PDA

View Full Version : Movies that everyone loves, that you hate



DeadEye
08-31-2002, 11:56 AM
Yeah. Post here movies that were well-received or made lots of money that you absolutely couldn't bear to watch, either from overall stupidity, bad acting, bad plot, or any number of reasons.
For me, I'd say:
-Titanic
-The Sixth Sense
-Unbreakable
-Signs
-Independence Day
-I've not seen Harry Potter, and heaven forbid I say what I think of it, because no matter what I say I'm sure it'll start a flame war. :D
-I was about to put LOTR into this category, but upon watching the DVD a second time I realize that it's actually a very good movie!!!!! :D:D:D

bigbarada
08-31-2002, 12:45 PM
Y'know I was thinking about starting a thread about this very subject and the top movies on my list would be:

Unbreakable
Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
The Matrix

Glad you gave LOTR a second chance, from what I have heard and read in the books, the next two films should be much more action packed as (like in the books) the first film was just set-up. So don't hesitate to check out T2T this December.:)

As for Harry Potter, I haven't seen it yet either and I am very adamant about not expressing an opinion about a movie until I have watched it at least once. I don't really see how you can hate (or love) a movie you have never watched.

DeadEye
08-31-2002, 12:52 PM
BigB,

I never hated LOTR at all. I merely, at first, didn't see what the big deal was since I hadn't read the books. But now I think it's really awesome, and am looking forward to the Two Towers. :D
Yeah, Unbreakable was on my list too.
I didn't like Crouching Tiger...all those subtitles gave me a headache! :D
And as for the Matrix...it had one good scene (the lobby shootout) which was about two minutes long! Not to mention the fact that Neo was using 9mm Skorpion machine pistols but the casings that landed on the floor were from .223 Remington rounds...:rolleyes:
I don't see why people go apesh*t over that movie.

bigbarada
08-31-2002, 01:09 PM
Other movies:

Armageddon
Space Cowboys (my dad and brother both love this movie and I have watched it several times and can't see the appeal)
X-Men

I do need to give Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon and Unbreakable another chance in all fairness. I watched them at my brother's house in the middle of the day with two screaming toddlers running around and his wife cleaning house, so I missed quite a bit of both films.

QLD
08-31-2002, 02:47 PM
Armageddon
Independance Day
Flintstones
The Crow
Pearl Harbor
Varsity Blues
Romeo & Juliet (DiCaprio)
Ever After
The Piano
Twister
Dante's Peak
Me, Myself, and Irene
Ace Ventura
The Mask
Scary Movie
Scream 2 and 3
Castaway
Pay It Forward
Batman and Robin
Batman Forever
Tin Cup
Con Air
Dead Poets Society
Monty Python and the Holy Grail
Life of Brian
Gone With the Wind
English Patient
The Bodyguard
xXx
Jurassic Park 2 & 3


I could probably go on all day, so I will stop here....and continue later perhaps.

And BigB, You should Definately giving Crouching Tiger another chance. It's very very good, but something you need the right atmosphere and right mood for.


And on a side note, I really like The Matrix, Titanic, Signs, Sixth Sense, and Harry Potter. :)

Nexu
08-31-2002, 03:36 PM
Royal Tenenbaums. What in the world? :rolleyes:

bigbarada
08-31-2002, 03:47 PM
The Big Lebowski (I had to just shut it off halfway through, I couldn't stand it, but I am told that the ending redeemed it, but I am just not sure if I can sit through all that again)

Being John Malkovich (gets my award for being the most repulsive film ever made)

Austin Powers 2: The Spy Who Shagged Me (I've never laughed so little while watching a so-called comedy, I had to go see Ep1 a fourth time just to get the taste out of my mouth)

2-1B
08-31-2002, 03:49 PM
Fight Club :rolleyes:

QLD
08-31-2002, 03:57 PM
I would like to add Big Lebowski to my list as well.

I am in the middle on Fight Club. Didn't hate it, didn't love it.

I really liked Royal Tennenbaums. Almost bought it the other day. I may later! ANd I thought AP2 was OK......but just OK.

Needles
08-31-2002, 09:17 PM
last man standing
xXx
and finally Godfather 2

2-1B
08-31-2002, 09:36 PM
Needles, do you like GF 1 and hate GF 2?
Or do you dislike both, hating just the second one? :confused:

Lowly Bantha Cleaner
08-31-2002, 10:48 PM
For some reason I thought Rocky was just an average picture. It did win a best movie Oscar though so I am probably wrong.

Everybody in my family is enamored about the movie Tombstone. I never saw why they have liked it.

I know there is a thread about movies everyone hates, but you love, but I am going to say everybody hated "Mystery Men," but I really liked it. Ben Stiller was full of corny one-liners and I love corny one-liners.

2-1B
08-31-2002, 11:10 PM
Thanks for reminding me, LBC! :D
I totally hated Mystery Men after several poeple told me it was good. :)

stillakid
08-31-2002, 11:51 PM
Hate is a strong word so there aren't too many of those. "Dislike" or "can't see the popular appeal of" is a better description for me:

1. There's Something About Mary. Stooopid, contrived, juvenile tripe. Extremely laborious scene setups for a series of weak payoffs. Then it lapses into just plain ol' ridiculousness when the friend starts having that rash or whatever it was. Dumb. Dumb. Dumb.

2. Harry Potter. Great visualizations and interesting "universe," but atrocious storytelling and plot development.

3. The Phantom Menace. See Harry Potter notes.

4. The Lord of the Rings. One excuse after another to show off different fairies and other fantasy elements. Contrived plotline. Just why does that kid have to take the ring anywhere in the first place? It's never explained, and yes, I'm well aware that there are two more movies on the way, but there's no reason to leave a major motivation like that out of the loop, especially when you're trying to attract more than just the previously established fan base. Maybe this would have been far more interesting when I was like 10 years old, but now I just don't get it.

5. Ace Ventura, Pet Detective. Okay, the guy has his moments, but not enough of them to carry for an hour and a half. But how can you argue with a gazillionaire? He found the dumbest audience niche he could and took their money to the bank.

6. Austin Powers. At least #1 and #2. Funny moments, but terrible plot tying them together. Elizabeth Hurley and Heather Graham salvage the watchablity of both. #3's "babe" wasn't such a draw, but the jokes were a bit funnier albeit still strung together with a poorly conceived plotline.

7. Spy Kids. I expected so much more from this after hearing all the hype. It really is a good concept but it was clearly dumbed down because studio execs (just like our own GL) think that kids are blithering idiots. What could have been a good movie was ruined by a Saturday Morning mentality. "Thumbs?" Oh brother.

8. Air Force One. Can anyone say "cookie cutter?"

9. The Silence of the Lambs. Probably a really good book (I haven't read it), but the story I saw onscreen was weak at best. There was no true motivation ever to have the cop return to Hopkins for "advice." Beyond a bunch of meaningless generalities, Hopkins offered nothing concrete that would have logically led to the suspect being caught. Just more superficial "shock value" eye candy.

10. Signs. I took me a whole extra day to realize that he was trying to make a horror movie. I sat there the whole movie trying to figure out what the hell those opening credits were supposed to be conveying. When my neighbor (a girl) told me that she was scared the entire time, all the pieces fell into place. I went in looking for a sci-fi movie, and here Shymallalalnaldkaldsjkafjsdannn was handing off his version of horror/suspense. If that's the case, then I didn't buy into it for a second.

11. The Matrix. Again, I went in looking for a sci fi movie and found that they ruined a great concept by dumping some farcical Kung Fu crap all over it. Several screenwriter friends of mine who also were working on similar sci fi concepts all dumped their work into the trash the day Matrix came out. The brothers f'd it up, but they got there first. On the other hand, martial arts fans I know went in looking for great moves which they got wrapped up in a plot only fleshed out enough to get from one action sequence to the next. They were totally satisfied as they went in looking for Kung Fu with the story being secondary.


But, oh well. The "audience" is a strange and evolving beast. No one can predict what will strike a chord or why. You can critique success, but you can't really argue with it.:rolleyes:

bigbarada
08-31-2002, 11:58 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
4. The Lord of the Rings. One excuse after another to show off different fairies and other fantasy elements. Contrived plotline. Just why does that kid have to take the ring anywhere in the first place? It's never explained, and yes, I'm well aware that there are two more movies on the way, but there's no reason to leave a major motivation like that out of the loop, especially when you're trying to attract more than just the previously established fan base. Maybe this would have been far more interesting when I was like 10 years old, but now I just don't get it.


Maybe if you actually paid attention to the movie you wouldn't sound so ignorant and uninformed.:rolleyes: The motivation for the "kid" (shows how much you did pay attention, he wasn't a kid, he was a Hobbit) to destroy the Ring was covered more than adequately.

Oh yeah I would suggest reading the books too, but that would imply actual effort on your part to appreciate something. And we all know that unless it's presented to you on a silver platter, it isn't worth knowing is it?:rolleyes:

And show me one instance in the movie where we actually saw a "fairy." There wasn't one was there?:stupid:

stillakid
09-01-2002, 12:30 AM
Originally posted by bigbarada


Maybe if you actually paid attention to the movie you wouldn't sound so ignorant and uninformed.:rolleyes: The motivation for the "kid" (shows how much you did pay attention, he wasn't a kid, he was a Hobbit) to destroy the Ring was covered more than adequately.

Oh yeah I would suggest reading the books too, but that would imply actual effort on your part to appreciate something. And we all know that unless it's presented to you on a silver platter, it isn't worth knowing is it?:rolleyes:

And show me one instance in the movie where we actually saw a "fairy." There wasn't one was there?:stupid:

Man, a mention of LOTR draws you like a bug to a light at night. Relax for a few minutes, will ya?

First, I'm not required to read the book to appreciate the story. The question was about movies...not what the book intended. If the filmmaker can't adequately convey the story from words to screen, then it's open season on his efforts. Maybe the books are fantastic, but the film left me with no desire to spend the time to fill in the spaces that are so evidently missing.

No, I'm not ignorant and I saw the same movie that you did. There was not an explanation of why that "kid" (hobbit, whatever, he still looks like a kid for pete's sake. Spock ears or whatever make him look a little different maybe...but, whatever...) has to be the one. It just says he was "chosen" and it's left at that for all intents and purposes.

And that whole sequence with the glowing people (Kate Blanchett I believe it was) are fairies or something of that ilk. Fairies, goblins, cyclops creatures, magic wands...that's what I'm getting at with that comment. All that "dungeons and dragons" stuff. If it appeals to you, great, have a good time.

So get off your high horse about the story, accept that it's not made of platinum, and realize that not everyone is required by law to like it before the LOTR Police squad gets sent out everytime a disparaging remark is made about your precious epic.

JesusFreak
09-01-2002, 12:32 AM
Harry Potter - Love the books, but the movie just didnt tell the story very well.

Spy Kids - I agree with you stillakid, the thumb thumbs were one of the stupidest ideas I had ever seen, it was an ok movie, but the fooglies (sp?) and thumb thumbs kinda ruined it for me.

Shrek - The first time I saw it it was an ok movie, but now I absolutely detest it.

bigbarada
09-01-2002, 12:43 AM
Originally posted by stillakid


Man, a mention of LOTR draws you like a bug to a light at night. Relax for a few minutes, will ya?

First, I'm not required to read the book to appreciate the story. The question was about movies...not what the book intended. If the filmmaker can't adequately convey the story from words to screen, then it's open season on his efforts. Maybe the books are fantastic, but the film left me with no desire to spend the time to fill in the spaces that are so evidently missing.

No, I'm not ignorant and I saw the same movie that you did. There was not an explanation of why that "kid" (hobbit, whatever, he still looks like a kid for pete's sake. Spock ears or whatever make him look a little different maybe...but, whatever...) has to be the one. It just says he was "chosen" and it's left at that for all intents and purposes.

