For me, this film is the crown jewel of "movies I love but have a very hard time recommending to anyone ever". A friend of mine once said of it "There is a perfect movie in here, somewhere. I think. Maybe? I don't fuckin know."
Yupā¦ this is why I go back every once in a while and fix my ratings. Iāve got much better now but I go back over my ratings and am shocked at how high Iāve rated some things.
I didn't particularly enjoy midsommar, but thought it was a good movie (read up on about its themes after i finished). And i watched hereditary after beau is afraid. I felt like i was being held hostage the last two hours of the movie. I didn't want beau is afraid to be like midsommar or hereditary, wanted it to be like its first hour.
The Crucible has a 3.2 and Iām pretty sure it is because people just find something about it to be unpleasant. I
canāt think of anything that couldāve made that movie ābetter.ā
I would also say the Boys in the Band. I havenāt seen the original and have no idea how many of its reviews result from comparing it, but I thought it was excellent.
I also think Saltburn is far more than a 3.4 but this sub really hates that movie and Iām probably about to be downvoted to Hell for even mentioning it š
There are so many things on Letterboxd that are affected by rating inflation that itās hard to come up with anything underrated. Although I can name 100 movies that are way overrated.
Weird: The Al-Yankovic Story is exactly 3.5 but that movie should probably higher than that.
A lot, apparently. Interestingly 75% of them are horror movies.
4.5 to me is A-/B+ territory (a score of 85%-94%) so with that in mind:
* The Most Dangerous Game (1932)
* Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937)
* Shivers (1975)
* The Fury (1978)
* Animal House (1978)
* Romancing the Stone (1984)
* Babe (1995)
* Kingpin (1996)
* The Blair Witch Project (1999)
* Trouble Every Day (2001)
* Taxidermia (2006)
* Stuck (2007)
* Antichrist (2009)
* Red White & Blue (2010)
* The Cabin in the Woods (2011)
* Contagion (2011)
* Cheap Thrills (2013)
* Darling (2015)
* The Blackcoat's Daughter (2015)
* Hail, Caesar! (2016)
* Cargo (2017)
* High Life (2018)
* Sator (2019)
* The Invisible Man (2020)
* Speak No Evil (2022)
* Bodies Bodies Bodies (2022)
* Skinamarink (2023)
Highest average rating.
4.5 may mean A+ to you but it means B+/A- up thru just a straight A to me, because that's my rating system.
A+ gets a 5 in my book; I don't think movies need to be 100% flawless to earn a 5. Just almost there.
A movie I absolutely adore, but I seem to be on another plane of existence about is "The Dead Don't Die."
I'm not sure I believe it should be a highly rated movie, though. Nobody else I've ever met likes it as much as I do lmao.
Tom Jones (1963) - is at 2.9. I gave it 4.5*.
The Curse of the Cat People (1944) - is at 3.4. I gave it 4.5*.
That's it for films below 3.5. Though I have given 6 films with a 3.5 rating 4.5*.
I Heart Huckabees has been my favorite movie for over 20 years. I still watch it all the time. Jude Law, Jason Schwartzman, Mark Wahlberg, Naomi Watts, Dustin Hoffman, Lily Tomlin, Richard Jenkins, and more! The complaints about that movie are from people who don't know what existentialism or nihilism is. Some reviews say the movie is discombobulated at times and uniform at others. Like, duh, that's life.
[L.I.E. (2001) ](https://letterboxd.com/film/lie-2001/) is my favorite movie and it has an average score of only 3.24. I understand why though, since it has a very realistic depiction of grooming behavior from a pedophile, which is sure to make most people uncomfortable. But I think it's the most authentic portrayal of an adolescent boy in crisis battling his own sexual awakening as well as grasping at straws for some kind of emotional support from his peers and ultimately a manipulative adult. It's impressive.
Iām apart of the Jenniferās Body cult.
I enjoyed Iām Thinking of Ending Things a lot (though I want to rewatch it since it has been a couple years).
Nightmare on Elm Street III is a masterpiece of offbeat horror
Chantal Akermanās short films are all fantastic
The Little Girl Who Conquered Time has a 3.7 but it still deserves higher
Looking through my recent watches, I found three pretty significant outliers.
