TheRealJ-Ro
Cinema Addict - 1494 Film Ratings
Member Since: 27 Jul 2008
Location: Bridgewater, Nova Scotia, Canada
Age: 39
TCI: not enough ratings
Films in Common: 0
Not in Your Top 1000 TCIs
Bio: TWITTER @BlockBuster_Guy
YOUTUBE BridgewatersFinest
I rank in tiers of 5 (so every ranking will end in either 5 or 0), decided (mostly) by the following criteria.
100-90 is OUTSTANDING: I do feel like there is such a thing as a "perfect film", but I don't dole out 100s easily. The difference between a 100 and a 95 film is a certain intangible quality I suppose, something that I know will make me always come back to it no matter what. Any film that makes a 90 and up from me is one I would either recommend to anyone in a heartbeat, or one which I feel goes far above and beyond my expectations from it.
89-80 is QUALITY: A quality film for me is one which is often a strong recommendation, a film that does its job to a higher level than the next tier, often notable for overall performances and/or production.
79-70 is SERVICEABLE: A serviceable film for me is one which does its job and is good entertainment either within its own genre or as a stand-alone film. It may or may not be recommended viewing from me, but more often than not it will be.
69-35 is AVERAGE: Since the term "average" is so wide, here is how I define it. An average film falls anywhere between something that is not a total flop and has redeeming qualities (performance, content, production, etc.), and one which has the ability to entertain most people (while potentially not being a personal recommendation).
34-0 is UNDERWHELMED: An underwhelming film is one which is forgettable. It either has no redeeming qualities, or its positive qualities do not outweigh the negative ones. At their worst, movies in this category offend me as a movie-watcher.
YOUTUBE BridgewatersFinest
I rank in tiers of 5 (so every ranking will end in either 5 or 0), decided (mostly) by the following criteria.
100-90 is OUTSTANDING: I do feel like there is such a thing as a "perfect film", but I don't dole out 100s easily. The difference between a 100 and a 95 film is a certain intangible quality I suppose, something that I know will make me always come back to it no matter what. Any film that makes a 90 and up from me is one I would either recommend to anyone in a heartbeat, or one which I feel goes far above and beyond my expectations from it.
89-80 is QUALITY: A quality film for me is one which is often a strong recommendation, a film that does its job to a higher level than the next tier, often notable for overall performances and/or production.
79-70 is SERVICEABLE: A serviceable film for me is one which does its job and is good entertainment either within its own genre or as a stand-alone film. It may or may not be recommended viewing from me, but more often than not it will be.
69-35 is AVERAGE: Since the term "average" is so wide, here is how I define it. An average film falls anywhere between something that is not a total flop and has redeeming qualities (performance, content, production, etc.), and one which has the ability to entertain most people (while potentially not being a personal recommendation).
34-0 is UNDERWHELMED: An underwhelming film is one which is forgettable. It either has no redeeming qualities, or its positive qualities do not outweigh the negative ones. At their worst, movies in this category offend me as a movie-watcher.
Recent Ratings
Check out TheRealJ-Ro's...
| 70 42% | Abigail (2024) - Rated 22 Apr 2024
"Spiritually, feels very similar to Lisa Frankenstein - another Kathryn Newton vehicle - in that it's clearly not taking itself too seriously, but I think still wants to provide a certain level of spook and scare. Definitely had fun with this! It's no surprise that this reunites the directors of Scream VI with one of its main stars (Melissa Barrera), who does good work here. Touching post-film tribute to Angus Cloud, and well done to Alisha Weir for going all-in with the Abigail character."
|
| 90 93% | Hundreds of Beavers (2024) - Rated 20 Apr 2024
"So THAT'S how Wisconsin was created! Listen, I distinctly remember NOT dropping acid this afternoon so I don't know WHAT the hell I just watched, but I can tell you this: this shouldn't work. Like, at all. But after 110 minutes, it still hadn't worn out its "can't look away" appeal. It's weird, it's drowning in running gags and pantomime physical comedy, occasionally SUPER dark, and probably the most baffling piece of cinema I've ever seen. In summary, it's genius and everyone should see it."
