Will I "Really Like" this Movie?

Navigating Movie Website Ratings to Select More Enjoyable Movies

Oscar Nominations Can Lead You to “Really Like” Movies

Movie fans will pore over the list of Oscar nominations that will be announced next Tuesday. Some seek affirmation that their favorite movie of the past year is a favorite of the industry as well. Others hope to find nominated movies that they might have overlooked, or prematurely dismissed, when they were first released. These movies go on their list for future streaming. Many others are intrigued by the drama of seeing who made the cut and who was snubbed. You could argue that there is more uncertainty over who will get nominated then there is over who will win. Whatever your motivation, Oscar nomination day is a big deal for movie fandom.

I have to admit that “all of the above” feed my excitement of the day. I’m hoping that movies on the bubble that I loved like Molly’s Game and The Big Sick get the recognition that they deserve. I’m hoping that Christopher Nolan and Greta Gerwig break through in the Best Director’s race. And, I’m hoping to identify some movies that weren’t on my radar that possibly should be for “really like” viewing in the next year.

As nominees walk the red carpet on Oscar night, you will hear “I am so honored just to be nominated.” When it comes to selecting “really like” movies “just being nominated” is a big deal. Movies that don’t receive an Oscar nomination have only a 64.4% chance of receiving a 7 or better from IMDB voters. Movies that receive a nomination have a 76.1% probability of a 7 or better IMDB vote. Even a minor nomination gives a movie a 72.9% chance of being a “really like” movie. And if a movie is nominated in one of the major categories (Picture, Director, Actor, Actress, Screenplay) the odds increase to 76.9%.

So, when the Oscar nominations are announced on Tuesday, pay attention to all of the categories. A nominee for Best Art Direction-Set Direction may be your next “really like” movie.


Metacritic Makes the “Really Like” Movie Grade

For sometime now, I’ve been aware that Rotten Tomatoes is not the only website that aggregates movie critic reviews into an overall score. Metacritic, which was launched in 2001, also creates a movie critic consensus rating for individual movies. Initially, I felt that using two movie critic rating website scores in my selection algorithm might be redundant. I chose to use Rotten Tomatoes because it used more critic reviews and it provided ratings for almost every movie ever made. Metacritic is more hit and miss for movies released prior to its 2001 launch. After choosing Rotten Tomatoes over Metacritic, I put Metacritic off to the side intending to study it more when I got the chance. Well, I’ve finally taken the time to analyze Metacritic and I’ve changed my tune. Metacritic ratings belong in my algorithm.

If you’ve never seen Metacritic ratings before, click here to view the website. They use  Green, Yellow, and Red recommendation symbols which parallel Rotten Tomatoes’ Certified Fresh, Fresh, and Rotten Ratings. Metacritic uses fewer critics but they evaluate the quality of the critics and weight their final ratings towards the better critics.

Both movie critic rating systems are predictive of whether you will “really like” a particular movie. Here are the “really like” probabilities that a specific Rotten Tomatoes Rating will produce a rating of 7 or better on IMDB:

IMDB 7+ Prob.
Certified Fresh 79.3%
Fresh 72.1%
Rotten 59.5%

and here are the probabilities for Metacritic recommendations:

IMDB 7+ Prob.
Green 78.7%
Yellow 67.5%
Red 56.1%

Both rating systems are predictive of how people who see the movies will rate the movies. But, is their value in using both rating systems in the algorithm? Are they redundant?

The answer lies in the methodologies used in each rating system. They measure different things. Rotten Tomatoes measures how often the universe of critics recommend a movie. Metacritic measures how much the critics in their universe like a movie. Rotten Tomatoes uses a quantitative measure. Metacritic uses a qualitative measure. They should complement rather than replicate each other.

The data supports the complementary nature of Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic.

7+ Prob.
Certified Fresh & Green 78.4%
Certified Fresh & Yellow 73.8%
Fresh & Green 73.8%
Fresh & Yellow 71.2%
Rotten & Green or Yellow 64.7%
Rotten & Red 56.1%

Certified Fresh movies that are also Green on Metacritic are more likely to be enjoyed by IMDB voters than movies that are Certified Fresh and Yellow. If you want to take a chance on a Rotten movie, stay away from the movies that Metacritic has also rated Red.

