Biggest Disappointments...

[John Wesley Norton]

I'm sure I'm not alone (especially here) in saying that few topics of conversation get my brain spinning more than talking about movies. I could go all night, as I'm sure most you could as well.

This is what I propose, we each name a film that we saw that we had high expectations for, and was sorely disappointed. What is your BIGGEST disappointment?

Let's also do the same thing with a film you weren't expecting much from, but came away thinking it was very good.

Now I've already mentioned a few in another thread that were heartbreakingly bad, in my opinion. Namely, The Hulk, Godzilla, and Alien 3.

However, I must say that the worst I've ever felt coming out of a theater is when I walked out of Highlander 2. It was a while ago, yes, but the disappointed feeling has stayed with me. I was a huge Highlander fan, but part two ripped the guts out of the first one and created a silly, nonsensical mess.

My wife watches a show called The 4400, and she is always trying to get me to watch it. I always pass, being not much of a TV watcher. But she got the first season on Netflix and threatened to make me sleep on the couch if I didn't at least give it a try. I watched the first season, then I went out and rented the second season at Blockbuster, and now I cannot wait for the third season to come out . I really, really like it. I haven't been into a TV show like this since The X-Files.

(Now she's trying to get me to watch Buffy the Vampire Slayer, not sure about that one either)

Please share.

John

[J.R. Hudson]

Nice topic John !

Planet of the Apes -

Just unthinkably worse than one could imagine. Burton just falls on his face and I lose all respect for him in one sitting

Escape From L.A. -

How do you mess this up ? My 6 year old could do better than this ?

Dee Blue Sea -

I should have guessed this would have sucked for 2 words: Renny 'The Hack, I suck and am sleeping with a big producer to get my gigs' Harlin. Has this guy ever made a good film ?

Resident Evil -

The game may be singulary responsbile for bringing the undead genre back to life and they make pure crap. How did P W.S.A get into this business anyway ?

Land of the Dead -

I called it waaay before the film came out. I knew Romero could not make a film. He just is not a good filmmaker. He gets far too much credit for inventing the genere. A complete let down

King Kong -

Maybe it was time for PJ not to have a killer film. He was on a role in my eyes:

Bad Taste, Dead Alive, Heavenly Creatures, The Frighteners, The Lord of the Rings 1, 2 and 3 ...

and then this just really bad and inplausible scenario called the 8th Wonder of the World.


But the winner and taker of all the cake is:

Star Wars 1, 2, 3 (The new ones)

Ruined an entire franchise and destroys the magic that was once Star Wars

[Brandon Rice]

Nice topic John !

Planet of the Apes -

Just unthinkably worse than one could imagine. Burton just falls on his face and I lose all respect for him in one sitting

REALLY? I loved the film! Totally loved it.

I will completely agree with you about Star Wars though... what was Lucas thinking?

[Evan S]

Lucs was thinking $$$$

[Brandon Rice]

Lucs was thinking $$$$

He's a brilliant businessman, I'll give him that.

[John Wesley Norton]

George Lucas is a great producer.
I just wonder what the final (first) three films would have been like if he had written the basic story, then turned over writing and directing chores to other talented filmmakers, like he did with two of the original films.

Anyway,
Mr. Hudson, I agree with you whole heartedly on several of your choices.

Planet of the Apes: Who would have thought that Tim Burton could take a movie with the serious themes of the original and turn it into a warning against... Animal Testing!

Escape from L.A: Veeeerrrrry disappointing indeed. I'm a huge fan of Carpenters early work, but this... This was just not taken very seriously at all.

Deep Blue Sea: I didn't have great expectations here, so not very disappointed. Renny Harlin = a bad joke. If you asked him to direct traffic someone would get killed.

Resident Evil: Again, Zero expectations, and rightly so.

Land of the Dead: Although I don't agree that Romero isn't a talented Director, Day of the Dead and Creepshow being my two favorites of his, Land of the Dead was a let down, for sure. Not scary, No Disturbing, Not Entertaining, Not going to buy it.

