Rate the last movie you saw

[BrAinPaiNt]

Peppermint on Netflix.
Revenge movie starring Jennifer Garner.
6.5/10 worth a watch if you like action and violence

Had no expectations going in so it was a pleasant surprise.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Buddy Games nothing new or great about it. But ok if you like raunchy low brow humor.
Reminded me a tad of the Sandler grown up movies.

 

[CouchCoach]

Peppermint on Netflix.
Revenge movie starring Jennifer Garner.
6.5/10 worth a watch if you like action and violence

I would actually give that a 7.5 but revenge flicks are right down my alley. I also dig female action flicks like Anna, Ava, Aeon Flux, Atomic Blonde, Columbiana and Red Sparrow.

 

[aria]

I would actually give that a 7.5 but revenge flicks are right down my alley. I also dig female action flicks like Anna, Ava, Aeon Flux, Atomic Blonde, Columbiana and Red Sparrow.

Ha, yeah, I kind of low balled it. I was torn and started thinking of all time greats like Field of Dreams, Saving Private Ryan, The Big Lebowski and couldn’t bring myself to give it much higher due to lack of content and overall acting.

 

[CouchCoach]

Ha, yeah, I kind of low balled it. I was torn and started thinking of all time greats like Field of Dreams, Saving Private Ryan, The Big Lebowski and couldn’t bring myself to give it much higher due to lack of content and overall acting.

But you are not limited to the number of 7.5's you can have.

I used to be critic-like as my older son is but then I found myself not along for the ride. Anything in the 7.5 range for me is a "yeah, I'd watch that again".

 

[G2]

But you are not limited to the number of 7.5's you can have.

I used to be critic-like as my older son is but then I found myself not along for the ride. Anything in the 7.5 range for me is a "yeah, I'd watch that again".

Same here. Plus I purposely try to never rate anything a "10." It leaves you nowhere to go.
Anything above a 7 is a win-win for me. I've watched much, much lower caliber films and I always catch something new regardless of how many times I've seen it.

 

[aria]

But you are not limited to the number of 7.5's you can have.

I used to be critic-like as my older son is but then I found myself not along for the ride. Anything in the 7.5 range for me is a "yeah, I'd watch that again".

True, I should be more generous with them. I’m kinda thinking 6-7 is something I would watch again, 7-8 I liked a good bit, 9-10 some of the best movies I’ve ever seen.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Couple of Christmas movies.

Unaccompanied Minors - mostly a family/kid movie but I kind of enjoyed it for whatever reason. Number of kids get stuck in airport due to a blizzard and let the mischief begin.

Office Christmas Party - Love this movie. Kate McKinnon kills it IMO and she cracks me up.

 

[CouchCoach]

True, I should be more generous with them. I’m kinda thinking 6-7 is something I would watch again, 7-8 I liked a good bit, 9-10 some of the best movies I’ve ever seen.

I collect them so I re-watch them as I am doing with Christmas movies and will do Harry Potter in December and Hobbit/LOTR in January because of the winter scenes.

I don't exactly rate them except for after I watch one, do I still consider that time well invested and I am not just watching something because I bought it and feel required to watch it. The other side of that is watching something new and thinking 'why the hell didn't I watch something I know I like'.

Then there's the story behind some of them that make me like them even better like what they went through to make Tombstone after the director got fired and what Spielberg did to Matt Damon to alienate him from the cast.

They put all of them through a pretty rigorous boot camp except Damon. It was so unenjoyable most of them wanted out early but Hanks rallied them. Edward Burns said he was an inspiration but they all hated Damon because he got out of it and Spielberg did that on purpose to add some realism to his shots. After reading up on it, I watched one of the few to approach 10 for me with renewed interest.

 

[CouchCoach]

Couple of Christmas movies.

Unaccompanied Minors - mostly a family/kid movie but I kind of enjoyed it for whatever reason. Number of kids get stuck in airport due to a blizzard and let the mischief begin.

Office Christmas Party - Love this movie. Kate McKinnon kills it IMO and she cracks me up.

She kills everything.

 

[aria]

I collect them so I re-watch them as I am doing with Christmas movies and will do Harry Potter in December and Hobbit/LOTR in January because of the winter scenes.

I don't exactly rate them except for after I watch one, do I still consider that time well invested and I am not just watching something because I bought it and feel required to watch it. The other side of that is watching something new and thinking 'why the hell didn't I watch something I know I like'.

