Skip to main content

4.4K Messages

 • 

123.7K Points

Sat, Dec 28, 2019 1:00 AM

JFF: What Was the Last Film You Saw, and How Would You Rate It? (Pt. 19)

Simply a follow up to Jen's great post; there were getting to be so many pages in that one I thought it could use a refresh.  Happy to carry on the tradition!  

Responses

4.2K Messages

 • 

133.4K Points

10 months ago

    
What was the last film you saw and how would you rate it? Pt. 18
https://getsatisfaction.com/imdb/topics/what-was-the-last-film-you-saw-and-how-would-you-rate-it-pt-...
by Jen, Champion
Posted 3 years ago  - Feb 19 2017 -  1,532 replies - 62 pages
.

6 Messages

 • 

220 Points

never saw one. no way to play them... it shows list of videos it says I watched. but can't, they won't play.

115 Messages

 • 

4.6K Points

The last film i saw at the cinema was To a devil a Daughter starring Christopher lee, Richard Widmark it was awesome until the very end when Richard Widmark throw a flintstone on Christophers forehead, where did Christopher go. i rate it 10/10.

2.3K Messages

 • 

65.9K Points

10 months ago

This afternoon:
1917 (2019), 10/10. One of the best scores of the year. Definitely a lock for a cinematography Oscar as well.

Tonight:
The Visitor (1979). Easily one of the most baffling movies I have ever witnessed. 1/10. 10/10 for the Rifftrax commentary.

PS: You messed up the board tag for this one. Weren't you supposed to tag it to the Poll board?

Not sure how useful the Services: I Need To Know board is to me.

4.4K Messages

 • 

123.7K Points

10 months ago

Oh, I didn't know... it appears it is too late to change it, unless Dan or someone can help.
BTW, thanks for using it anyway.  :)

Champion

 • 

13.4K Messages

 • 

412.2K Points

Nia,

I updated the category to "IMDb Poll".

844 Messages

 • 

34.3K Points

10 months ago

Rewatch of Thelma & Louise 9/10

This movie does not give an exaggerated image of men, it gives a very realistic image about men, I grew up surrounded by machismo and misogyny everywhere, I could see how my uncles treated their wives badly and laughed at it making it happen as a thing normal, luckily I never saw my mother being abused of any kind by any man. The truck driver is the perfect stereotype and the embodiment of sluggish men who think of nothing more than to say embarrassing comments towards women, the men around laugh but Women really feel bad about this, maybe if it was too exaggerated to explode the truck but this must be seen more metaphorically. The best thing about the film is that it does not become a repetitive and meaningless feminist comment, it is original, touching and explores the true feelings of women.

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

Cool review man, we think the same 

Here's what I wrote in mine (9/10)...

[...] If there's anything "Thelma and Louise" exemplifies is how low feminism has sunk today by making everything a matter of "being like men" well this is exactly what Ridley Scott's film is not (but he's a man, so what does he know?) The fashion of gender-oriented movies today is to prove that women are as much capable of men but thankfully we don't need a female cop or a female truck driver for the film, we have pretty well-established archetypes, only this time, they're explored from a female standpoint.

The waitress isn't just here to cheer up the depressed visitors, she gives her personal insights about the rapist and her lack of surprise that he ended up being shot reveals how much of human nature she knows. Now, a word about the rapist [...] why would he sign his own death warrant by letting these last words slip off his mouth?

That's the key, he didn't anticipate a reaction. This is a man who had such a low perception of women that in no way he felt endangered, and that was Louise's epiphany. Obviously, raping is the most cowardly and bestial way to assert male power, in the physical way, Louise knew that and saw her friend in state of helplessness, if even the gun didn't insert some sense in his mind, then he would do the same thing again. So she killed him and she didn't feel happy about it. This is the hit-or-miss moment of the film but it works because Sarandon puts so much truth in her acting that you can almost feel some intern brainstorm at that very moment. Was she right or not? Never mind, she did what he expected the least, and involuntarily setting the pattern for the next moves.

