List some movies you've watched recently. Theatre, rental, TV... and give a */10

Page 619 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,157
5,064
126
i can sit down and watch seven samurai, the whole three hours, without any problem. no matter how many times i have watched it.

1. it looks real; this is a major point in filmmaking, i need to believe that what i see is the real thing and not fake
2. the story makes sense and flows flawlessly from one cause to another.
3. the characters are gripping. not just Toshiro Mifune, but the surly Kyuzo, the idealistic Katsushiro, down to the *quite evil* village leader, and they never look like they were made diverse on purpose, but rather they look like a bunch of samurai who were assembled randomly.
4. the filmography is amazing 60 years on.
5. there are some genuinely shocking moments in the film; the suicide of shame of the woman abducted by the bandits. the death of Kyuzo, who we think is invincible, but instead of dying a hero, he just becomes a casualty. The speech of the village leader.

the only so-so bit in the whole film is Kyuzo's duel; his opponent is a caricature, but it doesn't affect the film negatively.

i vastly prefer this film to Rashomon. Rashomon is an art film, 7 Samurai is .. a war film. A film about realism, life, and death. The message is real and can apply to everyone who watches it.
I'm saving your assessment here alongside Roger Ebert's in my data for Seven Samurai.

In my minds eye I can see Toshiro Mifune jumping up and down in excitement, 1/2 naked and sometimes in the mud of the rains. Fact is, they filmed a lot of this in extreme cold, winter was on them and if he wasn't extremely physical he couldn't have maintained the body heat to survive some of the filming. I think I got that in extras on the disks.
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,157
5,064
126
i'm seriously hoping you value my assessment better than roger ebert's.
I wouldn't say I don't value your assessment more than Roger's. Actually, you have a big advantage over him because you are explaining your personal take on the movie after many viewings. Roger was using his filter of his professional role as a critic, which is tough and very seldom clearly accurate. So, yes, I value your assessment more than Roger's. However, I haven't read his in a while. Yours is shorter and surely more to the point and I thank you for it. I read it several times already and obviously will read it again! I love it, actually.

I mentioned Ebert partly because he's my all time favorite professional film critic. There may be better, I can't say, but I've many times been very impressed with his reviews.
 
Last edited:

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
these are the three things that roger ebert considers when he reviews a film
is this film good? is this film bad?
will i be doing my job of professional film critic well if i say these words?
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,157
5,064
126
Roger Ebert is full of shit.
He thought The Phantom Menace was better than Star Wars.
Personally I don't think much of any of the Star Wars movies. I have watched them all (except the new one), have spent a lot of money on the discs. I never think to watch them. It's sad because I dislike buying movies I don't hope to be able to enjoy multiple times. I do, but usually unintentionally.

I have many times disagreed with Roger Ebert on his reviews. That doesn't mean he's full of shit. It just means that he blew a review. It happens. I doubt deeply that anyone has ever lived who would get every movie review right. I think being a film critic is very difficult. It's impossible to be ready for every film experience. They are too diverse, they come at you from every conceivable and inconceivable direction. You bring yourself to a film in whatever state you find yourself in. More so if you are a critic because presumably you have little control over what you are asked to review. I know I wouldn't make a perfect critic. I doubt that there have ever been any. If you disagree with my assessment of this subject in any aspect, please say so.

All that being said, I have loved a lot of Ebert's reviews. As I say, certainly not all, but many. He was often a very exceptional reviewer of films, IMO. And an exceptional writer.

And digdog, thank you for your assessment of Seven Samurai. It was heartfelt, sincere, to the point and obviously (to me, anyway) spot on. I will treasure it always, no sarcasm intended or implied. Your assessment is great!

I scratched my head on your mention of the village leader. You are evidently not talking about the elder who lived in seclusion but one of the others, I suppose maybe the guy who feared that his daughter would be raped by samurai. Or maybe it was someone else. Next time I watch I'll try to figure out who you are referring to.
these are the three things that roger ebert considers when he reviews a film
is this film good? is this film bad?
will i be doing my job of professional film critic well if i say these words?
These are bad? Of course, the man died. He lives on it seems as a contingent of living souls write reviews in his name. It's confounding. I figure it's silly to read a review by someone thinking to channel Roger Ebert. Alas, he's dead.
 
