I would go with 7. weakest of the three but still it was a pretty enjoyable sci-fi film.

I'm trying to go for an entertaining, informative youtube channel so, if you have the time, take a look. Hope you enjoy what you see and if you have any thoughts or criticisms, i'd love to hear them. Thanks in advance. Review right here- https://youtu.be/hJYnJuDPdn0

1/10

Clearly Bloodshot has only seen a handful of movies in his time, and real groundbreakers at that. He's in the right place to learn at least, or to screw up the scoring system, depending on his immature mood.

@krashd said:

Clearly Bloodshot has only seen a handful of movies in his time, and real groundbreakers at that. He's in the right place to learn at least, or to screw up the scoring system, depending on his immature mood.

Nah, I just don't like terrible movies. Call it what you will.

I agree with Bloodshot77. I also gave it half a star out of five and that was generous. Just a mediocre film without any original ideas that got progressively worse as it went on. Total garbage in my opinion, and they probably could've cut out at least 30 minutes without losing anything plotwise.

Excellent, then TMDb's scoring system will become as useless as IMDb's.

i gave it 1/2 star out of five as well. just dire. derivative, poor script, illogical acts, rushed ending, any pacing smashed to dog poo by suddenly cutting to michael on earth. nothing to recommend it except for offering a underdeveloped explanation for why the first cloverfield monster turned up.

@Kewl_Kat said:

I will give this 6/10 stars. It was the weakest of the three in my opinion.

Probably a 5/10

@krashd said:

Excellent, then TMDb's scoring system will become as useless as IMDb's.

You seem to take viewers giving this movie "bad" grades rather personally. Are you associated with the movie or is this just your favourite movie of all time?

Neither of the two. I just enjoy discussing movies with intelligent people that can differentiate between a sub par movie and movies that have absolutely no redeeming features at all, to rate this move 1 out of 10 is an insult to the majority of the hundreds of people who worked on it. IMDb became a breeding ground for imbeciles like that and it seems so far most of them have migrated here.

There's the reason why this site will never take off, every time someone asks "Why don't more people post here!" I imagine they have to be newcomers and not yet come across and of the neanderthal-like inhabitants of these boards. Also, explain, if you'll indulge me, how the lowest possible score imaginable can be 'generous'? Generous would have been not to score in the first place, but logic and all that...

@krashd said:

Neither of the two. I just enjoy discussing movies with intelligent people that can differentiate between a sub par movie and movies that have absolutely no redeeming features at all, to rate this move 1 out of 10 is an insult to the majority of the hundreds of people who worked on it. IMDb became a breeding ground for imbeciles like that and it seems so far most of them have migrated here.

I caught this discussion in the general boards and wanted to chime in. While I agree that many people do many goofy things with rating systems--such as giving a decent movie 1/10 stars, and average movie 10/10 stars and the notorious over/under staring to try to "offset" an overall rating that the voter thinks is too high or too low--ultimately this is the reality of an open voting/rating system. BTW, I can confirm that the accusation that @krashd is affiliated somehow to this production is extremely unlikely as I have encountered him on other films engaged in "discussing movies with intelligent people."

That said, personally I do not feel any particular obligation to any of the people who worked on a film in my ratings/reviews, I just react and record my thoughts. This is art after all. I have reviewed my own rating tendencies, and I have a pretty nice "bell curve" that peaks right at 6/7 but does lean a little to the high side. For me there are few ratings below 5, but I have given a few 1-4 star ratings for films that were particularly bad. I mean, there are 1/10 (.5/5) star films, but they are as uncommon as 10/10 (5/5) for me.

Oh, and to the OP: I gave Paradox a 6/10.

Edit: One more thought I had about reviewing your own ratings: as most of us tend to watch things we think we will like (why else watch films at all?), I imagine our aggregate rating curves are largely impacted by what we chose to watch. If your review graphic looks like an American Football goal post (tons of 1's and 10's), this might be an indicator of your habits.