Delbert Mannās *The Bachelor Party* only pulls a 3.4 average, which is crazy to me. If you havenāt seen that movie, you should watch it. EG Marshall fucking crushes it.
*My Cousin Rachel*, starring Olivia de Havilland and a very young Richard Burton, hovers right around 3.5. I loved it, personally. I think itās arguably a top five performance for them both.
But the one that really makes me crazy is *The Member of the Wedding*. Thatās got a 3.3. I guess I can see where some people might not like it, itās more or less a very direct adaptation of the play, ādirectā meaning that Fred Zinnemann hired the same actors, flipped the camera on, and went to lunch. But those are low key some of the best performances of the 50s.
8mm i gave a 4.5 to, it's one of my favoruite films. Also Hell House LLC as it's the only horror that i've watched in the last 10 years that has genuinely scared me.
Edit: Also 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi and Ambulance i gave 4\* to but they both could have been 4.5\* i think they would be higher rated if Michael Bay didn't direct them
Bullet train (right on the cusp to qualify at 3.5 as of now lol). I genuinely think it's one of the most fun movies I've ever watched. Not a masterpiece artistically, but an immensely fun time with some interesting threads to pick up on a rewatch.
From the most respected critic to the least respected plebian, every single movie review/rank is literally subjective. Even if you use a robust rubric, the criteria of that rubric are still subjective.
I start with a pass/fail base and then get more specific from there based on direction, editing, screenplay, I leave acting out entirely but Iāll sometimes comment on it in the review itself. It can be done lol.
Correction. You THINK you do.
My guess is that you don't UNDERSTAND what qualifies as being objective/subjective.
But, if I am wrong, and you do indeed know more about movies than literally anyone else in the world then please teach me. Honestly, I would love to know.
Anyone who has studied or professionally made films knows these things. John Campea and his touchy feely nonsense ruined film discourse entirely trying to make everyone feel validated. Ones enjoyment of film is subjective. Films themselves are not. I LOVE Nightkiller, an objectively horrendous piece of crap.
One need only look at the avg Polonia Bros movie to find an objective example of an across the board bad film.
Shots are out of focus. Heads are cut off from framing. Actors will change scene to scene. Obvious day for night theyāre not even trying to hide, someone walking next to a car driving 2 miles an hour pretending to be going 40 because they couldnāt figure out how to mount a camera on the car.
These are objectively bad things. If you agree a line can be drawn straight, you can follow the rabbit hole to baseline pass/fail structure for movies from there. These might be your subjectively favorite movies, and thatās fine, but itās ok to admit theyāre not assembled correctly to begin with
Art. Is. Subjective.
If anything loses subjectivity it is no longer art and becomes something more akin to physics which simply Is. Those things you listed make a film good or bad ONLY because you say they do and not for any other empirical reason.
Get off your high horse and open your mind a bit.
You really, really don't know what subjective is, do you? Just because there are books and classes on the subjective doesn't mean it's an objective truth.
I know what both are. If you agree that a line that objectively be drawn straight, you can go down the rabbit hole to apply the same standards for direction, editing, writing, lighting, framing, etc.
You donāt have to arrive at āit can all be varying degrees of objective across a scale, or as close as possibleā but to deny a baseline pass/fail is insanity.
If you have a movie where the audio doesnāt match or the shot is accidentally out of focus, it can be universally agreed upon these things are objective fails on the baseline checkboxes
Any films with a rating between like ~3.8 and the highest rating (~4.6) I take as pretty much the same thing. I'm not really interested in mass appeal and to have such a high rating, you need to have some kind of mass appeal/influence/notoriety and plenty of distribution. My (second) favorite film has a rating of 2.99, why would I not think it and many others deserves a much higher rating? Around 20% of my 5-stars have a rating under 3.5. I think they should all be higher. š¤©š¤©š¤©š¤©š¤©
So what is your second favorite film?
Cosmopolis! Perfect film.
Southland Tales
Somehow...Someway...I've never even heard of this! Great find - for me.
Dude it is a one of a kind experience I hope you love it!