Last edited:

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
i am referring to the elder who lives in seclusion. he tells the villagers "let the samurai die for you". the whole thing is like, three phrases and two facial expressions, but essentially he doesn't give a toss about the people who are lying down their lives for his villagers.
Kambei has an insight at the end of the film, saying "it's the villagers who won, not us" but he doesn't see the whole picture.
The bandits just want to take the food, they don't care if the villagers will die. The villagers just want to keep the food, they don't care if the samurai will die.
The samurai just want to samurai, because that's their purpose in life. That is why they accept a job with no reward and only risks.


about roger ebert, let's for example look at his reviews of films like Commando. he says the film is crap. uh, duh. the film is crap, but it's also irreverent, and fun, and exhilarating. it's not about acting, it's about charisma, bravado, machismo.
the guy is monodimensional as a reviewer. he goes in the film with a checklist, instead of experiencing the film, and there are many films that are great but do not follow the standard of filmmaking which is taught at film school; and more importantly, if you are on TV, your audience is not all 50yo history teachers, you might want to relax a bit your review parameters.

i doubt the guy has ever had fun at a film, even when he says stuff like "a rollercoaster of action and fun", he's thinking more "this is a phrase that describes what everyone else in the theater was experiencing" and not "this is what i felt".
 
Last edited:

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
i watched Atomic Blonde - http://www.imdb.com/title/tt2406566/reference

which i thought was reasonably good. Not for the story (which however is far more interesting than the otherwise similar Bridge Of Spies), but for the way the film is made, scene by scene. The pacing is very good and it kept me interested throughout. As for the film itself, it's just a lot of Bourne-style fighting, with a weak side plot of how spies during the cold war use each other, but deep inside have true feelings.

7/10
 

Muse

Lifer
Jul 11, 2001
33,157
5,064
126
Digdog, I think maybe your disdain for Roger Ebert is in part due to an admirable commitment to maintaining your own view, not taking another's word on a subject. I think you are a lot deeper into cinema than I am. I often feel like I need another viewpoint, others' critiques, ideas, etc. with regard to something I've just watched and am not sure about. I often wonder what other people have thought of a film I just saw. I go into my first time viewing experiences with barely an idea of what I'm going to see. I prefer it that way. I refuse to watch trailers (except sometimes after watching the movie). I have benefited from reading Ebert's reviews many times. Other critics, too.

I pretty much started all this when I acquired Microsoft's Cinemania back in the late 1990's. Cinemania's reviews consisted of Leonard Maltin reviews (always very very short), Pauline Kael (also quite short, but generally 2-3 times longer than Maltin's), Roger Ebert's (quite long in general, maybe 5x longer than Kael's), and Cinebooks (also usually long, but anonymous concerning who wrote them and therefore fairly impersonal). For more obscure films you can usually expect to see only a subset of those 4 review options, sometimes just one or two.

And, of course, Ebert was on TV all the time back then, with another reviewer with whom he had fairly extemporaneous discussions about films.

I still go to Cinemania with films that came out before 1998, when Cinemania stopped being updated or released. It's convenient because it's just an app on my machine, I don't even need to go to the internet for a variety of information on a film, an actor, a director, etc., and the information set is pretty comprehensive and organized. Of course, being 1997 and prior is a major restraint, but for older movies it hardly matters. The app is extensively hyperlinked, so I can click on an actor or director and find out immediately what films they are associated with and hit those hyperlinks, etc. It has other features. It's not so hot on modern machines, I can't even run it full screen on recent Windows OS's, but I don't use it a lot, just occasionally.
 
Last edited:
May 11, 2008
18,325
836
126
To the bone 8/10

Nice movie about an anorexic girl (Lilly Collins) getting into a unconventional treatment program.
Keanu Reeves plays the psychiatrist and it is odd and a revelation to see him in that role after seeing John Wick.
Much better indeed.
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
And, of course, Ebert was on TV all the time back hen, with another reviewer with whom he had fairly extemporaneous discussions about films.
the immortal Siskel & Ebert: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/At_the_Movies_(U.S._TV_series)

immortal because everyone makes fun of it.what was bad about it, is that it was purely an entertainment show, and the formula was this: "if a film is obviously good, we both say it's good, and if we can't tell, one will say it's good and the other will say it's bad". Now, Ebert has writers to help him, and he also i a human being (a not-inconsiderable advantage) which allows him to be able to do a reasonable review, most of the time. But keep in mind that this was the 80s, and they would be talking "Out Of Africa is such a majesctic film, blah blah blah Merryl Streep, blah blah Silkwood, etc" and we would laugh and express our disdain because the same year you could choose between Commando, Back To The Future, The Goonies, Cocoon, Witness, Weird Science, Ladyhawk, Lifeforce, Fletch, After Hours, Year Of The Dragon and a whoooole bunch more epic films which are still classics today, and they would always go for the boring, pompous Academy Awards-bait films that 90% of the people who watched them did so because they felt smug and smarter.
 

