MovieChat Forums > Fear and Loathing in Las Vegas (1998) Discussion > This movie would have a 9.5/10 if

This movie would have a 9.5/10 if

posted 11 years ago by doctorcraine
35 replies | jump to latest

This movie would have a 9.5/10 if every moron who didn't even give it a solid chance and turned it off after 25 minutes didn't give it a 1/10.

Given how many of said morons populate this board a 7.8/10 is a colossal accomplishment and a testament to the greatness of this film.

The first time I saw it, I probably got 1/5th of the jokes bc it's such a visual feast and I was literally sitting stunned in the theatre. Upon multiple viewings, this is clearly a masterpiece and a beautiful adaptation of HST's source material.

If you turn ANY movie off before it's over DO NOT VOTE, bc your opinion is totally irrelevant, you didn't even complete the film.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] h_ghias 11 years ago

these ratings are always subjective
imdb has become mainstream fodder now and most people who vote now dont know anything about movies...

[–] Mr_Argumentative 11 years ago

I loved it -- but I was aware of who Hunter S. Thompson was. And I knew about Oscar Zeta Acosta, too. So it was a treat for me to watch this movie. I thought they did a good job bringing the book to life.

But I can understand why some people who haven't read Hunter S. Thompson's writings wouldn't understand or appreciate this movie.

[–] ddangtruong23 10 years ago

So Roger Ebert must not know anything about movies then, because he called this "A horrible mess of a movie"

[–] franzkabuki 10 years ago

Ebert certainly had his embarrassing blind spots. Fear & Loathing is one of them.

"facts are stupid things" - Ronald Reagan

[–] mystereaux 10 years ago

It's like a painting you never liked until you learned what the intent was. You'll be utterly unable to think yourself back into a state of not understanding it. If you enjoyed the book you'll consider this film a work of artistic genius. If not, maybe it's not for you, yet. One size may fit all, but it suits few.

[–] PatrickBatman 10 years ago

The same Roger Ebert who called Speed 2 a great film?

Ebert is my favorite critic, but he made some terrible reviews (not because I don't agree with them, but because he was either too nit-picky or ignoring a movie's flaws and judging it by something else)

[–] taran-rod 8 years ago

I still can't get over his retarded review of Usual Suspects... he really didn't get the subtility...

[–] houstonfinny 10 years ago

The same Roger Ebert who gave...

Low:
A Clockwork Orange 2/4
The Usual Suspects 1.5/4
Dead Man 1.5/4
Brazil 2/4
Blue Velvet 1/4
Full Metal Jacket 2.5/4
Dogville 2/4
The Elephant Man 2/4
An American Werewolf In London 2/4
Leon: The Professional 2.5/4
Fast Times at Ridgemont High 1/4
Papillon 2/4

High:
The Happening 3/4
Anaconda 3.5/4
Rocky and Bullwinkle 3/4
Junior 3.5/4
Cop and a Half 3/4
Congo 3/4
The Manhattan Project 4/4
Speed 2 3/4
Knowing 4/4

Roger Ebert is not the be all and end all of film quality. If he was we'd all happily accept that Anaconda and Speed 2 are better films than A Clockwork Orange and Full Metal Jacket.
I respect the man, he was, after all, the first celebrity critic. But I've found that i disagree with the majority of his reviews.
Roger Ebert reviews are certainly no measure of a film's quality.

[–] ddangtruong23 10 years ago

I'm not saying this is a bad movie, I'm saying that disregarding anyone who don't like the same movie as you do as "not knowing anything about movies" is moronic

[–] gumbussy 9 years ago

To houstonfinny,

I just saw this article today & I have to tell you it's a brilliant posting. I respect Roger Ebert as most do, but he had some funky quirks with respect to some films.

Nothing more to add. I just like to compliment an insightful & mature posting on this mostly "troll-worthy" collection that is IMDB.

GUMBUSSY

[–] MovieManCin2 (26342) 4 years ago

I agree with Mr. Ebert.

😎

[–] sulla-3 9 years ago

What a pretentious crappy comment. You have to be a film buff to comment. You utter Pratt! Get your head out of your arse and look around. If anyone watches a movie, they are entitled to an opinion, pinhead! OMG..... God save the world from movie snobs, music snobs and all the other idiots out there!

Nec amicus officium nec hostis iniuriam mihi intulit, quo in toto non reddidi - Sulla

[–] PatrickBatman 10 years ago

AGREED!

[–] papatoony-33-670609 10 years ago

Watched the entire thing (regretfully) and would rate it a 3.5/10 if I could. I feel dumber for having finished the movie.

[–] Sidewindr 9 years ago

It's not the movie that's responsible for your "dumbness".. It's a certainty that you are not any "dumber" than before you watched the movie, it's just not possible.

[–] papatoony-33-670609 9 years ago

Bless your heart, sweet pea.

[–] jeginvest 9 years ago

It is not that you are dumber after watching the movie, you have just shown to the world how dumb you are. Rating it that low is horrible, maybe a 6.5 at the lowest, if you do not get any of the inferences.

[–] papatoony-33-670609 9 years ago

You're so right. I'm utterly humiliated. How will I ever show my face in public again?

[–] theSwedeking 9 years ago

I like Fear and Loathing, but the Metacritic (41) and RottenTomatoes (49%) ratings suggest a problem beyond the quality of the raters. If anything, the IMDb rating is high.

[–] franzkabuki 9 years ago

A lot of people just seem to lack the tools to properly process Gilliam's "explosive extremism" as someone described it, the outrageous absurdity and the colorful, relentless barrage of hallucinatory antisocial behaviour.

"facts are stupid things" Ronald Reagan

[–] Tommy711 (134) 2 months ago

Some people don't watch movies to really have to dig deep into the nitty gritty of 'why was this movie like this?'. I gave it a 5/10. I guess, judging from other posts and comments, you have to read Hunter S. Thompson books and stuff to get it. I don't read books cause I'm dumb af.

It's one of those 'cult classics' but I'm not in the cult nor want to be. It was fairly original, and good acting by both main characters (and good comedy at times), but I'm not a huge fan of artsy-fartsy day-in-the-life movies, tbh.

[–] theSwedeking 9 years ago

9.5 would make this the number 1 movie on imdb. I liked the movie but I have no problem with the rating. 7.7 isn't bad by any means.
Considering that imdb ratings generally range from something like 5.5-8.5

6.5 is *
7.5 is **
8.5 is ***

or maybe

5.5 is *
6.5 is **
7.5 is ***
8.5 is ****

Either way, the imdb metric is pretty sh*tty. A lot of movies end up lumped in that 7-8 range... just look at how many of the top 250 have an 8.0.

[–] cthulhulurks 9 years ago

Look at how much wrthless crap is rated anywhere from 5 to 10 and you wouldnt ever use mass rating as a guide.

my vote history:
http://www.imdb.com/user/ur13767631/ratings

[–] oocpaka 9 years ago

Lol, what a bigot you are.. I liked this movie, but there is nothing great about it, it is stupid, retarded, pointless and funny, definitely not for major audience. True rating is probably around 5-6 out of 10.
I turn off movies all the time after 10-15 minutes if I think they are *beep* there is nothing wrong with that. Telling people that they can't have an opinion without finishing some idiotic movie they don't like makes you a certified douche bag, congrats! 😀😀

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] taran-rod 8 years ago

Agree!

[–] taran-rod 8 years ago

"it is stupid, retarded, pointless"

What? If you say that, please don't rate it neither...

[–] djryback 9 years ago

I completely agree. If any movie deserves it, it's this one!
Pure film art.