What was the last film you saw and how would you rate it? Pt. 18

  • 11
  • Idea
  • Updated 12 hours ago
  • (Edited)
Thought I'd post this here until I hear we're doing it somewhere else....

Post the name of the latest movie you've seen and your rating out of 10. 
-------------------------------------

Sunshine Boys (t0073766) - 7/10 - loved Burns, hated Matthau.
Photo of Jen

Jen, Champion

  • 4905 Posts
  • 2282 Reply Likes

Posted 3 years ago

  • 11
Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
Photo of Jason Kreitzer

Jason Kreitzer

  • 41 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes

Ratings are for completely different reasons:


All About Eve 10/10.

Big Money Rustlas 10/10.

Photo of Rishabh

Rishabh

  • 67 Posts
  • 14 Reply Likes
Wrong Turn(2003), 5/10
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes

Jane got a gun (2015) - 7/10, entertaining, but I guess it would have been better if they had avoided all the problems during production.

The Penalty (1920) - 8/10, Always a good idea to see a Lon Chaney movie, he was great.

The Flying Ace (1926) - 7/10, barely the second 1926 film I have seen, one of the years I have neglected the most.

Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6287 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
L'amant double (2017), 8/10

Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6287 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
The Shape of Water, 8/10

(I was a bit bored.)
(Edited)
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes

A couple fo days dedicated to 1999

The Cider House Rules - 8/10

Gorgeous - 4/10

Photo of rubyfruit76

rubyfruit76, Champion

  • 4384 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
Wakefield (2016) I gave it a 7 but was pulled between a 6.5 and a 7.5. 'Great, well-written, short story, but I'm not sure that it could ever translate to screen super well. To me, a 7 is a solidly good rating but I think the source material, however good as prose, couldn't do better cinematically. Bryan Cranston is excellent and it's a good vehicle for his talents. 
Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
(Edited)
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes
Spartacus - 9/10, 1960 was a great year.
Photo of ElMo

ElMo

  • 3487 Posts
  • 3701 Reply Likes
BATTLESHIP POTEMKIN: 9/10 (in fact, it's more a 8 but +1 for the historical significance)
PEEPING TOM: 10/10 A great, great, great movie.
Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
A Fantastic Woman (2017), 9/10.  Deserves its Oscar prize.
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6287 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
Phantom Thread, 9/10

Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes
I watched it today and it was also 9/10 for Me. I wouldn't mind if it had taken the Oscar home, and the score certainly deserved better.
Photo of rubyfruit76

rubyfruit76, Champion

  • 4384 Posts
  • 4863 Reply Likes
A Fantastic Woman (2017) 8.5 - 9/10  'Wonderful with a powerfully sublime lead performance. 
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes

Not a good weekend

Le Divorce (2003) - 6/10

Despite the Falling Snow (2016) - 4/10

Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
Thought I posted this last Friday.  Wormwood (TV Mini-Series 2017), 10/10. Infuriating, fascinating, and very relevant to today's political zeitgeist.
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes

The Matrix (1999) - 7/10. First time I see it since its original theatrical run. I liked better the first time, it is innovative, but should not be anywhere close to be one of the top 20 films in history.

Still much better than the two that followed.

Photo of Kyle Perez

Kyle Perez

  • 2126 Posts
  • 1186 Reply Likes
I agree with your thoughts (I originally gave it a 7 but lowered it to a 5). It's one of those 'masterpieces' of which I don't fully buy into the hype. I thought it was cool but it got pretty nonsensical and I found the characters more wooden than provoking. Just wasn't that entertained by it I guess. But, no doubt, one can obviously see the influence it went on to have. 
Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes

Got to leave work early due to the blizzard.  Went to see Thoroughbreds (2017), 7/10.

Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
Being generous here: 4/10 for Terminator Salvation (2009).  9/10 for the Rifftrax commentary track.
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1240 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes
Photo of Peter

Peter, Champion

  • 6287 Posts
  • 7510 Reply Likes
The Florida Project, 8/10

Photo of albstein

albstein

  • 685 Posts
  • 1338 Reply Likes
Lucky (2017) - 8 or 9/10.

The Post (2017) - 7/10. Steven Spielberg has become something of a court painter for American history. He used to be more exciting. Oh, and this may be a controversial statement, but Meryl Streep is quite a decent actress.

The Shape of Water (2017) - 5/10. This piece somehow inspired a whole blog. (Mild spoilers ahead):

Take old formulas that worked in 50s B-movies, add a progressive message and expensive production values and you get this. Not even the monster in Creature from the Black Lagoon (1954) was as onesidedly evil as the villain Strickland played by Michael Shannon. Good villains always have a fascinating touch to them, something ambiguous, a superficial charm or at least a point that makes sense in a twisted logic. Not this one. Strickland is just there for you as an embodiment of all evils so you can feel better about yourself.

