Film Review Rubric
Use this rubric to plan, self-assess, and give peer feedback. A high score is not about using the most film terms. It is about making a clear judgement and supporting it with precise evidence.
| Criterion | 4 - Confident | 3 - Capable | 2 - Developing | 1 - Beginning |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Judgement and argument 4 marks |
Makes a clear, nuanced judgement about the film's meaning. The argument develops across the review and acknowledges complexity. | Makes a clear judgement and mostly sustains it. Some complexity is recognised. | Offers an opinion or a simple judgement. The argument may be repeated rather than developed. | Describes the film or gives a rating without a clear judgement about meaning. |
| Film-language analysis 4 marks |
Uses film vocabulary precisely and explains how techniques create meaning. Analysis moves beyond naming techniques. | Uses film vocabulary accurately and explains most techniques. Some points may be general. | Uses some film terms, but naming often replaces analysis. | Uses little or no film vocabulary, or uses terms inaccurately. |
| Evidence from sequence and design 4 marks |
Selects specific, relevant evidence from a sequence and/or design element. Evidence is closely connected to the judgement. | Selects relevant evidence and connects it to the argument. Some details may be under-explained. | Includes some evidence, but it may be vague, general, or only loosely connected to the argument. | Makes claims without specific evidence, or relies on plot summary. |
| Structure and cohesion 4 marks |
Organises the review effectively. Introduction, analysis, counterpoint, and conclusion build a coherent argument. | Organises the review clearly. Paragraphs generally connect and the conclusion returns to the judgement. | Uses a basic structure. Some paragraphs may be unfocused or disconnected. | Lacks a clear structure. Ideas are listed rather than developed. |
| Control of language 4 marks |
Writes with control, precision, and a consistent review voice. Spelling, punctuation, and paragraphing are accurate. | Writes clearly with a suitable voice. Minor errors do not impede meaning. | Writes with some clarity, but errors or repetition affect readability. | Writing is unclear or contains errors that make meaning difficult to follow. |
Marking guide
| Total | What it looks like |
|---|---|
| 17-20 | Confident, precise, and coherent. The review makes a persuasive judgement and analyses film language with purpose. |
| 13-16 | Capable. The review has a clear argument and relevant evidence, with some uneven analysis or expression. |
| 9-12 | Developing. The review has a basic judgement and some evidence, but analysis is often general or technique-led. |
| 5-8 | Beginning. The review relies on description, opinion, or plot summary. Film language is limited or inaccurate. |
| 1-4 | Minimal. The review does not yet address the task or provide usable evidence. |
Self-assessment
| Question | My response |
|---|---|
| What is my central judgement in one sentence? | |
| Which sequence did I analyse, and why? | |
| Which film terms did I use accurately? | |
| Where did I explain effect, not just technique? | |
| What counterpoint did I include? | |
| What is the strongest sentence in my review? | |
| What is one thing I will revise? |
Peer feedback
Read your partner's review once for the argument, then once for the film analysis. Give feedback using these prompts.
- Praise: Name one specific choice that made the review convincing.
- Question: Ask about one place where the evidence or effect could be clearer.
- Suggest: Offer one revision that would strengthen the judgement or analysis.
| Praise | Question | Suggest |
|---|---|---|
This rubric is for the Year 7 film review task. It can be used formatively before submission or summatively for assessment.