Artorias

Golden Member
Feb 8, 2014
1,760
994
136
Twelve monkeys 1995 - 9/10

This is one of Buce Willi's best performances, and the young Brad Pitt really has some memorable scenes.

Great sci-fi movie that does time travel right.
 

nutxo

Diamond Member
May 20, 2001
6,653
343
126
Twelve monkeys 1995 - 9/10

This is one of Buce Willi's best performances, and the young Brad Pitt really has some memorable scenes.

Great sci-fi movie that does time travel right.
This is a great freakin movie. Willis and Pitt were both great in it
 

Ackmed

Diamond Member
Oct 1, 2003
8,418
436
126
The Punisher - 9.7/10 Netflix TV series

I admit that this is a very high rating. And that is will be higher for some more than others based on their background. I thought they really nailed a large part of this with the subtle comments and details about being deployed and the transition to home. The struggles and hardships that some face during it. It was current to today's times too. So many of the side stories I have seen come true. There are some comments that ring very close to home and some parts of it are hard to watch because of it honestly. Some parts will just be hard to watch to some people. Jon Berthal did an outstanding job in the acting, more or less the same character from The Walking Dead. I called many of the plots and twists however, they are pretty easy to see coming. Some parts are VERY graphics for violence, but I thought well done.

One issue I had, was that they kept referring to Marines as soldiers. Marines are Marines, soldiers are soldiers. Such a small thing to get right, but really annoying when gotten wrong. 13 episodes, watch it. I doubt many will be disappointed.
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
man this thing takes forever

89. To Kill A Mockingbird
honestly, i remember watching this in school (after "reading the book") and .. well, thinking that it wasn't terrible. But no sane human being would think the themes this film deals with can be in any way interesting to a 16yo full of hormones.
And after associating it with BOOOOOOORING i have not gone back to watch it again, and probably will not. Maybe, one day, when i'm really old.

no vote

90. Full Metal Jacket
for the same reasons i didnt like 'Mockingbird, i liked FMJ. I honestly rooted for Private Goomer Pyle, maybe because i was a plump boy back then, and i saw myself in him.
I think that the first half of the film is superb; i just love the idea, the characters, and how brutally it reaches a conclusion.
The second half, meh. I mean, it's a great war/action film, but after i felt like i was Pyle, i just cannot feel like i'm Joker. And Joker himself is more a witness, but removed from the events, rather than being at their center. The key scene to this character, i believe, is the pin. HOW CAN YOU WEAR A PEACE SIGN AND WRITE BORN TO KILL ON YOUR HELMET, and he replies "i don't know .. i don't know". He doesn't know, he just looks at the events around him, but never fells like he's on one side or the other.
Amazing film. But, not as unmissable as 2001, or even Platoon. or at least, for what concerns the second half.

8.5/10
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
91. 2001, A Space Odyssey

ok, i will attack this monolithic review by going sideways.

i think that, just like The Shining, all the reviews of the film where the monolith "represents the cinema screen" , "represents mankind", "represent a pair of socks that Kubrick used to love very much when he was 14" are all a pile of shit.
The monolith represents the monolith. It is a character. It's a very basic creation myth and similar plot lines have been seen multiple times in SCIFI writings and stories. (at this point, it would be convenient to read Asimov's The Sentinel, where this film comes from).

Aside from this lighthearted observation, i think 2001 is possibly the third best film ever made, alongside Shichinin No Samurai and Star Wars. While Star Wars and 7 Samurai are great because they are film-school-book scripts, 2001 is great for the opposite, it manages to tell a complete story without resorting to a standards script .. without a standard plot .. without any semblance of pacing.