If you’ve reviewed the 2017 Objective Top Twenty within the last two weeks, you’ll note that there is a Metacritic column. That signifies that Metacritic has made the grade. It is in the algorithm and is a viable tool in our quest to find more “really like” movies.


If January Makes You Shiver with Every Movie They Deliver, Then Stick with the Oscar Bait.

What do the movies Molly’s GameThe PostPhantom Thread, and Hostiles have in common? For one thing, they all hope to receive Academy Award nominations when they are announced on January 23rd. Secondly, after going into limited release in December to qualify for 2017 movie awards, most of the world will finally get a chance to actually see these movies this January. Thirdly, these movies are the early front-runners for the 2018 Objective Top Twenty. Finally, they will be your very best bets for “really like” movies released in January.

Why do movie producers push some Oscar contenders into January and sometimes even into February? Are these movies artistically worthy but with limited audience appeal? Sometimes. That may be the case with Hostiles, for example. I’ve heard that the beginning of the movie is intensely violent which might turn off audiences, particularly women and older audiences. The overall IMDB rating is 7.1 but the male/female split is 7.2 and 5.3 respectively. The age demographics in IMDB reflect similar polarization. Voters under 30 give it a 7.6 so far while voters 30 and older give it a 6.5. Like the similarly violent The Revenant, which also went into wide release in January, it may have a better chance to find it’s audience away from the family dominated audiences of December.

Phantom Thread is another movie that might not appeal to wide audiences. This is a Paul Thomas Anderson directed film and, to say the least, he is an acquired taste, a taste that I have yet to acquire. The last time he collaborated with Daniel Day-Lewis was for the film There Will Be Blood, a movie I hated. Personal opinion aside, it has been reported that Phantom Thread may be the most mainstream movie that Paul Thomas Anderson has ever made. Early IMDB ratings are strong with an average rating of 8.8. Sometimes the selection of a release date is nothing more than superstition. There Will Be Blood opened on Jan 25, 2007, which is approximately the same weekend (Jan 19th) when Phantom Thread will open.

Molly’s Game, which I was fortunate to see already, is definitely not a January holdover because it lacks audience appeal. It’s IMDB rating is 7.6 and it is consistently strong across all demographic groups. This is an under-buzzed movie and sometimes the strategy is to roll out a movie slowly to build up the buzz.

The Post, on the other hand has all the buzz and star power it needs. With Spielberg, Streep and Hanks, along with a topical storyline, this movie screams Best Picture. So why slide this movie into January. It’s strategic. The producers hope that this will be the movie that everyone is talking about when Oscar voting is taking place. The strategy is to have the buzz be about The Post just as the buzz is winding down for other Best Picture contenders like The Shape of Water and Lady Bird.

So what about the rest of the January releases. Well, you might find a diamond in the rough but the odds are against you.

% with IMDB Rating 7+ Probability You Will “Really Like”
Prior Year Oscar Contender Jan. Wide Release 84.3% 75.39%
All Other January Wide Releases 51.3% 64.81%
Movies Released in All Other Months 72.0% 71.20%

The high IMDB ratings go to the prior year hold-overs and not the movies being released for the first time in January. The movies held over from the prior year are better, on average, than the movies produced over the remaining eleven months. The remaining January movies are significantly worse.

To avoid the January shivers on your next trip to the Cineplex, stick to the Oscar bait from last year, whenever it was released.



These Were My Top “Really Love” Movies of 2017

Tis the season to make year end lists. You have probably run across dozens of top ten movie lists for 2017. Why should mine be any different? It shouldn’t be but it is. Instead of limiting myself to the small pool of 2017 releases, I add all of the other movies I’ve seen this year, regardless of the year it was released. My top ten list is from the 153 movies I’ve watched this year. Three 2017 releases are on my list, along with a late 2016 release. The remaining six are movies that I first watched over fifteen years ago but took another bite of this year.

