Cacciatoreviews: A Metric

Let's make some sense of the numbers you’ll be seeing around this site:

10 - Perfect
As is, the film says what it meant to say, said it in a meaningful way, and leaves a lasting impression. Any desired changes to the story would be for small personal reasons rather than needed narrative ones. From technical perspectives [cinematography, sound, etc.] everything is clear where it needs to be clear, daring where it should be daring, and artistic where other films would choose plain or direct approaches. 10’s need to be taking major risks in either telling unheard narratives [The Father], telling them in strange and unique ways [Nine Days], or tackling complex topics all while remaining approachable and not venturing into the obtuse or pretentious just because they’re "high art".

It's difficult to call any film "perfect", but 2022's Everything Everywhere All at Once is as close as I've ever felt comfortable doing so. Wonderfully acted, complex and deep without being convoluted or pretentious, and absolutely stunning to behold; this film manages to throw everything at the wall and make every... single... piece... stick. This is the incredibly rare film with a novel's worth of words to say, that says it all perfectly.

9 - Mostly perfect, absolutely outstanding
As above, but usually 9's fall a little more on the pretentious side of "artsy" [A Ghost Story], are maybe a little too weird when they should be more plain [You Won't Be Alone], or miss minor story-beats [Turning Red] that would have made them 10's. 9's are still truly incredible films, and the complaints against them are nominal at worst.

If anything, it’s usually a 9’s prowess that make the minor complaints against it hurt all the more.

I was torn on my example of a 9 between 2019's Uncut Gems or the duo's other film Good Time. These movies are both perfect examples of in-depth storytelling that forces you into the shoes of people you hate. By the end, you're not sure where you stand, but you know you've been taken on a ride you won't soon forget. Masterfully crafted in a myriad of technical ways and films that will make you feel things you don't know if you want to [or should] feel, both of these are incredibly solid examples of truly exceptional filmmaking.

8 - Exceptional
8's are like 9’s but are usually a little shorter on the "lasting effect" stick. Some are a little more blunt than 9's, featuring real staying power when remembered directly, but not necessarily changing your view of the world around you [Possessor]. Some rely more heavily on personal experiences and their messages are important for those that relate but, maybe don't catch for a broader audience [Amelie]. 8's also tend to be a little bit more obtuse than 9's even if what they have to say is just as meaningful [Men].

An excellent performance, stellar cinematography, and a well executed plot, 2021's Oxygen is only held back by its ending and a bit of hand holding. While it's difficult to call an 8 "held back", this could have been a 9+ with a slightly more open ending and a little more trust in its audience. As is, however, this is a ride well worth taking and an impressive feat despite my desires for just a little more.

7 - Not delinquent, not exceptional. Standard.
7's are the absolute baseline of good, solid cinema. When I think of a 7 type movie, I think of the word "foundational". Something that serves as an excellent example of something that is neither going to blow your mind, or leave you hanging. I think 7's are my most contentious number because people often associate them with C's in terms of academics. However, I think of 7's more as just solidly good films that didn't do anything particularly exceptional. Sometimes they're a little safer than 8's and forget to take major risks that would elevate them higher [Encanto]. Sometimes their technical choices drag down an otherwise meaningful tale and are a little distracing with their blandness [Little Women]. There’s a lot of lines that 7’s fall on, but that’s kind of the point: They’re fine, they’re just not great.

Oh CODA... You could have been so great. This is my perfect example of a 7 because it just doesn't take the extra risk by having an artistic, slightly interpretable ending that would elevate it higher. Instead, it chooses to be safe, reliable, and lean into the soft spot audiences have for solid representation to make for an overall forgettable, but well crafted film.

There’s a moment in CODA where the film has a chance to elevate itself from a simple, slice-of-life drama into something really meaningful and beautiful. Unfortunately, the moment comes and goes and the film takes a much more banal approach to storytelling. What makes this a 7 instead of a 6, however, is that the film is entirely serviceable as is; there’s nothing wrong with how it was done. It just had a chance to be more than “serviceable”.

6 - Mostly passable, but could use some work.
6's are where I start to draw the line between "Movies" and "Films". Yes, the terms are mostly interchangeable but, I look at "Films" as more solidly built art pieces while "Movies" are more popcorn-munching frivolous entertainment. I like my experiences to have substance, and 6's really ride that line. My typical 6 will not quite pull all it's ideas together, but otherwise be good and maybe even great, just forgetting that it's a whole meal somewhere along the way, and not just a series of snacks [Licorice Pizza]. Sometimes, it will have an excellent premise and really great technical elements, but blow the ending by losing its sense of identity [Daniel Isn't Real]. Other times, 6's are just forgettable experiences that try too hard to be something they aren't and come across as pretentious [Pig]. Overall, a 6 is often where I start to seriously consider whether or not I'm going to finish a movie, but I'm pretty sure I will.

Another major facet of 6’s [typically mid-6’s] is that they can be saved/ improved with only minor tweaks. Single lines of dialogue that clarify confusing elements, added insert shots that add intrigue to flat characters, or otherwise small changes that don’t require a total rewrite of the script.

Glass Onion: A Knives Out Mystery is a perfect example of the above things. It has great pieces, but no satisfying whole. It begins with a certain air to it, but loses that entirely someway through in order to try and be different and clever. And the entire thing tries to be a large satire, but is so boring and lamely executed that it’s difficult to care about any of the subtext.

With a small edit to the way the film is portrayed [specifically during the second act], this romp would definitely sing. As presented though, it’s just a bunch of spoon-fed nonsense that isn’t fun to experience, talk about, or remember.

5 - Needs help, not quite there but, not awful.
This is where the consideration of finishing the experience is weighted in the other direction. With 5's, I'm not so sure that I'll finish them, and I almost certainly don't want to. This is where I often begin reviews or recaps with negative words. 5's often don't have anything to say but pretend they do [Last Night In Soho] or are so pretentious that whatever they had to say is lost in their bad plot points and annoying characters [Power of the Dog]. 5's are often too long [Possession] and too empty, or simply annoying to watch [Bad Luck Banging or Loony Porn]. A 5 is still savable with plot/ execution changes, but, as is, isn't really worth your time.

See You Yesterday has a lot to say and chooses a really unique vehicle with which to say it. Unfortunately, it gets so caught up in itself that it stumbles over its own message and just incoherently shouts at you like an angry parent at an elementary school soccer game. By the end of this one, you’re pretty sure what the message was, but, like the aforementioned parent, you just don’t care. They might be the best coach on the field, their kid might be the most skilled. Hell, your kid might be the most skilled and they’re shouting at theirs to give yours the ball. It doesn’t matter how much you agree with the narrative, the execution is so bland and annoying that you just want to move on.

4 - Start over, total rework.
This is where my spreadsheet starts to get very purple [stuff I didn’t finish]. 4's are almost always too long, too obvious, too try-hard, and too empty. They rarely have anything to say and the way they say it is rarely worth listening to. Occasionally there are good ideas hidden within 4's [Expired] but they often choose such idiotic paths to express those ideas that they just aren't worth having onscreen [Goodnight Mommy]. 4's need some serious help that minor narrative or execution tweaks will not fix.

What to say, what to say... 2022's The Black Phone could have been really good. Instead, the writers chose the obvious and cliché path at every possible moment. Imagine if 1995's Seven had been made by 6th-graders, and you can just skip this one.

3 - Hardly passable as entertainment, not worth finishing.
I have only a single 3 on my list that isn't purple, and I couldn't tell you why that is. 3's are just plain bad. 3’s are delinquent in nearly every aspect and don't even sport hidden possibilities in their construction. They often hinge on recognizable faces or flashy/ shocking premises and cheap laughs. 3's are movies that should have remained conceptual musings in private diaries.

Pointless, not funny, boring, and trite; 2019's Villains is an hour-and-a-half that I'll never get back. This could have been made better with some slight adjustments and a reality check but, as is, it's just a meaningless mess with nothing to say.

2 - How did this even get made?
There's not a whole lot to say about 2's except that they manage to be worse than 3's and that's kind of impressive. They typically lack any sort of technical skill, have very strange character interactions, meandering stories that don't matter, and simply aren't worth the time to finish [Call Me By Your Name comes to mind]. Some 2's fit the bill of "cheap, fun, entertainment" but feature so many unfulfilled plot points and poorly written characters that 2's are just not worth suffering even as that [Gunpowder Milkshake].

Inside is a 2007 French film that manages to be as goofy as it is brutal, without ever having a hint of intelligence. It isn’t fun enough to be cast as a “gory popcorn muncher”, it isn’t scary enough to be a cheap horror, and it isn’t anything but bad enough to be worth any living creature’s time. Characters do things that don't make sense simply to drive the plot, and the entire thing goes beyond "convenient" and falls somewhere closer to "incoherent" by the end. This one was unsavable but manages to avoid being a 1 because the core conflict itself [a psycho invades your home and tries to kill you] is at least fathomable.

1 - Why did anyone think this was a good idea?
1's shouldn't have been made, entertained when pitched, or encouraged when written and shown to Reddit. Even D-tier scifi-originals are better than 1's most of the time. To be ranked as a 1 is almost an impressive feat as it requires all of your technical skills and performances to be so bad and forgettable that they can't even be marked as satire and/ or funny; yet, the feat isn't worth commending, only denigrating. 1's take themselves way too seriously without seeing their flaws or stupidity. 1's mark shockingly bad decisions on the parts of everyone involved in the process.

2015's Green Room is my prime example of a 1, despite somehow sporting a 90% on Rotten Tomatoes. This film is stupid, driven by unrealistic and uninteresting character choices, and hinges on a cameo by Patrick Stuart where he says the "N-word". [Ooo, how edgy and cool.] Most bad movies rely on characters doing things that either don’t make sense or just don’t matter, typically in specific ways that allow the prescribed plot to happen rather than allowing the unfolding narrative to be organic. Green Room’s “plot” is so stupid that it might as well have just been left entirely out so the filmmakers could at least be more honest about wanting to create a film adaption of break.com.