It does so by using the visual power of its imagery; and this isn't my coming-out-as-a-film-reviewer statement, i mean that the actual images (and the music with them) generate a series of emotions which Kubrick shared with the viewer, and that he used in his montaging to create a sequence of emotions, which tell the plot of the film. It's not a film in the classical sense, it's a film to help you in your psychedelic trip, LSD not supplied. And all this, in the frame of a story that makes sense .. mostly.

The end doesn't make sense but it's still right, because we need those images to conclude the chain of thought which the rest of the film creates in the viewer. Honestly, i love 2001 so much, i can forgive him for all the Barry Lyndons of the world.

10/10, obviously.

92. Singing In The Rain

did not have a chance to watch it, but if i did, i suspect i would compare it not favourably to Mary Poppins.

no vote

93. Toy Story

eh .. it's ok, i guess. I don't know why this so often ranks as the best cartoon ever made, it's not even the best of the recent cartoons. I cannot begin to fathom how this is rated at 8.3 while Lilo & Stitch is at 7.2 .. i guess it's another victim of the Shawshank Redemption Syndrome, where the more something is average, the more of the bell curve it pleases.

7/10

94. 3 Idiots

not watched it, but my guess is that it's a classically inflated vote coming from its target audience (it's a Hindi film). i mean .. seriously .. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=K0eDlFX9GMc
the kind of film we have starring Ezio Greggio in my home town of pizzapasta mangia mangia.
If you really, really need to watch a film in Hindi, consider the excellent Chandni Chowk To China http://www.imdb.com/title/tt1091229/reference (IMDb vote: 4/10, my vote: almost8/10)

no vote


95. The Sting

i don't know if this film was the bomb when it came out, but i sat down one day to watch this cult classic and could not keep my eyes open. didn't get past the first half hour.

no vote

96. Toy Story 3

no, seriously, did not watch

no vote

97. Inglorious Basterds

eh, i watched this a second time through, to try to see if i had missed anything. And i didn't. Tim Roth's Christopher Waltz's performance is mediocre, and that famous scene with the dessert, i really don't know what you guys see in it. Or in the 100 scalps speech. or the baseball bat scene. Boring scenes without anything memorable about them.

6.5/10

98. Dunkirk

ok, i have not yet seen this, but i remember watching the trailer, and being like "wow, this is amazing". I have high expectation for this film when, and if, i manage to see it.

no vote

99. Bicycle Thieves

which i obviously had to watch, in school, in the original italian. Because "we need to understand the struggles of the post-war Italy which our glorious Republic is now founded on".

Truth be told, there are some really major groundbreaking film writing tricks in this film (and italian neorealism in general) but since Pulp Fiction, they've become a bit redundant.

7/10, mostly for historical reasons, more if you are into filmmaking on a shoestring.

100. The Kid

never had a chance to watch it, but aside from that one scene on the conveyor belt, i could not stand Charlie Chaplin. And the reason isn't "i don't like him", but i cannot help comparing him to the somewhat crass, but way funnier Laurel & Hardy, which i absolutely adored when i was a kid (and people still had a chance to catch The Kid on tv ... not likely to happen nowadays).

no vote
 

DigDog

Lifer
Jun 3, 2011
12,406
1,421
126
101. The Snatch

ugh .. guy ritchie. Well, he did launch dozens of imitators, first and foremost amongst them, guy ritchie himself. King Arthur is practically the same film.
entertaining to see these absurd characters put on film, but otherwise i'd rather go with something as weird, but that goes somewhere, such as 13 Monkeys. I simply cannot relate to caricatures of east-end gangsters to actually feel anything for these characters.

6.5/10

102. Monty Python And The Holy Grail

oh dear ... i mean, i LOVE this film and everything else Python have ever done (except The Golden Age Of Balooning) but for how funny, endlessly quotable, and unique this film is, it never tries to draw you in; there is no moment, even in a dark theater room, that you forget you are a spectator of a comedy, and actually feel in the movie.

7/10, with reserve. closer to 6.5/10

103. Good Will Hunting

very disappointing. The film starts with drawing up a great character (Will), a whole host of supporting characters that work perfectly with him, and then .. they kill him. He completely changes, instead of haing an arc, it turns around and disappears with a "aha, it was never me" act.