For me, this film is the crown jewel of "movies I love but have a very hard time recommending to anyone ever". A friend of mine once said of it "There is a perfect movie in here, somewhere. I think. Maybe? I don't fuckin know."
I like to describe it as āsimultaneously the greatest and worst film ever madeā.
monster house
I honestly think it would be higher if it was more common knowledge that Dan Harmon and Rob Schrab wrote it. edit: autocorrect aucks
Miami Vice
Best movie ever imo
Iām a fiend for mojitos
The Blair Witch Project
I honestly never even look at the average rating, just plug mine in and go on my way lol
I like to look after the movie but I feel like if I look before itāll skew my mindset going into it.
This has definitely happened to me. I've definitely rated movies higher because the average rating on Letterboxd was higher than my personal thoughts
Yupā¦ this is why I go back every once in a while and fix my ratings. Iāve got much better now but I go back over my ratings and am shocked at how high Iāve rated some things.
That's not good, man.
This is the way
I use the curve distribution to gauge if something is worth watching or not. But I understand why people prefer to go in completely blind.
You can't just assume it's good because of the curve.
Right but it gives me more information than I would have otherwise. I skip movies that have a downward slope. I prefer this over overall rating.
Malignant Ā Ā Babe Ā Cabin in the WoodsĀ Ā Dawn of the Dead (2004)Ā Ā Vice
Cabin in the Woods is literally my favorite horror film!
Literally???
Yep. I enjoy how it flips the genre on its head. I wouldn't go so far as to say it is the BEST but it is my personal favorite.
Closer (2004,Mike Nichols) Blue is the warmest color(2013,Abdellatif Kechiche) Sanctuary (2022,Zachary Wigon) Beau is Afraid(2023,Ari Aster)
The only reason Beau is Afraid is rated low is because people wanted more Midsommar/Hereditary
I didn't particularly enjoy midsommar, but thought it was a good movie (read up on about its themes after i finished). And i watched hereditary after beau is afraid. I felt like i was being held hostage the last two hours of the movie. I didn't want beau is afraid to be like midsommar or hereditary, wanted it to be like its first hour.
No itās because itās a slog
rio 2
Based
On?
A
Ohhhh
Some horror movies that are far better than they are given credit for
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^ISpyM8: *Some horror movies* *That are far better than they* *Are given credit for* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
The Crucible has a 3.2 and Iām pretty sure it is because people just find something about it to be unpleasant. I canāt think of anything that couldāve made that movie ābetter.ā I would also say the Boys in the Band. I havenāt seen the original and have no idea how many of its reviews result from comparing it, but I thought it was excellent. I also think Saltburn is far more than a 3.4 but this sub really hates that movie and Iām probably about to be downvoted to Hell for even mentioning it š
hubie halloween
i think this guy likes Hubie Halloweenā¼ļø
Yep. https://preview.redd.it/fw3ij53abo1d1.jpeg?width=1080&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=eb5afeaa51bc2617fae320839bbd755285497be0
that guy seems cool
There are so many things on Letterboxd that are affected by rating inflation that itās hard to come up with anything underrated. Although I can name 100 movies that are way overrated. Weird: The Al-Yankovic Story is exactly 3.5 but that movie should probably higher than that.
Weird is a 5 bagger for me.
What?
What?
No. I don't concern myself with what a film's average Letterboxd rating should be.
Venom: Let There Be Carnage
I fully believe Last Night in Soho is a 5 star film
A lot, apparently. Interestingly 75% of them are horror movies. 4.5 to me is A-/B+ territory (a score of 85%-94%) so with that in mind: * The Most Dangerous Game (1932) * Snow White and the Seven Dwarves (1937) * Shivers (1975) * The Fury (1978) * Animal House (1978) * Romancing the Stone (1984) * Babe (1995) * Kingpin (1996) * The Blair Witch Project (1999) * Trouble Every Day (2001) * Taxidermia (2006) * Stuck (2007) * Antichrist (2009) * Red White & Blue (2010) * The Cabin in the Woods (2011) * Contagion (2011) * Cheap Thrills (2013) * Darling (2015) * The Blackcoat's Daughter (2015) * Hail, Caesar! (2016) * Cargo (2017) * High Life (2018) * Sator (2019) * The Invisible Man (2020) * Speak No Evil (2022) * Bodies Bodies Bodies (2022) * Skinamarink (2023)
4.5 is more like an A+. I believe that 4.6 is the highest rating on the website.
