Stars are boring; at Maniacal_Hamster, we use pellets to show you just what we thought of the movies we've seen. But just what makes a movie worth 3 pellets instead of 4? Well, here, finally, is a handy reference that explains how the Hamster's Pellet System works:
The movie sucks, plain and simple. It can be fraught with mistakes and evidence of poor craftsmanship, but mostly, nothing about it is remotely interesting or entertaining and seeing it was either painful, or a gross waste of time (or both).
The movie suffers from story/acting/pacing/effects problems, but at least it's kinda fun to watch, if only because it's so bad otherwise.
Nothing special, here. It may be unimaginative, formulaic and full of unrealized potential, but it's basically a good time, might be worth seeing again.
Does everything a great movie should, with a few minor, forgettable exceptions, and can stand up to repeat viewings.
Flawless in every area: story, effects, acting, production, and goes above and beyond in one or more of these areas. Makes you forget your worries, makes you think, makes you forget the insane theatre prices you had to pay.