|
| 65 31% | Irena's Vow (2023) - Rated 19 Apr 2024
"I'm waffling back and forth on whether this is good enough for me to qualify with a green-spectrum review. Right now I think it falls just short of that but tells a nonetheless compelling story of Holocaust-era atrocities in Poland. Another film that feels authentic and is probably worth some time in classrooms and historical film societies. Sophie Nelisse shines throughout, and there's a scene with a young mother and a baby that underscores the emotional weight of the picture. Worth seeing!"
|
| 20 5% | Air Force One Down (2024) - Rated 18 Apr 2024
"Cudos if you forced this trite piece of garbage down. Reads like a 14 year old watched Black Hawk Down and wrote a movie over March Break. Endlessly fun to make fun of. Half its budget is spent on glory shots of random satellites. "Main Character Girl" is 9 minutes into her SS career before she gets a nepo spot. Her uncle's name is literally "Uncle Sam". It tells, because it's never creative enough to show; it loves to tell you what time it is, and that "Falcon" is the President's codename."
|
| 60 25% | Civil War (2024) - Rated 13 Apr 2024
"Like Facebook "vague-booking", it's an incomplete story which undercuts the good it presents. I can come to terms with the creative decision NOT to "take a side" (instead creating an apolitical fantasy land), but the fact that this refuses to show you WHY THERE'S A CIVIL WAR, is a bridge too far. If the message is just "photojournalism is hard and important", then... okay. And that ending is bad. It's definitely a letdown when there's probably enough good here to otherwise call it serviceable."
|
| 85 85% | Monkey Man (2024) - Rated 08 Apr 2024
"I think the final third is what ultimately pushed this back into 85 territory for me, after the middle did admittedly dip a bit. Dev Patel shows tremendous chops in front of and behind the camera. An intense, highly violent portrayal of one man's quest for revenge, being simultaneously thrust into the role of combating the systemic abuses that surround him. Whoever had transgender Indian warrior monks on their 2024 bingo card, give yourself a pat on the back. Unique and well-executed by Patel."
|
| 80 70% | The First Omen (2023) - Rated 06 Apr 2024
"The utter starmaking performance of Nell Tiger Free underscores perhaps the most surprising film of the year for me. In a year of mediocrity from this genre (so far), this delivers intensity from its lead, the right tone, atmosphere and authenticity from its director, and makes me want to go back to see the original. I don't say that often. It's memorable and takes its time getting to you. Immaculate should unfortunately be embarrassed to have released in the same year as this. A legit delight."
|
| 75 56% | One Life (2023) - Rated 02 Apr 2024
"I've known the basics of Nicholas Winton for some time - like many I've seen the viral talk show clip - and here the masterfulness of Anthony Hopkins brings this together. He's incredible. James Hawes does a good job behind the camera telling this time-hopping story, although I will say that the pacing in the early part of the film knocks this down a bit for me; they were rushing so hard to get to 1938 that they forgot to let the "current day" breathe. When they slow down, it's much better."
|
| 70 42% | Godzilla x Kong: The New Empire (2024) - Rated 02 Apr 2024
"Big meaty kaijus slapping meat: the movie. This might be another one that's getting a friendly bounce due to most of this year operating at about a 6/10. At least this satisfies the baseline of what I want to see out of these movies. I feel though that they wasted how badass Godzilla COULD HAVE been in this story. Focusing on Kong is fine but I mean, Godzilla triple powers up just to, what, break up some rain clouds? Big let-down. At least it was cute watching him cuddle up inside the Colosseum."
|
| 35 11% | Immaculate (2024) - Rated 30 Mar 2024
"For those who prefer their Sydney Sweeney a little bloodier. This just isn't very good; most of this 35 is due to the catacombs sequence and the ending, which I respect on a performance level from Sweeney. It's transparent, only occasionally scary, and doesn't engender investment from the audience, which a lot of movies forget is not given, it's earned - through compelling characters, good storytelling, etc. Genuinely, why would you watch this when "The First Omen" came out just weeks later?"
|
