10: The best work of all times. Either the industry or my life will not (or should not) be the same after this one. In other words it's really, really rare.
9: One of the greatest works of all time. I may have trouble to call it the greatest though. Still a masterpiece that probably could not be better whatever you do.
8: Extremely good work, could be among my favourite works even. Nonetheless, even if I love it, calling it the best work ever would be wrong. Worthy to join the Top 250 though. Probably inspiring and/or innovative as well as highly immersive.
7: Very good work. Could even be the best of the year (in a not so great year) or among the very best of its genre. Definitely not just good. Could also be an ingenious work, or a very innovative one, a work that may have been the best ever "if only...". As is it sadly features a few too many weaknesses to be up there.
6: A good work. Probably not that special but a work worth watching in cinema. E.g. a good Bond, which simply delivers what I expect and no more, shows no innovation and is a bit flat but extremely well made. A very generic rating for the majority of the good works, possibly great entertainment and enthralling in the moment. Still not the one that'll come to mind two years later, when asked for great works of that genre.
5: A decent work. Often pure entertainment, rather uninspired and without any superlatives (e.g. no awesome acting nor an incredibly well written story etc). Probably a bunch of forgivable flaws. Living up to its mediocre expectations. Good art actually, if you just turn on the TV, for example, to watch... anything really.
4: Honestly not a good work. Maybe not terrible but definitely not good. Major flaws, some of which hit where it counts and thus can't be forgiven. Could also be plain boring, not because I went for a genre I generally dislike but because it simply doesn't convince. Thus it is neither truly entertaining nor in any way artistic. If I'd enjoy one of those that's definitely "guilty pleasure".
3: Bad work. Just because there is worse doesn't mean we ought to beat around the bush: it is bad. Really bad. A flat art production or a real failure. I can certainly enjoy watching a 5 and I may not even regret watching a 4 if there are forgiving circumstances but... this one is just bad.
2: Terrible work. Probably disappointing, too. Perhaps even making better works worse in hindsight or leaving me so appalled that it may ruin my evening. To call it bad is an understatement. It does not have zero value: that's a three. This one has a negative value. Now a 3... for TV... there may be people to... whatever: what's done is done and the existence of 3s is altogether expected and okay. A 2 should never have been made.
1: Worst work of all time, or competing for that title anyways. Straight out bad in every aspect, probably causing damage to something better, disappointing and/or promoting evil. This one is a personal insult and creating such a work is not just questionable but straight out offensive.
- P.S.: This rating system was originally a film rating system.
All Comments (1) Comments
9: One of the greatest works of all time. I may have trouble to call it the greatest though. Still a masterpiece that probably could not be better whatever you do.
8: Extremely good work, could be among my favourite works even. Nonetheless, even if I love it, calling it the best work ever would be wrong. Worthy to join the Top 250 though. Probably inspiring and/or innovative as well as highly immersive.
7: Very good work. Could even be the best of the year (in a not so great year) or among the very best of its genre. Definitely not just good. Could also be an ingenious work, or a very innovative one, a work that may have been the best ever "if only...". As is it sadly features a few too many weaknesses to be up there.
6: A good work. Probably not that special but a work worth watching in cinema. E.g. a good Bond, which simply delivers what I expect and no more, shows no innovation and is a bit flat but extremely well made. A very generic rating for the majority of the good works, possibly great entertainment and enthralling in the moment. Still not the one that'll come to mind two years later, when asked for great works of that genre.
5: A decent work. Often pure entertainment, rather uninspired and without any superlatives (e.g. no awesome acting nor an incredibly well written story etc). Probably a bunch of forgivable flaws. Living up to its mediocre expectations. Good art actually, if you just turn on the TV, for example, to watch... anything really.
4: Honestly not a good work. Maybe not terrible but definitely not good. Major flaws, some of which hit where it counts and thus can't be forgiven. Could also be plain boring, not because I went for a genre I generally dislike but because it simply doesn't convince. Thus it is neither truly entertaining nor in any way artistic. If I'd enjoy one of those that's definitely "guilty pleasure".
3: Bad work. Just because there is worse doesn't mean we ought to beat around the bush: it is bad. Really bad. A flat art production or a real failure. I can certainly enjoy watching a 5 and I may not even regret watching a 4 if there are forgiving circumstances but... this one is just bad.
2: Terrible work. Probably disappointing, too. Perhaps even making better works worse in hindsight or leaving me so appalled that it may ruin my evening. To call it bad is an understatement. It does not have zero value: that's a three. This one has a negative value. Now a 3... for TV... there may be people to... whatever: what's done is done and the existence of 3s is altogether expected and okay. A 2 should never have been made.
1: Worst work of all time, or competing for that title anyways. Straight out bad in every aspect, probably causing damage to something better, disappointing and/or promoting evil. This one is a personal insult and creating such a work is not just questionable but straight out offensive.
- P.S.: This rating system was originally a film rating system.