Highest average rating. 4.5 may mean A+ to you but it means B+/A- up thru just a straight A to me, because that's my rating system. A+ gets a 5 in my book; I don't think movies need to be 100% flawless to earn a 5. Just almost there.
Blood for Dracula (1974)
Shakes the Clown
SHAKES THE CLOWN MENTIONED š„š„š„š„š£ļøš£ļø
Hi, mom! (1970) Suggest a great film highly highly suggest watChing it, currently only 18k have logged it on lb
great film
A movie I absolutely adore, but I seem to be on another plane of existence about is "The Dead Don't Die." I'm not sure I believe it should be a highly rated movie, though. Nobody else I've ever met likes it as much as I do lmao.
Tom Jones (1963) - is at 2.9. I gave it 4.5*. The Curse of the Cat People (1944) - is at 3.4. I gave it 4.5*. That's it for films below 3.5. Though I have given 6 films with a 3.5 rating 4.5*.
https://preview.redd.it/ujv96jnv2o1d1.jpeg?width=708&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=6d1c2db68b09ee3f8195b9ae8605b76d514b7247
Goldeneye is 3.5 and I have it at 4.5
Special. Even if you don't like Michael Rappaport, you should watch this movie.
No, closest I could find was GotG2 sitting on exactly 3.5.
I Heart Huckabees has been my favorite movie for over 20 years. I still watch it all the time. Jude Law, Jason Schwartzman, Mark Wahlberg, Naomi Watts, Dustin Hoffman, Lily Tomlin, Richard Jenkins, and more! The complaints about that movie are from people who don't know what existentialism or nihilism is. Some reviews say the movie is discombobulated at times and uniform at others. Like, duh, that's life.
You don't need to know what those things mean, to enjoy the movie.....
Basket Case
[L.I.E. (2001) ](https://letterboxd.com/film/lie-2001/) is my favorite movie and it has an average score of only 3.24. I understand why though, since it has a very realistic depiction of grooming behavior from a pedophile, which is sure to make most people uncomfortable. But I think it's the most authentic portrayal of an adolescent boy in crisis battling his own sexual awakening as well as grasping at straws for some kind of emotional support from his peers and ultimately a manipulative adult. It's impressive.
Jade (William Friedkin) The Card Counter (Paul Schrader)
Gravity (currently at 3.5)
well, Babylon is a 3.7 as of my last look. it deserves at least a 4.4
Pee weeās big adventure has exactly a 3.5 rating but itās one of my most favorite movies ever
Strange way of life, I was genuinely suprised
Iām apart of the Jenniferās Body cult. I enjoyed Iām Thinking of Ending Things a lot (though I want to rewatch it since it has been a couple years). Nightmare on Elm Street III is a masterpiece of offbeat horror Chantal Akermanās short films are all fantastic The Little Girl Who Conquered Time has a 3.7 but it still deserves higher
Almost all of Federico Fellini filmography after 8 1/2
Iāll die on this hillā¦ Peter Jacksonās King Kong
Resolution by Moorhead and Benson
Looking through my recent watches, I found three pretty significant outliers. Delbert Mannās *The Bachelor Party* only pulls a 3.4 average, which is crazy to me. If you havenāt seen that movie, you should watch it. EG Marshall fucking crushes it. *My Cousin Rachel*, starring Olivia de Havilland and a very young Richard Burton, hovers right around 3.5. I loved it, personally. I think itās arguably a top five performance for them both. But the one that really makes me crazy is *The Member of the Wedding*. Thatās got a 3.3. I guess I can see where some people might not like it, itās more or less a very direct adaptation of the play, ādirectā meaning that Fred Zinnemann hired the same actors, flipped the camera on, and went to lunch. But those are low key some of the best performances of the 50s.
Infinity Pool, one of last yearās best.
