UKH

My scoring system is a little questionable - every film starts at 10/10 and loses points for things I deem as faults. Also, that starting 10/10 is based on what I think the film was hoping to achieve, such that a relatively small low-key film like The Beguiled, or a daft-as-a-brush caper like Baywatch, can reasonably be put up against arty Oscar fare like "mother!"

Aside from those seen as in-flight movies, listed as they are presumably new releases, these were all seen on cinema screens. Older films were seen as "mystery movies" mostly, with just Starship Troopers being a billed retro screening for its 20th anniversary. Scores are all "immediate response" - I come up with them within around 16 hours, sometimes within 16 minutes - I don't want to dwell too much on things. This means sometimes mistakes are made (see: note about "Life")

Silence 2.5/10
Manchester by the Sea 9/10
Live By Night 5/10
La La Land 6/10
My Feral Heart 6.5/10
Assassin's Creed 3.5/10
A Monster Calls 7.5/10
Jackie 7/10
Split 6/10
Lion 6/10
T2 Trainspotting 8/10
Hacksaw Ridge 6.5/10
Sing 8.5/10
Gold 4.5/10
The Lego Batman Movie 7/10
Rings 6/10
Loving 6/10
John Wick Chapter 2: 6.5/10
The Founder 6/10
Hidden Figures 6.5/10
The Great Wall 7/10
20th Century Women 7.5/10
Toni Erdmann 6/10
A Cure for Wellness 7/10
Patriots Day 6/10
Certain Women 6.5/10
Moonlight 6/10
Logan 8/10
It's Only the End of the World 6/10
Kong: Skull Island 6/10
Free Fire 5.5/10
Get Out 8.5/10
Life 8.5/10 (*)
Ghost in the Shell 8/10
Goodfellas 8.5/10
Elle 8.5/10
Fast and the Furious 8, (The Fate of the Furious) 8/10
Blade 8.5/10
Their Finest 7/10
Guardians of the Galaxy Vol 2, 9/10
Unlocked 5/10
Alien: Covenant 6.5/10
King Arthur: Legend of the Sword 6/10
Baywatch 6/10
The Spy Who Loved Me 6.5/10
For Your Eyes Only 8.5/10
Wonder Woman 7/10
My Cousin Rachel. 4/10. 
Gifted. 8/10. 
The Mummy. 6/10. 
Baby Driver 7/10
Spider-Man: Homecoming - 8/10
Despicable Me 3 - 6/10
The Beguiled - 6/10
Cars 3 - 6/10
Run, Lola, Run - 6/10
Dunkirk 9/10
47 Metres Down 7/10
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets 9/10 on both of 2 viewings
Kathryn Bigelow's "Detroit" 8/10
Atomic Blonde. 6/10. 
The Big Sick. 9/10
The Hitman's Bodyguard. 6/10. 
The Dinner. 8/10 (seen on plane)
Snatched. 3.5/10 (seen on plane)
The Belko Experiment 7.5/10 (seen on plane)
CHiPS 6/10 (seen on plane)
Starship Troopers 8/10
It 7/10
American Made 8/10
Logan Lucky 6/10
Total Recall 8/10
mother! 9/10
Kinsgman: The Golden Circle 4.5/10
Goodbye Christopher Robin 7/10
Bladerunner 2049, 8/10 on both of 2 viewings
The Ritual 7/10
Galaxy Quest 10/10
Happy Death Day 7.5/10 (**)
Thor: Ragnarok 7/10
Jigsaw 7/10
The Death of Stalin 7.5/10
Murder on the Orient Express 5.5/10
The Killing of a Sacred Deer 7.5/10
Justice League 6/10
Battle of the Sexes 8.5/10
Better Watch Out 6/10
The Disaster Artist 9.5/10
Paddington 2 9/10
Star Wars Episode VIII - The Last Jedi 8/10


* having seen bits of this on a repeat screening, it seems that maybe I was dazzled by the craft of the special effects, some story elements and some great grisly death scenes, and overly forgave it some bad science. Possibly more like a 6.5

** My scoring system fell down here - this film is brilliantly done, great fun and I'd love to give it more like 9.5/10 but there were a few things I had to downmark it for

In reply to Blue Straggler:

That's a mighty impressive list! I was hoping you might have 'Loving Vincent' in there, as a friend was singing its praises to me the other day and I was curious to get your take on it.