6.5/10 there is no need for the sob stories

104. The Hunt

never watched it

no vote

105. For A Few Dollars More

i honestly couldn't tell you what the story is, except that it recycles Van Clyff and Eastwood's characters from Good Bad Ugly. I'm sure i must have watched it, but whatever.

no vote

106. L.A. Confidential

a bunch of good actors and a decent script in a film that looks like it's on the set of Batman (1989), same lighting, same horrid makeup, same shit sets, it's a decent afternoon film to watch once, but does not hold a candle to the otherways superior .. in everything .. Devil In A Blue Dress.

6.5/10

107. Scarface

good performance by Pacino, light script, some nice character interaction, but not a masterpiece in any sense. I wouldn't trade Scarface for, say , Highlander. Those few famouse quotes don't make up for the fact that it's basically a well made TV film with a super-basic plot.

7/10

108. The Apartment

This has been on my to-watch list for about 20 years ...

no vote

109. Metropolis

i watched this both in the ... in ONE of the original-soundtrack versions, and once in the restored, Queen-soundtrack version. Both times i thought it was magnificent, and must have been amazing for its time, but once the novelty of the exaggerated facial expressions wears off, it's .. well, still a decent film.

7.5/10, mostly for historical reasons


110. A Separation

an Iranian film i had never head of before

no vote

111. Rashomon

to Rashomon i reserve the same treatment that i did for Citizen Kane; the spectacle of the camera facing upwards through the leaves, the characters costumes and framing that strongly recall Noh theater, all these artifices are cool once, but after that, it's an art film. Sure, a pretty awesome art film, but it only works because the characters are exaggerated. Nothing like 7 Samurai, which is so real, it could happen to you.

8/10 it's still awesome

112. Indiana Jones and The One Scene With The Umbrella

otherwise, this film was the new definition of pathetic .. before refrigerators and aliens brought us a new meaning to the word "shame". garbage (mostly copied from Umberto Eco's book "Focault's Pendulum", itself a patchwork of other preexisting Templar bullshit).

5/10

113. the original All About Eve

which i did not watch, because i did not know it existed.

no vote

114. Yojimbo

ok, i simply love this film because Mifune is a massive badass. Not just in his combat skills, but in the way his character plays everyone else. And Kurosawa's refusal to even try to explain WHY he does it (basically Eastwood's Man With No Name) just makes the film so much more interesting.
it's not a GREAT film, but it's a very entertaining film.

8.5/10

115. My Father And My Son

turkish drama.

no vote and the armenian genocide is a myth


116. UP !

eh h.. heheh .. he he he .. giggles. I cannot help thinking about UP! http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0075376/reference , my favourite Russ Meyer film (spoiler - it has substantially more nudity than most normal Russ Meyer films, but it also has much more effective comedy).
Anyway, i did watch the film, yeah yeah i know, it's the best thing since sliced bread, but i have no sympathy for a character that looks too much like Mr Magoo (who i profoundly detest as a character) and therefore i'm in no rush to watch it.

no vote

117. Batman Begins

crap filWOOHA. wait. hear me out.
yes, i didnt like it.

This film is too much about bruce wayne. Which it shouldn't be. Bruce wayne is just a mask for Batman, who is the real hero.

Liam Neeson's Ras Al Ghoul is a stupid character retconned into the batman mythos to justify batmans ability to not suck, and Neeson sucks in it. The scarecrow is weak AF and the whole film is just mediocre. Black God Guy is totally out of place (as he is most of the time), and Alfred is ok, and so is the Tumbler, but otherwise, i'll pass.

6/10

118. Some Like It Hot

a great comedy if you are 12, but it hasn't stood the test of time well. would not recommend, if not for nostalgic reasons. If i really had to watch something along these lines, i'd go with the 1963 classic The Pink Panther.

6/10 down from 8/10


119. The Treasures Of The Sierra Madre

when i saw this film, the one time, it almost made me panic. The tension and paranoia is so high, it's still a great film capable of creating great emotions despite the years. Not something i would recommend for repeat viewings, though.

7.5/10


120. Unforgiven

the classic afternoon tv timefiller, it's just Eastwood putting the final touches on his "i'm a badass" character, however, he does lack the help of Leone, or Morricone, and generally someone telling him to put a little more content in his films. personally, i'd much rather watch Pale Rider, or even Misty. Or any Dirty Harry.

6/10
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY