[Movies] Last Movie You Saw and What You Would Rate it Out of 10

[Arrowstormen]

Definitely but I am hardly the only person who thinks the intelligence and quality of the average blockbuster has decreased over time for a number of reasons.

Oh, a lot of people definitely think so, but that is not the same as it actually being so. Blockbusters weren't really a thing before the late 70's -
early 80's, and I struggle to think of the time when the average intelligence and quality of blockbusters was higher. There were fewer, and people are prone to only remember the classics and forget the majority.

[RobertoCarlos]

Oh, a lot of people definitely think so, but that is not the same as it actually being so. Blockbusters weren't really a thing before the late 70's -
early 80's, and I struggle to think of the time when the average intelligence and quality of blockbusters was higher. There were fewer, and people are prone to only remember the classics and forget the majority.

Agreed. Two words

Chevi Chase

http://www.imdb.com/name/nm0000331/

/shudder

[Deletedaccount1]

Oh, a lot of people definitely think so, but that is not the same as it actually being so. Blockbusters weren't really a thing before the late 70's -
early 80's, and I struggle to think of the time when the average intelligence and quality of blockbusters was higher. There were fewer, and people are prone to only remember the classics and forget the majority.

I think there has been a measurable decline in quality during that period.

Look at the highest grossing movies of the 80s. None of the movies on that list are dumb.

The 90s look a little worse with films like Armageddon, Independence Day and the Phantom Menace (which to be fair, no one expected to be as bad as it was).

The 2000s are okay, you have a few mediocre to bad movies like Spiderman 3, a few Roland Emmerich films, the Pirates of the Caribbean films. But mostly you have some decent superhero movies and the things like Lord of the Rings and the Harry Potter movies which did well critically.

I think The 2010s look quite bad in comparison. Most of these films are just the tired Marvel films, reboots, shit like the Fast and Furious movies, bad animated movies like Minions, Transformers movies, etc. Some exceptions but I would hesitate to call more than 4 of those top 10 decent movies. Even some of the good ones qualify as "loud and dumb".

[Shadowferal]

There may have been few and far between in earlier years; Ben-Hur (a personal favorite); The Ten Commandments (hokey script but it worked well with the times, and Charlton Heston was quite the draw. And Yul Brynner was a sexy beast); The Day the Earth Stood Still is still the best movie of 1951.
There were some incredible film-making...and that's what should be desired.

[Arrowstormen]

I reject that the top grossing movies of a decade is an indicator of the blockbuster quality of said decade.

[Eliot123]

Black Panther easily 9/10

The movie is awesome! Just enough action, humor and overall fun to make it quite entertaining without going overboard. Can't wait for Infinity War!

[TJ]

I reject that the top grossing movies of a decade is an indicator of the blockbuster quality of said decade.

Nope, money made is nothing but hype in a lot of cases, no 100% direct correlation at all to actual quality of the film. Just look at viewers and quality of series, how does the Walking Dead pull the numbers it does?

[P for Pancetta]

Black Panther 6/10

The movie was very marvel all in all, it had a no-brain story, plot driven not character driven, extremely bad physics defying cgi and forgettable villains (literally can't even remember the real name of the bad guy just his gamertag nickname). It was pretty enjoyable. However I was quite disappointing with Wakanda, didn't look quite developed, Africa is more then having buildings with twigroofs, even South Korea looked more advanced.

[shaunika123]

Err, what? The plot in Justice League is beyond horrible writing. They tried a different direction and then missed it by lightyears, made even more clear because you're essentially watching 2 different movies in one.

Hell, they managed to make Batman the most useless fuckup in the entire movie, AFTER he pretty much defeats Superman before that. Pretty much any scene that didn't feature Wonder Woman was a joke of CGI with no depth whatsoever, or no choreography. The jokes could've been written by a 10 year old. The line where Bruce says Superman is more human then he is, is probably the only line with any depth in it.

Seriously, the movie has no plot or any form of consistency. It does show that a movie with popular superhero's doesn't need any intelligent writing to be a success though.

i didnt say it wasnt horribly written, I just said it's more coherent than BvS.

the characters, the dialogue, the story everything is horribly written, but that doesnt mean that the plot itself makes no sense, it makes sense because it's way too simplistic not to make sense.

also you gave too much credit to BvS batman, he was completely useless in the doomsday fight there too. and anyway, everyone was useless in justice league not just batman. except for superman, who basically proved he doesnt need anyone else to save the day effortlessly. which makes him and the others such compelling characters. /s


back to topic:

Call me by your name 7.5/10

a nice little quaint story with some great cinematography, performances, and some nice song selection.

but the first act was a little weak and too long, and the tone of the two leads towards each other switches maybe a bit too abrubtly.