Here we go starting at the top:

  1. Casablanca (1943). I watched this with my son on Christmas night. It is one of those rare studio movies that still connects with a younger generation. I think Roger Ebert, in his Great Movie review of the film, states it well. “Seeing the film over and over again, year after year, I find it never grows over-familiar. It plays like a favorite musical album; the more I know it, the more I like it. The black-and-white cinematography has not aged as color would. The dialogue is so spare and cynical it has not grown old-fashioned. ” I wouldn’t presume to say it better than Roger. Here’s looking at you kid.
  2. Lady Bird (2017). Saoirse Ronan communicates more with her eyes than most actors communicate with their speech. At the age of 23 she is one of the great actors of our day. Combine that acting talent with Greta Gerwig’s genuine and fresh vision of the “coming of age” story and you end up with one of the best reviewed movies in the history of Rotten Tomatoes. Like Casablanca, Lady Bird tells its story in less than one hour and forty five minutes. Both are good examples of how sometimes less is more.
  3. Beauty and the Beast (2017). Although The Last Jedi is likely to become the number one worldwide Box Office champion for 2017, as of today, that distinction goes to Beauty and the Beast. Despite that success, I didn’t find much love for the film in the year end top ten lists. For me, it is the most fun I’ve had at the movie theatre in 2017. I also believe that Emma Watson provided us with one of the most under-appreciated acting performances of the year.
  4. A Beautiful Mind (2002). This is one of my not seen in fifteen year movies. When I wait fifteen years for a movie that I’m seeing for just the second time, it feels like the first time. A Beautiful Mind was better the second time around than the first. I don’t believe that I appreciated the first time how effectively Ron Howard tells a story on the screen that takes place most of the time in the mind of John Nash.
  5. Molly’s Game (2017). This movie has been getting second tier awards buzz. In other words, not Best Picture worthy, but a contender for supporting awards. I went to see it in the theatre because Aaron Sorkin is my favorite screenwriter. This movie blew me away with how good it was. Jessica Chastain chews up Sorkin’s screenplay and provides a performance for the ages. Idris Elba is Oscar-worthy in a Supporting Role. Molly’s Game did not get a Golden Globe nomination for Best Drama. With the exception of Dunkirk, I haven’t seen the other four nominees. They will be hard pressed to be better than Molly’s Game.
  6. The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers (2002). In my opinion, this is the greatest movie trilogy of all time. Like Tolkien’s three books, you can’t separate one of the three movies from the whole. They are one long form story. Similar to the Star Wars trilogies, the second movie sets up the premise that it is always darkest before the dawn.
  7. The Deer Hunter (1979). This is a three hour movie that doesn’t feel like three hours. I watched it for the third time this year and it doesn’t lose its powerful anti-war message in the retelling. Meryl Streep is likely to earn her twenty first Oscar nomination this year. Her supporting role in The Deer Hunter produced her first nomination.
  8. Black Hawk Down (2002). Another fifteen year movie that surprised me the second time around. This is a movie about mission creep and the chaos of modern warfare. I felt like I understood this movie better the second time around. Maybe the War on Terror that has filled the intervening fifteen years has made me more attuned to what is going on in this film. For whatever reason, this movie communicates the chaos that can arise in the fog of war better now than it did fifteen years ago.
  9. Cool Hand Luke  (1967). Some actors have a charismatic presence that is bigger than the films they appear in. The movies become a “Jack Nicholson” movie or a “John Wayne” movie. Cool Hand Luke is a “Paul Newman” movie at the height of his charisma. In the first half of his career he was a star. In the second half of his career many would argue he became an actor. This is probably the fourth time I’ve seen this movie. Newman dominates the film and he never fails to communicate that he is a star.
  10. Hacksaw Ridge (2016). This is the fourth war movie on my list, if you consider Casablanca a war movie, which I do. It is the only one of the four that is about unadulterated heroism. What makes this movie unique is that it isn’t the heroism of a John Wayne war movie and its theme of righteous killing. It is the true story of a conscientious objector, Desmond Doss, who earns the Medal of Honor without firing a single shot at an enemy. It is a compelling story with an Oscar nominated performance from Andrew Garfield.

Of the 153 movies I saw in 2017, all but 11 were at least “really like” movies. These ten movies just happen to be the best. Starting next Monday we begin compiling a new list of “really love” movies.


Merry Christmas

No in depth movie analysis this week. Like many of you, I’m enjoying the holidays with family and friends, and a few movies tossed in. I will be back next week with my year end list of the top ten movies I watched in 2017. Until then here’s wishing you and your loved ones a very Merry Christmas and a Happy “really like” movie New Year.