And that whole sequence with the glowing people (Kate Blanchett I believe it was) are fairies or something of that ilk. Fairies, goblins, cyclops creatures, magic wands...that's what I'm getting at with that comment. All that "dungeons and dragons" stuff. If it appeals to you, great, have a good time.

So get off your high horse about the story, accept that it's not made of platinum, and realize that not everyone is required by law to like it before the LOTR Police squad gets sent out everytime a disparaging remark is made about your precious epic.

You know what? Tolkien is not for everyone, too bad you can't enjoy it; but that shouldn't surprise me.:rolleyes:

Beast
09-01-2002, 01:40 AM
Stillakid needs everything forcefed to him and prechewed before he can enjoy anything obviously. Everything should be tied up in the very first movie, and no questions should be left to tickle the viewers mind and make them guess and wonder as what is to come. I'm suprised he likes Empire Strikes Back, because that movie leaves questions for the audience and doesn't wrap everything up. All I can say to that, is make your own movie if nothing satisfies you. :rolleyes: :p

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

bigbarada
09-01-2002, 01:55 AM
Careful, we don't want to be accused of "cliquish" behavior again.:rolleyes:

But I agree JJB, the mere fact that someone doesn't even try to understand the basics of the story ("Well he looks like a kid to me!":stupid: ) just goes to show that they had no intention of liking it, no matter how good it turned out.

Beast
09-01-2002, 02:06 AM
Agreed BigB, but anyone that goes out of their way to watch a movie with blinders on and ignore the story, I'm sorry but I can't appreciate or accept any opinion stating the movie sucked. That's like reviewing a meal, and not tasting the food.

I haven't even ever read the LOTR's books, and I could understand what was going on and what the story was. People that go to movies and ignore the story, and then just complain about the movie afterwards, are sad IMHO.

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

bigbarada
09-01-2002, 02:29 AM
My parents knew nothing of the LOTR story but loved the movie. Of course, they had their questions, but I believe stimulating people to think and wonder is the first sign of a truly great movie. What's the fun of having everything served up on a silver platter? Sure you walk out of the theater satisfied, but with no urge whatsoever to watch the film again.

DeadEye
09-01-2002, 07:47 AM
I was very satisfied by my second viewing of FOTR. I was amused by all the people that thought that would be the only LOTR movie. :rolleyes:

Hey stillakid, maybe Frodo looks like a kid because Elijah Wood, who plays him, is a kid! He's like 18 or 19 IIRC.

JON9000
09-01-2002, 01:18 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
The Lord of the Rings. One excuse after another to show off different fairies and other fantasy elements. Contrived plotline. Just why does that kid have to take the ring anywhere in the first place? It's never explained, and yes, I'm well aware that there are two more movies on the way, but there's no reason to leave a major motivation like that out of the loop, especially when you're trying to attract more than just the previously established fan base.

Frodo has to take the Ring to Mount Doom because it is only there that it can be unmade. Frodo is the Ringbearer because Hobbits show an extraordinary resilience to its powers over one's mind. Notice how Gandalf and Galadriel, powerful beings, dare not touch it due to its corruptive power. Look what it did to Boromir. Anyone other than a Hobbit would get to the precipice on Mount Doom and find himself unable to toss it. Wil Frodo be able to at the moment of truth? Watch on! Give it another chance.

I agree with Deadeye- I cannot stomach Titanic nor Independence Day. Both pander, IMHO. :rolleyes: Also, I just saw a movie that got good reviews. "Boogie Nights" is just lame, although the TK-421 reference was cool.

JON9000
09-01-2002, 01:22 PM
Originally posted by stillakid

First, I'm not required to read the book to appreciate the story.


Very true, but you might find a map of Middle Earth to be useful while watching the film. I kept picturing it in my mind as I watched the movie. I'm sure there are some online somewhere. I'll bet BigB knows where some are.

derek
09-01-2002, 05:21 PM
Caesar,

do you know anyone who liked fight club? i loved it, but have yet to find someone who likes it. i know of people who rented it and never got half way through it.:)

bigbarada
09-01-2002, 05:28 PM
I'm not Caesar, but I liked Fight Club.:) Mind you I didn't love it, but I thought it made some pretty good points on a few issues.

Prince Xizor
09-01-2002, 05:32 PM
Originally posted by derek


do you know anyone who liked fight club? i loved it, but have yet to find someone who likes it. i know of people who rented it and never got half way through it.:)

All of my friends have seen the movie and loved it. Almost everybody I know has liked, and if they don't like it, its because they haven't seen the movie.

derek
09-01-2002, 05:36 PM
maybe i need some more friends???:D

i disagreed with the message of "fight club", that man should return to a primative society, but i loved the fact that the film actually had a message, unlike so many films today.:)

i also liked "american psycho", which none of my friends liked.

stillakid
09-01-2002, 05:39 PM
BB and JJB, you guys are hilarious! Thanks for the entertainment. By the way, I didn't realize that they were selling stock options in LOTR. Just how much have you purchased anyway?


JF, I forgot all about Shrek. I thought I was the only one alive who didn't see the magic. While the story was alright, as well as some of the jokes, the style of animation isn't my cup of tea and really threw me off.


But then again, the boys sure told me off, so I guess anything that I don't like just means that I'm a complete idiot because I don't have the capacity to appreciate the finer things in life. BB and JJB's ability to compartmentalize people and draw tremendously large stereotypes just kills me. What a great Christian attitude, by the way. (f'ing hypocrites) :p Instead of listening to what people (read: me, it's now apparent that they're on a personal vendetta) they defend their own preferences regardless of any divergent opinions. I used to get upset about it, but now it's become so ludicrous, it's funny. :D

The True Maul
09-01-2002, 06:12 PM
Harry Potter
Shrek
And I forgot the other two.:)

bigbarada
09-01-2002, 06:41 PM
Originally posted by stillakid
BB and JJB, you guys are hilarious! Thanks for the entertainment. By the way, I didn't realize that they were selling stock options in LOTR. Just how much have you purchased anyway?


JF, I forgot all about Shrek. I thought I was the only one alive who didn't see the magic. While the story was alright, as well as some of the jokes, the style of animation isn't my cup of tea and really threw me off.


But then again, the boys sure told me off, so I guess anything that I don't like just means that I'm a complete idiot because I don't have the capacity to appreciate the finer things in life. BB and JJB's ability to compartmentalize people and draw tremendously large stereotypes just kills me. What a great Christian attitude, by the way. (f'ing hypocrites) :p Instead of listening to what people (read: me, it's now apparent that they're on a personal vendetta) they defend their own preferences regardless of any divergent opinions. I used to get upset about it, but now it's become so ludicrous, it's funny. :D

Y'know, when I first saw this thread, I knew it was just a matter of time before SOMEONE listed LOTR as a movie they hated (I was just surprised it wasn't DeadEye). So getting angry when someone did express dislike was childish and ignorant. For that I apologize. Whether you accept that apology or not is up to you. I just want you to know that I have regretted my personal attacks against you from the moment I woke up this morning (after having a night's sleep to cool off). I really do need to understand that people like and dislike different things and there is really nothing anyone can do to change that. My tirade probably did more to damage your impression of LOTR more than anything else. I would change my posts above to pretend this never happened but I will leave them for people to visit and see what a jerk I can be when I let my temper get away with me.

Again, I would like to offer my apology and I completely understand if you don't accept it.

DeadEye
09-01-2002, 06:53 PM
I accept your apology, BigB, because on occasion you've been a jerk to me too! ;):D

Anyway, I can't help but wonder why you said you were surprised it wasn't me who said I hated LOTR. I've already mentioned at least twice in this thread that I liked it. And I can understand your vicious nature towards people that dislike LOTR...it's a very important thing to you...I'm the same towards people that think consoles are better than PCs.

bigbarada
09-01-2002, 07:02 PM
Originally posted by DeadEye
I accept your apology, BigB, because on occasion you've been a jerk to me too! ;):D

Anyway, I can't help but wonder why you said you were surprised it wasn't me who said I hated LOTR. I've already mentioned at least twice in this thread that I liked it. And I can understand your vicious nature towards people that dislike LOTR...it's a very important thing to you...I'm the same towards people that think consoles are better than PCs.

Oh, that was just little joke refering your old "I finally saw LOTR!" thread.:) Just sort of a friendly jab.:o

Besides, who on this site hasn't been a jerk to you at one point or another?:p

Anyways, the whole point of my last post was to explain that I really have no good reason for having a vicious nature towards people who don't like LOTR. Like Star Wars, it isn't real and thus shouldn't be something that I get so upset about. It happens to lots of people, I know, but that is no excuse for my behavior. Period.



Oh yeah, and consoles are better than PCs.;):D:D

Rogue II
09-01-2002, 07:15 PM
Hate(the first movies that come to mind):
Armageddon - Made my brain hurt.
The Perfect Storm - Too much whining
Jurassic Park 2 - Made my want my $7 back
The Mummy 1 & 2 - I couldn't finish watching them
American Beauty
E.T. -Does that make me evil? I've actually seen it more times in Spanish than in English. "E.T. telefono casa!"
Broken Arrow

Avoided (because I know I wouldn't like them):
Jurassic park 3 - I heard its better than JP2, but so are most "Earnest goes to..." movies.
Titantic - I saw an hour long documentary on the ship, that was enough for me, thanks.
Scorpion King
Pearl Harbour - I saw Tora! Tora! Tora! CGI and special effects don't impress me.

DeadEye
09-01-2002, 09:33 PM
Originally posted by bigbarada

Oh yeah, and consoles are better than PCs.;):D:D

I really hope you don't mean that.

QLD
09-01-2002, 10:07 PM
*avoids being baited into console vs. PC discussion AGAIN*

DeadEye
09-01-2002, 10:33 PM
*Laughs*

Anyway, I don't mind if this thread continues where it's headed...just make sure to transfer it to video games! Talk about your off-topic mutation...:D

JesusFreak
09-02-2002, 12:30 AM
Consoles are slightly better than PC, only slightly because you can download emulators and roms on PC, I never would have been able to experience the Shining Force series if it wasn't for my Genesis Emulator on PC

bigbarada
09-02-2002, 02:04 AM
Originally posted by stillakid
11. The Matrix. Again, I went in looking for a sci fi movie and found that they ruined a great concept by dumping some farcical Kung Fu crap all over it. Several screenwriter friends of mine who also were working on similar sci fi concepts all dumped their work into the trash the day Matrix came out. The brothers f'd it up, but they got there first. On the other hand, martial arts fans I know went in looking for great moves which they got wrapped up in a plot only fleshed out enough to get from one action sequence to the next. They were totally satisfied as they went in looking for Kung Fu with the story being secondary.


I feel the same as you about The Matrix. I went with two friends of mine and when it was all over, they acted like they had just had a life-altering experience. If we weren't all sitting next to each other (keeping the one-seat between each guy "safe zone":) ) I would have sworn that we had seen a different movie.

However, I am interested in your comment about friends of yours throwing away their scripts-in-progress. Did you get to read any of them, if so were any of them any good?

DeadEye, I do prefer consoles for games and I like to keep my computers memory free for other applications (like art programs and many large picture files). Plus I don't like the whole compatability question when you buy a computer game. With a console, as long as the brand name matches, you don't have to worry about having enough RAM or processor speed to run it. However, I really don't play video/computer games enough to really have a preference.

QLD
09-02-2002, 02:26 AM
I like the Matrix a lot. At the time, it was very fresh, a nice change of pace to action movies. WHile the story was a little lite for Sci-Fi fans, for action fans, it was very detailed :)

But I was thoroughly entertained by the movie. I wouldn't say it was the best movie I have ever seen, not by a longshot, but a very entertaining one.

stillakid
09-02-2002, 10:42 AM
Originally posted by bigbarada
However, I am interested in your comment about friends of yours throwing away their scripts-in-progress. Did you get to read any of them, if so were any of them any good?

Life's too short to be angry over disagreements about movies. :)


Anyway, the scripts-in-progress thing: the Matrix concept isn't new, as I'm sure you know. THX-1138 and Logan's Run, just to name a couple, are kind of cult-following type movies from the past. It was time for some kind of modern update to that idea of an entire society captured within some kind of manufactured "world" that it wasn't even aware of. With the advent of VR in the '90's, it was only a matter of time until somebody sold a script to the studios. Most of the scripts (that I saw) were a lot more serious (mine was) and the writers worked hard at creating a story that made sense from one scene to another.

But the W Bros. exploited the concept only as a way to string together Kung Fu fights, which made little sense in terms of the overall idea. I know that there are "movie reasons" why, but I could never figure out why this huge computer program felt the need to "fight" these "simulations" with Kung Fu instead of just zapping them out of existence. Essentially, when you create an alternate reality like this, there are a new set of groundrules for what is possible, and the W. Bros saw fit to alter their own setup whenever it got in the way of dropping in some gratiuitous action. In fact, as one of my associates put it, they were still explaining the setup right up to the last frame of the movie. Maybe there will be room in the future for somebody else to take a stab at the concept, but it won't happen until this Matrix bs clears the field.

But, I'm sure fans of the film could try to drive me back in a corner on this one just as you do with LOTR. I read a lot of scripts-in-progress for people but I insist that beforehand that they tell me what they are trying to accomplish with it. Is it supposed to be an action film, a sci fi, a more thoughtful "European" art film, etc. Then I can more accurately give them notes on whether they are diverging from the original path. That's one reason I didn't like SIGNS that much. I thought he was making a sci fi film when that wasn't the case at all. Maybe that's my fault for taking pre-conceived notions into the theater, but those notions are formed from the marketing materials beforehand.

I'm not sure what I expected from LOTR exactly, but my overall afterthought is that I didn't care about even one of those characters after I left the theater. I didn't care who lived and who died and it didn't seem to matter to the plot who lived and who died. I know that it does, of course, but the movie that I saw didn't make it very clear. I'm sure that if I read the books, some background info would lodge itself into my psyche that would help me appreciate the film better, but again, I don't see it as my responsibility to study before I head to the theater for an afternoon of entertainment. Sometimes, I think, epics like that (just as DUNE before it) aren't meant to be adapted to the screen. There's usually just too much going on in terms of character development to really nail it. There's too much pressure to squeeze in the plot developments so there isn't enough time to spend fleshing the characters out onscreen.

But hey, if people enjoy it for what it is, then great! The movie business has made something like 3 billion this summer (I heard that in the background this morning on tv , I could be wrong) (Spiderman has made $400 million alone). There are well made movies, and there are some not-so-well made movies, but people go to see 'em all regardless. We can strive for perfection, but sadly, it doesn't seem to matter one way or another.

But, that's just my opinion... ;)

stillakid
09-02-2002, 11:47 AM
Been thinking about my above post and I sound like some kind of g-ddamned elitist or something. Somebody shoot me right now! :dead:

I'm guilty of it all too. Hell, I liked SPEED, ID4, and even XXX (which I finally just saw last night). Plotholes, silly dialogue, other conveniences, but hey, I had a good time with those. Sometimes I'm willing to forgive problems, others I'm not. Usually I don't forgive when I put the filmmakers at a higher level of expectation. A popcorn flick is supposed to be great escapist entertainment. But when an EPIC is made, the audience is asked to take the filmmakers seriously to consider them for those OSCAR nominations. If a serious epic wants to downgrade itself to become a mere "popcorn" flick, then I'll downgrade my critique level as well and let the story problems go. Until that time, those kinds of movies deserve to be examined thoroughly. The only way to keep quality coming is to not settle for less and show that we care.

DeadEye
09-02-2002, 01:37 PM
I remember the good old days, when movies were made simply for entertainment. Nowadays they have to have some deep moral meaning in order to get an Oscar.

bigbarada
09-02-2002, 02:50 PM
Originally posted by DeadEye
I remember the good old days, when movies were made simply for entertainment. Nowadays they have to have some deep moral meaning in order to get an Oscar.

I remember the good old, old days when movies were made to have a point and tell a story, not just shuffle you from one action sequence to another.:p (I assume you are talking about all the 80s action flicks, I am referring to all the 'classics' from the 50s and 60s - watch Vertigo or Harvey and you will see what I mean)

Stillakid, I used to get so peeved at the people who would go on and on about how original and innovative The Matrix was. It made me want to strap them to a chair and force them to watch THX-1138.:)

About LOTR, while I don't necessarily agree with the idea of consciously going into the theater with any pre-concieved notions (probably how I was able to enjoy the prequels for what they were, not what they failed to be); given my interest in the fantasy genre and given Hollywoods previous failures in bringing that genre onto the big screen (Dungeons & Dragons, DragonSlayer, DragonHeart, Willow, Labyrinth - which I liked but more as a kid's movie not a true fantasy film), it was only natural that I go into the movie theater with a bias. So imagine my surprise when I see that Peter Jackson managed to bring an entire world of fantasy alive onscreen. Maybe that has colored my perception of LOTR; but I still believe it is a brilliantly made film. (So do a few others or else it wouldn't have been nominated for Best Picture) In any case, I truly am sorry that you couldn't enjoy it and hope that you give it another chance sometime in the future.

stillakid
09-02-2002, 06:37 PM
Originally posted by bigbarada
I truly am sorry that you couldn't enjoy it and hope that you give it another chance sometime in the future.

Thanks. I do plan on it. However, I'm torn between wanting to see #2 on the big screen, where the visuals are meant to be seen or just waiting it out for #3 so that I can sit down with the whole story all at once so that it will make better sense to me. My LOTR-fan neighbor told me last night about the extras that are planned for the November release, but he didn't think that any of them really will add anymore to the story per se. Just a little expansion on some of the action sequences. However, he did mention something about one of the Hobbits having the hots for the Kate Blanchett character, though I don't know if he was suggesting that it would be in the movie or if he was just mentioning it as one of the elements that was left out from the book. Just one example of character development that was "abandoned" in the name of "adaptation."

derek
09-02-2002, 06:44 PM
i think it was gimli, the dwarf, who had the crush on gladraiel. correct me if i'm wrong BB or JJB:)

bigbarada
09-02-2002, 06:50 PM
The character of Gimli (the dwarf) fell in love with Galadriel (Blanchett) in the books and that element is supposed to be put back into the movie. It was edited for time, but stole a major bit of character development from the dwarf (dwarves typically hate elves). The fact that Gimli is one of my favorite characters in the story, I am glad to see this put back in.

We will also see Sam getting some rope from Galadriel (explains a minor plot point in the next film) and more scenes of the Hobbits in their hometown (to help stress their friendship and personalities).

I personally feel that Peter Jackson would have loved to have put all these scenes into the theatrical release, but the studio probably took into account his "lack of experience" as a director and forced him to edit it down to just under 3 hours. Just my take on the whole deal.

The next film is supposed to be much more action packed as it pretty much has many of the characters jumping from one battle to another (it all makes sense in the context that this is a war that has just hit full force). FOTR was used to simply set up the story and develop the characters, which I believed was done very well. But that's just me.;)

Beast
09-02-2002, 06:52 PM
Yes, it's Gimli the Dwarf. In the gift giving scene that is being restored to the Extended DVD version of FOTR's. You can see it in the features on the current DVD, about the extended cut. I don't have it in my player right now, so I don't know if the quote is exact.

Galadriel: "And what gift would a dwarf ask for?"

Gimli: "To look upon the Queen of the Elves, one more time."

BigB said that is not in the book exactly, but that she gives him three strands of her hair. But they never really come into play in future books, so I don't know if they kept that part for the movie. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Eternal Padawan
09-03-2002, 08:05 AM
I have it more satisfying to not expect anything from a movie and be pleasantly suprised and delighted by it, than to have high hopes about a film dashed because it sucked. Those kinds of films leave an extra dose of bad taste in my mouth.

It is rarer still to have high expectations and have them surpassed by the film maker from beginning to end. LOTR was one of those films. It was all I hoped for and more.

ROLLO!

Rogue II
09-03-2002, 08:38 AM
The first movie that really let me down was Batman. It was still an ok movie, but I expected more for some reason. Since then, I slowly started to give up listening to the hype about movies. I never go to the theater anymore(except for ATOC). I find it hard to get excited about them now. I've been very picky about the movies I've seen recently.

I was sent to Korea for a year in 99-00 and Kuwait this time last year. Sometimes, especially in Kuwait, there isn't much to do other than watch movies. And the majority usually rules(and availablility;)) on what movies are watched. I was basically out voted and forced to watch The Matrix and it wasn't that bad.

I didn't expect anything from The Matrix because of
(1) Keanu Reeves:rolleyes:
(2) I'm not really into action movies any more (Thank you Steven Segal and Jean Claude Van Damm)
(3) It looked like another "hey, we have cool computer graphics" movie. Special Effects do not make up for a crappy story line.

Now, I'm not trying to defend this movie or going to go out and buy it, but it was tolerable. EP is right,

Originally posted by Eternal Padawan
I have it more satisfying to not expect anything from a movie and be pleasantly suprised and delighted by it, than to have high hopes about a film dashed because it sucked. Those kinds of films leave an extra dose of bad taste in my mouth.

bigbarada
09-03-2002, 01:14 PM
Geez, Rogue II, when I was in Bosnia the only movie that the majority could agree on was Days of Thunder. For a movie I never wanted to watch at all, watching that movie nearly everday for months was almost too much for my brain to take.

Dumb & Dumber was another movie I had little choice but to watch over and over and over and over and over......

For people who have never been deployed to a place like that, it's kind of hard to understand how you would have to watch those movies. It was mainly because there was nothing else to do. You couldn't go to the movies or a club or anything else. You were basically stuck in a little camp about the size of a football field and had very few choices for entertainment. No computers or internet, phone were too expensive to spend more than a few minutes a week calling family, alcohol was banned from the camps (I don't drink, but many of the alcoholics were pretty grumpy most of the time).

I tried watching ESB in my tent once (which I shared with 7 other guys) and after half-an-hour I just shut it off since everyone was complaining so much at how stupid it was (One guy even called it a Battlestar Gallactica rip-off :rolleyes: )

Needless to say, I didn't enjoy my time in Bosnia at all.

Beast
09-03-2002, 01:23 PM
BigB, you aren't instilling a whole lot of confidance in us about the army. If they wanted to watch crap like "Days of Thunder" and especially "Dumb & Dumber" all the time, and started ragging on you about "Empire Strikes Back". And the military actually give these people guns and they defend our country? Let me guess, you were one of the older people there. And the rest of them were in their early 20's?

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Rogue II
09-03-2002, 01:45 PM
Well, that's the Army. I'm in the Air Force :D ;).

We had internet and access to VCRs and DVD Players, not to mention we had access to several movie channels(That's the Air Force for you). There was also a smaller group of us (5-8 enlisted and 3 officers), so the decision making process wasn't too hard. 2 of the Lieutenants were female, but they went elsewhere when they wanted to watch thier girly movies.

We did get lucky because we knew the people on base that ordered all of the DVDs. We got to borrow them as they came in. We also had access to a mini-Base exchange that suprisingly had newer releases for purchase.

We did watch the Classic Trilogy and Episode 1 a couple times. There were a couple Star Trek Fans, but they were quickly silenced:evil: . The big debate was "How did 1 hit take out a Super Star Destroyer?":rolleyes:

We didn't watch 1 Star Trek film in those 90something days.

I didn't like Dumb and Dumber.

bigbarada
09-03-2002, 02:30 PM
Originally posted by JarJarBinks
BigB, you aren't instilling a whole lot of confidance in us about the army. If they wanted to watch crap like "Days of Thunder" and especially "Dumb & Dumber" all the time, and started ragging on you about "Empire Strikes Back". And the military actually give these people guns and they defend our country? Let me guess, you were one of the older people there. And the rest of them were in their early 20's?

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

Just the opposite for the most part, I was 23 at the time and the majority of guys in the tent were late 20s to early 40s. The demographic breakdown went something like: Two older NCOs in their late 30s and early 40s, both black and who only listened to old R&B/Soul music of the 70s (they also only liked movies like Superfly and Shaft and any modern movie with Will Smith in it); three country hicks (2 in their late twenties, one who was 19) who listened to almost primarily country music (they also listened to a lot of Techno music too, strangely enough); one kid from New York City (he was 18) who was into the whole gansta scene; and one Sgt in his thirties who liked sci-fi and Star Wars (pretty much most of the same things I liked).

Then there was me, who listened to rock music and classical and loved Star Wars and other sci-fi movies at that time. I was a Specialist at that time and wouldn't make Sgt for 2 more years. I was there from Oct 96 to May 97, I missed all of the SE rereleases (except for ROTJ in the dollar theater).:(

It was the 19-year-old country kid (from West Virginia no less) who thought ESB was a Battlestar Gallactica rip-off.:stupid:

Rogue II, the Air Force does seem to get the better end of everything. You guys don't have that mentality where you try to make things more difficult and miserable than they need to be. The Army loves to take a simple and easy concept that works and infuse it with so many rules and regulations that it then becomes too complex to handle. Also, if you appear to not be totally beat down by life and miserable, they have to find a way to add some misery to your life.:frus:

I am so glad to be out of the Army, in case you couldn't tell.

DeadEye
09-03-2002, 06:02 PM
No offense dude but the Air Force sorta spoils their guys. Their MREs are like 3 times the size of the Army ones, and you get a medal for practically anything. :D
And JJB, just because someone has a differing opinion of a movie doesn't make them a moron. Case in point: me.
And anyway, a well-trained soldier can be BSing around, watching movies, and be in "discipline mode" in a split instant when the time arises. And most are completely different men in combat.
Except for Corporal Upham in Saving Private Ryan...damn moron. "I looked up FUBAR and it's not in the German dictionary!" He was a coward, too. :frus:

Rogue II
09-03-2002, 06:55 PM
I was under the impression that all MREs are the same. I'm not going to debate the difference in the Services here because this thread is about movies. We should start a Military thread over in the General Discussion. I know there are a several active duty and former military members wandering through these forums.

Ever notice how the Air Force is always portrayed as either idiots or "bad guys" in movies?

DeadEye
09-03-2002, 07:02 PM
The Army often is too, you know.
And Air Force MREs are in fact different from Army ones.

Rogue II
09-03-2002, 07:12 PM
Good point. Sgt Bilko and Stripes were hardly kind to the Army.;)

It's those lousy Liberals that hang out in Southern California. Its all their fault. As Homer Simpson said, "Lousy Democrats."

DeadEye
09-03-2002, 07:36 PM
I know! I hate liberals! Although Boys' State taught me more about government than I'll ever need to know, it did teach me what was wrong with those liberals. Damn tree-huggers. I was on the city council and they sued us on account of air pollution when we didn't have any industry!

stillakid
09-03-2002, 08:10 PM
Originally posted by Rogue II
The first movie that really let me down was Batman. It was still an ok movie, but I expected more for some reason.

That's funny, I had the opposite experience. I went in expecting the absolute worst and found myself enjoying it somehow. Maybe if I start doing that for every movie, I'll like everything that comes down the pike. Hmmm?


And my dad's Navy experience wasn't the greatest I guess because he didn't really encourage any of us to enlist with any branch. Though I did take some aptitude test (is that normal procedure?) once just for the hell of it and the recruiter guys just about tripped on themselves trying to get me to stay and join up. It was pretty funny. I gathered by their reactions that I did better than average on the test. I didn't stay to find out.

scruffziller
09-04-2002, 07:35 AM
Armageddon
Galaxy Qwest
Wing Commander
Wrath Of Khan

Rogue II
09-04-2002, 07:44 AM
Eww, Galaxy Quest. I went to and from Seattle to Korea twice(4 total flights) in a 1 year period. That movie was one of the infight movies each time I flew. I made the mistake of watching it once.

stormie
09-04-2002, 07:22 PM
A few movies I really dislike that many others (including critics and the Academy) have liked:

Titanic - I thought it was overly dramatic and over-acted.
Pearl Harbor - Same as above, but slightly redeemed by all the cool War footage! ;)
A Beautiful Mind - I just thought the acting was predictable (especially Jennifer Connelly) and the story was boring.
Monster's Ball - Just recently saw this movie. More over acting, and a story that was trite. Plus, Billy Bob and Halle are actually two of the more ugly actors around! ;)

DeadEye
09-04-2002, 07:25 PM
Pearl Harbor had delicious visual effects but was laden with plot holes and inaccuracies--I.E., Japanese Zeroes shooting at civilians on the streets. :rolleyes:
Besides, I'd rather see the attack on Pearl Harbor itself than the lackluster love life of a fictional pilot. :p

JediTricks
09-04-2002, 07:39 PM
these made my "dislike that everyone else likes" list:
- ET
- Pulp Fiction
- Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
- THX-1138
- Batman Returns
- Jurassic Park 1 & 2 (didn't bother seeing 3)
- Sixth Sense

(AOTC might be somewhere on this list too, but I don't quite "dislike" it any more than I "dislike" flavorless mush for breakfast)

However, those are just films I actually saw, I won't bother putting films on my list that I didn't even go see because they looked like stuff I wouldn't like.


I would like to add that I dislike the LOTR trilogy and can barely stomach The Hobbit, but I liked the LOTR:FOTR film. I think the film works on an epic platform that takes the pacing into greater consideration for the audience.

Beast
09-04-2002, 07:55 PM
It may have been changed to be a bit more dramatic, but the fact is that the Zeroes did fire at the ground. I was watching a show late night a month or so ago on one of the news channels about movies based on Pearl Harbor. They showed patches of cement near civilian buildings, that still have the bullet impact holes in them. So whether or not they really fired at civilians, they did strafe the ground.