There are two kinds of monsters which often overlap: 1. a creature that is otherworldy and looks frightening; 2. an antagonist, an absolutely evil villain with no redeeming qualities. Creature from the Black Lagoon has one monster that is both a frightening creature and the absolute villain. The Shape of Water has a creature that is frightening at first, but the villain-monster is someone else: Strickland. Maybe Frankenstein (1931) is still one of the supreme horror movies because it doesn't need such a villain-monster, an easy target for our hate, to get its point across. We see how the simple townspeople are deluded by fear and anger over the dead girl into attacking the misunderstood creation.

In Frankenstein, we see the mechanisms that make people escalate in this thirst for revenge. In The Shape of Water, we may get the idea that at one point in history, some people just decided to be evil. Evil like the facial expressions Michael Shannon can put on.

To create humor or tension, this movie always takes the dullest standard approach (sinister guys visit good guy - good guy grabs knife and hides it behind the back - sinister guys talk a bit and leave the house - whew!). The homages get as original as Richard Jenkins pointing out that he really likes Bette Davis. Or there is a fancy movie theater below his apartment that screens an old bible movie. It's as if the movie were saying, "we all love classic cinema, don't we? So please don't be too hard on me. Believe in my qualities without checking them".

I'd rather go back and watch the real deal - Bette Davis always has more bite than anything in this movie. (a little exception: Octavia Spencer has fun with her role as a chatty cleaning lady with an inert husband).

Then there is an allegory: supposedly, the mute woman falling in love with a water creature stands for love that conquers prejudices, or interracial love. But in this case, the prejudice is not a prejudice (not entirely anyway): how can a creature that is actually not human and is dangerous to a point symbolize someone with, say, a darker skin color?

The romance is a reverse Little Mermaid story. Instead of a mermaid who becomes mute to get on land and be with prince charming, it's a mute woman who migrates to the sea to be with a water creature. I don't think it's polarizing to say that the love relationship is not quite the best aspect of The Little Mermaid. There's hardly a foundation for this love. Should it be enough that the couple in The Shape of Water are both outsiders of sorts? Should we believe in this love because, oh, it's a fairy tale and it's such a magic experience, so stop expecting just about anything from this movie?

Green is another symbol, fine. If you want, it stands for Hope, Life, and Progress. But the whole movie is soaked in green. Isn't that somewhat dull? At least it would be possible to use the color to convey different ideas. When Strickland buys a greenish car, that would be an opportunity to show that he also thinks he represents Hope, Life, Progress, only in a more sinister way (he thinks progress means militaristic strength and economic success). But no, Strickland must be convinced that the car's color is called teal to buy it. So again and again, we get the point that yes, Strickland is absolutely evil and he rejects anything that's good in any way possible.

The Shape of Water is a throwback to 1950s classics, but it resembles those movies we have long forgotten because they are so derivative, and so little thought-provoking and ambiguous. Guillermo del Toro is nostalgic for the classics, but the thing about nostalgia is, it often takes something that is forever fresh and challenging and makes it musty and boring.

Ultimately, isn’t this movie so popular because people love to hate the societal backwardness of the 1950s (an easy target – of course we know now what was wrong then) but are all too fine with seeing a movie that is backward in storytelling and aesthetics?
Photo of ElMo

ElMo

  • 3484 Posts
  • 3699 Reply Likes
Well, that's the scene Jeunet used as a teaser (or trailer) for the US Market :)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XJU4IwC3LjQ
also one of the most memorable (and funniest) moments of the film
Photo of albstein

albstein

  • 685 Posts
  • 1338 Reply Likes
It's obvious right away that Delicatessen was a visual influence but it's fun and creative moments like that which I missed in The Shape of Water. The same with Amélie. If anything, del Toro could have "stolen" more.
Photo of ElMo

ElMo

  • 3484 Posts
  • 3699 Reply Likes
That's why I was thinking of watching Jeunet and Caro's City of Lost Children before Shape but after reading your post, I can't wait anymore:)
Photo of Pencho15

Pencho15

  • 1232 Posts
  • 1017 Reply Likes
As a Mexican I must say I don't agree with the best Picture award, Three Billboards was better, and this is no del Toro's masterpiece.
Photo of albstein

albstein

  • 685 Posts
  • 1338 Reply Likes
Elmo - I'd be glad to read what you thought once you've seen it :)

Pencho - Mexican directors have made stunning feats during the last years, although I tend to like those movies better which didn't win them Oscars. The Devil's Backbone by del Toro was good.
Photo of Stephen Atwood

Stephen Atwood

  • 1071 Posts
  • 759 Reply Likes
A.I.C.O. Incarnation (TV Series), 7/10.  Muddled, confusing and tried to be a tad too hard for the perfect happy ending.
Photo of Jason Kreitzer

Jason Kreitzer

  • 41 Posts
  • 7 Reply Likes

Get Out.  10/10.  Wild stuff, and completely deserving of all of its success, praise and acclaim.

(Edited)