King Kong: I kind of liked this one. Although again, a computer generated beast was out-acting every human in sight. Jack Black, totaly mis-cast, Adrian Brody, dull dull dull.

I thought of another one:

Alien Vs. Predator: Again, who gave Paul W.S. Anderson this project? The potential was nearly unlimited here, but man, he embraced every limit he could reach. A missed opportunity. Very sad about this one.

On a cheerful note, Snakes on a Plane was much better than I expected. Maybe because I wasn't expecting much.

Later.

[The Machinist]

The Matrix sequels - Especially the 3rd one. I could have lived with Reloaded (and the awesome freeway sequence) if Revolutions had been something amazing. The last fight between Neo and Agent Smith was a blow for blow ripoff of the kind of aerial kung fu fights that hallmarked the latter episodes of Dragonball Z for christsakes.


Gangs of New York - One of my favorite periods of American history set in my hometown and directed by my hero. I can't describe my crushed spirit when i walked out of the theater that night. I've seen it since and it wasn't as horrible as i had first thought but i think my expectations were set too high.

I'll try to think of more.

[chromeboy007]

I haven't been into a TV show like this since The X-Files.


you mean to tell me you have never seen The Sopranos?

[Jack_Felis]

House of the Dead, Bloodrayne, Alone in the Dark, all of them have something in common, Uwe Boll!!!:furious3:

I didn't like Resident Evil very much when Paul W.S. Anderson made the first one but the second one made me realize that things weren't going to get better so I may as well stick with it.

Ultraviolet was a big letdown, how the heck do some of these movies get made?

Stolen Summer and Battle of Shaker Heights (the Project Greenlight movies) were big letdowns too, there were better directors and scripts to choose from and the crew chose those two movies to make? I hope Feast will do better, which is a failure in its own right as it's taken forever to come out and has basically canceled the show or at the very least put it in limbo.

Aliens Vs. Predator was bad on so many levels, why couldn't they have followed the comic books? Not original, sure, but honestly, would it really have mattered if it was the comic book made into a movie? It's freaking Aliens Vs. Predator!!!

[ernesto]

Ultraviolet was horrible. I was wondering the same thing.

Little Miss Sunshine was a good surprise, I thought it'd be a run-of-the-mill comedy like Taladega Nights but it was actually really good.

[FilmMakerr]

Nice topic John !

Planet of the Apes -

Just unthinkably worse than one could imagine. Burton just falls on his face and I lose all respect for him in one sitting

Escape From L.A. -

How do you mess this up ? My 6 year old could do better than this ?

Dee Blue Sea -

I should have guessed this would have sucked for 2 words: Renny 'The Hack, I suck and am sleeping with a big producer to get my gigs' Harlin. Has this guy ever made a good film ?

Resident Evil -

The game may be singulary responsbile for bringing the undead genre back to life and they make pure crap. How did P W.S.A get into this business anyway ?

Land of the Dead -

I called it waaay before the film came out. I knew Romero could not make a film. He just is not a good filmmaker. He gets far too much credit for inventing the genere. A complete let down

King Kong -

Maybe it was time for PJ not to have a killer film. He was on a role in my eyes:

Bad Taste, Dead Alive, Heavenly Creatures, The Frighteners, The Lord of the Rings 1, 2 and 3 ...

and then this just really bad and inplausible scenario called the 8th Wonder of the World.


But the winner and taker of all the cake is:

Star Wars 1, 2, 3 (The new ones)

Ruined an entire franchise and destroys the magic that was once Star Wars


Yes! I completely agree with the Star wars. I always thought they sucked, but thought Id get hissed at if anyone found out :)

The original Star Wars was the best, one of my favorites.

[donkathon]

the Pink Panther with Steve Martin.

Atleast give a good aceent.

