards or getting a life long legacy as a classic, but its a fine way to spend a couple of hours in the theatre. From 3 stars and up, a film is worth your time and money, and the ranging rating really just depends on the personal opinion of the reviewer. Martin Scorseses Hugo, for instance, was released last year to rapturous critical praise (many gave it 4 stars), but while I didnt think it was perfect because of its uneven plot, it was certainly enjoyable and enthralling and worth seeing, making the 3 star rating a perfect score for the film according to my liking.
3 and ½ stars / 4 stars Much like 2½ stars, the 3½ star rating can be quite confusing because many critics use it differently essentially, the 3½ star rating comes down to how a critic differentiates it from his/her 4 star rating. While many critics will give a film four stars for being visually and technically perfect, I use the rating more like Rolling Stones Peter Travers, a critic who rarely gives 4 stars to films. For Travers, the 4 star rating is a highly opinionated score to give a movie and is reserved for films that go above and beyond technical perfection and hit emotions and bring out feelings that you wouldnt think a film could draw out. In other words, both 3½ star films and 4 star films are both award-worthy, must-see pictures with strong acting and directing, the only difference just depends on how the film moves me. For instance, last years classics The Tree of Life and Drive were both brilliant films with some incredible components, but the only reason I gave Life 4 stars over Drives 3½ stars was because Life transported my mind into my own childhood and family experiences. Because Life so powerfully resonated with me emotionally, it was able to notch a perfect 4 star rating, but in no way does it mean that its technically a better film than Drive; in fact, Drive has a stylish noir direction and a performance by Ryan Gosling that is hypnotically addictive and thrilling. If rating films was solely based on the technical components, than Drive wouldve received 4 stars easily and without hesitation, but because I use the 4 star rating selectively it had to settle with 3½ stars. Either way, 3½ and 4 star ratings are scores that signify powerful, must-see films the difference solely depends on the preference of the reviewer.
http://sharfatthemovies.wordpress.com/2012/04/27/4stars/
_____________
Note- i disagree that the first transformers movie was bad.
The average score rating was 3/5,so that's not bad.
t:
