The IMDb user rating system has been a source of ridicule in some film corners, especially due to the bro-like nature of the voter demographic. After all, Denis Villeneuve, Christopher Nolan and most of the MCU movies can do no wrong when it comes to the IMDb user rating system. And yet, I have always looked to it for inspiration when it comes to my Oscar picks. Despite some of the flaws that come with the IMDb rating system, it also tends to show how mainstream America may regard a movie. You know, the non-elite film circles, where watching a movie is seen as a night out or as a way to unwind after a long week at work.
On IMDb, all films are given an overall rating out of ten. These ratings come from IMDb users themselves, who submit a single rating – a number between one and ten – for any film on the website. “
An overall rating of 8.0 and over is considered exceptional.
That’s part of the reason why I predicted lots of Oscar nominations last year for mixedly reviewed fare such as “Bohemian Rhapsody” (8.0 rating based on 390k votes) and “Green Book” (8.2 rating based on 226k votes). These were films that proved, post-#OscarsSoWhite, that the divide between film critics and audiences was real and only growing.
Let’s back it up a bit for a second. These are the Best Picture winners this last decade and their IMDb ratings. Practically all in the 8.0 range.
2010 The King’s Speech (8.0)
2011 The Artist (8.0)
2012 Argo (7.7)
2013 12 Years A Slave (8.1)
2014 Birdman (7.8)
2015 Spotlight (8.1)
It’s been happening for many years now: films that have been greeted by critics with middling-to-decent reviews get Oscar-nominated for Best Picture. That’s where the, as Hollywood-Elsewhere’s Jeffrey Wells likes to call it, “Joe and Jane Popcorn” factor of the Oscar equation comes in.
Just a few examples of this phenomenon can be seen with some Best Picture nominees this last decade: Les Miserables (7.6 rating), Life of Pi (7.9), Philomena (7.6), The Imitation Game (8.0), The Theory of Everything (7.7), Lion (8.0), and Hacksaw Ridge (8.1). These are all films that struck a chord with audiences but that were met with a shrug by critics.
Then #OscarsSoWhite happened.
Shortly after the nominations were announced In 2016, many media outlets observed that there was a certain lack of racial diversity amongst the nominees in major categories. The total snub of “Straight Outta Compton,” and “Creed,” not to mention the controversy surrounding Ava DuVernay’s directing snub the previous year, came to a heat when activist and former attorney April Reign started the hashtag #OscarsSoWhite. Reign tweeted, "It's actually worse than last year. Best Documentary and Best Original Screenplay. That's it. #OscarsSoWhite." She also noted that while the Caucasian screenwriters of the film Straight Outta Compton earned nominations, the African American cast of the film was overlooked.
It only got worse. Jada Pinkett Smith and Spike Lee announced plans to boycott the ceremony.
In the meantime, the virtue-signaling phase of the Oscars began.
Actress Penelope Ann Miller responded to the Oscar boycott by stating "I voted for a number of black performers, and I was sorry they weren't nominated. To imply that this is because all of us are racists is extremely offensive. I don't want to be lumped into a category of being a racist because I'm certainly not and because I support and benefit from the talent of black people in this business. It was just an incredibly competitive year."
During an interview with a reporter, President Barack Obama commented on the controversy saying, “I think when everybody’s story is told, then that makes for better art. That makes for better entertainment. It makes everybody feel part of one American family. So I think, as a whole, the industry should do what every other industry should do, which is to look for talent, provide an opportunity to everybody.”
The Academy even went out of their way to change the voting body of the AMPAS. A richer, more diverse voting demographic was being formed. And all the better for it.
Well, wouldn’t you know it — the next year, Barry Jenkins’ “Moonlight” (7.4 rating based on 237k votes) won Best Picture, upsetting Damien Chazelle’s “La La Land” (8.0 based on 452k votes) for the top prize. The film, directed by and starring an all African American cast, was the perfect film for the Academy to virtue signal its way into less controversy. Of course, unlike most of my colleagues, I didn’t buy the hype. “Moonlight” is a well-made and delicately rendered story, but quite frankly, it couldn’t stick the landing. Its overly sentimental last half-hour ended up pushing the heartstrings too hard. If “Moonlight” had been released the previous year, chances are it would have been ignored by Oscar and, quite frankly, most critics.
This is where the Academy, and film critics, lost their footing within the zeitgeist. The political nature in film criticism expanded in ways that have isolated its, once important, relevance in 21st century thinking.
The following year, “The Shape of Water,” a female fish love story courtesy of Guillermo del Toro won Best Picture. It was crystal clear, now, more than ever, that the Academy had entered a state of limbo.
You must remember that, despite the aforementioned changes to the voting body, an overwhelming majority of Oscar voters are still white and male. An eventual pushback to this hysteria was inevitable.
Enter “Green Book.”
Peter Farrelly’s film has been universally loved by the non-elites. Every single non-film critic I have spoken to these last two years has had nothing but shining words for Peter Farrelly’s loveable road trip movie. I predicted it would win Best Picture because I was listening to people outside the elite bubble of America and they fell head over heels for '“Green Book.”