In reply to Fraser:

I have an unlimited annual pass to Cineworld cinemas (costs me £144, or £2.76 a week, via a company discount) and an 8-screen Cineworld just a 7 minute walk from my front door. Thus, I can fit in films around trips to local climbing wall, or pop out and see something at noon on a Sunday if I am around. The downside is that Cineworld does not screen much stuff like Loving Vincent, which then puts me in a quandary - do I spend about £20 and use up the whole evening on the film, by travelling to another town and paying up at the arthouse, OR do I go and watch John Wick Chapter 2 effectively for "free" and then go climbing?
This is why there is perhaps a lot of junk (Baywatch, FFS!) and not much "art" there.

I did make a plan to see Loving Vincent during a work trip to Ireland, as the timings were right (land at airport, collect car, drive to wherever it was, see film, go to hotel) but as it turned out, I was already quite tired upon landing. It was my only realistic chance of seeing the film. I'd like to see it, it sounds like it is much more than just a novelty.

In reply to Fraser:

The weird thing is that I saw three films directed by Paul Verhoeven, on the big screen in 2017!

Some other odd statistics in there. 2 Dane Dehaan films with running times in excess of 170 minutes, and quite a lot of Domnhall Gleeson...

Apologies for this seeming an indulgent thread (it's not - it's actually here to invite debate about some of the scores; I predict some queries about The Fate of the Furious )

Anyway from the list, the standouts are (as, hopefully described) not necessarily the highest scoring ones.

Manchester by the Sea
20th Century Women
A Cure for Wellness (this one is overlong with a disappointing payoff but it's bold and different, for a big-budget American studio film)
Get Out!
Gifted
Dunkirk (pleasant surprise as I usually get annoyed with Christopher Nolan films)
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets (great straightforward storytelling and incredibly cinematic)
Detroit (drags on at the end but contains one of the most terrifying screen performances I've ever seen, up there with Patrick MacGoohan in Hell Drivers and Robert Duvall in The Apostle)
The Big Sick
mother!
Bladerunner 2049
Battle of the Sexes

I put "Gifted" in bold because I am not sure whether anyone has even heard of it. Chris "Captain America" Evans as the uncle and guardian of a young girl mathematics prodigy. Overbearing grandmother insists that the be programmed to complete her late mother's unfinished theorem; Chris wants the girl to lead as normal a life as possible. Nothing original in there but it's done really well, the kid is a superb actress, and somehow this little film has stuck with me all year. Also Lindsay Duncan as the grandmother is superb, I can see a Best Supporting Actress nod for her.


Seemed to be a year of lots of "well made, worthy-but-dull" films like My Cousin Rachel, Their Finest, Certain Women, Goodbye Christopher Robin, Loving, Moonlight, Lion, Jackie, Hidden Figures....

In reply to Blue Straggler: i thought Manchester by the sea was beautifully shot but you didn't always feel you were waiting for something to happen? I was always expecting something else awful to happen

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Agree with your scoring for most of those I've watched but surprised at your categorising of Moonlight as worthy-but-dull. I thought it was fantastic. Heartbreakingly sad but ultimately hopeful.

Mother! was the best thing I watched this year, closely followed by Manchester by the Sea.

Off to see The Last Jedi on Tuesday.

In reply to wbo:


I see your point although I felt the opposite - the flashback structure tells us something BIG happens, then we see it (perfectly timed IMHO) and I certainly didn't want any more after that I got that we were watching how people deal with the aftermath.

In reply to Fraser:


Well not sure whether the OP has seen it but I have!

It’s very good and I highly recommend it.

In reply to MonkeyPuzzle:
Moonlight just didn't give me much to engage with, it wasn't a particularly original or interesting story and I didn't have a great investment in any of the characters. These (IMHO) shortcomings were not compensated for by style or impact (there was an embarrassing early attempt at a "style" shot, multiple 360 deg spins around Mahershala Ali's head, it was just clunky and distracting). To each their own and all that. I SHOULD watch it again just to see if I missed the point, but I can't muster the enthusiasm for it TBH


Weirdly, on the day of the Oscars I hastily crossed out La La Land and wrote Moonlight for Best Picture (not having seen Moonlight at the time), and look what happened later that night. Spooky!

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Cheers for the explanation - makes sense now.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Goodfellas 8.5/10?

