Rate The Last Movie You Saw

[moorman]

Stalker (1979)  Up there with The Searchers as highly overrated...   3 out of 10...

[moorman]

The Wages of Fear (1953)  This was pretty good.  The opening sequences were too long though.  Once it got going though it was pretty good.  Clouzot did excellent work here also. I rank this a 8 out of 10...

[noodles_leone]

Baise-moi / Fuck me (2000) 2/10
I enjoyed Virginie Despentes' book Vernon Subutext so I decided to try her early movie (adapted from her first novel). The film had created a huge public outcry in France when it was released because of its untamed use of violence and pornography (in a way that would make Lars Von Trier jealous). Well, everything sucks and is boring apart from some cool lines here and there. And the outcry wasn't deserved.

House of Cards - season 6 4/10
At first, I didn't want to watch it since the show had only gone downhill after the first two episodes of season 1. Yet, I needed something easy to consume during the (very busy) past couple of weeks so I decided to give it a shot. The dialogues are still pretty good but the writing as a whole feels clunky at best, and mostly pointless. It tries to resonate with Trump's America from time to time and fails every time. Robin Wright finally demonstrates she isn't able to hold a full show on her shoulders (I had my doubts after her disappointing performance in Blade Runner 2049): she was much, much better as a supporting character. On the positive side of the ledger, while the directing is still miles under Fincher's opening episode, it's better than in the recent seasons, and the cinematography may be the best in the show's history.

[stanton]

Anybody here who watched the 2 seasons of Westworld? Or at least the first one?

[stanton]

Baise-moi / Fuck me (2000) 2/10
I enjoyed Virginie Despentes' book Vernon Subutext so I decided to try her early movie (adapted from her first novel). The film had created a huge public outcry in France when it was released because of its untamed use of violence and pornography (in a way that would make Lars Von Trier jealous). Well, everything sucks and is boring apart from some cool lines here and there. And the outcry wasn't deserved.

Wasn't? Not enough porn? Not enough extreme violence?

And why should it make our Lars jealous? He directed real porn scenes already in Idiots.

But for me it did not really work in both films, while it did in Noe's Love or in Winterbottom's 9 Songs.

I think much more positive of Baise-moi, but have to rewatch it for something more substantial. Until then a 6 or 7/10

[noodles_leone]

Wasn't? Not enough porn? Not enough extreme violence?

And why should it make our Lars jealous? He directed real porn scenes already in Idiots.

But for me it did not really work in both films, while it did in Noe's Love or in Winterbottom's 9 Songs.

I think much more positive of Baise-moi, but have to rewatch it for something more substantial. Until then a 6 or 7/10

There was enough porn and violence, but it felt so amateurish and repetitive. Also it was probably more shocking in 2000, but in 2019 seing a plain close up of a coitus isn't shocking anymore, it's just ridiculous and naive.
The pornography in Noe's Love is much more interesting and impactful. Even the one in Enter The Void, although sometimes ridiculous too, is actual cinema.

In the end what would have been groundbreaking in a 1950 movie cannot be groundbreaking now. So if you're gonna play with ultra violence or pornography you have to come up with new ideas. "Let's put a penis in front of the camera" isn't sufficient anymore. If it was, more people would do it.

Anybody here who watched the 2 seasons of Westworld? Or at least the first one?

I got bored and frustrated afer episode 2 or 3. I'm sure there are good things in it further into the story though.

[stanton]

There was enough porn and violence, but it felt so amateurish and repetitive.

Of course, it was just like in every other boring porn film. But maybe this was done by Despentes in purpose, only that wouldn't make it less boring.

[drinkanddestroy]

Le Cercle Rouge (1970) 7/10 - 4th viewing or so.
Still cool as hell. Good to see Bourvil in something serious. His (unhealthy) face works great here. It's a shame he didn't get the time to do more of these, he could have become great. Delon is Delon, Volonte is volonte. Melville's eye for efficience still amazes and is what makes many of his films, like this one, unique to this day. His taste for everything that looks American was probably a bit ridiculous at the time (when you wanted to be discrete in 1970 France, the last thing you'd do is to buy an American car), but now that decades have gone by, it works pretty well, even for French viewers.

You're the only guy I know who can write seven positive sentences about a movie, zero negative, and still only rate it a 7/10.

I just saw this movie again also. I think it was my third viewing. This film is at least an 8.5/10.


By the way, that moment when Montand lines up the shot on the tripod ... then lifts the gun off the tripod and fires it on his own, just to prove to himself that he still has the marksmanship – it's a nice moment, and copied from an earlier Melville film, Le Deuxieme Souffle, where, in the heist scene, the young gangster atop the hill removes the telescopic lens from the rifle before shooting the motorcycle cop.