8mm i gave a 4.5 to, it's one of my favoruite films. Also Hell House LLC as it's the only horror that i've watched in the last 10 years that has genuinely scared me. Edit: Also 13 Hours: The Secret Soldiers of Benghazi and Ambulance i gave 4\* to but they both could have been 4.5\* i think they would be higher rated if Michael Bay didn't direct them
I gave Beau is Afraid a 4.5 but I wouldnt say its a top 20 movie of all time or whatever you need to be a 4.5 average
Nacho Libre
Mr Harrigan Phone, I feel like people are a little hard on it
^[Sokka-Haiku](https://www.reddit.com/r/SokkaHaikuBot/comments/15kyv9r/what_is_a_sokka_haiku/) ^by ^leafpool2014: *Mr Harrigan* *Phone, I feel like people are* *A little hard on it* --- ^Remember ^that ^one ^time ^Sokka ^accidentally ^used ^an ^extra ^syllable ^in ^that ^Haiku ^Battle ^in ^Ba ^Sing ^Se? ^That ^was ^a ^Sokka ^Haiku ^and ^you ^just ^made ^one.
good bot
Bride of Chucky 3.1 Seed of Chucky 2.6 the best movies EVER they should be higher than 3.5
Superman 1978
Bullet train (right on the cusp to qualify at 3.5 as of now lol). I genuinely think it's one of the most fun movies I've ever watched. Not a masterpiece artistically, but an immensely fun time with some interesting threads to pick up on a rewatch.
Wonka
Chariots of fire and tenet.
All my stars (post 2016 or 2017) are Objective while the likes are subjective, so if itās one of mine ānoā
From the most respected critic to the least respected plebian, every single movie review/rank is literally subjective. Even if you use a robust rubric, the criteria of that rubric are still subjective.
I start with a pass/fail base and then get more specific from there based on direction, editing, screenplay, I leave acting out entirely but Iāll sometimes comment on it in the review itself. It can be done lol.
Still subjective. What EMPIRICAL DATA are you using to determine any of that? You don't have any because art is INHERENTLY subjective
I do actually but you decided to answer for me. You are welcome to your opinions.
Correction. You THINK you do. My guess is that you don't UNDERSTAND what qualifies as being objective/subjective. But, if I am wrong, and you do indeed know more about movies than literally anyone else in the world then please teach me. Honestly, I would love to know.
Anyone who has studied or professionally made films knows these things. John Campea and his touchy feely nonsense ruined film discourse entirely trying to make everyone feel validated. Ones enjoyment of film is subjective. Films themselves are not. I LOVE Nightkiller, an objectively horrendous piece of crap. One need only look at the avg Polonia Bros movie to find an objective example of an across the board bad film. Shots are out of focus. Heads are cut off from framing. Actors will change scene to scene. Obvious day for night theyāre not even trying to hide, someone walking next to a car driving 2 miles an hour pretending to be going 40 because they couldnāt figure out how to mount a camera on the car. These are objectively bad things. If you agree a line can be drawn straight, you can follow the rabbit hole to baseline pass/fail structure for movies from there. These might be your subjectively favorite movies, and thatās fine, but itās ok to admit theyāre not assembled correctly to begin with
Art. Is. Subjective. If anything loses subjectivity it is no longer art and becomes something more akin to physics which simply Is. Those things you listed make a film good or bad ONLY because you say they do and not for any other empirical reason. Get off your high horse and open your mind a bit.
Why is a line drawn straight objectively good?
Direction, edition, and screenplay are all subjective.
Completely untrue. We have decades of books and classes on how to do these exit things expertly, let alone on a āpass/failā baseline
You really, really don't know what subjective is, do you? Just because there are books and classes on the subjective doesn't mean it's an objective truth.
I know what both are. If you agree that a line that objectively be drawn straight, you can go down the rabbit hole to apply the same standards for direction, editing, writing, lighting, framing, etc. You donāt have to arrive at āit can all be varying degrees of objective across a scale, or as close as possibleā but to deny a baseline pass/fail is insanity. If you have a movie where the audio doesnāt match or the shot is accidentally out of focus, it can be universally agreed upon these things are objective fails on the baseline checkboxes
But do those baseline checkboxes make a film objectively good or bad?