[Deleted]

i didnt say it wasnt horribly written, I just said it's more coherent than BvS.

the characters, the dialogue, the story everything is horribly written, but that doesnt mean that the plot itself makes no sense, it makes sense because it's way too simplistic not to make sense.

also you gave too much credit to BvS batman, he was completely useless in the doomsday fight there too. and anyway, everyone was useless in justice league not just batman. except for superman, who basically proved he doesnt need anyone else to save the day effortlessly. which makes him and the others such compelling characters. /s

How exactly is it more coherent? It was basically: here's a bad guy, kill the bad guy. And everything around it was just piss poor writing or didn't make any sense whatsoever. In my opinion BvS was a lot more real.

And sure everyone was useless, but atleast everyone besides Batman could fight a Parademon without too much effort. But Batman was a complete loser, who's only superpower truly was being rich. And that's after he defeated Superman, who's pretty much depicted as a god in Justice League.

It makes ZERO sense.

[shaunika123]

How exactly is it more coherent? It was basically: here's a bad guy, kill the bad guy. And everything around it was just piss poor writing or didn't make any sense whatsoever. In my opinion BvS was a lot more real.

And sure everyone was useless, but atleast everyone besides Batman could fight a Parademon without too much effort. But Batman was a complete loser, who's only superpower truly was being rich. And that's after he defeated Superman, who's pretty much depicted as a god in Justice League.

It makes ZERO sense.

that's specifically why it's more coherent, cos it's just "here's the bad guy, kill the bad guy" not some overcomplicated bullshit story that implodes in on itself.

because it's easier to understand what the characters want: here bad guy wants to take over the world and wants to use those cubes to do it, easy and JL wants to save the world and want to use the same cubes to do it, also easy.

in BvS it was: bad guy thinks superman is a god, but he hates gods for some reason, so he tricks some random guy into killing him, but he also makes his own god(??) that he cant control and is even stronger and worse than the god he wants to kill, but he also blows up congress to trick people into thinking superman did it, when noone would ever think that. and he uses specialized bullets that easily trace back to him to hide the fact that it was him trying to frame superman(???)

Superman wants to stop batman, even though he's doing way worse shit and has in fact murdered multiple people, but in the end he only does it because luthor has his mother hostage. and the only reason batman fights him is because the world's greatest detective wont listen for 2 seconds until superman explains the situation AND THEN HE STOPS BECAUSE THEIR MOTHERS HAVE THE SAME NAME.

see what I mean? you act like I'M defending justice league, but all im saying is, that batman V superman is even worse.
there's a difference between mediocre and lazy and convoluted and incoherent. the barebone plot of justice league is so simplistic and lazy that it cant not make sense. whether that's an improvement or not is up to you I guess, but at least I could follow what was happening in JL.


and again, batman being useless wasnt exactly a plot problem, more of a story or character problem. it's horrible, but I dont consider that problem part of the "coherent plot" because he was consistently useless throughout the movie.

[Sierra85]

Black Panther - 8/10

pretty good. can't say anything negative about it or SJW will murder me.

[Archon14]

Darkest Hour - ?/10

Apart from Gary Oldman's performance, the movie was pretty meh. I wasn't sure what I was expecting, to be honest. If it was just for the performance, then it's 10/10. I love Gary Oldman, and I think this is one of his greatest acting achievements. But other than that, the movie didn't have plenty of substance to me, nor did it make me care enough about Churchill himself as a historical figure, or other characters in the movie, or the whole idea of citizens wanting to fight back and how much it was actually important for Churchill to succeed.

I understand it from a historical perspective, but there wasn't enough emotional investment for me, which I think should be an important purpose of the movie, otherwise I could just watch a documentary. So I have no idea how to rate this movie.

[Fencers]

Black Panther 7/10

Typical Marvel fare. Well made and entertaining. Not nearly as radical as the ad campaign suggests. Acting is pretty good though.