[noodles_leone]

You're the only guy I know who can write seven positive sentences about a movie, zero negative, and still only rate it a 7/10.

I just saw this movie again also. I think it was my third viewing. This film is at least an 8.5/10.

Maybe I'm the only guy you know who actually knows how to use a rating from 0 to 10. In French schools, and more importantly, at university, we're graded like that (well, mostly on a 0 to 20 scale, but it's the same). So we know how to use it and what it means. If you rate every good film above 8, then 10 doesn't mean anything anymore. And if you don't use 0 to 5, then why don't you use a 5 stars system?

To each his own, I'm not trying to tell you what to do but I'll say it again once more, there is only one correct way to use a 10 points rating:
5 is average, everything under is bad, everything above is good. 10 is a masterpiece and is ultra rare, 0 is shit and is exactly as rare. 4 is a bad rating but there are still things to save. 7 is good, as in "I mean it, it IS good". I can tell you that after 18yo, if I had had 7/10 at everything I would easily have gone to the very best business school in France.

By the way, that moment when Montand lines up the shot on the tripod ... then lifts the gun off the tripod and fires it on his own, just to prove to himself that he still has the marksmanship – it's a nice moment, and copied from an earlier Melville film, Le Deuxieme Souffle, where, in the heist scene, the young gangster atop the hill removes the telescopic lens from the rifle before shooting the motorcycle cop.

Cool, I didn't know that (haven't seen Le Deuxième Souffle nor its remake).

[dave jenkins]

Le Cercle Rouge (1970) 7/10 - 4th viewing or so.

I've seen it 10 times or so, and I'd say a 7/10 is a fair rating. The first half is probably a 10/10, but the second half, the heist and aftermath, is merely competent. And one should never miss the opportunity to penalize Jean-Pierre for his bad process work.

[cigar joe]

Anybody here who watched the 2 seasons of Westworld? Or at least the first one?

The first one

[drinkanddestroy]

I've seen it 10 times or so, and I'd say a 7/10 is a fair rating. The first half is probably a 10/10, but the second half, the heist and aftermath, is merely competent. And one should never miss the opportunity to penalize Jean-Pierre for his bad process work.

Nobody loved process shots more than your boyfriend Hitchcock 

[drinkanddestroy]

Maybe I'm the only guy you know who actually knows how to use a rating from 0 to 10. In French schools, and more importantly, at university, we're graded like that (well, mostly on a 0 to 20 scale, but it's the same). So we know how to use it and what it means. If you rate every good film above 8, then 10 doesn't mean anything anymore. And if you don't use 0 to 5, then why don't you use a 5 stars system?

To each his own, I'm not trying to tell you what to do but I'll say it again once more, there is only one correct way to use a 10 points rating:
5 is average, everything under is bad, everything above is good. 10 is a masterpiece and is ultra rare, 0 is shit and is exactly as rare. 4 is a bad rating but there are still things to save. 7 is good, as in "I mean it, it IS good". I can tell you that after 18yo, if I had had 7/10 at everything I would easily have gone to the very best business school in France.

The reason you hardly ever see me rate a movie between 0 and 5 is that if I am watching a movie that's that bad, I'll shut it off before I reach the end, and I never post a rating for a movie I haven't finished 

[stanton]

The first one

Ok, but what did you think about it?

[stanton]

Maybe I'm the only guy you know who actually knows how to use a rating from 0 to 10. In French schools, and more importantly, at university, we're graded like that (well, mostly on a 0 to 20 scale, but it's the same). So we know how to use it and what it means. If you rate every good film above 8, then 10 doesn't mean anything anymore. And if you don't use 0 to 5, then why don't you use a 5 stars system?

To each his own, I'm not trying to tell you what to do but I'll say it again once more, there is only one correct way to use a 10 points rating:
5 is average, everything under is bad, everything above is good. 10 is a masterpiece and is ultra rare, 0 is shit and is exactly as rare. 4 is a bad rating but there are still things to save. 7 is good,

But then you still waste more or less the 0 - 5 range. If 5 is mediocre, then 7 is already a low rating.

5 out of 10 points for mediocre stuff is much too generous. Mediocre (aka average) films are not half as good as masterpieces. Mediocre stuff gets a 2/10 from me, watchable films get a 4 and good films a 6, and then we go upwards.
Watchable films are entertaining, but on a low level, but nonetheless entertaining, While average films are already often boring, cause they don't have much too offer. And bad films are completely boring.

Drink is right for once btw, what you have written about Le cercle rouge is so positive, that a 7 rating sounds pretty wrong. And odd.

I think Le cercle rouge is a 9.