Then there's the story behind some of them that make me like them even better like what they went through to make Tombstone after the director got fired and what Spielberg did to Matt Damon to alienate him from the cast.

They put all of them through a pretty rigorous boot camp except Damon. It was so unenjoyable most of them wanted out early but Hanks rallied them. Edward Burns said he was an inspiration but they all hated Damon because he got out of it and Spielberg did that on purpose to add some realism to his shots. After reading up on it, I watched one of the few to approach 10 for me with renewed interest.

I’ll be damned, I had no idea about Damon, very interesting.

Sometimes I have to knock a rating down a bit due to accuracy. I sure as hell don’t know everything about history (majored in Russian history and pretty much forgot everything) but I still read lots of books that were made into movies, both historical and fiction.

I understand why they sometimes change things to make it more interesting but it’s a pet peeve of mine when it’s not historically accurate. Young Guns I and II are two of my favorite movies but I can’t not bump them down a bit due to the inaccuracies.

With fictional books, 99% of the time the books are always better and when I read the book first, then watch the movie, it’s usually a let down and the movie leaves stuff out most of the time so I have to naturally reflect that in my ratings.

 

[CouchCoach]

I’ll be damned, I had no idea about Damon, very interesting.

Sometimes I have to knock a rating down a bit due to accuracy. I sure as hell don’t know everything about history (majored in Russian history and pretty much forgot everything) but I still read lots of books that were made into movies, both historical and fiction.

I understand why they sometimes change things to make it more interesting but it’s a pet peeve of mine when it’s not historically accurate. Young Guns I and II are two of my favorite movies but I can’t not bump them down a bit due to the inaccuracies.

With fictional books, 99% of the time the books are always better and when I read the book first, then watch the movie, it’s usually a let down and the movie leaves stuff out most of the time so I have to naturally reflect that in my ratings.

I am pretty forgiving of that and "based on true events". It's like what Ben Affleck said in an interview after Argo came out and he was asked about embellishing it a but and he replied "it's a movie".

I look around at real life and think 'yep, this could use some embellishment'.

 

[Runwildboys]

Couple of Christmas movies.

Unaccompanied Minors - mostly a family/kid movie but I kind of enjoyed it for whatever reason. Number of kids get stuck in airport due to a blizzard and let the mischief begin.

Office Christmas Party - Love this movie. Kate McKinnon kills it IMO and she cracks me up.

Office Christmas Party was hilarious!

 

[Runwildboys]

I’ll be damned, I had no idea about Damon, very interesting.

Sometimes I have to knock a rating down a bit due to accuracy. I sure as hell don’t know everything about history (majored in Russian history and pretty much forgot everything) but I still read lots of books that were made into movies, both historical and fiction.

I understand why they sometimes change things to make it more interesting but it’s a pet peeve of mine when it’s not historically accurate. Young Guns I and II are two of my favorite movies but I can’t not bump them down a bit due to the inaccuracies.

With fictional books, 99% of the time the books are always better and when I read the book first, then watch the movie, it’s usually a let down and the movie leaves stuff out most of the time so I have to naturally reflect that in my ratings.

Ender's Game is one of the few exceptions, but that's thanks to them waiting until the technology was available to do the book justice. I actually remember thinking about how it would be impossible to make it into a movie, back when I read the books, but that was in the early 90's.

 

[aria]

Ender's Game is one of the few exceptions, but that's thanks to them waiting until the technology was available to do the book justice. I actually remember thinking about how it would be impossible to make it into a movie, back when I read the books, but that was in the early 90's.

Huh, never even heard of it, I’ll have to check it out.

 

[dreghorn2]

I am pretty forgiving of that and "based on true events". It's like what Ben Affleck said in an interview after Argo came out and he was asked about embellishing it a but and he replied "it's a movie".

I look around at real life and think 'yep, this could use some embellishment'.

Canadians to this day are still upset at Affleck seeing that he completely minimized the Canadian embassy staff's involvement when it was they that were risking their lives for the Americans involved.