It's pretty much an object lesson in movie-making. Perhaps it runs out of punch in the final third, but still at least 9.5, surely?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I've seen 3 of those films and I thoroughly agree with your marking for both as I really enjoyed Ghost In The Shell and Dunkirk but I felt embarrassed watching Trainspotting 2 and would give it a fat zero.I will however use your list to weed out the ones to avoid.

In reply to BnB:
If you only knock of a half point for running out of punch in the final, then maybe.
It is a bit disjointed and it can be argued that is misogyny goes beyond that of the characters. But mostly the 4K restoration I saw caused is all to be distracted by just how bad everyone’s skin looked in crisp detail

In reply to Blue Straggler:


It wasn’t so much the impossible biology (I think Adam Rutherford was a consultant but it doesn’t look as if they were listening), it was the Weyland Corp approach to biosecurity. They even made a big thing about their zero tolerance attitude to potentially dangerous alien pathogens and then kept poking the increasingly alarming protoplasm with the inevitable result and then let the bloody thing escape by not closing the door in time.

In reply to 8A machine elf:

I never saw Trainspotting so came to Trainspotting 2 ignorant of a lot of the allusions.
I thought it a good film nevertheless, an absolute hoot in places, and the final shot will stay in my memory for a very very long time.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Something/someone interrupted me watching "It's Only the End of the World" so I haven't finished it yet, but if I don't rate it massively above John Wick 2, one of the most pointless films I have ever seen, I will be very surprised.

In reply to Blue Straggler:
How do Atomic Blonde & Baywatch get the same score as The Beguiled? First two were utter dogshit. The Beguiled was not as bad I thought it might be but still a cheesy american gothic chunkier. All three get beaten by Jackie by a long chalk, and that's saying something as my usual response to Natalie Portland worthiness and subtourettic ticks which mean 'watch me I'm acting' is to want me to flay my own skin and pull out my eyes?

All the good writings gone to t.v.

D

P.S. The Great Wall 7/10. He's gone mad I tell Yee!

We have a Apple T.V. account at work with glorious Sony 4K so I've seen much of the same list I'm embarrased to say.

In reply to Dauphin:

Like

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Manchester by the sea was awesome so I'll go with that 9/10

Hacksaw ridge was pure bile so 6/10 is too generous. I'd give it 2/10

In reply to Dauphin:

I simply enjoyed The Great Wall more than expected. It delivered on its promise of being a daft colourful all-over-the-place epic with silly dragons. Some of the action scenes were truly awesome. The story did seem to have been written on the back of a postage stamp but that’s ok

In reply to Dauphin:


This is explained in the OP.
Atomic Blonde and Baywatch are scored according to what I think they were aiming to be, i.e. a stylish slightly retro comic-book spy caper, and a comedic rehash of a daft old TV show, respectively. And they both kind of achieved that, with a bunch of flaws (Baywatch made the mistake of inserting an actual thriller plotline that they seemed to want us to engage with, and IMHO would have worked better if they'd minimised that in favour of just doing more comedy sketches like a Naked Gun film. CHiPS got this right)
The Beguiled was IMHO aspiring to be high art, to be filed alongside Picnic at Hanging Rock etc. So it had loftier goals than Baywatch, and fell short of its goals.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I like it that your film of 2017, was one made in 1999. I agree though, in terms of judging a film on what it is meant to be, it is near perfection.

In reply to The New NickB:

Very surprised at that one myself! I saw it in 1999 and at the time I thought "mmm, amusing, OK, nothing classic" etc.

It came on as a "mystery movie" (you pay £4 and you don't know what your getting until it starts), and I thought "ah well, let's see..." and frankly there wasn't a thing that I would change about the film - everything just "works". It cleverly escapes any attack on plot holes, bad science etc.
The really odd thing is that the special effects are far better than they arguably needed to be - they stand up quite well by today's standards.

btw bear in mind that the highest score is not actually "the best film" (see explanation in OP)

In reply to Blue Straggler:

im with you on MbtS but 8 for transpotting2?? That was a travesty of a film imo

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Thanks for that, useful.

I've only seen T2 and Bladerunner 2, of the new films. Bit disappointed by both so I'll go for the 9s.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I like your system. The trouble with most critic's star rating systems is they pretend to quantify opinion across multiple genres .. some never intended to be more than fun ... as fact. The averaged rating systems on film sites like imdb and rbtten tomatoes are much more likely to be close to your score than most keen film critics. Judging against what such films are intended to be is useful : keep it up.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I was expecting something akin to 'The Last Emperor' when I read something predicable about the casting of Matt Damon and white washing - ten minutes in I'm like WTAF is this? Utter Shitzu. It couldn't have been worse if they cast had cast Mickey Rooney.

