The insanity of ratings.


If this film doesn't deserve a 10, then none do. Who are all these fools who think it's only a 7? Bah!

reply

This was one of the worst films I have ever seen. Why aren't there negative ratings?

reply

Because it's Chekhov, Malle, and a great cast that brings vibrance and energy to this play. If you don't understand the constructs, then you should think it's bad. It's not on your level. You must be looking for DOOM. Have fun.


"Nice beaver!"
"Thanks, I just had it stuffed."
--The Naked Gun

reply

^^^
Owned

reply

Agree, go watch Doom. :)

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

> This was one of the worst films I have ever seen.

You just watched a few minutes and did not get it so your turned it off.
Take another look at it, it is a masterpiece ... this little movie is better
than all but one or two movies from this entire year .. that's 2009.

reply

I was thinking that the other day: People who watch something that is clearly outside of their interest zone should refrain from voting on the same.
Unless you can be objective and judge the film on its merits rather than personal tastes then spare us please.

reply

Wait, I absolutely beg to differ. I think it's entirely plausible that someone could intelligently watch this film and dislike it. I'm a Russian language and literature major at Stanford -- at the very least you can't say I'm completely stupid -- and watched this after reading Uncle Vanya, and absolutely did not like it. I definitely grant that it might be a good movie, and that my perceptions might change on a second viewing -- but the acting struck me as largely one-note (except, for the most part, Julianne Moore and Brooke Smith in the second act) and at too high an intensity for the subtlety of film; the interludes between the intra-diegetic play's acts were uncomfortably didactic; mostly, though, the absolute lack of cinematography nauseated me. I understand that this was meant to capture the experience of seeing the play, but it struck me as entirely regressive to capture (a great adaptation of) Uncle Vanya on film without adding anything decidedly filmic to the experience. Even if the theatre that Malle canned was very, very good theatre -- and it's impossible not to love Chekhov -- it seems a tragedy the the film was all content and didn't open itself up to the possibility of being enhanced by the unique form offered by the medium.

And okay, you might not agree with me, but can we at least not deride the tastes of anyone who had the audacity to not particularly enjoy this film?

reply

SO since you attend stanford and you are majoring in literature, we shouldn't consider you an idiot?

IS that arrogance or what? What would make you even think that to write it? Does it serve any purpose?

- Q.E.D (quod erat demonstrandum)

reply

Wow. This thread is interesting.

The first dissenting voice doesn't offer any kind of criticism. He's shot down. The second dissenting voice gives at least a passable criticism (one-note actors, not very cinematic), and he gets the exact same treatment as the first guy.

This is why people look down on the IMDb forums.

As for the first question, just because a film doesn't have a perfect 10 doesn't mean lots of people don't like it. Lots of people gave the film either 10's (hey!) or 8's. Just because more people voted 8 than 10 doesn't mean that they thought the movie sucked. From what I've seen, most films on the IMDb have 6's, so a 7.5 is a decent rating. Besides which, not everybody has to give 10's to any given film. It's not a black-and-white voting system for a reason.

And before you ask, no, I haven't seen the film, but I do want to.

reply

[deleted]

Unfortunately, you are terribly wrong about the film's qualities as pertaining to the medium. The film is done upclose nose-to-the-camera in a way that you can't experience even in the most intimate of theatres. Maybe you don't like that style, but it can't be acheived any other way.

For me, the film got Checkov's comedy in the way I have yet to see in the theatre, and I think the intimacy of the project was part of that. It was a revelation how poignantly Vanya defended his life - even though he despises it.

reply

it is getting a criterion DVD release, maybe it will go up. This was a great film I gave it 10/10. Great performances, great directing and camera work.

reply

People who make comment on movies or plays that are beyond their capacity to understand will quite possibly strive to understand the dialogue or read the clip notes so it can be made plain to them. But emotion and relationships are the most complex known to most of us, particularly other people's relationships...... I enjoy these type of plays, one of my favourites is Shakespears Hamlet, another is the last station a movie make by Michael Hoffman, about the last days of the writer and politician Leo Trotsky, quite a good story and well acted.

reply

I couldn't have said better. Phantasm21, will you marry me, please?

reply

And I thought you wanted to marry me... you heart breaker!

reply

I love this film and consider it one of the most haunting and powerful films of the 90’s. The setting of the old, abandoned theater was a perfect environment for these lost lonely people filled with regret. The performances were very raw and honest and I loved that the actors work in there street clothes giving it a timeless quality. Focusing on the stories center and not distancing the audience from it the way some costume dramas do. The cinematography is nothing special (A very good point Klewin), but I felt it match the subdued mood of the story well. Most of my favorite films have richer cinematography than this one.
However to each there own. I’d say Klewin seems intelligent because of his well thought post not because he has a degree or I agree with him. It’s a shame that people can’t discuses films honestly with out being bashed for there views. It makes for very boring and one sided discussions if you ask me.


In the shadows of future passed the magician longs to see, one chants out between two worlds: fire walk with me.

reply

It deserves 10/10. Period. Mamet delivers the power of Chekhov's play flawlessly. Everything is about the acting here and the cast is simply brilliant. Malle's directing is masterful. What's there left to say... Go watch it! (Or maybe I should say - watch it again?) lol

reply

10 out 10 is what I rated it by the way. Forgot to put it in my above post.

In the shadows of future passed the magician longs to see, one chants out between two worlds: fire walk with me.

reply

To me ratings serve to help those individuals that choose which films to see by relying on the quick opinion of those that would offer a quick opinion. I don't give ratings much cred, nor the arguments for or against.

Reviews and testimonials are another story. I get far more worked up when someone takes the time to write a few lines blasting a movie I love. This is a movie I love. And as that term suggests, it's a personal evaluation that I can't expect others to share. I've a great kid that I love, but I can't expect everyone to do the same.

A reviewer skillfully took apart the levels that are worked into this film. I can't add to that. What I can say is that I've never found fault with any actor, direction, camera work, etc in this film. I've read the play before I saw the film and I have to admit my reading didn't live up to this performance.

I rated this a 10. But since I refuse to get into the complexity of the production I can only compare it to my Parthenon of faves of plays to film; Death of a Salesman; A Raisin in the Sun; and the Piano Lesson. When my son comes of age I hope he wanders into these four films and gets a glimpse how dreams, if not tended and fought for, can wound.

reply

It is a remarkable film. It captures the essence of acting, capturing your attention and making you feel, without any of the trappings of films and plays, costumes, props, music.

Plus I kinda crush on Brooke Smith.

reply

Yeah, I'm with you: although doesn't that kind of indicate that she was a questionable casting choice? Sonya is supposed to be so plain, and Brooke Smith is not.

9/10 for me, BTW.

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

I so agree ... I took this out today and watched it from my private DVD collection, and
it is so amazingly true to life and natural, and the environment of the old theater was
brilliant.

It still struck me as so delightful the way the actors are at once talking to each other
and preparing, and then you realize they are in the movie. Wonderful, masterful and
very meaningful.

I just gave it a 10 again ... if that helps!?

reply

[deleted]

[deleted]

Then you're going to have to avoid a lot of films, because nearly every board seems to have someone who takes that attitude.

--------
See a list of my favourite films here: http://www.flickchart.com/slackerinc

reply

I don't think it was a particularly memorable performance, and it's certainly not a "10" by any measure. I'd give it a 6 (as a film) and a 4 (as a play), but it's IMDB, so I gave it an 8 to make up for mass stupidity.

There are far better performances of the play on video, check out the BBC Play of the Week version with Anthony Hopkins as Astrov. The difference is night and day.

--

reply