This is what the ending is about too, this is what everything is about: unpredictability [...]

I don't feel like polluting this review by mentioning the recent "Ghostbusters" movie but the equivalent of a "Thelma and Louise" today would show female truck drivers acting the same toward men instead of women giving a lesson of decency, we wouldn't have comprehensive men like Louise's boyfriend played by Michael Madsen or the cop played by Harvey Keitel, all the guys would've been as rude as Thelma's husband (Christopher McDonald) wimpy as the cop or disgusting like the truck driver [...]

"Thelma and Louise"  is a film that doesn't say that women are "little things" but that it's the way men look at them and it's up to them to make a difference by acting "big" which doesn't mean, acting like "men". [...]

Champion

 • 

4.2K Messages

 • 

91.1K Points

10 months ago

Rewatch

Oldboy (2003) - 8/10

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

10 months ago

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

10 months ago

Speaking of ratings, my resolutions for 2020 is to review (and rate) enough movies to complete the following lists:

COMPLETED
AFI Top 100 Movies (2007): all 100 movies rated and reviewed
AFI Top 100 Movies (1998) : same
AFI Top 25 Scores: same

AFI Top 100 Thrills: 97 out of 100 (still missing 3)
AFI Top 100 Passions: 88 out of 100
AFI Top 100 Cheers: 83 out of 100
AFI Top 100 Laughs: 76 out of 100
AFI Top 100 Musical: 20 out of 25
I have about 55 AFI movies to watch (many appear in two lists)

Best Picture Winners: 79 out of 91 (12 to watch, 9 of them pre-1945)
Golden Palm Winners: I watch like 10-12 every year, so far I've seen 47 Palme d'Or winners

Finally, I want an IMDb Top 250 Badge... the easiest I can get is the 2008 one: 245 movies out of 250, only 5 movies and I guess it won't be difficult to get the 2006-2007-2009-2010 after

Wish me good luck!

Champion

 • 

4.2K Messages

 • 

91.1K Points

10 months ago

In 2020, my resolution is to watch the acclaimed drama TV shows from IMDb Top 250 TV. Some of those are:

Sopranos
The Wire
Downton Abbey
Fargo
Dexter
House MD
etc.

950 Messages

 • 

45.9K Points

10 months ago

The Two Popes (2019), 5/10. The real Benedict XVI., who by all that we know wanted to retire from public offices even before he became pope, and who is certainly bookish and conservative, but not without private humility, would have been a more compelling character than the Palpatine imitation we see here. Neither is Francis much more progressive than him content-wise. That much at least is true: Francis loves to watch soccer, Benedict prefers Formula 1 racing and drinks Fanta.

The confession scene, in which Benedict begins to open up about the child abuse affair, could have been interesting. But we never hear what he says, so we quickly forget and forgive.

The movie feels like one of those stupid European comedies where mere caricatures solve all the problems in the world by learning to dance, or whatever. Har-har, stuffy guy begins to make jokes and is forced to tango. Still, I laughed out at this - "it's a German joke, it's not meant to be funny".

Jonathan Pryce and Anthony Hopkins look their parts. They give the earnest moments a semblance of depth.

4.2K Messages

 • 

126.2K Points

THE TWO POPES 8/10

I found  "The Two Popes" a rather interesting movie even if it's for "shallow" reasons.

First, it's not everyday that we get a film focusing on the political "modus operandi" of the Vatican, its perspective on the world and a system whose existence lasted for twenty centuries, surviving wars, invasions, philosophy and Western relativism. So I would say that: speaking on a pure thematic and educational level, Fernando Meirelles' film is interesting to watch.