[J.R. Hudson]

Yes! I completely agree with the Star wars. I always thought they sucked, but thought Id get hissed at if anyone found out :)

The original Star Wars was the best, one of my favorites.

Yes

The typical conversatoin goes something like this:

George Lucas is a bitch.

What do you mean ?

The man ruined the franchise. Ever since the Ewoks were introduced it has catered to the lowest common denominator. He is obsessed with CGI and forgot about storytelling. The new films lack any substance or creativity. His constant tinkering of the original trilogy has muddled it into mediocrity. The mutation of a walking Jabba, Han stepping on his tail, Yoda becoming Bruce Effin Lee samurai warrior, droids smacking each other into slapstick, again with Jedi, Han became a P*ssy in that one. It signalled the demise of the franchise right there.

People chalk up it being a let-down to it being overhyped. No. Like the last ever episode of Seinfeld, it just sucked.

Once, the Star Wars universe was something we could touch. It had metal and sand and wood and all sorts of organic tangible qualities like Snow and swamps. It was real. Now it has become a commercial. It's like a live action video-game with it's bullshite CG world. Am I watching Final Fantasy or Star Wars ?

Star Wars used to be cool, and now it caters to the geek Jedi worshippers. When I was a kid, everyone wanted to be Han Solo, now, everyone wants to be a Jedi Master. Why do I have to sit through 3 films of some whiny Annakin 'I loooove her. They wont let me be a Jeeedi. Im reeaddyy. Waaaaaaaaaa'

It sucks, because Star Wars could be really cool.

And Han did shoot first.

And they reply with:

Lucas is rich.

[donkathon]

Yes

The typical conversatoin goes something like this:

George Lucas is a bitch.

What do you mean ?

The man ruined the franchise. Ever since the Ewoks were introduced it has catered to the lowest common denominator. He is obsessed with CGI and forgot about storytelling. The new films lack any substance or creativity. His constant tinkering of the original trilogy has muddled it into mediocrity. The mutation of a walking Jabba, Han stepping on his tail, Yoda becoming Bruce Effin Lee samurai warrior, droids smacking each other into slapstick, again with Jedi, Han became a P*ssy in that one. It signalled the demise of the franchise right there.

People chalk up it being a let-down to it being overhyped. No. Like the last ever episode of Seinfeld, it just sucked.

Once, the Star Wars universe was something we could touch. It had metal and sand and wood and all sorts of organic tangible qualities like Snow and swamps. It was real. Now it has become a commercial. It's like a live action video-game with it's bullshi*e CG world. Am I watching Final Fantasy or Star Wars ?

Star Wars used to be cool, and now it caters to the geek Jedi worshippers. When I was a kid, everyone wanted to be Han Solo, now, everyone wants to be a Jedi Master. Why do I have to sit through 3 films of some whiny Annakin 'I loooove her. They wont let me be a Jeeedi. Im reeaddyy. Waaaaaaaaaa'

It sucks, because Star Wars could be really cool.

And Han did shoot first.

And they reply with:

Lucas is rich.

If you wrote that, you are the most brilliant person I know.

[J.R. Hudson]

Of course I wrote it !

What do you mean?

[Pen Cap Chew]

Yeah, great post, John. Exactly my sentiments. George "soft and silly" Lucas. Why, oh why, couldn't he see what a mess he was making? :furious3:

[donkathon]

Of course I wrote it !

What do you mean?

I didnt know if you had wrote it, or someone else wrote it and you were quoting it.

[Aaron Marshall]

newsflash, read all about it: Star Wars was always nerdy. They're not exactly art films. Their target audience is kids. You have to adapt to that way of thinking when you watch them. To gripe about them would kind of like going to a playground with 3rd graders to play basketball, then whining because your teammates are too short.

The originals were nerdy as hell too. I had an argument the other night with an old friend about this. How can you get any more nerdy than Luke Skywalker? How can the acting and terminology get any worse? It was always about accepting the fantasy and just going with it. I can see all the negative points brought up about the new trilogy. I just think most of it is over trying to live up to the original, and the original time period and political climate where Star Wars thrived.

The Matrix Reloaded and Revolutions were a major upset for me. Talk about just for $$$. It doesn't get any worse than this.

LOTR: Fellowship : This film disappointed me. I thought the color schemes were all over the place, the acting too melodramatic the most important thing is it just lacked a sense of humor JRR had. I think this was a case of a nerd trying to take something too seriously because he knows he's a nerd and better impress the cool kids by staying as serious as possible. It worked, and the oscar goes to.... Actually, Fellowship wasn't too bad. I was still let down to what I had envisioned for LOTR's.

LOTR: Two Towers : I thought maybe the franchise would get better with this film. I was so pissed off. This was no Empire Strikes Back bridge to a trilogy. It took everything I disliked about the first film and AMPLIFIED it x 100.

LOTR: Return : This movie actually did not disappoint me. I'll put this in the surprise category. I almost felt sympathy from PJ. It was almost like he realized his own errors and tried to make ammends.

Anything negative I said about LOTR you can apply my "fantasy and just going with it". I should have followed my own advice, but I didn't. I was too critical because of my own vision for LOTR's. The same goes for Star Wars bashers. I don't think I took it too seriously because Star Wars was never literature. It was always based for film and made accordingly. I took LOTR too seriously, but I can't help it. I don't expect anyone's opinion about the new star wars to change either.

Tomb Raider - I guess I should have known. I was disappointed none the less.

Terminator 3 - Idiotic, blasphemous

[Blaine]

newsflash, read all about it: Star Wars was always nerdy. They're not exactly art films. Their target audience is kids.
That was always my problem with ALL the Star Wars movies, including the original. While it was Sci-fi it just wasn't aimed at the same audience as Blade Runner and Aliens and it always felt like a kids movie to me. But then, I was 25 when it came out so I was seeing it in a different frame of reference than many here. Had I been in my teens when I first saw it, I'm sure it would have affected me differently.

[Greggl]

Godfather 3.

[John Wesley Norton]

Sorry, I thought LOTR was exceptional on nearly every level.
And can we please not mix our genres? Star Wars is fantasy, not Science Fiction. As mentioned above, Blade Runner and Aliens, THAT's Science Fiction.

Here's a dissapointment...
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome!

Mad Max - Fierce, down and dirty, gritty filmmaking.
The Road Warrior - Kinetic and powerful, awesome.
Beyond Thunderdome - What the F*ck was that?!

Godfather 3 - Correct, should never have been made. Not a horrible movie, but c'mon! It's The Godfather!

[Blaine]

Sorry, I thought LOTR was exceptional on nearly every level.
And can we please not mix our genres? Star Wars is fantasy, not Science Fiction. As mentioned above, Blade Runner and Aliens, THAT's Science Fiction.
http://yoursay.imdb.com/title/tt0076759/
http://www.digitaldreamdoor.com/pages/movie-pages/movie_sci-fi.html

[J.R. Hudson]

newsflash, read all about it: Star Wars was always nerdy. They're not exactly art films. Their target audience is kids. You have to adapt to that way of thinking when you watch them. To gripe about them would kind of like going to a playground with 3rd graders to play basketball, then whining because your teammates are too short.

The originals were nerdy as hell too. I had an argument the other night with an old friend about this. How can you get any more nerdy than Luke Skywalker? How can the acting and terminology get any worse? It was always about accepting the fantasy and just going with it. I can see all the negative points brought up about the new trilogy. I just think most of it is over trying to live up to the original, and the original time period and political climate where Star Wars thrived.

Newsflash ? No no no. Disagree completely.

The originals; scratch that ...

The first 2 films hold up as adult films. There are not catered towards children anymore than Raiders of the Lost Ark was.

Obi Wan severing off the aliens arm in the bar, Darth Vader almost choking the dude to death, Darth Vader breaking the neck of Rebel guy and then tossing him aside, the burning bodies of Aunt Beru and Uncle Owen, the Sand Person attacking Luke, the overall violence of Stormtroopers and Rebels having laser fights ......

All signs of a nice childrens film, right ?

Star Wars became 'kids film's' offically with Jedi and the original did so by accident.

Adapt to the material ? The films just plain suck. When I see The Lion King, I'm not adapting to view more like a child would, I just like it because it is really well done and nice story and a great job at filmmaking. I'm not going to dumb down for it.

Geeky ? Noooooo. Star Wars was cool. Geeky was Star Trek and D & D.

Star Wars was cool. That's the difference between then and now



To gripe about them would kind of like going to a playground with 3rd graders to play basketball, then whining because your teammates are too short.


:undecided I really really really tried to make the correlation on this one. No idea what it means. Is this where were supposed to dumb down for the film and think like a child ?

Newsflash ? Not even a soundbite. :laugh:

[J.R. Hudson]

Sorry, I thought LOTR was exceptional on nearly every level.
And can we please not mix our genres? Star Wars is fantasy, not Science Fiction. As mentioned above, Blade Runner and Aliens, THAT's Science Fiction.

Here's a dissapointment...
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome!

Mad Max - Fierce, down and dirty, gritty filmmaking.
The Road Warrior - Kinetic and powerful, awesome.
Beyond Thunderdome - What the F*ck was that?!

Godfather 3 - Correct, should never have been made. Not a horrible movie, but c'mon! It's The Godfather!

Spaceships? Space? Robots? Lasers?

Science Fiction by every definition

Science Fiction Fantasy ? Yes

Blade Runner ? Scifi Noir

Aleins ? Scifi Horror

Gotta mix genres, its the only way to classify these things.

-

I have come to appreciate Beyond Thunderdome over the years.

[Hairy Lime]

For as little as i expected from it, the remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre was surprisingly good.

Biggest disappointment? My favorite directors usually come through and i don't expect much from anyone else so this is tough for me. I guess I was really disappointed in Million Dollar Baby. Eastwood can direct the hell of a movie, but he picked a dud of a story with this one.

[J.R. Hudson]

For as little as i expected from it, the remake of Texas Chainsaw Massacre was surprisingly good.

I loved it; glorious cinematography

[thartley]

The Transporter 2--it went from something fun and enjoyable in the first film, to the land of comic book stunts in the second.

[specialed]

king kong was unwatchable.

lotr 3 was okay but suffered the same problem in the last hour or so.

Too Long.

Now i usually have no problem with 3 hour films, but the length in both cases usually had little to do with telling the story.

i.e. cue another shot of kong looking at girl
cue shot of girl looking away and then back at kong
two shot of kong and girl looking at each waterfall
kong looks back at girl
girl looks at kong
kong looks away
girl looks at kongs massive penis...

i think you catch my drift.

on the flip side, i was pleasantly suprised by lord of war. i literally found the dvd as i was unpacking for a friend. having never heard of it i popped it in and enjoyed the hell out of it.

[J.R. Hudson]

I liked the KONG film; l i k e d

I think it could have been PJ's Swan Song (Like LOTR isn't enough) ...

I would never say KONG was unwatchable.

[Brandon Rice]

Kong was great IMO! I was stunned and moved by it when I saw it in the theatre the first time.

[Blaine]

Kong was great IMO! I was stunned and moved by it when I saw it in the theatre the first time.
You are easily "stunned and moved." :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

[Brandon Rice]

You are easily "stunned and moved." :Drogar-BigGrin(DBG)

I try to be, makes movies more enjoyable.

[Batutta]

The Phantom Menace. Without question. After that stinker, I had less hopes for the other two so they weren't nearly as big a disappointment. There are so many things wrong with the prequels it's hard to know where to begin, and it makes my head hurt to think of them all, so I won't. I won't even mention Jar-Jar, as that's going for the low hanging fruit. The biggest mistake was George directing them the way he did, mainly against green screen with minimal sets. George was never a great director of actors, but in the movies he directed that work, American Grafitti and the first Star Wars, he put his talent in real environments and sets and the actors were able to inspire their own performances. Neither film has outstanding acting, but the actors were beliveable in their roles. In the prequels, his actors were stranded in green screen limbo, so they needed a strong director who could inspire them and shape their performances, and GL is just not up to this task. The movies suffered greatly as a result, with incredibly stiff and stilted acting throughout. Of course, no amount of great acting could have saved the shitty writing, but that's a whole other nut. Just top to bottom there's bad choices. GL himself once said one bad idea can kill a thousand good ideas. Unfortunately he fell prey to his own words.

[Elton]

Contact.

After Forrest Gump? Some liked Contact but I just hate it more and more when I think about it.

[J.R. Hudson]

Contact was a huge let-down in the end ....

Any Sci-Fi that pull's that BS copout routine is lame in my book:

Contact, Mission to Mars ... (Now that I think about it, both of those Mars flicks sucked) have those endings where some profound mysterious being or alien or god or whatever talks to them (The Abyss as much as I loved, in the end just makes me roll my eyes ....)

2001 is like that as well ....

Lame lame lame

Someone have some balls and predict what the universe is or will be; at least a film like The Black Hole gives us something in the end

--

But wait; Forrest Fump was a let-down too you ?

The one nominated for 14 Academy Awards and winner of Best Actor, Director and Picture ?

That Forrest Gump ?

[Elton]

No, Forrest Gump was hugely enjoyable. Zemeckis reached his apex with it and then...big sigh...Contact.

A.I. is a close second for me. I read the short story it was based on and I remember the hype about Kubrick bringing it to the screen. It promised to be his grand finale.

Then old Stevie just had to step in after Kubrick's passing. (which I still wonder about)

Gotta sharply disagree with you about 2001 though. Maybe you meant 2010?

2001 is one of the greatest films ever.

[J.R. Hudson]

2001 is one of the greatest films ever.


Sigh .....

That film lacks soul.

I find this to be one of the more boring, slow paced prentencious films ever made. It is a huge leap in cinematography and special effects for 1968, but other than that ....

Could it have any less emotion in the film ?

-

A.I. was great until Act 3.

[Jeremy Ordan]

A.I. was great until Act 3.


AI falls into this weird category of films that I call 'TWO IN ONE'

Essentially this means that at some point in the film it just takes a weird left turn and becomes a completely different film that what you started out watching. For example:

Hostel - Fun teen sex romp to torture room stomach churn

There are others but I can't think right now

[Elton]

Sigh .....

That film lacks soul.

I find this to be one of the more boring, slow paced prentencious films ever made. It is a huge leap in cinematography and special effects for 1968, but other than that ....

Could it have any less emotion in the film ?

-

A.I. was great until Act 3.

Funny how 2001 strikes people differently. What you call "slow paced pretentious" I call deliberate pacing to establish a mood and atmosphere. Blade Runner can feel extremely slow, but it's stunningly brilliant.

2001 isn't so much about emotion as it is about intelligence and the destiny of mankind. It's all about symbolism and metaphor. I love it...but it's an acquired taste...especially for newer generations.

You're right, A.I. felt like it was going somewhere until the last act, but man did that last act obliterate whatever goodwill I had for the effort.

[Blaine]

AI falls into this weird category of films that I call 'TWO IN ONE'

There are others but I can't think right now
The Island...1st half, reasonable but derivative sci-fi, 2nd over-the-top mindless action flick.


Now, regarding 2001, I loved it when I saw it in 1968. It blew me away. To me, the years have not been kind to 2001. I can barely set through it now.

[Elton]

Now, regarding 2001, I loved it when I saw it in 1968. It blew me away. To me, the years have not been kind to 2001. I can barely set through it now.