Some incredible well honed CGI and digital cinematography agreed.

D

In reply to Offwidth:

About 85% of my scores end up remarkably close to IMDb averages. Not by design. I only look at IMDb, as i am used to it, and I wait until more han 10k people have voted unless it is a small film.

In reply to Dauphin:

Matt Damon played a white man in The Great Wall. Mickey Rooney comparisons are not meaningful!

In reply to Kimono:


Maybe so, but perhaps no more so than was the first film. T2 did its job, it wasn’t great but didn’t pretend to be. The Begbie stuff in it was a bit shit but I liked the Renton and Spud reconciliation and attempt at redemption quite a lot so it scored highly for that despite the ludicrous action climax

In reply to Blue Straggler:

It’s a rock monster, it doesn’t have motivation.

Totally brilliant

In reply to The New NickB:

If you enjoyed Galaxy Quest then chances are you may enjoy the TV series The Orville. Big budget Star trek spoof starring Seth McFarlane. I'm about 6 episodes in and thoroughly enjoying it.

In reply to becauseitsthere:

Does MacFarlane also write The Orville? I’ve shied away from him a bit because some of his humour is a bit too puerile sometimes (by which I mean, LOTS of jokes about rape and sexual abuse, to make 13-year-olds think they are enjoying something edgy). A shame because his good stuff is good, but the aforementioned issues spoiled Ted and a good few of the (few) episodes I’ve seen of a Family Guy.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Yeah exactly - complaints about white washing not valid, but still comic book trash.

D

In reply to Blue Straggler:

He does have his critics. There are certainly a few stereotypes thrown in there but the ending message is pc. It's in a prime time slot on US TV so he's had to clean up his act. He's very likeable in it.

In reply to becauseitsthere:
Thanks
And if I remember correctly, Adrianne Palicki is in it, right?

In reply to Removed User:



I liked the first half of Hacksaw Ridge quite a lot. The home stuff (including boot camp).
The combat stuff was nothing more than generic war film action , I’d agree, but luckily at the end of the film I I had managed to remember how good the first half had been, hence the decent score

In reply to Blue Straggler:

She is. The casting is pretty spot on.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

What did people think of The Death of Stalin? We were discussing it last night and while some thought it funny I have to say that I and the three others I saw it with didn't. It was just too horrible to find the absurdity of it amusing.

Worth seeing all the same.

In reply to Blue Straggler:


no more so than the first film?? That was one of the best movies of the last century! well, more or less

In reply to Tom Valentine:

It's Only the End of the World 8/10. The most emotionally engaging film I've seen for a long time, only losing out because its stage play origins mean it hasn't got the scope to be all that impressive cinematically. Superb performances from every single actor. very surprised by its mixed reviews.
I can't bring myself to speak about John Wick 2 in the same post.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

Do you need my scoring system explaining again Tom?

In reply to Blue Straggler:

No thanks.
Just re read your explanation.
I OT E O T W now gets 9.

In reply to Removed User:

Just not very good.

But see the Florida Project if love feral kids.

In reply to Tom Valentine:

It was the first Xavier Dolan film I’d seen after a few years of the world raving on about this new young genius. I was forewarned that it wasn’t his strongest work but this did not prepare me for the predictable unoriginal typical French family drama that unfolded before me. It seemed a waste of a very talented cast. Most were good but Cotillard seemed a bit lost with her thankless role.

Not to directly compare the two films but I thought a good “family tensions” French drama was Oliver Assayas’ 2008 offering “Summer Hours”, I’d be interested on your take on that

In reply to Blue Straggler:

My surprise of 2017, one of two films I saw at "the pictures" Jumanji 9/10.

My sister hated it, but I thought it was a clever remake.

My other film was Train-spotting 2 8.5/10

In reply to krikoman:

With Karen Gillan’s costuming in Jumanji, it’s a cert that men will enjoy it more than women do

In reply to Blue Straggler:


Easy now!! Although I do have to agree.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I wasn't forewarned about anything and was unaware of the name Xavier Dolan. I just clicked the play button.
Most of my French viewing is flic films with the odd foray into arty stuff.
For an "unoriginal typical French family drama" to have me enthralled like it did, it must have been special, at least in my terms of reference.
I was by turns scrunched up on the settee covering my ears (pointlessly because of the subtitles) or railing at the screen telling people to shut up and wishing I could do it more forcefully in French. In its way it was a match for Abigail's Party.
Without the sexy dancing ( though maman did have a go).

In reply to Tom Valentine:




Apart from the two times you’ve unnecessarily done so today already

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Oh dear! You don't want to quibble, do you?
I've already been accused of pedantry in another thread nearby but here goes:
I mentioned John Wick 2 on Sunday and today, which is a Tuesday. So "two times" today is incorrect.
Whether either of my references to that film was unnecessary is a matter of opinion.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

That's one hell of a list. I've seen 3 of them in my life.
I thought Run Lola Run deserves at least an 8, both the first time I saw it, and then again with The Bays doing a live soundtrack.
The Last Jedi? Meh. Started looking at my watch an hour in... I think after 9 (or is it 10) films I am over Star Wars.

In reply to Tom Valentine:




Ok I made a mistake, it happens


I have no issue with it but you are the one who said you can’t bring yourself to mention it in the same post as the Dolan film, in a post about the Dolan film, so if you wanna start on pedantry ....

In reply to Hooo:
Saw Run Lola Run on its original release then probably once again on scratty VHS some time then this year as mystery movie .
It gets 6/10 mostly because I have no reason to care for the outcome. The characters give me nothing to root for.
I’ve seen The Bays not doing a soundtrack but just playing their own set at a festival and I regret not going to see them again doing a headline concert a few years later.
If you like them, check a band called Gallops

In reply to Blue Straggler:
You're risking breaking your own rules. Why should a film intend to make you care about the outcome? For some films 'the journey' is clearly the point.

In reply to Offwidth:


This is actually also the system that Roger Ebert used -

"When you ask a friend if Hellboy is any good, you're not asking if it's any good compared to Mystic River, you're asking if it's any good compared to The Punisher. And my answer would be, on a scale of one to four, if Superman is four, then Hellboy is three and The Punisher is two. In the same way, if American Beauty gets four stars, then The United States of Leland clocks in at about two."

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I concede.
Your brand of pedantry is more thorough than mine .

In reply to Offwidth:
Risking breaking them but not actually breaking them. I liked The Big Sick despite the leads actually being quite indulgent selfish gits. I liked Kill Bill Vols 1 and 2 despite never having been given a reason to root for The Bride. I liked Nocturnal Animals despite all the characters being privileged snobs whose problems didn’t amount to more than a heap of beans.

Run Lola Run clearly expects us to engage with Lola’s quest to help her idiotic boyfriend out of the criminal mess he’s got himself into.

It’s just not THAT good. I like the director’s vision but that alone does not raise the score (actually his vision and style work well in a load of other films that overall fall down a bit, hmmm)

In reply to planetmarshall:


I adapted it from What Hi Fi. They review £300 components, £3000 components and £30000 components so they had to level he playing field somehow.
I know a cinema ticket costs the same regardless of the film you see, so it’s not a direct adaptation but it makes sense to me

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Here is one for ya in 2018, A bad idea gone wrong.

It is VERY light hearted but great if you don't need anything dark and heavy for the evening.

youtube.com/watch?v=rFLKpZoTZsY&

In reply to Removed User:

Looks alright. I like that I have not heard of anybody in it too

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Yea, its a bit Canadian, but that's actually a good thing.

In reply to krikoman:

I saw Jumanji tonight , 8.5/10
Never saw the first one

What I thought was really good in this 2017 film was its dabbling (at a kid-friendly level) into transgender aspect of life. I know male-female bodyswap films have been done in the past but usually in certificate 15 films. What they did with Jack Black and Nick Jonas in Jumanji was actually a bit edgy for a kids’ film and I thought it was well done.

Film overall was good fun, maybe it is easier to make a good “video game film” if there was no real video game to base it on. Performances were really good (I don’t quite get Kevin Hart but maybe one needs to see a bit more of his output in order to join in with his schtick).

In reply to Blue Straggler:

The old one is probably quite dated, I'd imagine. It was good at the time I think, but the special effects helped.

