Before I post any of my reviews, I want to explain my rating system again, especially now that I’ve changed it a bit. Also, after this article, I’m going to be posting both of my articles in the same entry, so I don’t overtake the article section.

I break down movies into individual sections when I review them. That way, you see exactly how I came up with the score I gave it and I don’t take too many points off a movie for just one problem, or give a movie too much for one thing it did especially well. At the same time, my ratings are comparative, and I come up with a final score before I come up with the individual components. So, my ratings breakdown exists for me to understand why I liked a movie as much as I did. Note that, even though some things don't actually effect their specific category, I will still mention them if I feel they're worth mentioning.

The first category is story. This is not a rating based on how much I like the story. It’s a rating based on how much sense the story makes. How much I like a story really has no effect on the quality of the movie, outside of maybe the entertainment value. Story is worth one point, and it starts with one point, losing points as the movie stops making sense.

Next is Story Flow and Length. They’re two different things, but they kind of go together as far as I’m concerned. It’s something that should be an easy category for most things, and even bad movies can usually get at least this section right. It starts with two points out of a possible two, and loses as it goes on for too long or as the story gets harder to follow.

Next is characters. It’s simply based off how memorable, realistic, and likable the characters are. It starts at half of a point out of a possible one, gaining or losing as it fits those terms.

Acting is next, where the performances effect the score. Starts with half of a point (used to be .7) out of one.

Atmosphere and environment, based on the emotional atmosphere and if the settings actually fit the story or not. Starts with one of one point, losing as the emotions don’t properly fit what they’re trying to create, or as the settings just don’t match.

Technical starts with a full point, losing as technical flaws become apparent.

Dialogue starts with half a point, and goes up or down depending on the quality and how memorable the dialogue is.

After this, I give a star rating. Basically, the star rating represents the base value of the movie, the more objective points of the movie.

Entertainment Value is next, how much I enjoyed the movie. It’s now only worth one point as opposed to two, and it starts at half a point, going up or down as I find it fun or boring.

The newest addition is an odd one, the Lasting Value. How much of the movie truly stood out to me, and how much of it will I truly remember. So, since atmosphere, technical, and story all start off with full points, if they do something that truly stands out in those sections, they will probably get points in this section. This section starts off with zero points, and is worth one. I made this section due to the fact that I generally seemed to do this a lot already in my entertainment value section, which I really needed to stop doing, as I was giving entertaining movies lower scores than they deserved. Basically, I made this as a reaction to action movies, which generally manage to do well in the first seven categories, and easily do well in entertainment, but just don’t actually stand out to me.

I give a final score after that, combining every part of the movie.

It usually makes sense this way. So, if a movie doesn’t gain or lose in any category, it gets a 7/10.

The scores and what they mean:
10-Perfect (six movies have this after just redoing my rating system. Those six are City of God, The Dark Knight, Sunset Blvd., A Clockwork Orange, The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly, and Spirited Away.)
9-Masterful
8-Outstanding
7-Great
6-Good
5-Average
4-Mediocre
3-Bad
2-Awful
1-Terrible
0-Abomination

So, yeah, don’t go insane because I gave a movie you like a six. If I gave a movie a six, I think it is worth seeing.

So, let’s get on with the reviews.

My Fair Lady (1964)

Directed by George Cukor

My Fair Lady is a musical adaptation of the play Pygmalion. Two men try to make a proper woman out of a poor flower girl in London at the beginning of the 1900s. Hilarity and random musical numbers ensue.

Story:
The story makes sense. I don't think there were any problems in it. It is a memorable story, and pretty creative. The whole idea of the story is pretty interesting, and the main draw point to the movie.
1/1

Story Flow/Length:
But, really, does a story that simple really need to be almost three hours long? The length of this movie is ridiculous. This seems to be a problem with a lot of musicals. They seem to take up an epic length of time while having a story with no epic qualities. I honestly don't get how or why you'd drag out such a simple story for so long. Due to the massive length, I honestly lost interest about two thirds of the way through. Luckily, it does at least flow well.
1/2

Characters:
The characters easily make the story. Henry Higgins is a lovable jerk. He constantly says the rudest things, yet manages to just write them off as just being in his personality. Eliza is also a pretty interesting character, believably going from a poor, badly speaking woman to a proper lady. Even the minor characters have interesting personalities and quirks.
1/1

