I Care a Lot (Amazon) Movie Review & Comments

steve sph

Well-known Member
Dreadful dross - gave it 15 minutes of my life and I'll never get them back.
Only bothered because Kermode said it was pretty good on his film roundup - that man has seriously lost his critical faculties of late.
Maybe lockdown has got to him, although it's hard to imagine being holed up watching films has made much difference to his normal routine.
 

Evinger

Well-known Member
From the comments above of most who have now watched it, I think this could be renamed "I Care a Lot but the Audience couldn't Care Less".
 

Peew971

Well-known Member
Dreadful dross - gave it 15 minutes of my life and I'll never get them back.
Only bothered because Kermode said it was pretty good on his film roundup - that man has seriously lost his critical faculties of late.
Maybe lockdown has got to him, although it's hard to imagine being holed up watching films has made much difference to his normal routine.
Most reviews of this movie are glowing but really they are just praising Pike's acting and scoring that. Most times the script is barely addressed, if addressed at all and that script is really poor (in particular from the moment Pike and Dinklage meet).
 

goingoingong

Distinguished Member
No offence but do you really think you should be the one pointing out lack of granularity? You gave it a 0/10 ..... I have never given a movie 0/10. I have not watched it yet but can safely say there is more chance of me giving it a 9 then a 0.
I have a scale of 10 possible poinbts between worst movie and the greatest movies ever made.
The OP had just one point difference between this movies and the greatest movies ever made.
Which puts it into the category of just below the greatest movies ever made.
Really?
And how can you place something you have never watched into the category of just below the greatest movies ever made.
 

barnaby jones

Distinguished Member
I have a scale of 10 possible poinbts between worst movie and the greatest movies ever made.
The OP had just one point difference between this movies and the greatest movies ever made.
Which puts it into the category of just below the greatest movies ever made.
Really?
And how can you place something you have never watched into the category of just below the greatest movies ever made.
In the same way that people on here are rating this 0/10 having only watched 10 minutes of it.
Essentially anybody can do, think, say what they want. When that changes, you can come round and burn a bunch of films from my collection that aren’t deemed ‘worthy’ until then I suggest you get over yourself.
 

camelot1971

Well-known Member
The story had great promise, and a great cast but in my eyes the second half of the film just lost its way completely. They should have either gone for all out black comedy or a thriller. I also didn't care about the characters at all - none of them were likable. 4/10
 

Garrett

Moderator
Absolute garbage of a movie and 0/10 from me.
A misogynist smear campaign against feminists, lesbians, and strong women who think they are a lioness and can roar :censored:

As it failed for me even as a dark comedy to connect any 'jokes' at all it then falls into a non comedy con crime caper category.

What person when faced by threats from a russian mafia boss basically says
Bring it on.
I am a woman, I am strong, I am a Lioness, hear me roar.
I never loose
.
And when offered the chance to walk away scot free along with $300K, instead demands 5 million when threatened with torture and eventual death.

Perhaps this was the so called 'comedy'. A total piss take of the themes of gurl power movies.
And the only 'joke' was that she was brought down in the end by the sad inoffensive man whose balls she had threatened to rip off.
0/10 a bit pedantic a bit like those on IMDB giving 1/10 the worst film they ever seen till the next one comes along they did not like and that then becomes 1/10 worst film they ever seen.
Was the acting/score/cinematography etc. bad?
Never watched some of the film on the Horror channel?
 

barnaby jones

Distinguished Member
Were you as upset when Denzel took on the
Russian Mafia in The Equaliser
or was that an attempt to smear the BLM movement by making a ridiculous but hugely entertaining movie.
 

goingoingong

Distinguished Member
In the same way that people on here are rating this 0/10 having only watched 10 minutes of it.
Essentially anybody can do, think, say what they want. When that changes, you can come round and burn a bunch of films from my collection that aren’t deemed ‘worthy’ until then I suggest you get over yourself.
Really?
Hate speech is frowned upon. Why then are hate movies accepted.

It is a nasty piece of work film with a misogynistic sub text likely to instill hate against a particular group of people in society. As Casimir notes Ultimately, you just want this horrible barely-human being to be hurt, a lot, for the personal horrors she has made into a lucrative business model

Now it's not the first or only film to do this but with those which do it well such dislike for a character is surrounded by the dark humour which makes you smile, chuckle,laugh. Any negative feelings are balanced or exceeded by positive ones (Laughter is the best medicine). With this one the negativity is strong and unbalanced.

Those who watched 10 or so minutes and bailed still have something to base an opinion on vs those who haven't even seen a minute of it.

As for your final comment seems you think anyone who questions your scoring should get over themselves. Not much sign of accepting anybody can do, think say what they want.
 

Peew971

Well-known Member
Were you as upset when Denzel took on the
Russian Mafia in The Equaliser
or was that an attempt to smear the BLM movement by making a ridiculous but hugely entertaining movie.
Surely you are not comparing these two plots? :p
 

steve sph

Well-known Member
Purely my two pennerth, but once you go down the road of censoring anything with dubious moral content you might as well throw away your dvd collection and stick to watching The Sound of Music on repeat.
And even then you've got the nasty Nazis to contend with.
Taxi Driver, Apocalypse Now - are they bad movies because they feature lead characters with questionable views?
The plays of Shakespeare contain bestiality, incest, rape, torture, murder, necrophilia - do we ban them?
For me the bottom line when judging the merits of a film are things like character/script/narrative/cinematography/acting - not some kind of arbitrary contemporary moral barometer as to whether everyone is a nice person.
 

Peew971

Well-known Member
I hated that movie but there's no way it's a 0/10 because the acting was still great and the cinematography was good. If scoring the script alone then maybe that's more a valid point but even then, the first half was good overall.
Film is definitely below 5/10 though.
 

kbfern

Distinguished Member
A bit of woke appearing on this thread methinks.
 

encaser

Member
Ultimately unrewarding and disjointed tale, with far too much style over substance.
It's sad when you keep experiencing those words coming to the fore.
 

barnaby jones

Distinguished Member
I do understand people having issues with all the characters essentially being utter c-words, it didn’t bother me in Wolf Of Wall Street either (a much better film than the stodgy overblown Irishman IMO), maybe that says something about me. 😆
 

goingoingong

Distinguished Member
0/10 a bit pedantic a bit like those on IMDB giving 1/10 the worst film they ever seen till the next one comes along they did not like and that then becomes 1/10 worst film they ever seen.
To be pedantic: how can a score be pedantic.
Worst film they have ever seen is a category. Thus such 1/10 marks place a particular film into that category of being one of the worst films they have ever seen. And they give 1/10 because IMDB like Amazon doesn't allow 0/10 scoring or negative scoring.

-1/10 for one of the worst movie I've ever seen dropping to -10/10 for the absolute all time worst I've ever seen would alow more granularity and nuanced scoring. Opinion polls managed to have a postive and negative range of highly agree to highly disagree, so why not movie scoring? Using this I've now revised my score to -4/10 as I'm sure there must be movies I haven't seen which I'd score worse if I did have the misfortune to watch them.
I hated that movie but there's no way it's a 0/10 because the acting was still great and the cinematography was good. If scoring the script alone then maybe that's more a valid point but even then, the first half was good overall.
Film is definitely below 5/10 though.
My 0/10 was to put this into worst film I've seen in a decade category. My category. My worst films. My personal score. For movies I score on plot and how I feel at the end of a movie.
Was the acting/score/cinematography etc. bad?
I loosely use the Academy Awards as a model. Acting would be a seperate category as would score, cinematography etc. A film doesn't walk away with the Oscar for best movie just because the soundtrack was good, or the acting etc was good.

Conceivably I could then give 0/10 to a movie but 10/10 for soundtrack and 10/10 for cinematography. Overall end result though is still 0/10 for the movie. My scoring isn't additive, in the above scenario lowest score takes the movie category score.

Nothing particularly wrong with the technicalities of the movie. I'd expect movies with a budget like this one to be technically proficient. Cinematography was if anything uninspired but adequate.
It's the plot and execution of it I have a problem with.
Never watched some of the film on the Horror channel?
No, I don't like Horror movies. So I would never watch them and thus never score a horror movie for that reason.

I do however like comedies and in particular dark comedies which is a subset which is harder to sucessfully pull off. The movie was described as a comedy but for me it completely failed as a comedy and/or as a dark comedy. As many others apart from myself have noted (see amazon and IMDB comments) they found nothing funny at all in the movie.

Dark comedies intend to make light of events that would otherwise be considered too painful to discuss. The hope is that viewers will gain a cathartic experience, or simply laugh at some absurd situation. 70 Best Dark Comedy Films That Filmmakers Can Learn From

Strip away the comedy wrapper which the film is claimed to have but doesn't manage to pull off and the plot is then just ''nasty people doing nasty things'. The only cathartic experience given or intended is to hate this person and hope they suffer "Ultimately, you just want this horrible barely-human being to be hurt, a lot"

Even at that it failed as Marla never really suffers but has plot armour of the highest kind for most of the movie.
No skin peeler for her from the Russian mafia which Red Sparrow so graphically showed in use. No fingernails or fingers removed, no teeth pulled or drilled, no waterboarding, no nothing in fact employed by Roman to find his diamonds.

Now if Prime wanted to tagline the movie and describe the movie as 'Nasty people doing nasty things' I wouldn't have a problem with the movie as I then wouldn't have watched it. And I don't score movies I haven't watched. Instead I wasted my main evening movie viewing with this garbage and feeling negative at the end. I wanted to watch a comedy, what I got was anything but that.

And that annoys me. It makes me less likely to watch a film on the spur of the moment without the benefit of reading reviews. If I had with this, the 43% one star vs 29% 5 star reviews at amazon and the huge mass of 1/10 reviews at IMDB would have been enough for me to pass and have watched something, anything, better.
 

Peew971

Well-known Member
I do understand people having issues with all the characters essentially being utter c-words, it didn’t bother me in Wolf Of Wall Street either (a much better film than the stodgy overblown Irishman IMO), maybe that says something about me. 😆
Since you've been comparing with other movies, in the case of The Equalizer
the guy was an ex-marine/DIA operator so you buy him nuking the Russian mafia more than that random lady who does Pilates.
And in Wolf of Wall Street
you can see likeable, redeemable traits in the characters, whereas Pike's character in this is completely despicable. There is zero reason to root for her, she's actually worse than the people she is fighting against.
 

Garrett

Moderator
To be pedantic: how can a score be pedantic.
Worst film they have ever seen is a category. Thus such 1/10 marks place a particular film into that category of being one of the worst films they have ever seen. And they give 1/10 because IMDB like Amazon doesn't allow 0/10 scoring or negative scoring.

-1/10 for one of the worst movie I've ever seen dropping to -10/10 for the absolute all time worst I've ever seen would alow more granularity and nuanced scoring. Opinion polls managed to have a postive and negative range of highly agree to highly disagree, so why not movie scoring? Using this I've now revised my score to -4/10 as I'm sure there must be movies I haven't seen which I'd score worse if I did have the misfortune to watch them.

My 0/10 was to put this into worst film I've seen in a decade category. My category. My worst films. My personal score. For movies I score on plot and how I feel at the end of a movie.

I loosely use the Academy Awards as a model. Acting would be a seperate category as would score, cinematography etc. A film doesn't walk away with the Oscar for best movie just because the soundtrack was good, or the acting etc was good.

Conceivably I could then give 0/10 to a movie but 10/10 for soundtrack and 10/10 for cinematography. Overall end result though is still 0/10 for the movie. My scoring isn't additive, in the above scenario lowest score takes the movie category score.

Nothing particularly wrong with the technicalities of the movie. I'd expect movies with a budget like this one to be technically proficient. Cinematography was if anything uninspired but adequate.
It's the plot and execution of it I have a problem with.

No, I don't like Horror movies. So I would never watch them and thus never score a horror movie for that reason.

I do however like comedies and in particular dark comedies which is a subset which is harder to sucessfully pull off. The movie was described as a comedy but for me it completely failed as a comedy and/or as a dark comedy. As many others apart from myself have noted (see amazon and IMDB comments) they found nothing funny at all in the movie.

Dark comedies intend to make light of events that would otherwise be considered too painful to discuss. The hope is that viewers will gain a cathartic experience, or simply laugh at some absurd situation. 70 Best Dark Comedy Films That Filmmakers Can Learn From

Strip away the comedy wrapper which the film is claimed to have but doesn't manage to pull off and the plot is then just ''nasty people doing nasty things'. The only cathartic experience given or intended is to hate this person and hope they suffer "Ultimately, you just want this horrible barely-human being to be hurt, a lot"

Even at that it failed as Marla never really suffers but has plot armour of the highest kind for most of the movie.
No skin peeler for her from the Russian mafia which Red Sparrow so graphically showed in use. No fingernails or fingers removed, no teeth pulled or drilled, no waterboarding, no nothing in fact employed by Roman to find his diamonds.

Now if Prime wanted to tagline the movie and describe the movie as 'Nasty people doing nasty things' I wouldn't have a problem with the movie as I then wouldn't have watched it. And I don't score movies I haven't watched. Instead I wasted my main evening movie viewing with this garbage and feeling negative at the end. I wanted to watch a comedy, what I got was anything but that.

And that annoys me. It makes me less likely to watch a film on the spur of the moment without the benefit of reading reviews. If I had with this, the 43% one star vs 29% 5 star reviews at amazon and the huge mass of 1/10 reviews at IMDB would have been enough for me to pass and have watched something, anything, better.
Well when on a forum were as far as I remember we not used a - score and generally been out of 10 if your going down to -10 that as far as the other member are concerned we now take it on your 10 to -10 converted to their scoring system a 0/10 is 5/10.

