How we go about rating films is largely a matter of taste and personal experience. Yet if we are going to do a service to the readers of our reviews we need to have some common standards upon which to base our ratings. As such, here are a few easily recognizable criteria, (or touch stones) that any reviewer can use as a guideline for rating films. For convenience sake we are using a four star system with four stars indicating an exemplary film and 1 star indicating a mediocre film.

• Few if any memorable performances.
• Virtually no plot - why did they make this film anyway?
• If there are any special effects used they are poorly executed.
• Virtually all of the technical aspects of this film are poorly executed.
• A genuine watch checker (Let's hear it for Indiglow ©)

• This film has its "moments".
• This film has a plot although sometimes it is either hard to follow or it is so blatant that it literally beats you over the head with it. You know the kind of film that takes itself so seriously that it literally preaches the moral of the story to you in a special segment (generally at the end of the movie), that leaves you feeling as if you have beaten about the head and shoulders by a large blunt object.
• The majority of the actors turn in credible performances. You do not catch any one acting and most of the time you are watching the characters on screen as opposed to the performers.
• You hardly ever looked at your watch.

• This is a well made film that achieves its purpose.
• The director achieves his/her intent. If it was a comedy you laughed, if it was a horror film you were scared.
• The actors all turn in credible performances.
• The plot was engaging. Not only could you tell why they made the film you were also interested in it.
• The film manages to inspire willing suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience. Translated: you forget that it is only a movie.
• This is the sort of film that you would strongly recommend to people who enjoy this type of genre. You would marginally recommend it to people who don't, as a rule like this type of film. This is potentially a classic film.

• The director achieves his/her intent. If it was a comedy you laughed, if it was a horror film you were scared.
• The actors all turn in credible performances, in fact some of these may be of Oscar caliper.
• The film not only manages to inspire willing suspension of disbelief on the part of the audience but there were times you genuinely forget that it was only a movie. Tell tale signs of this are ferociously grabbing the persons hand next to you or clinging to them in terror during extremely intense scenes. Another sign is people in the audience talking back to the screen.
• This is the sort of film that you think everyone should see regardless of their genre preferences.
• This is a classic film. You can see yourself watching it again and again and seeing something different each time. You can also see yourself introducing your children or your friends to it in fifteen or twenty years.
• Audiences leave this film changed in some manner. Perhaps the audience's awareness has been increased about a subject, this was certainly the case with "One flew Over The Cuckoo's Nest" where audiences were confronted with the realities of mental institutions. Perhaps the audience is forced to confront their feelings about a subject matter, in the case of "Schindler's List" director Steven Speilberg not only educated his audience he also forced them to confront their feelings about prejudice. Or perhaps the audience is asked to think about their relationships with people, as they were in "Field of Dreams" and "Tootsie". Whatever the case, if the audience leaves the theater thinking or feeling differently about the films subject matter the odds are fairly good that it is a four star film.