If you want movies about Pearl Harbor that actually deal with the attack, one of the best is "Tora Tora Tora". Add it to the long list that we keep suggesting to you. I'm sure there are a few more good ones, but they slip my mind at the moment. :)

MTFBWY and HH!!

Jar Jar Binks

stillakid
09-04-2002, 10:51 PM
Originally posted by JediTricks
these made my "dislike that everyone else likes" list:
- ET
- Pulp Fiction
- Crouching Tiger, Hidden Dragon
- THX-1138
- Batman Returns
- Jurassic Park 1 & 2 (didn't bother seeing 3)
- Sixth Sense

(AOTC might be somewhere on this list too, but I don't quite "dislike" it any more than I "dislike" flavorless mush for breakfast)


You guys keep reminding me of movies that I probably wanted to forget about. :rolleyes: I need to add these to my list above as well.

I've always thought ET was overrated emotional drivel.

Pulp Fiction is nothing better than a "fad" film that just happened to drop into the theater at the right time, much like the Blair Witch Project. The dialogue is pointless. It's only "innovative" because everyone was smart enough to not write that way.

Crouching Tiger is another good one to mention. What the H was with the 2 hour flashback (well, it seemed like that long anyway) dropped right into the middle of the movie? It was like they forgot to write the guy into the script, remembered part way through, but didn't realize that they could actually re-write the beginning of the story to introduce him there. Ugggh. The fights were cool though.

I don't really know many people that "like" THX. It's interesting in a sort of nostalgic museum sort of way ("And over here on the right is George Lucas's first commercial film, THX1138. If you remember, he was the man who created the surprise success Star Wars and then set about ruining it several years later. Moving on, we see on our left....")

Some people really like Batman Returns? :sur:

Jurassic 1 was pretty good, I thought. In a glossy we're-going-to-stay-in-comfy-hotels-and-make-this-movie kinda way. No real edge, but the realistic Rex was frightening. Then, as most sequels go, the series went downhill and fast. JP1 was already on the cusp of cartoony and the subsequent attempts only made it all that much worse.

Sixth Sense I liked, but somebody has to slap M Night around and let him know that he can't use that same technique for every gdmned film he makes (the slow....methodical....takes 10 minutes for a character to finish his line....style). It worked in 6th Sense because it had to. The movie would have failed without that style, but if that's all he's got to offer as a filmmaker, the audience will (hopefully) get bored soon and he can be taken off the "high budget" list.

Rogue II
09-05-2002, 06:47 AM
I'm glad I'm not the only one who didn't like ET. I didn't even like it as a kid.

The first Batman movie was good, but they decline pretty quick. The other 3 are a blur not worth mentioning.

Jurassic Park 2, Batman 2-4, and all of those other sequals were annoying back in the 90s. They were all so terrible. Did Hollywood loose all ability to produce new ideas back then?

scruffziller
09-09-2002, 06:39 AM
Dang what does everyone have against E.T.?!!
For those who are hardcore Sci-Fi fans, the degree of emotionalism in the movie is what I think turned folks off, but I think it is a great movie. I really just ignored the "emotional drivel."
This does seem to strike a nerve with alot of folks.

stillakid
09-10-2002, 12:03 AM
Originally posted by scruffziller
Dang what does everyone have against E.T.?!!
For those who are hardcore Sci-Fi fans, the degree of emotionalism in the movie is what I think turned folks off, but I think it is a great movie. I really just ignored the "emotional drivel."
This does seem to strike a nerve with alot of folks.

From a technical story standpoint, it wasn't a bad movie by any stretch. All the pieces were there and in the proper order. For me, it was just way overrated for what it was/is. But a lot of a movie's appeal has to do with timing more than the thing itself. The audience was just in the mood for that kind of movie at that precise time so it hit a chord that resonated a bit more than had it been released at another time. I may be mistaken, but wasn't it Blade Runner that was released at the same time and literally got buried under the attention that ET received? Pure victim of timing there.

wedgeA
09-10-2002, 01:38 AM
Anything by John Hughes, Cameron Crowe (not counting Vanilla Sky, I actually liked that film) Steven Soderbergh or the Coen Bros.- I have yet to see a film by those directors that transcends mediocrity.

Pretty much every best picture Oscar winner in recent memory. I did not hate all of them, but I never thought any of them was the best film of their respective years.

The Sound of Music- sentimental tripe.

The Excorcist- no scares for me there.

Dr. Strangelove- I don't hate it but it is terribly overrated.

The Overlord Returns
09-10-2002, 12:29 PM
Damn....I can't believe I haven't sen this thread before......

Anyhow...

TITANIC: for obvious reasons. I consider this one of the WORST films ever made.

The Sixth Sense: Never understood the appeal. I had this films "surprise" figured out within 20 minutes. I loved Unbreakable though.

Signs: again, had it figured out. Worst ending I've ever seen for a film.

Vanilla Sky: useless piece of wankery. felt like it was six hours long, and the ending seemed like it was written by a thousand monkeys working at a thousand typewriters.

Matrix: I did notnhate the Matrix, I quite enjoyed it actually. What I hated was the reaction it caused in western filmgoers. All of a suddent he Matrix, and it's camera work was revolutionary, simply because the western world, in large, was seeing this type of camera work in the matrix for the first time. It was by NO MEANS a revolutionary film. I also hate the fact tht it was heavily built on the comic Book "The Invisibles" by Grant Morrison, which is a far superior story. This has pretty much ruined the chances of ever seeing an Invisibles film.

Spider Man: While I did enjoy the film, I had MASSIVE problems with the cheeseball factor, and what a waste of willem dafoe.

As for LOTR, well, I cannot comment as I did not see the film. I was never a fan of the novels, as I feel they're no better written than any other poorly written fantasy novel series...aka...anything by that brooks fellow.

I will see it before 2 towers comes out....as the preview for that rather interested me.