Expectations Are High For Star Wars: The Last Jedi

Coco, your three week reign at the top of the box office is over. Star Wars: The Last Jedi opens this weekend and it doesn’t take a genius to predict that it will dominate the box office over the next several weeks. Every movie in the Star Wars franchise has been the number one movie for the year at the box office except for Attack of the Clones. Last Jedi is going to be the number one movie this year. That’s the easy part. What’s a little harder is predicting whether Last Jedi will be a step up or a step back from Star Wars: The Force Awakens in terms of quality. I have an opinion but first a little history.

The original trilogy was launched in 1977. When it was first released Star Wars: A New Hope was known just as Star Wars. It didn’t have a lot of pretensions beyond that. It went on to become a cultural phenomenon, a monster hit at the box office, and a force at the Academy Awards with ten nominations and four wins. It is the only movie in the franchise to earn a major nomination (Best Picture). The rest is history.

Here are the objective “really like” probabilities  for the original trilogy:

Star Wars: Episode IV – A New Hope 1977 76.58%
Star Wars: Episode V – The Empire Strikes Back 1980 76.58%
Star Wars: Episode VI – Return of the Jedi 1983 74.89%

While Star Wars: The Empire Strikes Back matches A New Hope’s “really like probability”, Empire Strikes Back has a slight objective edge. It has an IMDB rating of 8.8 compared to an 8.7 for A New Hope. Empire Strikes Back also is 94% Certified Fresh on Rotten Tomatoes while A New Hope is 93% Certified Fresh. Return of the Jedi, although a notch below the first two movies, is a worthy cap to one of the great trilogies of all time.

A new trilogy that filled in the history of the beloved characters from the original trilogy seemed like a good idea. Star Wars: The Phantom Menace shows that good ideas can quickly turn into bad ideas if the execution is flawed. Phantom Menace almost killed the franchise. Phantom Menace had a worldwide box office gross of over $1 billion. The next movie in the trilogy, Star Wars: Attack of the Clones, dropped to $650 million worldwide despite being a better movie than Phantom Menace. It is the only movie in the franchise to earn a Rotten rating on Rotten Tomatoes. For me, the introduction of the obnoxious character Jar Jar Binks totally turned me off to the whole trilogy. The objective “really like” results for the prequel reflect the drop in quality.

Star Wars: Episode I – The Phantom Menace 1999 69.51%
Star Wars: Episode II – Attack of the Clones 2002 71.01%
Star Wars: Episode III – Revenge of the Sith 2005 73.74%

Star Wars: Revenge of the Sith put the franchise back on the path to recovery. It got solid reviews and fan feedback and the worldwide box office recovered its mojo with over $850 million and a number one ranking.

Star Wars: The Force Awakens continues the story of the original trilogy. Many felt it was too derivative. It was too much like A New Hope. Another way of looking at it was that it returned the franchise to its roots. However you look at it, though, it was very well done. Only A New Hope and The Empire Strikes Back has a higher Objective “Really Like” Probability.

Star Wars: Episode VII – The Force Awakens 2015 75.26%
Star Wars: The Last Jedi 2017 75.93%
Star Wars: Episode IX 2019 ?

Star Wars: The Last Jedi is off to a good start based on early feedback from moviegoers and critics. Its objective probability is running a little ahead of The Force Awakens so far.

The second movies of the two prior trilogies both stepped up from the first movies. In each of the first movies there is early success for good over evil. In the second movies, it is the Dark Side that is ascendant. It may be that the rise of evil presents more interesting story lines than the triumph of good.

I try to avoid reviews before I see a movie and so I don’t know where the plot heads in The Last Jedi. I suspect that it will follow the Dark Side ascendant theme. This allows for more interesting plot twists and in the end will raise the movie to a step up from the original in the trilogy. At least, that is what I expect.


“Really Like” Movie Recommendations Are Even Better When You Exercise a Little Judgement

Last Saturday night my wife Pam and I watched 20th Century Woman for our weekend movie night. If you’ve been following the Objective Top Twenty, you’ll note that this movie has been on the list for most of the year. We were pretty excited to see it. In the end, though, it wasn’t the movie we expected.

20th Century Woman is a semi-autobiographical movie directed and written by Mike Mills and reminisces about his teenage years in Santa Barbara, CA, He is raised by a single mother, played by Annette Bening, with the assistance of two other women in his social circle.

