The How

It's simple, really. My score on a scale of 100 (begrudgingly, but seemingly necessary) compared with Metacritic (my preferred aggregator) followed by a review. My tastes run from classics to genre films, with a healthy dollop of art house, foreign and documentary thrown in the mix.
Here's how my scale of 100 works. And I'm coming up with these off the top of my head:

90-100: An unparalleled masterpiece (ex. Lawrence of Arabia 100)
80-90: Truly exceptional (ex. Fight Club 90)
70-80: Really good or noteworthy (ex. Evil Dead 80)
60-70: Nobody's perfect (ex. Indiana Jones and the Temple of Doom 70)
50-60: A really nice scene or two (ex. Sicko 55)
0-50: Degrees of loathing (ex. Halloween: Resurrection 20)

The What and the Why

So. MD'A and I were having lunch recently, and we both had a laugh at the length of my Netflix queue. (I'm currently still in early 2006). A discussion of film criticism in general led me to an interesting idea. The traditional critic reviews each film as it's released, either in previews or day of. (At Time Out New York, I was the occasional "Saturday Morning" film critic who went out to see the films studios refuse to preview.)

These days, that release date may be the culmination of months of studio-created hype and/or major marketing campaigns. Why not take my particular situation (every month or so, I add every new release of interest to my cue, whether I've seen it or not) and use it to revisit these films out of the context of their studio-imposed release. Will they have aged terribly/well in a short time? Were they more favorably reviewed because of the festival they appeared in or the time of year in which they opened? I think I've already pre-loaded the gist of my first review.

I also wanted to be a little fancier and call this blog Cinepaste, but I realized it would look like Cine-paste.