Hirschhorn’s Ratings vs UMR’s Ratings

There are four writers that have heavily influenced how UltimateMovieRankings.com is set up. Those four writers are (in alphabetical order) Roger Ebert, Joel Hirschhorn, Bill James and Danny Peary.

Roger Ebert was the first film critic that I became aware of as a kid. Watching Ebert and Gene Siskel’s Sneak Previews on PBS with my grandmother every Saturday is one of my best childhood memories. I was lucky enough to have not one but two different correspondences with Ebert before he passed away.

Danny Peary is a writer that has written numerous books on movies and baseball. Peary’s three volume Cult Movie book series is “must read” for any film fan. Another highlight in his book career is Alternative Oscars®…which shows Peary’s choices for best picture, actor, and actress Oscars® for the film years from 1927 through 1991. Many many moons ago, I actually got to met Mr. Peary when he was doing an interview for my friend’s college radio show.

Bill James is a baseball stat god. James has redefined baseball statistics. James created new formulas to show baseball in a new light. Our UMR calculation for rating a movie using statistics is a version of what James has been doing with baseball since the 1970s.

Joel Hirschhorn was a song writer who won two Oscars®. That is nice but it was his book, Rating the Movie Stars, that influenced me the most. In his book, Hirschhorn gives a rating for every movie a star made. He used a 1 to 4 star rating for each movie and actor/actress. His book was published in 1983. After years of reading that book….I started thinking it was time for a new edition. Sadly an internet search showed that Mr. Hirschhorn had passed away. Eventually I realized that I could do a version of what Hirschhorn had done in Rating the Movie Stars. Been at it since 2011.

Example of how Rating The Movie Stars looks….in this case Mr. Marlon Brando

So what is this page about? Well….we have now done UMR pages on almost half of the stars Hirschhorn has listed in his book (he has 410 stars in his book). So we figured it would be interesting to see how our two ratings compare….it means nothing….but the stat geek in me could not resist.

UMR vs Rating The Movie Stars

The really cool thing about this table is that it is “user-sortable”. Rank the movies anyway you want.

Column One: Rank By Sort
Column Two: Actor or Actress
Column Three: Average UMR score for each actor or actress
Column Four: UMR Rank….from 1st to 195th
Column Five: Average Rating The Movie Stars score for each actor or actress
Column Six: Rating The Movie Stars Rank from 1st to 195th
Column Seven: Combined Ranking of UMR & Rating The Movie Stars

Actor or Actress	AVG UMR Score	UMR Rank	AVG Rating Movie Star Score	Rating Movie Star Rank	Combined Ranking
Charles Chaplin	57.58	3	3.60	10	1st
Fred Astaire	53.18	8	3.62	9	2nd
Thelma Ritter	52.55	16	3.68	2	3rd
Grace Kelly	63.57	1	3.45	17	4th
Spencer Tracy	53.33	7	3.51	12	5th
Sydney Greenstreet	51.82	20	3.55	11	6th
Judy Garland	58.32	2	3.31	30	7th
Claude Rains	49.72	33	3.66	6	8th
Charles Laughton	49.69	35	3.66	7	9th
Cary Grant	52.98	12	3.31	31	10th
James Stewart	51.93	19	3.33	27	11th
John Garfield	50.49	29	3.44	19	12th
Ronald Colman	49.57	36	3.51	13	13th
Bing Crosby	51.37	25	3.37	24	14th
Ingrid Bergman	53.03	11	3.27	38	15th
Greta Garbo	48.56	50	3.67	3	16th
Humphrey Bogart	50.18	32	3.35	25	17th
Fredric March	47.97	58	3.66	5	18th
Leslie Howard	47.00	71	3.76	1	19th
Donald Crisp	47.09	70	3.67	4	20th
James Cagney	47.70	60	3.51	14	21st
Claudette Colbert	48.74	46	3.33	28	22nd
Clifton Webb	51.08	26	3.22	50	23rd
Vivien Leigh	51.41	24	3.21	52	24th
Harrison Ford	48.93	43	3.27	39	25th
William Powell	48.26	53	3.30	32	26th
Katharine Hepburn	51.80	21	3.14	64	27th
Clark Gable	52.56	15	3.12	72	28th
Jean Harlow	49.41	39	3.22	49	29th
Betty Hutton	52.83	13	3.11	75	30th
Irene Dunne	50.54	28	3.15	62	31st
Audrey Hepburn	50.91	27	3.14	65	32nd
Marlene Dietrich	48.84	44	3.20	54	33rd
Deborah Kerr	47.90	59	3.27	40	34th
Gary Cooper	52.41	18	3.07	83	35th
Marx Brothers	45.57	85	3.43	20	36th
Gene Kelly	48.72	47	3.18	58	37th
Burt Lancaster	47.40	65	3.26	41	38th
Olivia de Havilland	49.56	38	3.13	70	39th
Peter Lorre	44.45	102	3.62	8	40th
Margaret Sullavan	45.00	96	3.50	16	41st
Dustin Hoffman	47.31	66	3.24	48	42nd
Jean Arthur	53.86	5	2.99	109	43rd
Norma Shearer	51.54	22	3.04	93	44th
Myrna Loy	47.63	63	3.18	56	45th
Montgomery Clift	54.63	4	2.94	115	46th
Sally Field	46.03	81	3.25	43	47th
Danny Kaye	53.52	6	2.94	118	48th
Edward G. Robinson	44.43	103	3.39	22	49th
Tyrone Power	52.81	14	2.98	111	50th
Barbara Stanwyck	44.29	105	3.39	23	51st
Gregory Peck	49.71	34	3.04	94	52nd
Jeanette MacDonald	47.99	55	3.07	81	53rd
William Holden	45.50	88	3.21	51	54th
Lee Marvin	43.81	112	3.28	34	55th
Laurence Olivier	45.13	92	3.19	55	56th
Steve McQueen	47.98	57	3.04	90	57th
Gene Tierney	48.57	49	3.03	98	58th
Greer Garson	53.10	9	2.88	138	59th
Angela Lansbury	43.15	122	3.34	26	60th
Woody Allen	45.98	83	3.13	66	61st
Mae West	45.24	91	3.17	59	62nd
Meryl Streep	46.49	76	3.11	74	63rd
Paul Muni	46.84	73	3.09	77	64th
Walter Brennan	52.46	17	2.88	135	65th
Bob Hope	48.42	51	3.02	102	66th
Lionel Barrymore	47.28	67	3.05	88	67th
Jack Nicholson	48.97	42	2.97	113	68th
Barbra Streisand	53.05	10	2.83	147	69th
Robert Ryan	43.00	125	3.28	33	70th
Robert Duvall	41.86	144	3.50	15	71st
Paul Newman	46.91	72	3.05	87	72nd
Ginger Rogers	47.98	56	3.01	103	73rd
Carole Lombard	42.47	132	3.33	29	74th
George C. Scott	42.20	141	3.43	21	75th
Henry Fonda	44.52	100	3.15	63	76th
Frank Sinatra	49.09	40	2.93	123	77th
Lucille Ball	47.14	69	3.03	95	78th
John Barrymore	43.21	121	3.25	45	79th
Jodie Foster	42.49	131	3.27	37	80th
Orson Welles	46.58	75	3.02	100	81st
Jack Lemmon	46.29	79	3.03	97	82nd
Robert Montgomery	42.13	142	3.27	35	83rd
Robert Shaw	42.45	133	3.25	44	84th
Rosalind Russell	45.47	89	3.04	91	85th
Betty Grable	49.56	37	2.86	144	86th
Marilyn Monroe	50.26	31	2.81	152	87th
Doris Day	48.81	45	2.87	141	88th
Rita Hayworth	46.00	82	3.00	106	89th
Julie Andrews	47.64	62	2.92	126	90th
Joan Fontaine	47.25	68	2.93	122	91st
Robert Redford	49.01	41	2.82	149	92nd
Robert DeNiro	38.58	173	3.44	18	93rd
Joel McCrea	40.79	158	3.27	36	94th
Sidney Poitier	42.94	127	3.13	67	95th
Susan Hayward	45.56	86	2.98	112	96th
Janet Leigh	42.32	138	3.15	61	97th
Vincent Price	43.14	123	3.10	76	98th
Fred MacMurray	43.71	115	3.06	86	99th
Shirley Temple	50.44	30	2.66	173	100th
Marlon Brando	51.44	23	2.55	182	101st
Walter Matthau	41.72	146	3.15	60	102nd
Robert Young	42.32	139	3.13	68	103rd
James Mason	40.92	156	3.18	57	104th
Maureen O'Hara	46.83	74	2.87	140	105th
Walter Pidgeon	42.39	137	3.08	78	106th
Bette Midler	44.07	108	3.00	108	107th
Clint Eastwood	44.89	97	2.94	119	108th
Dick Powell	43.69	116	3.02	101	109th
Peter O'Toole	42.99	126	3.04	92	110th
Van Johnson	45.34	90	2.90	128	111th
David Niven	45.10	95	2.93	124	112th
Diane Keaton	42.43	136	3.07	84	113th
Ray Milland	41.20	152	3.13	69	114th
Robert Mitchum	41.52	148	3.11	73	115th
Errol Flynn	47.55	64	2.77	158	116th
Richard Harris	45.11	94	2.89	132	117th
Sean Connery	43.10	124	3.00	105	118th
Kathryn Grayson	48.11	54	2.65	175	119th
Bette Davis	43.95	109	2.94	121	120th
Bruce Dern	37.19	189	3.26	42	121st
Dorothy Lamour	46.38	78	2.81	153	122nd
Jennifer Jones	48.32	52	2.58	180	123rd
John Wayne	48.62	48	2.45	186	124th
Jeff Bridges	37.76	182	3.21	53	125th
Warren Oates	37.10	190	3.24	46	126th
Martin Sheen	36.32	191	3.24	47	127th
Kirk Douglas	41.18	153	3.05	89	128th
Goldie Hawn	40.45	162	3.07	82	129th
Mel Brooks	47.66	61	2.50	185	130th
Richard Pryor	39.53	167	3.07	80	131st
Richard Dreyfuss	38.96	170	3.08	79	132nd
Julie Christie	41.76	145	3.00	107	133rd
Al Pacino	44.35	104	2.83	148	134th
Anthony Hopkins	37.60	183	3.13	71	135th
Elizabeth Taylor	46.12	80	2.66	174	136th
Natalie Wood	45.13	93	2.75	162	137th
Gene Hackman	42.21	140	2.94	116	138th
Linda Darnell	43.83	111	2.83	145	139th
Donna Reed	45.51	87	2.68	169	140th
Paulette Goddard	44.17	106	2.81	151	141st
Shirley MacLaine	42.69	129	2.90	129	142nd
Steve Martin	40.93	155	3.00	104	143rd
George Peppard	43.47	120	2.88	139	144th
James Garner	40.20	164	3.03	96	145th
Dana Andrews	41.31	150	2.99	110	146th
Lana Turner	44.74	98	2.73	164	147th
Roy Scheider	38.30	178	3.06	85	148th
Dean Martin	46.47	77	2.42	188	149th
Alan Ladd	44.72	99	2.68	170	150th
Joseph Cotten	42.92	128	2.83	146	151st
Anne Bancroft	43.49	119	2.78	156	152nd
Charlton Heston	43.61	118	2.77	159	153rd
Abbott & Costello	45.78	84	2.17	193	154th
Glenn Ford	41.54	147	2.90	131	155th
Robert Taylor	43.92	110	2.69	168	156th
Howard Keel	41.11	154	2.92	127	157th
Donald Sutherland	37.52	184	3.03	99	158th
Michael Douglas	41.23	151	2.89	133	159th
Anthony Quinn	42.65	130	2.79	154	160th
Jane Fonda	43.78	113	2.67	171	161st
Lauren Bacall	44.14	107	2.64	177	162nd
Warren Beatty	42.44	135	2.81	150	163rd
Ernest Borgnine	39.06	169	2.94	117	164th
Michael Caine	38.54	175	2.96	114	165th
Ava Gardner	43.67	117	2.67	172	166th
Debbie Reynolds	43.74	114	2.65	176	167th
Liza Minnelli	40.81	157	2.88	137	168th
Carrie Fisher	40.51	161	2.89	134	169th
Jerry Lewis	44.45	101	2.02	194	170th
Christopher Plummer	38.38	177	2.94	120	171st
Shelley Winters	38.75	172	2.92	125	172nd
Rock Hudson	42.45	134	2.71	165	173rd
James Coburn	38.78	171	2.90	130	174th
Peter Sellers	39.70	166	2.88	136	175th
Joan Crawford	40.63	160	2.86	142	176th
Randolph Scott	41.88	143	2.58	179	177th
George Segal	39.79	165	2.76	160	178th
James Caan	37.43	185	2.86	143	179th
Sylvester Stallone	38.16	180	2.77	157	180th
Anthony Perkins	40.64	159	2.64	178	181st
Tony Curtis	41.52	149	2.38	191	182nd
Yul Brynner	37.35	188	2.78	155	183rd
Richard Burton	40.32	163	2.53	184	184th
Sophia Loren	37.43	186	2.73	163	185th
John Travolta	38.57	174	2.57	181	186th
Burt Reynolds	33.71	195	2.76	161	187th
Victor Mature	39.48	168	2.38	190	188th
Chevy Chase	34.94	193	2.71	166	189th
Charles Bronson	36.09	192	2.70	167	190th
Faye Dunaway	38.27	179	2.54	183	191st
Ronald Reagan	37.96	181	2.40	189	192nd
Elvis Presley	38.49	176	1.65	195	193rd
Ann-Margret	37.35	187	2.25	192	194th
Roger Moore	34.35	194	2.44	187	195th

When Hirschhorn published his book….he had three people with a perfect 4.00 score. All three had less than 5 movies. Those three thespians were James Dean, Eddie Murphy and Ben Kingsley. Dean was not included here because 3 movies is just not enough to give a fair comparison. Murphy and Kingsley now have many many more movies. Certainly Murphy’s Norbit and Kingsley’s BloodRayne would have ruined their perfect scores if Hirschhorn was still alive.

Hey Flora/Bob…….for some unknown reason Hirschhorn did not include Richard Widmark….which is why he is not listed….sorry about that….I think he should have been included.

(Visited 677 times)

55 thoughts on “Hirschhorn’s Ratings vs UMR’s Ratings”

BOB says:

July 21, 2017 at 4:54 am

Joel Hirschhorn
July 20, 2017 at 5:59 pm

“All acting, if it’s any good, is character acting. said Melvyn Douglas. Nobody demonstrated the validity of this better than Douglas himself. Even in lightweight romantic leads, he suggested colors and complexities not specifically indicated by the script”

1 A respected historical anthology of the Great Movie Stars that I once possessed argued that the GREATEST of movie stars like Cooper, Wayne, Grant and Gable were “natural in that they always played themselves and did not get involved in character acting more suited to the stage and supporting parts.”

2 Though it pains me to say it authors went on to opine that Marlon Brando played a wide range of parts and personalities that no “natural” actor like those others just named would want to undertake and therefore the authors questioned whether Brando, magnificent on stage, could be regarded as being among the truly GREATEST OF SCREEN actors despite his great talent, fame and popularity. The authors regarded Oliver as being in the same boat as Brando.

3 Conversely Bogie and Cary Grant each stated the opinion that Brando’s diversity was a “hide in plain sight” smokescreen and that he was in effect himself in every role. Be that as it may the clear view of the authors of the historical anthology was that the Duke et al were THE great screen actors and they were great ON SCREEN because they were themselves and shunned character studies. In short the camera unlike the stage preferred naturalism [ie “being oneself”] as a form of greatness.

Reply
BOB says:

July 5, 2017 at 3:31 am

HI BRUCE
1 LIZ I agree with you that the Cleo WW grosses so far in the public domain cannot be trusted. The sources that I’ve seen quoting Cleo’s WWs are IMDB and The Numbers and I’ve long suspected that those two sites regularly actually understate classic era grosses. Indeed it is noteworthy that Wikipedia which will quote the WW figure where it is certain of it confines itself as you do to the domestic gross and its figure for the actual domestic gross mirrors your own to virtually the last cent.

JOEL/LADDIE
2 I certainly agree with Joel here and so did William Bendix who always insisted that Ladd was a much underrated actor though of course Bill was virtually Alan’s’ employee’ and appeared with him in 7 of the movies you have listed on the Ladd page. And don’t you dare start giving Bendix credit for my Alan’s grosses! William also claimed that whilst Laddie had no fears for the bad guys of the screen in real life he was terrified of W of Alan who ruled the roost.

3 I agree too with your assessment of Shane’s influence and it has seemed to me that the character has been the template for many subsequent screen heroes since who have been professionals who ‘adopted’ a community of ‘amateurs’ and sorted out the bad guys for them. Dalton in Road House (1989) struck me as a Shane type in modern surroundings just as Mariner in Costner’s Waterworld reminded me of a seafaring version of the type of character Stewart played in Bend of the River and Far Country. Anyway I think that Joel can now be filed away with your and his own apparent Goddess as someone about whom you and I must agree to differ. Thanks for all the backchat.

Reply
BOB says:

July 4, 2017 at 12:45 pm

BOB
July 4, 2017 at 12:35 pm
HI BRUCE – PS

McDORMAND
1 I see you’re getting back into things again and Steve will be pleased if he feels that the Automation has been stood down for now! I personally could not praise the brilliant McDormand enough but the Dan-like link in the matter is that it was my continuing to think about your Frances page that caused me to call Francis Frances if you get what I mean!

JOEL
2 Naturally I agree with John’s assessment of Julius Caesar and Brando’s performance and Joel was entitled to criticise any performance he didn’t like; but the piece that you kindly reproduced for me was not in my opinion so much a critique as a character assassination.

3 Again actors are fair game and as our societies believe in freedom of speech Hirschhorn was entitled to conduct such an assassination if he felt it was warranted. However I thought that rather than rely solely on his own opinions and prejudices it was unprofessional of him to lean on for example the subjective views of Sinatra who harboured personal ill-feeling against Brando. Either Joel was a poor researcher and so ignorant of the other side of the story that Professor Mizruchi has recounted in relation to Apocalypse Now or else Joel was not interested in anything that showed Brando might not have been completely at fault.

4 Certainly Sinatra has never been regarded universally as a role model.to say the least and for a professional author and critic to cast him in the role of the good guy in a dispute with a fellow Great without looking into both sides of the story does to mind smack of either unbelievable bias or professional laziness.

5 However just as Joel’s crazy ratings some which Steve for one also found ‘”hilarious” show up how sensible your own and Steve’s usually are Hirsch’s one-sided rant against Brando illustrates how much the Cogerson site with its own likes and dislikes is overall very fair
balanced and professional.

Reply
1. BOB says:
  
  July 4, 2017 at 12:47 pm
  
  BRUCE
  PS I don’t buy the “scarce sources of the day” angle. The Brando/Sinatra feud for example had been in the public domain since the 1950s and I knew about it and I’m no professional. Also if Joel did not have the connections to check out facts he should have refrained from printing just one side of the matters concerned but he probably wasn’t interested in the other side. What sort of professional would have blindly accepted Sinatra’s version of ANY quarrel?
  
  Reply
  1. Cogerson says:
    
    July 4, 2017 at 1:47 pm
    
    Hey Bob…I am not saying he was without sources…I am saying when I was younger….my lack of sources found my discovery of Joel’s book…to be the equivalent of finding hidden treasure. I am sure Joel had lots of sources…..especially since he was living in Hollywood…and making some great movies…and winning Oscars for his work.
    
    Hirschhorn received 4 Oscar nominations…..slamming on the brakes….I should do an UMR page on him…..just some of his movies.
    
    Pete’s Dragon, Towering Inferno, Posideon Adventure, Freaky Friday, Cheyenne Social Club, The April Fools
    
    Reply
2. Cogerson says:
  
  July 4, 2017 at 1:39 pm
  
  Hey Bob.
  1. I think the comment box was on auto-pilot….the numbers of new material in June are now in….10 brand new pages and 2 You Tube videos…..that is doing new material once every 2 and half days….pretty good output…in my mind.
  2. As for the comments….I admit it….at times the comments have been overwhelming…granted this is a good problem to have….but at one point a couple of months ago…I was spending about 2 to 3 hours a day just responding to comments……and when I am working…I just do not have the time to respond that much.
  3. As much as Joel’s Brando ratings frustrate you….I highly recommend checking out his book. https://www.amazon.com/Rating-Movie-Stars-Joel-Hirschhorn/dp/0517414449 You can own for less than 4 bucks…just tear out the Brando section and you might like the book.
  4. Thank goodness….Mr. Joel liked Myrna Loy….lol.
  5. Joel’s wrap up on Loy….”Loy’s consistent and engaging contribution is a remarkable achievement. Even more remarkable, she was never nominated for an Oscar. Like all great performers, she never made her efforts seem enough like work to garner attention”.
  6. Joel listed 27 of her movies as 4 star performances…compared to his 7 for Brando.
  
  Reply
  1. BOB says:
    
    July 4, 2017 at 4:25 pm
    
    HI BRUCE
    
    1 Thanks for the additional comments but I think I”ll pass on buying Joel’s book as I don’t feel he has any real sense of proportion from what I’ve already seen. It’s not just his attitude to my own faves Bud and the Duke that is off-putting but a lot of his ratings are as Steve pointed out hilarious.
    
    2. I realise that as the organiser of this site you may feel you have a responsibility to your viewers and readers to trawl the widest possible range of opinions so that they can benefit from the diversity, but it does surprise me that someone like Joel who seems to me to have had some kind of chip on his shoulder can have such an influence on you and if I started to buy books to tear out sections about stars that I LIKE I would feel that I was becoming as ridiculous as it strikes me he may have been..
    
    2 However it is probable that he will appeal to many among the cinema-going public as in other entertainment mediums and indeed many walks of life a bigot who conducts character assassinations and says weird and unpleasant things can draw appreciative audiences in preference to somebody who offers analysis in an unbiased and courteous manner –
    
    “Then cried they all again, saying, Not this man, but Barabbas. Now Barabbas was a robber.” [John 18:40]
    
    Reply
    1. Cogerson says:
      
      July 4, 2017 at 8:34 pm
      
      Hey Bob….just letting you know how easy it would be to have the book at your fingertips….he does have nice things to say about some of your other favorites.
      
      Alan Ladd – “Alan Ladd was always underrated even though he had genuine star quality, a deep, resonant voice, and coldly compelling good looks. Critics ridiculed his low-key acting style, but today his performances look less mannered than many of his contemporaries”.
      
      Speaking of Shane…watched Logan last night and Shane has decent amount of influence on the movie…first of all….they show a couple of movie clips in the movie….and then Jackman does a Shane like role….and then it ends using a Shane movie quote.
      
      As for different opinions on this site…..Variety is the spice of life.
      
      Reply
Lupino says:

July 3, 2017 at 4:12 pm

Funny what you have to say about the way your Hirschhorn looks. My first movie related book was Norman Mailers biography on Monroe- I got 2 copies for my sixteenth birthday and brought one back to the bookshop…got Daphne du Maurier’s My Cousin Rachel in return. Little did I know that Mailer’s book, boasting a number of names of american actors and actresses, started a curiosity in me to get to know more about these people…bought another copy of the MMbiography a few years later to put on the shelf, the original was a collection of loose pages by that time 🙂 (just imagine- on first reading, I had never heard about Zsa Zsa Gabor but did know about Garbo- so I thought Zsa Zsa was Greta’s nickname …ouch!) The first reference book on movies was an early Leonard Maltin. it suffered a similar fate as my MM book. It is so easy nowadays to get information through the internet, and I really love that- but I am glad that in the beginning I had to do it the old way, because although it was much harder, finally getting answers to certain questions after intensive search seemed much more rewarding.

Reply
1. Cogerson says:
  
  July 3, 2017 at 9:42 pm
  
  Hey Lupino….thanks for sharing the information on the Monroe biography. I remember finding some books on the Three Stooges and Abbott and Costello when I was really young…I remember my mom repeatedly checking those books out for me.
  
  Funny about mixing up Zsa Zsa Gabor and Greta Garbo…..I am sure that happened a lot….lol. Got love those old books….and all the effort to get those books and information. These young kids today have it made….lol.
  
  I agree working for the information was a lot more rewarding. Good feedback.
  
  Reply
Lupino says:

July 3, 2017 at 1:28 pm

Hello Bruce,
I’m sure it doesn’t surprise you to read that my biggest joy about this new chart is the inclusion of Margaret Sullavan. Hirshhorn’s ratings of her movies puts her into a spot safely within his Top 20. As most likely her biggest german fan I am always glad to find others who support the strong feelings I have concerning this lady’s talent and the importance of her almost forgotten contribution to the art of film. Thus, I’ll simply keep quiet about some other Hirschhorn ratings that I don’t agree with 😉
One question, though: Did he not include Sylvia Sidney in his book? I know she has some pretty low rated films in her career, nevertheless, it would be interesting to know how she fared in his overall evaluation.
I enjoyed this latest, different entry and am happy to read that you had fun doing it.

Reply
1. Cogerson says:
  
  July 3, 2017 at 2:17 pm
  
  Hey Lupino….thanks for checking out our Hirschhorn vs Rating The Movie Star ranking. I figured you would be happy to see Sullavan so highly rated. Sylvia Sidney did not make his book….other surprising omissions? Margaret O’Sullivan and Richard Widmark.
  
  I agree with many of the complaints on Hirschhorn’s ratings. But I will always have fond memories of his book. For years this was my main source for information on classic stars. It was my checklist to track down and watch all of Cary Grant’s movies. Before the internet…books like Hirschhorn’s were “bibles” for film buffs. Pretty sure I have gone through 4 of those books….my 4th copy is held together by duct tape……my 5th edition has already been bought….and awaits it’s time to be abused and used….lol.
  
  Reply

Ultimate Movie Rankings

Ranking Movies Since 2011

Hirschhorn’s Ratings vs UMR’s Ratings

UMR vs Rating The Movie Stars

The really cool thing about this table is that it is “user-sortable”. Rank the movies anyway you want.

55 thoughts on “Hirschhorn’s Ratings vs UMR’s Ratings”

Leave a Reply Cancel reply