It is an intriguing movie with interesting characters. I wasn’t bored by it but the movie didn’t quite connect with me. As an aside, I found it interesting that Greta Gerwig, who co-stars as one of the other female influences in the story, turned around after this movie and drew on her own teenage experience in Sacramento, CA.  Gerwig wrote and directed a similar movie, the recently released and highly acclaimed Lady Bird. While Mills made the focus of his movie about the mother, Gerwig centered her movie on Lady Bird, the teenager. Perhaps 20th Century Woman would have more effectively connected with me if it were focused on the teenager, Jamie. Punk Rock also has a prominent place in 20th Century Woman, a music genre that passed me by without hardly an acknowledgement of its existence.

I ended up rating this movie as a “like” but not a “really like” movie. The “really like” algorithm estimated that there was a 67% probability that I would “really like” 20th Century Woman. Is this a case of the movie simply representing the 33% probability that I wouldn’t “really like” it. Sure, but that doesn’t mean that there weren’t warning signs that it might end up in the 33%.

Without getting into the mathematical weeds of the algorithm, let it suffice to say that the probability that I will “really like” a movie is the blend of the objective data that goes into the Objective Top Twenty and subjective data from Netflix, Movielens, and Criticker which are based on my personal taste in movies. If the data from the subjective sites is limited, my “really like” probability is weighted closely to the objective data. On the other hand, if the subjective data is plentiful, then its recommendation is very reliable and my “really like” probability is close to the subjective recommendation.

You might find this illustration helpful. The Credibility Quintile organizes the movies into five groups based on how reliable the subjective data is. Quintile 5 is very reliable data and Quintile 1 is not very reliable. The five movies listed all have close to the same probability that I will “really like” them but are in different quintiles.

Movie Credibility Quintile Objective “Really Like” Probability % Subjective “Really Like” Probability % Probability I Will “Really Like” This Movie
Men of Honor 5 63.4% 69.0% 67.2%
Far and Away 4 61.6% 69.6% 66.6%
Nebraska 3 69.1% 63.4% 66.3%
Fabulous Baker Boys, The 2 65.3% 69.9% 67.0%
20th Century Women 1 68.3% 51.2% 67.0%

While all five movies have relatively the same overall probability, they aren’t equally reliable. Men of Honor is clearly a movie that, according to the highly reliable Quintile 1 data, I will like more than the rest of the world and the algorithm reflects that. The same could be said for Far and Away. The movie Nebraska, on the other hand, seems to be a movie that I would like less than the general public. Note as a Quintile 3 movie my probability is halfway between the objective and the subjective probabilities.

It’s the last two movies that illustrate the point I want to make. The probability that I will “really like” The Fabulous Baker Boys is identical to 20th Century Woman. Both movies are in below average credibility quintiles. That is where the similarities end. When you look at the subjective probabilities for both movies, The Fabulous Baker Boys has a strong trend towards being a movie I will “really like”. Even without reliable data it might be a movie worth taking a chance on. 20th Century Woman is headed in the opposite direction towards being a movie I probably wouldn’t “really like”. I should have caught that before watching the movie. It doesn’t mean I would have given up on the movie. It just means that I should have waited another cycle or two for more data to more reliably predict whether I would “really like” it or not.

Algorithms are tools to help you analyze data. Using algorithms to make decisions requires the exercise of a little judgement.



“Really Like” Movie Experiences With My Family at Thanksgiving

Over the course of a typical Thanksgiving weekend, movies have become a part of our family experience. We watch them. We discuss them. For me, my family is my own private focus group. They challenge my ideas and generate new avenues of thought to explore.

This Thanksgiving was no different as my wife Pam and I flew into Seattle to visit with Meggie, Richie and Addie, our daughter, son-in-law and 4 month old granddaughter. Our son Brendan and his girlfriend Kristen (a very loyal follower of this blog) flew in from Boston. And our youngest, Colin, made the trip up the coast from L.A. With our family scattered from coast to coast, these family gatherings are very special.

Movies aren’t the only topic of conversation, especially when Addie’s in the room, but they do surface from time to time. Richie and I had a conversation about my Objective Top Seven from the years 1992 to 1998 that was in my last post. While he thought Schindler’s List was good, he would never put it at number one. He liked movies that made him feel happy when they were over. Now, Scent of a Woman, that was a movie on my list he could get on board with. On the other hand, my son Brendan couldn’t understand why his favorite movie Braveheart wasn’t on the list.