However, within moments of “Green Book” winning the Oscar, the Los Angeles Times published a story by critic Justin Chang with the the headline: “‘Green Book’ is the worst best picture winner since ‘Crash.’” Obviously, this was timed and pre-written just in case the film was awarded the grand prize instead of Alfonso Cuaron’s more artfully delivered “Roma.”
Chang wrote that “Green Book” is “insultingly glib and hucksterish, a self-satisfied crock masquerading as an olive branch.” Calling it “an embarrassment,” he added: “It reduces the long, barbaric and ongoing history of American racism to a problem, a formula, a dramatic equation that can be balanced and solved.”
The backlash further continued with The New York Times’ Manhola Dargis tweeting, “Remember that this is the same organization that gave its top honor to ‘Crash’ – so not surprising but still, f— it.” Manhola clearly took this win to heart.
“No one is happier than [‘Crash’ director] Paul Haggis right now,” RogerEbert.com editor Brian Tallerico wrote on Twitter. Whereas IndieWire’s David Ehrlich snarkily tweeted a scene from “First Reformed” with the tag “Will God Forgive Us?"
“Green Book” was deemed a rather problematic film in progressive circles, with the racially-themed buddy dramedy spouting a message of hope, which critics deemed to be too old-fashioned, even going as far as to say it was a step backwards for the current racial zeitgeist in America, especially with a film industry trying its damnest to have a more fully-fleshed and personal approach to African American storytelling.
Of course, this is all part of the outrage culture we live in. People overreacting, virtue signaling, calling attention to themselves in ways that seem disingenuous. This is no knock on Tallerico, Dargis or Chang — three very fine film critics and people — but more a knock at the culture of social media itself and the way people seem to now be programmed to follow a herd-like mentality. We are, after all, genetically tribal-driven and that has proven true now more than ever before, with factions of groups splitting into micro groups, to the point where, for example, the democratic party is now going through a totally ignored inner civil war of ethical moral servitude.
If “Green Book” has been deemed as the Donald Trump of cinema by Twitter, which, to me at least, is a perfect example of its current reputation, then anyone that likes the film must be a racist. I’m not even kidding. Try to go and tweet out how much you loved “Green Book” and have fun with the response that you get.
However, what you won’t hear from these same talking heads was that Peter Farrelly’s film was absolutely adored at the Toronto International Film Festival last September, where it won the much coveted People’s Choice Award, beating out Oscar contenders such as “A Star is Born,” and “Roma.” It can’t be that bad now, can it? It was loved by a crowd that was into it from first reel to last; I can vouch, I was there at its world premiere at Toronto’s Roy Thompson Hall and hadn’t felt that kind of engaged and delighted crowd response in years. This was before the film would garner controversy online by being attacked as a “white savior” and “magical negro” movie. The crowd at Roy Thompson Hall that night was allowed to enjoy the film for what it was, not for what it would eventually get molded into and become.
I wrote this right after “Green Book” won Best Picture:
The film clearly struck a chord with Joe and Jane popcorn. Practically every day I get asked the same question: “what movie should I watch?” It’s become such a mundane query, given that you have to figure out what kind of movie tastes the person asking might have; Do they like drama? Arthouse? Token Hollywood-ist conventionality? It’s very hard to just blurt out “Roma!” to every single person who asks, because truth be told, “Roma” is not as easily accessible a movie as, say, “Green Book.” However, I’ve been just saying “Green Book” to everybody since November, not out of sheer laziness, but because I truly believed it was the most universally loved movie. It’s such an easy recommendation. A sure-fire crowd-pleaser that has an A+ CinemaScore and an impressive 8.3 rating on IMDb. You’d be hard pressed to find a mainstream moviegoer who doesn’t like Peter Farrelly’s Oscar-nominated film. I sure as hell haven’t. Everybody I’ve recommended it to came back to me raving about it.
For critics to vehemently hate on a movie like “Green Book,” whose 8.2 rating on IMDb places it 123rd on its all-time top 250 list, not to mention it garnering an all-too-rare A+ CinemaScore from movie audiences, makes me think that the divide is real. Film criticism is at a critical juncture right now, its isolating distance from movie audiences at an all-time high.
Does the “Green Book” win last year officially mean that the Oscar voting body has moved on from its “woke” stance? We can’t really be sure, but the fact that “Green Book” got away with a victory means that social media and film criticism may not have as big an impact as they did just a few years ago.
Let’s take a closer look at this year’s current slate of films and their IMDb ratings. Taking into the equation that, it repeats mentioning, the majority of Oscar voters are white and male, the following films seem to have struck a chord with American movie audiences and look like near-locks:
Once Upon A Time in Hollywood 8.0 (224k votes)
The Irishman 8.6 (4k votes)
Parasite 8.6 (60k votes)
Joker 8.8 (460k votes)
The Farewell 8.0 (10k votes)
Not enough votes/Haven’t been released yet:
Marriage Story 8.0 (2k votes)
Jojo Rabbit 7.9 (5k votes)
The Two Popes 7.6 (323 votes)
Ford V Ferrari 7.6 (1k votes)
A Beautiful Day in the Neighborhood 6.9 (641 votes)
The more votes coming in, the more likely we will learn which films have truly won over moviegoers.