It's also interesting to have the part of Cardinal Ratzinger aka Pope Benedict, the only Pope to date who has resigned from his "office" played by the actor who played Richard Nixon. It's like Anthony Hopkins was born to play these misunderstood "well-meaning" figures with strong convictions minus the talent to communicate them. Benedict incarnates a system that has strong followers but inside walls so high they can't admit people with more liberal views. He's much aware of the social climate of his time and yet he refuses to let Church marry its age so it wouldn't be widowed in the next one. This is a gamble on the future he refuses, he's rigorist, categoric, technical... well, he's German.

Pope Francis is the opposite, he's a man of progress who would rather build bridge than walls, attract non-believers than reward devotees, a man who might have understood the pragmatic nature of compromising. He's from Argentine, a country of tango and football, a dance that takes two people to be performed, a sport of passion and spirit that takes a whole team... Benedict loves to play piano alone. But Francis also comes from a country that went through a  horrific dictatorship that left as indelible stains as Germany during the war.  Francis' soul didn't come unwounded from this time and was indirectly taught to listen more.

 Jonathan Pryce's uncanny resemblance with Pope Francis is half the performance and I was enthralled by his gentleness, his open-mindedness and humility, and the way it was the perfect foil to Benedict's more rigid personality. The two Popes formed a great pair and their interactions were the soul of the film, to the point that the film seemed to take a whole different path whenever one of them was missing and not to something as interesting as their exchanges. I wouldn't have minded the film to be a sort of "Dinner with Andre" kind of movie, it loses its pace when it confronts us to Francis' past. I agree it's an important part but since Francis is such a spellbinding speaker, his words and his facial expressions were enough to convey the tragedy he went through, something like the "USS Indianapolis" speech.

I say this because this is a film that shines through its intellectual dynamics, the way the two Popes confront their views on how to lead the Church and represent Christianity, the two men are from different generations, one is still healthy, one can't barely moves (both literally and symbolically). Benedict shares the same conservatism with John Paul II without having his aura while Francis is a fan of sport, pizzas, the Beatles and even ABBA, he's got the humility, the non pretension to be a leader that makes his a natural born one. When you have two characters like this, with the right casting, it can't fail.

Anthony McCarten, the writer said he came from a Catholic family and was so shocked that a Pope would resign that it inspired him the script. The challenge was to make the dialogues believable although no one ever knew what was said during the encounters. So he got he idea of turning their statements, quotes from interviews and various declarations into dialogues so that everything they said was "indirectly" true so we get the genius of the script here, if not everything is believable, it's at least plausible. And then all you have to encrust it with some humorous bits and we get a fine entertainment.

So the parts that show the ascension of Francis were not necessary and might betray a desire from "City of God" to make something more 'spectacular' and 'Academic' than needed. Bene of he filmmaker to make the film more ambitious. Maybe the director of "City of God" was so carried away by the project he decided to make some multi-production à la Inarritu or Cuaron, and surely Netflix has the money to finance such projects but more introspection, intimacy and humility would have served the film better. It's very ironic that just after Francis' "throning", when he says the "Carnival is over"(a great line by the way), we get a flashy montage showing how big a star he became. His lack of Carnival-decorum became his 'trademark'.

So I liked the film as a collision of two schools, two visions of power and representation, Pryce' warmth and sensibility with Hopkins' dryness but vulnerability create a wonderful dynamic, a Papal tango culminating with a fun football-game watching. and both actors deserve Oscar nominations. The film is never as good as when they're together, they incarnate a very defining aspect of our time: it is very polarizing and divisive: pros vs. cons, liberals vs. conservatives etcit's getting more and more difficult to raise your voice or listen to the other. If only for this line "the hardest thing is to listen", I think the film deserves our attention.


207 Messages

 • 

9.6K Points

10 months ago

Richard Jewell 7/10
First movie of this year

Another generic and academicist film by Clint Eastwood, although it is very well made and we must take into account the fact that Eastwood is almost 90 years old, it is a sterile and forgettable film, hopefully Clint can give us another film as one of his classics before let us leave.