About

raiders-of-the-lost-ark-1981_gallery_primary1We like ranking movies…and that is what this website is all about.  And we are not talking about a Top Ten list…we are talking about ranking all the movies in somebody’s career from Best to Worst.   The criteria used for the rankings is:  box office grosses, critic reviews, audience voting and award recognition.  Every day the amount of movies ranked by Ultimate Movie Rankings increases ….our tally is now over 25,000 movies.  The number one ranked movie is The Godfather ….coming in last is Kirk Cameron’s Saving Christmas.  Thankfully our pages have been well received.  Recently we crossed the 5 million view mark and are now read in over 200 different countries.

How I got here.

Sometime in 2010, for the millionth time I was looking at Joel Hirschhorn’s book Rating The Movie Stars (1983) when I wondered had he updated his ratings lately? A quick internet check provided the sad news that Mr. Hirchhorn had passed away in 2005.  About a month later, I thought I could update the ratings.  I then came up with an idea to create a mathematical equation that would create a numerical score for each movie. The first thing I had to come up with were factors for the equation.

The book that got me thinking.

The book that got me thinking.

So I thought….if I were producing a movie, what would I like to see my movie accomplish. The first thing I would want would be for the movie to be successful at the box office. Secondly, I would like the critics and moviegoers to enjoy my movie. And finally I would like my movie to receive award recognition through Golden Globe® and Oscar® ceremonies.

There are all kinds of ways to determine if you want to see or skip a movie. You can depend on your favorite critic.  My favorites are the late great Roger Ebert and Leonard Maltin. You might go to Rotten Tomatoes to get the consensus of all the critics. You might watch the viewer ratings at Yahoo Movies and IMDB. You might depend on which movies are doing the best at the box office. You might wait for the end of the year awards.

Ultimate Movie Rankings (UMR) Score takes all of these options and creates a mathematical equation that generates a score from 1 to 100. The higher the score the better the movie.  An average score = 39.86 points. So anything over 40 points should be a good movie to check out.  This gives a good comparison number between centuries and now my wife and I can argue over the merits of her favorite, The Sound of Music and one of my favorites, Pulp Fiction using the same scoring criteria.

So far, I’ve generated scores for 25,000+ movies.  With these scores, I’ve written 300+ web pages with focus on actors/actresses and similar groups (Star Trek vs Star Wars, Top 100 Sports Movies are examples).

So let’s look at the breakdown of the variables in the equation.

1. Box office results.  Receives the second highest percentage (30%) of the equation. The ceiling was 200 million in adjusted for inflation dollars. Any movie that crossed 200 million maxed out the points in the category.

2. Critics and audience reception.  Receives the highest percentage (46%) of the equation. So where do I find critics/audience reception? I use many different sources: RottenTomatoes, IMDb, MetaCritic, Yahoo Movies, Roger Ebert, Leonard Maltin and Fandango. Put them all together and I get an average with 100% being the highest score possible.  Sadly with the passing of my all-time favorite critic, Roger Ebert, I needed a new source….after much research…..our latest movie critic and taking Mr. Ebert’s spot is You Tube movie reviewer Jeremy Jahns,

3. Award Recognition. The final part of the equation is worth 24%. A movie gets points for Golden Globe® and Oscar® nominations and wins. The Golden Globes get 5% while the Oscars® get 13% of the equation. The last 6% goes to amount of Oscar® nominations and amount of Oscar® wins.

One way to see how the scores are calculated: 

Top 200 Box Office Hits with Inflation + Top 100 Best Reviewed Movies + 88 Best Picture Oscar Winners = Top 100 UMR Score Movies

In January of 2011 I published my first Cogerson Movie Score table on HubPages.com….I picked my favorite actor, Bruce Willis, to be the guinea pig.  I have updated his page countless times over the years.  I have now published over 400 movie pages and have been viewed/read over 8 million times.