As for the new one, I think it was helped by my hatred for anything Jack Black, but he was really very good in this so I was impressed by how little he was irritating me

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I thought The Death of Stalin was absolutely brilliant. As good, or better even, than Paddington 2, i.e. of its genre - though its so outrageously original that it's scarcely of any genre. Extreme black humour/biting satire (quite a long way beyond Dr Strangelove, or even Bunuel ) I thought it was nearly pitch-perfect (I repeat, nearly), in that it almost never wobbled on its outrageous balancing act of being absolutely horrific and very funny at the same time. Brilliantly directed, superb performances, totally original, very tight, really well made. Of course, not to everyone's taste (the Americans, and most lovers of conventional Hollywood-style pics will surely hate it.) 9.5.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Just seen this. Thanks. I really enjoy your reviews; you rarely hate something I like and often point me in the direction of something I've missed.

I saw very few films last year, but those I did see I pretty much agree with you on the scoring. I especially like they way you haven't been snobby about the 'disengage your brain and have fun' films, sometimes that's just what I want to do.

I'm going to have to take issue with Logan, though. It was the best film of the year, for me - it left me feeling devastated for some time after it finished! Very hard viewing, and not much like other Marvel films at all, but I though it was a bit of a masterpiece, easily worth 9+. And a stark contrast to other X-Men films.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:

The Death of Stalin is not a particularly original concept/genre in film-making! Sharp humour to depict serious or dark issues?

Also rather unfair and somewhat jingoistic to tar all Americans with your brush there, Gordon. And, in fact, lovers of "conventional Hollywood-style pics" (whatever they may be, but I think I know what you mean. Lawrence of Arabia, that kind of thing, right? )

In reply to skog:

>



I gave it 8/10! No other superhero / comic film of 2017 beat it! (I know I gave Blade 8.5/10 but that is a 1998 film!)

For the first hour it was brilliant but it hit a weak point - I don't want to do spoilers but let's just say "the group of people that might as well have had 'DEAD MEAT' tattooed on their foreheads the minute we meet them". Logan completely changes his attitude to dementia-ridden Charles, which so out of keeping with what we've seen up till then.

And it would have been bolder to keep the girl mute for much longer.

In reply to Blue Straggler:

I've never seen a more extreme example, so that it seems almost to be moving into new territory. I'm fairly certain that Stanley K would have loved it ...


Well, I was a bit naughty there, but so many Americans are just so *nice* and trusting in a rather worrying way (possibly why they don't see shit like Trump coming?)

Re. Lawrence, yes, up to a point. Because a supreme example of its genre. Except ... the story arc was not at all typical Hollywood. It was a massive 'fall from grace', depicting him in the second half as a very nasty, blood-thirsty maniac. The script, in its depiction of the uglier aspects of the 'British empire' was acerbic.

I'm always interested in this crucial thing of genre, tone and pitch. Great movies get the pitch just right, lesser movies don't (often a mighty crash). As far as I'm concerned, it can be any genre at all, but every movie has to have its virtually unique tone, I think (a bit like each Beethoven symphony). The pitch is the accuracy with which it achieves it.

Exactly the same applies with books.

[All this, btw, more or less said off the top of my head, based on years of 'working at the coal face'.]

Extra note: You say 'the Death of Stalin is not a particularly original concept/genre in film-making! Sharp humour to depict serious or dark issues?' But I would challenge you to give other examples in movie history. About the only thing I can think of that was possibly as strong was Viridiana.

In reply to Gordon Stainforth:
A busy day today so I am quite distracted but an obvious - blindingly obvious - recent one would be Four Lions.
I am sure you will come up with some grounds to shoot down my examples in favour of The Death of Stalin (which in case you didn’t notice, was based upon a graphic novel...)

In reply to Blue Straggler:

T2 is the one that stands out as a outlier for me. Which is quite a triumph, I guess, if you only have one film a violently disagree with you on (a few other quibbles).

Flaws in T2 - Begbie's relationship with his son storyline; ludicrous scene in club(?) in glasgow*; ewan mcgregor's acting; Robert Carlisle's acting; jarringly peculiar edinburgh geography (having lived/worked in or around edinburgh most of my life, I couldn't let that go); at no point did it justify it's existence, which if you are going to . that's just for starters.

*The Glasgow scam scene annoyed me on several levels but one that stood out was that, it's been done before, by Christopher Brookmyre and others. It just felt like a lazy steal.

In reply to mav:

I think T2 is another one that shows the flaw in my scoring system. It wasn’t that good yet for me it didn’t do anything too egregiously “wrong”

I may also have been drunk when I watched and appraised it

In reply to Blue Straggler:

Excellent example!

CB

In reply to mav:

People steal things all the time.