I'm Greg and This is How I Review Movies
LET ME TELL YOU ABOUT MY WEIRD SYSTEM.
My reviews are made up of 2 parts:
Recommendation
Discussion
The Recommendation comes first, and is intended to answer the question “should I see this movie”. I assume you’ve watched a trailer or two, and aren’t sure whether or not it’s worth your time. I’ll avoid any discussion of the plot that isn’t obvious from the trailer or the common discourse around the movie, so as not to spoil anything – because if you need a recommendation, you probably haven’t seen the movie yet.
The Discussion comes second, full of spoilers. This is where I’ll discuss how I arrived at my recommendation, and analyze the film itself.
I try to avoid the formalist/technical style of film criticism that dominates a lot of genre criticism- the listing of plot holes, the box-checking obsession of the 3-act structure, or the fetishization of production values. These things all matter, but to my mind they only matter insomuch as they immerse (or alienate) you from the film itself. Put another way, plot holes only matter if they distract you and pull you out of the magic circle in the moment.
I start by asking: “What does this movie want me to think? What does this movie want me to feel?” Every element of the film: the plot, the score, the effects, the performances, the direction, the editing – everything works either in service of those goals, or to their detriment, and that’s how I arrive at my conclusions. Hereditary wants me to feel the horror, confusion, rage, and powerlessness brought on by family tragedy, and almost everything in the film flows in that direction, and very little gets in the way. Conversely, Suicide Squad wants me to feel the power of adopted family, and the redemption of social outcasts making good. But the wildly inconsistent tone, underdeveloped characters, and numerous plot dead-ends all distract and confuse.
But when we examine what a movie wants us to think/feel, we also have to think about the value of the ideas/feelings it is trying to convey. To put it succinctly: the film's morality/politics will be a part of the discussion and recommendation
I use a 3-star system. Note that this is a recommendation system, not a measure of quality- art is subjective, we all like what we like, and movies are complicated things. Movies can be formally "bad", but still worth seeing; and movies can be formally "good" and still not worth your time.
3 Stars: Unqualified Recommendation.
“Everyone should see this movie.” This movie is good enough, or important enough, or thought-provoking enough that everyone should endeavor to see it, even if it falls outside their typical interests and/or comfort zone.
2 Stars: Qualified Recommendation.
“Everyone should see this movie unless….” This movie meets all the above descriptions, but due to its nature or its content its appeal is necessarily limited. Some examples:
Part of a series, whose impact is lessened if you haven’t seen the preceding parts (The Last Jedi)
A film that relies heavily on genre conventions to have much of its impact (The Cabin In The Woods)
A film that contains content that could be triggering, traumatizing, or otherwise excessively challenging to a reasonably large number of viewers (Hereditary)
1 Star: Narrow Recommendation.
“You should only see this movie if…” This is a movie that has some redeeming qualities, but they’re overwhelmed by so many other issues that the movie is only relevant to a narrow slice of viewers. Examples:
A movie that has some striking visuals, but a problematic story and a muddled message (A Cure For Wellness)
A movie that is bad in an interesting way (The Mummy 2017)
An excellent example of a niche genre (The Raid)
A bad movie that is interesting in an academic/historical sense (Suicide Squad).
0 Stars: No recommendation.
This movie is a waste of your time (Justice League).