As for pedantic I really meant to word that means : anything I don't like 1 or 0/10 and the worst film I've seen till the next film comes along I don't like. And yes I know what the word is.
e.g. The Commuter a film with more plot holes than a cullender and people give it 1 on IMDB which does not go below 1/10 now I'm sure they seen way worse films so they score this film on the same level as absolute utter drivel films with a one line plot bad acting poor cinematography and cant hear the actors for invasive soundtrack.

I though was not that great of a film but Id not give a 1 score because there's way worse films out there and base my score between the best and worse not did not like 1, I liked 10.
 
Last edited:

goingoingong

Distinguished Member
Purely my two pennerth, but once you go down the road of censoring anything with dubious moral content you might as well throw away your dvd collection and stick to watching The Sound of Music on repeat.
And even then you've got the nasty Nazis to contend with.
Taxi Driver, Apocalypse Now - are they bad movies because they feature lead characters with questionable views?
The plays of Shakespeare contain bestiality, incest, rape, torture, murder, necrophilia - do we ban them?
For me the bottom line when judging the merits of a film are things like character/script/narrative/cinematography/acting - not some kind of arbitrary contemporary moral barometer as to whether everyone is a nice person.
Can't recall anyone saying censoring the movie in this thread.
Not bothering to watch a movie because the consensus of user reviews are negative is not censorship.

Except in the sense that box office losses as a result mean that similar films will not be made in the future. Was the major box office loss of the Golden Compass and the planned sequals thus being pulled censorship?

Possibly could be considered so as the loss resulted from a publicity campaign orchestrated by american fundamental christians and right wingers. But how different really was that to any other loss where people kept their arses off cinema seats due to bad reviews or word of mouth resulting in the planned sequals never being made.
 

steve sph

Well-known Member
Always difficult to be objective when judging any creative medium - one man's Citizen Kane may well be another man's Godfather 3.
Although if you do prefer Godfather 3 to the masterpieces that preceded it you're probably unlikely to get the job of film critic anytime soon.
What I don't get is 'so awful it's good'.
If that logic applied to everything then we'd all exist on a diet of Maccy D's and listen to music on an 8 track Dansette.
 

barnaby jones

Distinguished Member
Since you've been comparing with other movies, in the case of The Equalizer
the guy was an ex-marine/DIA operator so you buy him nuking the Russian mafia more than that random lady who does Pilates.
And in Wolf of Wall Street
you can see likeable, redeemable traits in the characters, whereas Pike's character in this is completely despicable. There is zero reason to root for her, she's actually worse than the people she is fighting against.
Yeah an ex marine in his late 60’s, with DIY weapons, on his own up against the Russian Mafia. Come on.
Its not more or less believable, it’s all nonsense.
I’d entirely disagree with your assessment of the WOWS characters, what made it stick in throat of audiences even more so is that they based on real people and events.
At least ICTM is a complete work of fiction.
That’s the point here, a film allows you to suspend your belief or it doesn’t. Pike convinced me she could (at times) outsmart a fairly low rent mobster, if not out muscle. Let’s have it straight though, at no point did I think I watching a documentary.
 

Evinger

Well-known Member
Always difficult to be objective when judging any creative medium - one man's Citizen Kane may well be another man's Godfather 3.
Although if you do prefer Godfather 3 to the masterpieces that preceded it you're probably unlikely to get the job of film critic anytime soon.
What I don't get is 'so awful it's good'.
If that logic applied to everything then we'd all exist on a diet of Maccy D's and listen to music on an 8 track Dansette.
"so awful it's good" is very subjective, & I'd probably put Starship Trooper in that category; nearly nothing like the Book, script written on the back of a napkin in the 50's, over the top acting, some painful dialogue, but I love it!

And regarding your last point, (Looks out of window to Bus Stop, sees a bunch of young Teens eating McDonalds & listening to music on their iPhones through the $5 earphones that (used to) come with them.) My friend, a section of the upcoming generation is already there! :)
 

The latest video from AVForums

Podcast: Large Screen HDR TV or Projector For Home Cinema + Best of the Month

Latest News

AVForums Podcast: 24th February 2021
  • By Phil Hinton
  • Published
LG opens up webOS platform to TV manufacturers
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
NAD launches MDC USB DSD upgrade module
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Spotify HiFi service to deliver CD quality music later in 2021
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Copland announces CSA150 hybrid integrated amplifier
  • By Andy Bassett
  • Published
Support AVForums with Patreon

Top Bottom