Double Lover 8/10

Delicious and trashy in the all the best ways. The best film Brian De Palma never made. Superb direction and art design.

15:17 to Paris 0/10

Terrible. Full of cliches and manipulative filmmaking. Broad, meaningless appeals to magical thinking. The movie also has no point. The script is shaggy, the metaphors (such as they are) are so ham fisted I needed mayo to ease it down... ugh. Total shit.

[hellhamster]

Darkest Hour: 7/10

Very by the numbers and predictable, even very dull at times. However Oldman's chilling Oscar winning performance saved it from mediocrity.

[Ebalina]

Black Panter - 9/10
The actress that plays Suri made it for me she is amazing.
Chadwick Bosman also is preaty good for the role of T'chala but we already knew that from Civil War.

[hellhamster]

Three Billboards Outside Ebbing, Missouri: 8/10

Great script and extremely well acted. Loved the cartoony depiction of the American backwater, really made this film into a wonderful tragic/black comedy. It could have been so much more though, it kinda dozed off after the middle mark.

In Bruges is still the superior Martin McDonagh film.

[melodramocracy]

The Mummy - 4/10 The baseline premise wasn't bad, but I walked away wishing that more was known of her backstory (lust for power on its own is a rather boring motivational point), and that the dynamics between her and Cruise were more interesting.

The Dr. Hyde thing could have been carried out far better as well. Overall, I can't really recommend this flick.

[shaunika123]

Darkest Hour - ?/10

Apart from Gary Oldman's performance, the movie was pretty meh. I wasn't sure what I was expecting, to be honest. If it was just for the performance, then it's 10/10. I love Gary Oldman, and I think this is one of his greatest acting achievements. But other than that, the movie didn't have plenty of substance to me, nor did it make me care enough about Churchill himself as a historical figure, or other characters in the movie, or the whole idea of citizens wanting to fight back and how much it was actually important for Churchill to succeed.

I understand it from a historical perspective, but there wasn't enough emotional investment for me, which I think should be an important purpose of the movie, otherwise I could just watch a documentary. So I have no idea how to rate this movie.

come on, it's worth watching for the subway scene alone :P I was actually surprised how witty and funny the script was, I was expecting a dry dama, but got an entertaining one.

[Al Gorefiend]

Black Panther: 4/10

Weakest entry in the MCU IMO. Had more technobabble "just go with it" nonsense than both Iron Man AND Guardians of the Galaxy. Characters were intensely uninteresting, Suri was the only character with a modicum of personality, and.. whoever... the Dore was that followed them around. Who was she? Uhh.. you got me on that, she looks exactly like all the others. Was she the one killed at the end? Was she the ex-girlfriend? Couldn't tell.

Erik's entire motive was hard to grasp. I... think... his motive was to overthrow the Wakanda monarchy and use Wakandan tech to make black people in America the new top dogs? Idk, he kept making allusions to the slave trade and his "oppressed brothers" but never flat out stated he was racist towards white guys, Disney not greenlighting controversial topics maybe?

Chadwick Boseman isn't present for 1/3rd of the movie, and is black panther for maybe 1/4th of that 2/3rd he's in it?

And the technobabble was absurd. Seriously, it was worse technobabble than Iron Man and Guardians. So they have this super metal that can basically do whatever they want. It can heal paralysis, create force fields, cloaking devices, can be refined into fertilizer to make a heart fruit send people into the afterlife. Can deflect bullets and absorb kinetic energy (which okay we already knew it could do that). Then it just gets.. ridiculous. Suri makes Iron Man and Rocket Raccoon look like morons because this metal, it's just SO POWERFUL BRUH.
I liked the part especially when Suri says "it's not magic, it's advanced technology!" As if to break the fourth wall and tell people raising their eyebrows in the theater to just go with it.

Just having their tech consist of Vibranium-enhanced things would have been enough to show Wakanda is super advanced. C'mooon, all that nonsensical magical "tech" completely removed any sense of danger from the movie with Suri's go-go gadget Vibranium wonderall.

So the entire movie just felt like mumbling to me. *mumble mumble* Wakanda tradition *mumble mumble* hard to pronounce made-up words *mumble mumble* my dad did bad things *mumble mumble* time-space flux vibranium capacitator *mumble mumble*

All around just didn't really like this one, and I'm a guy who binges the MCU at least once every few months or so.