My conversations with Richie and Brendan illustrate why I rank movies based on “really like” probabilities. What movies we like and why we like them are unique to our own experiences and tastes. Many of us watch a movie to boost our mood. Schindler’s List is not a mood booster. On the other hand, if we are in the mood to expose ourselves to a harsh reality of the human experience and have our emotions touched in a very different way, there are few movies as moving as Schindler’s List. I confess that, like Richie, I prefer the mood boost to the harsh reality of life. The movie Moonlight has been sitting on my Watch List for some time now, waiting for me to be in the mood to experience it.

Later in the weekend, Meggie and Colin watched The Big Sick with me on Amazon Prime. They were really excited to see it based on the enthusiastic recommendations from Pam and I, and from many of the other people in their lives. At the end of the movie, they indicated that they both liked it but expected more from a movie that everyone else had raved about. It gave me another interesting insight into why people “really like” some movies but not others. Your expectation for a movie can significantly shape your opinion of the movie. Watching a movie that others say you “gotta see” may set the bar so high that only the great movies will reach it. A mere really good movie has no shot.

That expectations shape your opinion of a movie is a truism. If I flip the scenario to movies that I’ve stumbled upon that became unexpected movie treasures, I can attest to a second truism. Good movies that fly under the radar will be enjoyed more than they have any reason to be. One of my personal top fifty movies is the greatest baseball movie few people have seen, Bang the Drum Slowly. Less than 5,000 voters have rated it on IMDB. Released in 1973, it stars De Niro before he was “De Niro”. At the time it didn’t go totally unnoticed. The movie earned a Best Supporting Actor nomination for Vincent Gardenia. I only saw the movie because I went to a double feature at the drive-in. The second movie was one of those “gotta see” movies. Bang the Drum Slowly was the first. That’s the movie that I fondly remember today and not the second feature.

Rating movies is not a science. Movie fans who rate movies on websites like IMDB don’t use a Pythagorean Formula to derive that one correct answer. But it’s from these disparate reasons for each individual rating that I try to tease out some understanding each week as to which movies you will “really like”.

I am very thankful for the strong support and inspiration of my family at Thanksgiving and all of the other 364 days of the year.


There Are No Turkeys in the Objective Top Seven Movies From 1992 to 1998

Shall we call it “The Drive for Twenty Five”? If so, this installment of our journey to the Objective Top Twenty Five Movies of the last Twenty Five years begs the question which of these Cinematic Seven will survive to Twenty Five. By adding 1998 to the Objective Database more discrete groupings of data are statistically viable. As future years are added the number of groupings will grow resulting in many changes to this list. From the initial Top Six list that was published just two weeks ago, only three movies remain in the Top Seven. I think we can expect this kind of volatility with each year we add. How many of these movies will be in the Top Twenty Five at the end? Fewer than we’d expect, I’m sure.

Here’s our significant seven:

7. Scent of a Woman (IMDB 8.0, Certified Fresh 88%, CinemaScore A, Major Academy Award Win)

This movie is a favorite of mine. It produced Al Pacino’s only Academy Award win after being shut out for his seven previous nominations.

6. Good Will Hunting (IMDB 8.3, Certified Fresh 97%, CinemaScore A. Major  Academy Award Win)

One of my followers wondered why his favorite movie didn’t make the list. Good Will Hunting is a good illustration of what it takes. It requires high ratings from all feedback groups, movie watchers, movie critics, opening night moviegoers, and peer movie artists.

5. The Shawshank Redemption (IMDB 9.3, Certified Fresh 91%, CinemaScore A, Major Academy Award Nomination)

Another one of the original Top Six. The Achilles Heel for this movie from an objective rating standpoint is its failure to win a major Academy Award despite three major nominations.

4. The Usual Suspects (IMDB 8.6, Certified Fresh 88%, No CinemaScore rating, Major Academy Award Win)

Because this is an objective ranking rather than subjective, Kevin Spacey movies are still considered. In the long run, I wonder how much the absence of a CinemaScore rating will hurt this movie and, if so, should it.