In a CNN interview, former U.S. president Jimmy Carter addressed the controversy:

90% of the contributions to the ideas and the consummation of the plan was Canadian. And the movie gives almost full credit to the American CIA. And with that exception, the movie is very good. But Ben Affleck's character in the film was... only in Tehran a day and a half. And the main hero, in my opinion, was Ken Taylor, who was the Canadian ambassador who orchestrated the entire process.[41]

Taylor noted, "In reality, Canada was responsible for the six and the CIA was a junior partner. But I realize this is a movie and you have to keep the audience on the edge of their seats."[39] In the film, Taylor is shown threatening to close the Canadian embassy. This did not happen, and the Canadians never considered abandoning the six Americans who had taken refuge under their protection.[39]

In addition that rat Affleck insinuated that the British and New Zealand embassies turned away the 6 Americans.

Nothing could be further from the truth..

The British had initially hosted the American refugees; however, the location was deemed unsafe as the British embassy itself had been targeted and surrounded by mobs and all involved officials from the various nations believed the Canadian ambassador's residence to be a safer location. New Zealand diplomatic ambassadors organised a place for the refugees to hide if they needed to change their location,[42] and driving the Americans to the airport when they made their escape from Tehran.[43] British diplomats also assisted other American hostages beyond the escaped group of six.[44] Bob Anders, the U.S. consular agent played in the film by Tate Donovan, said, "They put their lives on the line for us. We were all at risk. I hope no one in Britain will be offended by what's said in the film. The British were good to us and we're forever grateful."[45]

Sir John Graham, the then-British ambassador to Iran, said,

My immediate reaction on hearing about this was one of outrage. I have since simmered down, but am still very distressed that the film-makers should have got it so wrong. My concern is that the inaccurate account should not enter the mythology of the events in Tehran in November 1979."[45]

That film was BS from the get go.

 

[Runwildboys]

Canadians to this day are still upset at Affleck seeing that he completely minimized the Canadian embassy staff's involvement when it was they that were risking their lives for the Americans involved.


In a CNN interview, former U.S. president Jimmy Carter addressed the controversy:

90% of the contributions to the ideas and the consummation of the plan was Canadian. And the movie gives almost full credit to the American CIA. And with that exception, the movie is very good. But Ben Affleck's character in the film was... only in Tehran a day and a half. And the main hero, in my opinion, was Ken Taylor, who was the Canadian ambassador who orchestrated the entire process.[41]

Taylor noted, "In reality, Canada was responsible for the six and the CIA was a junior partner. But I realize this is a movie and you have to keep the audience on the edge of their seats."[39] In the film, Taylor is shown threatening to close the Canadian embassy. This did not happen, and the Canadians never considered abandoning the six Americans who had taken refuge under their protection.[39]

In addition that rat Affleck insinuated that the British and New Zealand embassies turned away the 6 Americans.

Nothing could be further from the truth..

The British had initially hosted the American refugees; however, the location was deemed unsafe as the British embassy itself had been targeted and surrounded by mobs and all involved officials from the various nations believed the Canadian ambassador's residence to be a safer location. New Zealand diplomatic ambassadors organised a place for the refugees to hide if they needed to change their location,[42] and driving the Americans to the airport when they made their escape from Tehran.[43] British diplomats also assisted other American hostages beyond the escaped group of six.[44] Bob Anders, the U.S. consular agent played in the film by Tate Donovan, said, "They put their lives on the line for us. We were all at risk. I hope no one in Britain will be offended by what's said in the film. The British were good to us and we're forever grateful."[45]

Sir John Graham, the then-British ambassador to Iran, said,

My immediate reaction on hearing about this was one of outrage. I have since simmered down, but am still very distressed that the film-makers should have got it so wrong. My concern is that the inaccurate account should not enter the mythology of the events in Tehran in November 1979."[45]

That film was BS from the get go.

Hey, do you ever hear us complain about protecting Canada from Mexico???

 

[bb721]

Don’t Breathe. Entertaining thriller/horror flick, I give it a solid 7.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

Greenland - Not bad, not great. Basic Comet is going to destroy the world movie.

After watching the whole thing I thought to myself....How can you have so many bad things happen to this man, woman and child at yet later have so many impossible scenarios that turn out in their favor.

Again not bad, definite time waster but not sure I would watch it again. Liked Deep Impact and Armageddeionsanders better.

 

[BrAinPaiNt]

I, frankenstein - Surprised I had not seen it before as that would normally be the type of movie that would garner my attention.
Pretty bad overall. Could have been so much better imo. But if you want to watch it, it is currently free on Youtube.

Also for fans of The Great Escape - it too is free on youtube right now.