Acting:
The movie also has a strong cast of actors. Rex Harrison gives a great performance as Henry Higgins. All of the cast seems to do incredibly well as their characters. Audrey Hepburn could have done a bit better, but the other performances easily make up for it.
1/1

Atmosphere and Environment:
It keeps a humorous tone throughout, and it has an overall fun mood. It does a great job of looking like the time it takes place in, and it does a great job representing the upper class areas. It goes even one step further, creating a world you want to get lost it.
1/1

Technical:
The set designs and costume designs in this movie are unbelievable. That is generally something I don't pay much attention to, but they stand out greatly in this movie. I'd have a hard time thinking of a movie with better costumes than this one. Unfortunately for this category, there's one obvious technical problem with this movie. Audrey Hepburn doesn't actually sing, and it is noticeable. I don't get why you'd get someone who can't sing to do a musical. Especially whenever the character in the musical was apparently played by Julie Andrews, who, in the same year, won best actress for Mary Poppins. Choosing Hepburn for this movie role just seems like a bad choice overall. It is a minor flaw, but a flaw nonetheless.
.8/1

Dialogue:
Being a story about learning to speak properly, dialogue is a very important aspect of the story. Luckily, it does it very well, and it shows a mastery of dialogue. The movie does a great job of translating the dialogue and scenes from the story into musical numbers, which, while I myself would have liked it to be kept as just dialogue, I could easily imagine a fan of musicals falling in love with this movie because of it.
1/1

Star Rating: *** and a half/****

Entertainment Value:
Oh, how the potentially mighty fall. This is why length matters so much. When a movie goes on too long, it gets boring. My Fair Lady is a big offender in this aspect. Musicals already are a genre I don't like all that much, and having it take up this much time is a good way of making me not enjoy it. Any possibility of giving any points in this category is marred by the fact that there's no way I could say I was enjoying myself by the time the movie was over. Really, I don't want to blame the fact that it's a musical, but that really is the main problem with the movie. It seems to take every, and I mean every, piece of the story and makes a musical number out of it. This causes the movie to last a lot longer than it should have, and the payoff really isn't anywhere near worth it.
0/1

Lasting Value:
Like I said, this movie has some of the best costume design I've ever seen. It is a surprisingly fun movie to look at. Its lasting value is kind of weakened by being a movie I wished was over about two thirds of the way through, but it still is a very well made movie.
.5/1

Final Say:
My Fair Lady is an almost perfect piece of cinema, featuring an excellent script, great acting and characters, and some of the best costume designs of all time. However, this perfection is broken by overstaying its welcome by about an hour, and it really could have used Julie Andrews over Audrey Hepburn.

Final Score: 7.3/10

The Last of the Mohicans (1992)

Directed by Michael Mann

In The Last of the Mohicans, three men, two Mohicans and their adopted white son/brother, try to protect two women as the French and Indian War rages on.

Story:
The Last of the Mohicans is a disturbing tale. While keeping a mature storyline, it still keeps the feel of a rollercoaster action movie with the way it plays out. As far as I can tell, there weren't any plot holes or anything, or at least any noticeable ones. The story features many surprising and dark elements, and there are many scenes you won't soon forget.
1/1

Story Flow/Length:
This movie surprised me with its length. It had all the makings to be an epic length movie, but they decided against it. Which is good, because I have a hard time enjoying epic length films, even if it matches the type of film. It flows greatly, too.
2/2

Characters:
The characters aren't anything too special. They never really do anything to really stick out. Well, outside of the villain. Magua is one intimidating man. He has an unbelievably brutal personality, and you know something bad is going to happen when you see him. It's a good cast of characters, but none of them will really do anything to make you remember them.
.7/1

Acting:
Luckily, we get some good acting out of the movie. The two Mohican characters have good actors, and Daniel Day-Lewis gives a good performance as Hawkeye. Wes Studi also gives a good performance as Magua. It's not the type of acting that would win Academy Awards or anything, but it still does a good job as far as the movie goes.
.9/1

Atmosphere and Environment:
It keeps an intense atmosphere throughout, with you never knowing when something bad is going to pop out and cause the quest to fail. It also does a good job with its settings. The deep, wooded areas help create a feeling of fear. It does a great job showing an America before the nature of it was torn apart.
1/1

