Database page: Uno a uno sin piedad - The Spaghetti Western Database
Bill wants to take revenge on the murderers of his father. This was Colonel of the Confederate Army. This is said to have stolen the war chest. His son wants to find the money and wants it back again.
I have seen the film several years ago on television, and … fell asleep in between. The level is appalling and the location looks very cheap.
Very boring and bad actors. For fans of Fidani recommended.
What is your opinion?
Spoletini is pretty good here. The rest is pure mediocrity. Overall still 6/10
Cannot remember what I think of this one. When this is the case for me the film is only average most of time.
A mediocre film gets a 6/10?
6/10 is ‘just okay’, ‘sufficient’ in the Dutch (school) rating system, I guess BL is referring to it
10 = perfect (extremely rare)
9 = outstanding (still rare)
8 = very good
7 = good
6 = mediocre, sufficient
5 = mediocre, insufficient
4 = bad
3 = rubbish
2/1/0 = not worth mentioning
In school 5,5 becomes 6, so means ‘sufficient’
In Belgium exams are rated on a scale 0-100 (sometimes 0-20)
51 is sufficient; on the 0-20 scale, you need 11 points
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:5, topic:2304”]8 = very good
7 = good
6 = mediocre, sufficient[/quote]
Only a small step between very good and mediocre … but a big step for mankind.
Yes, that´s how I rate them. But perhaps I should have said: Spoletini and Marchent manage to lift an otherwises mediocre affair.
Mediocre means middelmatig in Dutch; average. I have reviewed more than 800 films with an average of 5,3. So the extra 0,7 is for the efforts of the aforementioned pair. Also, PLL portrays an annoying character and does this rather well.
You know where to get that French DVD?
Amazon France perhaps ?
I usually can’t buy from Amazon but I’ll check.
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:5, topic:2304”]6/10 is ‘just okay’, ‘sufficient’ in the Dutch (school) rating system, I guess BL is referring to it
10 = perfect (extremely rare)
9 = outstanding (still rare)
8 = very good
7 = good
6 = mediocre, sufficient
5 = mediocre, insufficient
4 = bad
3 = rubbish
2/1/0 = not worth mentioning
In school 5,5 becomes 6, so means ‘sufficient’
In Belgium exams are rated on a scale 0-100 (sometimes 0-20)
51 is sufficient; on the 0-20 scale, you need 11 points[/quote]
I’m not Dutch but that would be my system for a 1-10 rating too.
Not for me.
Where’s the difference between bad, rubbish, not worth mentioning? Many words for the same opinion.
Also not a great difference between perfect and outstanding. And if 8 is already very good …
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:5, topic:2304”]6/10 is ‘just okay’, ‘sufficient’ in the Dutch (school) rating system, I guess BL is referring to it
10 = perfect (extremely rare)
9 = outstanding (still rare)
8 = very good
7 = good
6 = mediocre, sufficient
5 = mediocre, insufficient
4 = bad
3 = rubbish
2/1/0 = not worth mentioning
In school 5,5 becomes 6, so means ‘sufficient’
In Belgium exams are rated on a scale 0-100 (sometimes 0-20)
51 is sufficient; on the 0-20 scale, you need 11 points[/quote]
According to this classification, Uno a uno sin piedad is for me: 2 / 10.
6/10 is very high. Perhaps I missed something in the 10 minutes, when I slept. 
2/10 ?
I reserve that mark for the excruciatingly bad ones that make me want to jump out the window, or poke my eyes out.
Granted, the film is not too memorable, but it’s cheap fun. And yes, I’m a Fidani fan. The characters were quite alright and the humour and dumb fist fights managed to entertain to a certain degree as well. Overall this makes it good enough for a sufficent mark from me.
[quote=“Stanton, post:13, topic:2304”]Not for me.
Where’s the difference between bad, rubbish, not worth mentioning? Many words for the same opinion.
Also not a great difference between perfect and outstanding. And if 8 is already very good …[/quote]
Personally, as a teacher, I always felt a ‘3’ was harsh enough, it’s not necessary to add insult to injury
I only gave people a ‘0’ for fraud (did that several times) or not showing up at an exam
I always give students 1 point for showing up, 1 point for trying, and 1 point for the very least they had right
On the other hand, I have never awarded somebody with a 10 (for an official exam) in my career, and only occasionally awarded somebody with a 9
Talking about movies: many reference books use a star system, officially a 0-**** system, but Maltin only uses BOMB (0) for the bottem of the barrel, and starts his normal rating system with *1/2
The system seems to bee, more or less:
**** = masterpiece
***1/2 = very good
*** = good
**1/2 = average, sufficient
** = average, insufficient
*1/2 = bad
I use a 0-5 rating system here when I say something about movies I have watched recently
***** = masterpiece
**** = excellent
*** = okay
** = below average
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:16, topic:2304”]I use a 0-5 rating system here when I say something about movies I have watched recently
***** = masterpiece
**** = excellent
*** = okay
** = below average
[quote=“scherpschutter, post:16, topic:2304”]I use a 0-5 rating system here when I say something about movies I have watched recently
***** = masterpiece
**** = excellent
*** = okay
** = below average
I use the 0 to 5 system similar, only that 4 is good, not excellent.
Again: Excellent and masterpiece are more or less the same ratings for me. And then the gap is too big to an ok film. Doesn’t make sense for me.
But my personal 0 to 10 rating is absolutely different as some may remember. For that I give points for every step of quality (=fun).
0 bad
2 mediocre
4 ok
6 good
10 excellent
Every film beneath 4 is a waste of time and a bore.
But to avoid confusion for the forum I use now the 0 to 5 as described above.
But stanton, you are not the one to redefine mediocrity. It has medio (´middle´) in it. So out of 10 mediocrity is 5,5 providing the lowest possible score is 1. Unless of course it’s not so much the rating system, but the average movie you’re talking about. But I doubt that you think the average film gets 2/10. You would have given up on watching films if you felt that way.
As I explained I give points for every extra level of quality. It’s not about finding a middle and calling this mediocre. A mediocre (which is the same as average) film is mainly boring and doesn’t have much to offer, and therefore gets only 1 or 2 points in my system.
And as I said I’m doing this for myself, for my personal lists. And I need this lists. First it was simply marking films, cause I often couldn’t remember If I have watched a film or not when they were again aired in the TV. The logical next step was to give points to avoid watching turkeys again. And to compare films I have re-watched with my older opinions.
Yes generally that’s right, that a mediocre film somehow represents the middle. the rest I don’t understand. Why should I give up watching films if the average gets 2/10?
Average films are a waste of time, and I always try to avoid them, just like bad films. There are more watchable and good films around than i can watch in my whole life.
Only for the SWs I have watched more crap than necessary.
