Thinking outside the Letterboxd

How the film cataloging platform Letterboxd has influenced my relationship to movie watching

“Wow,” I say to my friend over the soda-sticky arm rest. “That was…” 

“I know right,” she says back. But we’re not looking at each other or at the big screen where the credits begin to roll on our movie of the week. 

While the lights come up and people start filtering out of the theater, my friend and I are still seated in our cushy recliners reading reviews and logging the movie we just finished, not even 30 seconds ago, on our Letterboxd accounts. 

Letterboxd is a social media platform where you can share your film taste with others. Anyone can use it to rate movies, create and read reviews and log their viewing history in their diary. It has been an essential part of my film-watching routine for a little over a year now. I log on to see what movies are getting a lot of buzz, which are highly rated and what kind of traction my own reviews are receiving. 

As a cinephile, I love being able to discuss movies and share my opinions with my friends. Cinema is an artform that I am really passionate about, so to be able to share a space with others who feel the same is a lot of fun. But recently, I’ve been noticing that my relationship to film has been completely transformed by Letterboxd in a few key ways. 

1. Film, Interrupted: the Letterboxd brain worm 

Letterboxd conjures a voice in me that sounds remarkably like that annoying person that chatters all the way through the movie. Before I even finish a film, I am constantly updating its subsequent rating in my head. 

Take, for example, the 2024 Oscar nominee Past Lives, which I watched recently and yes, logged on Letterboxd (5/5 stars, I highly recommend). The film is beautiful and emotional and yet, at times, I found myself thinking more about how many stars something like the cinematography would add to my rating, and not about what kind of substance it would add to my viewing pleasure and reception of the film's message. 

Along with this is my urge to search for moments in the movie that I want to comment on in a review. Of course there is nothing wrong with taking note of interesting scenes that you want to analyze later in greater detail, but the majority of “reviews” on Letterboxd are not this kind of critical analysis. Most “reviews” consist of a few short, funny phrases that are meant to generate likes. Because of this, my brain seems to subconsciously pick out and produce these kinds of comical, but often shallow remarks during a movie. 

Between my thoughts of rating, logging and creating the perfect quip, there is no room left in my brain to fully appreciate the film and all of its intricacies. 

2. Good Film Hunting: I’m allergic to movies rated less than four stars 

Okay, that is somewhat of an exaggeration. Some of my absolute favorite films are crappy cult classics that most people would not spare a second glance at. But, in general, using Letterboxd has made me more conscious about the film opinions of other people in a way that is not necessarily positive. 

Letterboxd is a great tool to use when deciding what to watch. The platform allows you to easily search for films by year, genre, cast members and more. But I have found that its primary focus on a film's rating has made me more critical of what films I watch. I have caught myself eliminating potential movies if they have low ratings and I am more likely to watch ones that other users deem “good cinema.” 

While this does not seem outwardly negative, I mean, how can you complain about only watching good movies? I think it does lend itself to the biases of the platform’s users, and effectively closes off entire groups of films that I may like but dismiss because others do not. 

Additionally, after I watch a movie and have developed my own personal opinion of it, that opinion is likely to be swayed (even minutely) by the general Letterboxd consensus. After all, it is a social media platform and it is not immune to the pressures that most social media platforms provoke. 

3. Every Movie Every Film All At Once: I can’t get enough! 

Last year, I watched over 200 movies. This was mostly due to the fact that I began using Letterboxd. The quick boost of dopamine I get from logging a movie, seeing my film count go up and having my review liked is addicting.  

I sometimes feel compelled to watch movies just to log them: The gratification of the app occasionally overrides my natural instincts to stop watching a film I am no longer interested in. My friends who use the platform have said they do this too. But it all feels a little backwards in the way that social media and digital technology can often be. Like going on a trip to Cancún just to post beach pictures on Instagram, I watched movies just to tell everyone on Letterboxd that I saw them. 

Although, Letterboxd is sometimes the best part of my movie watching experience. Like when my three-year-old nephew subjected me to PAW Patrol: The Movie twice in a row. At least I could have something to show for it. 

But this kind of digital motivation is not sustainable or healthy. In the worst of my overconsumption phase I became desensitized and bored with movies altogether. My use of Letterboxd had convoluted the reasons I enjoyed cinema and the reasons why I started using the app in the first place. I think this is partly my own fault, seeing as I had the free will to choose to sit through a movie and use Letterboxd, but the platform’s mechanisms for promoting user interaction certainly encouraged my overuse. 

Outside the Letterboxd

My experiences here are not unique to Letterboxd. Spotify Wrapped and Goodreads are two other notable examples of platforms where art consumption is commodified for social validation and clicks. I think our increasingly online social presences and the tools we use to navigate them, while fun, can inconspicuously harm how authentically we consume media, the volume at which we consume it and the ways do.  

Spotify Wrapped, for example, is an exciting opportunity to see what music you've listened to throughout the year. Part of its charm is that it is unique to your listening habits. But recently, as the trend of people sharing their Wrapped on social media has taken off, there has been a lot of talk about “embarrassing” tastes. People compare their tastes in music as if they are something you can buy. 

But does that not defeat the purpose of music? Just as constantly being steeped in other people’s ratings does for film?  To me, the beauty of art is its impact on your soul. The subjectivity of it is a gift, not a shortcoming. 

I don’t think the platforms or their social aspects are harmful in low doses. But when the prospect of your private opinions becoming public means that you no longer consume the media you like or you force yourself to think foremost about what others might deem cool, you give up agency in that part of your life and stifle the joy of the thing you consume. You are no longer doing it for you, you are doing it for them. 

This is a dangerous concept and one that I have been forced to confront in my own life as digital technology becomes more ubiquitous. It is not just Letterboxd or apps like it, but rather a digital culture that forces us to internalize the gaze of the masses. Feeling like we are being watched even when we are alone. A place where every pleasure becomes guilty. 

This is not a place I want to live in.

While I still find value and pleasure in using Letterboxd and similar platforms, I believe it is important for me to think more critically about why I use them and how they affect my perception of the world around me.

So, the next time I’m in the theater I will resolve to keep my phone in my pocket, even after the credits have started to roll, and attempt to think outside the Letterboxd.  

Lexi Oybkhan