Technical:
It has wonderful settings. The battle scenes are intense and well choreographed. Some of the shots are unbelievable, specifically a scene showing a fort being attacked, only lit up by the cannon fire. Another fun movie to look at. It also sounds good. The camera work is just overall great, and Michael Mann really knows how to capture what he wants on screen.
1/1

Dialogue:
I can't really remember much of the dialogue in the film. It gets the story across, but it's not anything memorable.
.5/1

Star Rating:*** and a half/****

Entertainment Value:

It is a pretty fun movie. It's fun to watch, and its story is interesting enough to draw you in. However, I just never seemed to really get into it, and I don't know why. There was something about it that didn't let me get completely into it.
.8/1

Lasting Value:
It has great settings, and it does a great job with its lighting. It was an overall fun movie, and some of the plot elements and scenes are disturbing enough that I will probably remember it well.
.8/1

Final Say:
The Last of the Mohicans is an incredibly fun movie with great atmosphere, always keeping a suspenseful mood. It doesn't do anything wrong, but, at the same time, I feel like there could have been a bit more to it. In the end, an excellent movie, and definitely a movie I'd recommend.

Final Score: 8.7/10

Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon (2000)

Directed by Ang Lee

A young woman in ancient China tries to find freedom to do what she wants. Meanwhile, a group of people are after the sword she stole and the woman who mentored her. Many, many subplots take place alongside this.

Story:
This story has many different plots. Two love stories go on as a battle for a treasured sword is fought. It manages to bring all these stories together perfectly. For a movie of its type, it has a surprisingly emotional storyline, and, surprisingly enough, it's actually the story that takes center stage most of the time. A story you won't soon forget, due to the fact that it mixes action and drama perfectly.
1/1

Story Flow/Length:
The length of the movie is just right. All of the plot points take up just enough time to feel relevant while not overdoing it. The story flows at the right speed throughout, slowing down and speeding up as it needs. It keeps everything engaging, whether it's a love scene or an epic battle.
2/2

Characters:
Much like the story, this movie has much deeper characters than I expected it to have. It is ultimately a tale of love, and what a young woman will do in pursuit of being able to love who she wants to, eventually becoming sidetracked as a sword comes into her possession. The characters all have memorable personalities, and it's a surprisingly likable cast in the end.
1/1

Acting:
The actors match their characters in greatness. Once again, it goes above and beyond what I expected out of a movie of its type. You can see the pain, the anger in their faces. You can see the quiet anger in the young woman's expression as people start to annoy her. An all around great cast of actors.
1/1

Atmosphere and Environment:
Due to the greatness of everything else, everything draws you in and keeps you drawn in. Completely unbelievable things will happen throughout this movie, but the mood of the story will keep you in such a state that you won't care that someone flew through the air, turned around, stopped, kicked something, and fell to the ground. The settings are wonderful as well. The ending of the film is one of the most emotionally powerful scenes I've seen in a long time.
1/1

Technical:
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon has some of the best fight scenes of all time. It is unbelievable how well choreographed they are. All of the sets are wonderful to look at, breathtaking at times. The costume design is great, as well. A technical masterpiece.
1/1

Dialogue:
It has some great pieces of dialogue throughout. Unfortunately, they are, in the end, not all that memorable. It fits the situation perfectly, but the great lines are soon forgotten.
.7/1

Star Rating: ****/****

Entertainment Value:
It keeps you interested both through the story and through the action. It has interesting character and some of the most enthralling shots of all time. It is a movie that will keep you watching all the way through, for many different reasons.
1/1

Lasting Value:
Having both a deep story and being incredibly fun to watch is my kind of movie. Just, everything about this movie is incredibly fun and memorable, and it keeps you hooked throughout. It's what most movies should try to be like. After watching it, I can definitely say it will be a movie that will influence some of the stories I'm writing.
1/1

Final Say:
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon is a masterpiece. It does everything perfectly. It throws away the rules of reality to be entertaining, while keeping the ones that matter in place for emotional effect, all the while keeping it perfectly believable. One of the best movies of this decade, and it's unfortunate that it's not getting as much respect as it did when it first came out.

Final Score: 9.7/10