 

(Visited 83,598 times)

122 thoughts on “About

  1. This website truly has all the information and facts I wanted
    concerning this subject and didn’t know who to ask.
    atletico madrid drakt

  2. HI BRUCE

    1 If you Google the following article CINEMATH-: MOVIE TICKET PRICES COST MUCH MORE THAN THEY USED TO,BUT HOW MUCH it will explain why the earnings of movies in the classic era have far less purchasing power that today’s movies. As I have illustrate previously a gross for a movie released in the thirties and forties could have as little as half the purchasing power as that same movie would have today with an identical audience. For example for Laddie’s 1944 And Now Tomorrow for which you quote an actual gross of $6.45 million you rightly show an adjusted figure of $170 million if it were released today. However the $6.45 million that it made back in 1944 would have the purchasing power in 2015 of just $85.72. Put another way Laddie’s movie would have had to gross nearly $13 million in 1944 for its gross to have the purchasing power today of $170 million because in real terms cinema ticket prices that year were around half of what they are today.

    2 The article is too long and complex to copy in full but the following is an extract from it.

    EXTRACT
    Sure, a movie ticket is more expensive than it used to be even when adjusting for inflation, but it is still relatively cheap entertainment. If you read Collider, I imagine you understand the value of seeing a movie in the theater. You may have to see a matinee to get that $8 movie ticket where you live, but for my money, the theater experience is always worth an $8 bet.

    1. Hey Bob. Interesting information….and thanks for the “suggested” link. I will see if I can find that later tonight.

      When we go to the theater it costs us almost a 100 bucks a visit. As we need between 5 to 6 tickets, popcorn, drinks and candy,

      Then again I am sure a dad of 6 complained about the price of movies back in the 1940s.

      Thanks as always for the visit and the comment .

      1. Actually Bruce when Iread that article I almost thought that you had written it because not only was it scholarly and stylish like your own work but the guy ends on an upbeat note I the way you normally like to do.

    2. Bob & Cogerson
      thanks for pointing out this interesting article. No doubt movie tickets have always been a relatively good and inexpensive buy.
      But inflation is tricky to say the least. Your article inspired me to do a quick study on the price of a gallon of gasoline. It seems to have been 10 cents a gallon in the 1930’s. What about 1944? Turns out to be interesting. I googled in “What was the price of a gallon of gasoline in 1944?” There were seven listed sources on the first page. That was enough for me. I didn’t try the second page.
      Okay. Three of the sources said 15 cents. Two sources said 21 cents. One source said 20 cents. One source said 25 cents. So I guess the best deduction is something between 15 and 25 cents. (the price went up during WWII because of rationing).
      Why such a relatively wide range of answers? I have a theory off quick research. It is difficult to figure out what an average price would be.
      Here is the price of a gallon of gasoline in various states in 2015.
      South Caroline $2.07
      California $2.99
      Hawaii $3.08
      Oregon $2.68
      They had all fifty states, but this sample shows the point. The price varies state by state. So how do you figure out a national average. Just putting in the states will give you the a national average among the states. But the states aren’t created equal (except in the Senate). California with its $2.99 has a much higher population than South Carolina. To actually know what the “average” person pays you have to equalize for population, not easy. But is California’s price actually equal throughout California. My guess is not at all. The price of a gallon of gas In San Francisco or LA is probably much higher than in the California boondocks.
      Bottom line–we know everything is getting more expensive but how much more expensive on the average is probably guesswork.
      As for the Federal Government’s Consumer Price Index, don’t forget that the politicians have a vested interest in underestimating the cost of living increase as this is tied to increases in Social Security, Pensions, and other financial outlays.

      1. Cogerson

        I used gas as I could get the stats state by state and I couldn’t for movie tickets. But I think the problems of figuring out the average cost of gasoline reflects the similar problems of figuring out the average ticket price for movies.

  3. HI BRUCE

    1 I can swear as well as anybody when I forget myself but I don’t favour the use of swearwords as a method of abuse and prefer informed opinion and/or factual debate where there is disagreement.

