Letterboxd and the Quantification of the Film
Image Credit: Ian Moore Via Mashable
Whether you’ve coincidentally come across red carpet revelations of celebrity ‘Four Favorites’ or you’ve been scrutinizing Charli xcx’s latest reviews on her not-so-secret account, you’ve almost certainly been wrapped up in conversation surrounding Letterboxd.
The platform’s function as a personal film diary and a sort of social media outlet has given it universal appeal, allowing it to transcend a strictly cinephile audience and attract the masses. However, with this surge in popularity has inevitably come discourse surrounding the standard Letterboxd has set for how we consume cinema. Should a film really be reduced to a three-star rating and a sarcastic one-line review?
Letterboxd’s five-star rating system has been criticised for being too simplistic. As a dedicated Letterboxd user, I often find myself wishing there was a way for me to distinguish between two films that I’ve given the same rating when I know one is ever-so-slightly better. For the average user, it can be difficult to decide upon a rating when there are no criteria involved, and with none of these standards set, you can never be too sure how someone else is deciding to rate their watched films.
The number rating can seem a meaningless, subjective marker. One person’s two and a half may very well be another person’s three. No one is really forced to develop an exact reasoning for their rating, and therefore, there is not much to discuss based on the numbers of it all. With this in mind, the star rating should be treated as a point from which to situate yourself in the conversation surrounding a film rather than something that itself encapsulates a film.
However, I think this subjectivity is at least in part counter-balanced by the ‘like’ feature. It allows for distinction between enjoyment and evaluation. The star is more critical where the heart is personal.
There is also some contention surrounding how reviews are treated on Letterboxd. While many use the ‘Review’ tab to express their in-depth analyses, others treat it like an Instagram comment section, summing up a movie with the latest chronically online reference.
The way these short, witty remarks end up dominating the review sections for each film speaks to the performative nature of Letterboxd. The fact that it operates as a social media platform where others can see someone’s ratings and reviews and boost them with likes could mean people are less inclined to give original, intellectual takes that won’t garner much attention.
I will admit that jokes certainly have a place on the platform. Although they aren’t extremely insightful, they are a testament to Letterboxd’s virtues as a space that facilitates discussion surrounding film and makes it more accessible and enjoyable for the general public.
Despite its possible faults, Letterboxd’s popularity highlights it as a platform led by its audience. You can choose the level at which you want to engage with the films you watch and interact with like-minded users. Ultimately, it is up to film enthusiasts to take conversations beyond numbers and shape Letterboxd to their vision for the way we discuss cinema.