3. The Lion King (IMDB 8.5, Certified Fresh 83%, CinemaScore A+, Minor Academy Award Win)

A few weeks before the release of this picture, Elton John was given a private screening of the movie. He noticed the love song he wrote wasn’t in the film and successfully lobbied to have it put back in. That song, Can You Feel the Love Tonight, won Elton John an Academy Award for Best Original Song.

2. Saving Private Ryan (IMDB 8.6, Certified Fresh 92%, CinemaScore A, Major Academy Award Win)

The only movie from the just added 1998 year to make the list. It is also the only movie on the list to be the top grossing movie for the year it was released.

1. Schindler’s List (IMDB 8.9, Certified Fresh 96%, CinemaScore A+, Major Academy Award Win)

According to the Objective “Really Like” algorithm, a 76.98% “really like” probability is the highest score that can be achieved with the algorithm. So far, Schindler’s List is the only movie with that perfect score.


Disney animated movies rule Thanksgiving weekend. According to Box Office Mojo, Disney owns 9 of the 10 highest grossing Thanksgiving movies of all time. Coco, which opened in theaters yesterday, is this year’s entrant into their tradition of Thanksgiving dominance. Early IMDB ratings give it a 9.1 average rating to go along with its 96% Certified Fresh Rotten Tomatoes rating. This morning CinemaScore gave it an A+ rating.

Also, two more Oscar hopefuls go into limited release this weekend. Darkest Hour is the perfect bookend to Dunkirk. It follows Winston Churchill’s response to the events at Dunkirk. Gary Oldman’s portrayal of Churchill has him on everyone’s short list for Best Actor. Also worth considering is a festival favorite, Call Me By Your Name, which was nominated this week for an Independent Spirit Award for Best Picture.

Happy Thanksgiving to you and your families.

Add a Year Here. Tweak a Formula There. And, the Objective Top Twenty Looks Very Different.

I was able to add 1998 to the Objective Database last weekend. The extra data allowed me to factor in Oscar wins to the algorithm. But, it was one little tweak to the Oscar performance factor that dramatically altered the 2017 Objective Top Twenty this week.

For the Oscar performance part of my algorithm I created five groupings of movies based on their highest Academy Award achievement. If a movie won in a major category it went in the first group. If it was nominated for a major but didn’t win, it went in the second group. If it wasn’t nominated for a major but won in a minor category, it went into the third group. If it was only nominated in a minor category but didn’t win, it went into the fourth group. Finally, if it wasn’t nominated in any Oscar category, it went into the fifth group.

In terms of what percentage of the movies in each group that had an average IMDB rating of 7 or better, here are the results:

Best Oscar Performance: %  7+ IMDB Avg. Rating
Major Win 90.3%
Major Nomination 87.7%
Minor Win 79.7%
Minor Nomination 71.7%
No Nominations 59.8%

Wins seem to matter, particularly for the minor categories. Major nominations clearly are better “really like” indicators than minor nominations. It’s the no nominations grouping that’s most revealing. If a movie doesn’t get at least one nomination, the odds of it being a “really like” movie are dramatically reduced. This led to my discovery of some faulty thinking on my part.

If movies like DunkirkLady Bird, and Three Billboards Outside of Ebbing, Missouri, all movies headed towards major Oscar nominations in January, are treated in my algorithm as if they failed to earn a single Oscar nomination, those movies are being unfairly penalized. It was this flaw in my system that needed fixing. Now, those movies that haven’t gone through the Oscar nominating process are designated as Not Applicable. No Oscar performance test is applied to them. Without the weight of the No Nomination designation, many of the movies that didn’t get their first release until 2017 have risen significantly in the 2017 Objective Top Twenty rankings.


Get ready for a Thanksgiving treat. Now that 1998 has been added to the Objective Database, we can reveal the Objective Top Seven Movies from the years 1992-1998. Adding Academy Award Wins to the mix will shake up those rankings as well. Check in next Thursday after you’ve taken your post-turkey dinner nap.


The wide releases this weekend are Justice LeagueThe Star, and Wonder, but it’s the limited release, Mudbound, that I’ll be watching closely . This movie, set in the post-WII rural American South, is being mentioned as a Best Picture contender. Here’s the thing though. Most people won’t see it in the movie theater since it opens simultaneously on Friday on Netflix streaming. Can a movie that is more widely viewed at home than in the theater gain Academy Award traction? Stay tuned.


Post Navigation