    2 Perhaps anon merely means to be funny but I could never see the humour in swearing for its own sake. It is not clear at whom the comment is aimed but whoever is meant to be the recipient or whatever the author’s intentions I would certainly be surprised if it became fashionable on this site for four letter words to be used freely as a means of conveying contempt for others and in my experience it is alien to the manner in which participants in Cogerson normally couch their views and/or disagreements.

    3 It is anyway probably inaccurate because whilst in relation to movies none of us knows everything and some are much better versed than others all of the people who contribute to this site and whose posts have seen have certainly impressed me as knowing a good deal about the subject. Also there is an old cliche that “the man who never made a mistake never made ANYTHING ” and the movies is such a vast subject that it’s impossibly for anyone who is involved with that subject in a prolific manner to get things wrong from time to time.

    PS I always type my posts elsewhere in draft form so that I can see if they need to be updated in any way before I commit them and I note that since I typed the above paragraphs you have now changed the four letter word concerned but I still regard the comment as making a point in a personalised extremely abusive manner that I am sure your general readership would wish to shy away from to express any criticism of their own

    1. Hey Bob….I assume that his or her comments were directed at me and the way the movies are ranked here.

      I have no problem with people voicing disapproval…just in the way he or she used profanity to voice that complaint. So even though I do not wish to censor….I changed one word in his comment….but I still think it is clear that they do not like how we set things up here.

      Well…you can’t make everybody happy all the time…lol. I am thinking this Anonymous is done commenting here. Thanks for sharing your thoughts on this comment….it is greatly appreciated.

      1. Hey Bruce, I get those kind of comments occasionally too, especially on my videos for more recent films – here’s a few samples –

        “who did this list a 5 year old boy?”

        “you disappointed me a lot man”

        “WTF??? kkkkkk”

        “Worst. List. Ever”

        “Where the f*** are… [long list of titles]?”

        “hey man, this list makes me sad man…”

        🙂

        I just smile and ignore them. If I reply it’s usually polite and it kind of makes them feel guilty for being nasty and I might get a “I’ve nothing against you personally man” sort of response.

        And sometimes they don’t make any sense at all, this comment was posted on my Top 20 Movies of 1981 video –

        “Elephants can f*** off! F*****g intelligent emotional giants”

    1. Hey Anonymous…sorry you feel that way….but I do appreciate that you checked out our website….and commented….I did change one of the words in your comment…as we generally stay away from profanity here. Have a great day. 🙂

  4. 1 John seems to have taken literally my playful jibes about Lansbury/Lamarr/Delilah and he feels that I have been “harsh” in what he apparently supposes was a serious criticism. Whilst about 95% of the time my comments on this site ARE serious I like to let my hair down occasionally though at times I may be guilty of carrying the humour too far.

    2 If I have misled others in this matter I can only apologise and state categorically that I have NO criticisms to make and indeed feel that the consistency of the accuracy of factual information on the site is remarkable given the vast number of pages and subjects that are covered and the normal pressures of keeping abreast with new releases and other fresh developments in the movie world.

    3 This is a user-friendly site that I think conveys much good will and tolerance of differing opinions and there is none of the friction that one sees too often elsewhere on the Internet and it is important to me that I am not seen to be wishing to depart from the site’s commendable ethos.

    1. Bob

      Gee Bob. I understood that you were doing tongue in cheek teasing of Cogerson. I was also doing tongue in cheek teasing of you. None of us were being serious. It was probably a typo by Cogerson. It happens, as it is said. I don’t want to dwell on it, but please consider that I might have a sense of humor.

      1. Hey John….I feel I have a good sense of humor….and I try to include that humor in as many comments as possible…sadly humor and sarcasm does not travel well in on line communications….which is why I have so many “lol” in my comment. I give Steve lots of credit…his sarcasm does travel well comments…lol.

    2. Hey Bob….no need to apologize…..I can handle it….one day you will know the power and awesomeness of the Double Ls…Loy and Lansbury….until then…we can wait for you patiently….lol.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.