I have the HDNET Movies 1080i broadcast of 2001 recorded on my DVR. It is absolutely amazing how good it still looks.

I think we've all been a little conditioned to fast paced editing as the movie industry has "evolved" over the years.

Movies don't breathe as well as they used to.

[Alex DePew]

AI falls into this weird category of films that I call 'TWO IN ONE'

Essentially this means that at some point in the film it just takes a weird left turn and becomes a completely different film that what you started out watching. For example:

Hostel - Fun teen sex romp to torture room stomach churn

There are others but I can't think right now

I have a 'TWO IN ONE', Superman (1978). It starts out with a great origin story. Well told and exciting. Then it turns into a campy, silly romp. The exact point where this change over happens is right after Superman catches Lois and the helicopter. I loved the movie as a kid, but watching it again the whole campy Lex and Otis thing didn't work for me. I still LOVE the begining of the movie though. And Supes II was pretty good as well.

There are many left turns in movie that have made me question the director. AI is definitely in this category. I chalk it up to Spielberg trying to channel Kubrick for the darker part of their collaboration.

[J.R. Hudson]

I have the HDNET Movies 1080i broadcast of 2001 recorded on my DVR. It is absolutely amazing how good it still looks.

I think we've all been a little conditioned to fast paced editing as the movie industry has "evolved" over the years.

Movies don't breathe as well as they used to.

I disagree Elton (Back to another of our spirited debates)

I can't accept that as films like Apacalypse Now, The Conversation, The Deer Hunter, Jackie Brown, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, M Knights entire body of work .... (Some more or less than others)

Malick !

all sit in that sort of premeditated storytelling mode; very deliberate in pacing and exectution and just are great great films IMO

[MojoTrancer]

Just had to throw out that the first two star wars prequels were just a let down. But the third was the single most disappointing experience I've had as a moviegoer. Twenty years of anticipation and here's what I get:

"Noooooooooooooooooooooooo.........."

Lucas owes me 10 dollars. And one of these days I'm gonna collect.

[Elton]

I disagree Elton (Back to another of our spirited debates)

I can't accept that as films like Apacalypse Now, The Conversation, The Deer Hunter, Jackie Brown, The Shining, Full Metal Jacket, M Knights entire body of work .... (Some more or less than others)

all sit in that sort of premeditated storytelling mode; very deliberate in pacing and exectution and just are great great films IMO

John, you're entitled to simply be wrong. ;)

2001 is supposed to feel slow. It's about ETERNITY, and it FEELS LIKE IT! LOL!!

It's one of the few sci fi's whose ambiguous ending is absolutely enthralling...to me, of course.

You're other examples are duly noted, but 2001 is on a different plane of existence. (pun intended) It's sloooooowwwww, but worth the pondering.

[Hairy Lime]

I'm with Koolaid boy, er, um, Elton on this one. 2001 is intentionally slow, empty, souless, etc.

Meet Kubrick on his terms rather than forcing your sensibility on his art.

[Elton]

Just had to throw out that the first two star wars prequels were just a let down. But the third was the single most disappointing experience I've had as a moviegoer. Twenty years of anticipation and here's what I get:

"Noooooooooooooooooooooooo.........."

What a climax!: http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Sith/SithNooo.jpg

[Elton]

I disagree Elton (Back to another of our spirited debates)


John, you underestimate my power!:http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Sith/Sith7.jpg

This ain't no Tatooine!http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Sith/SunsetSITH.jpg

[J.R. Hudson]

John, you're entitled to simply be wrong. ;)


Nooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo ooooo ! My opinion is never wrong. :thumbsup: :beer:


Perhaps I should explain my position on the matter. I like what Kubrick did with 2001; the allegory, the metaphor, duality of man with his tools and his evolution and his rebirth and the machines trying to kill him ...........................

I find the film a landmark in special effects (Trumball of course) .....

For me; I need the old familiar chreshendo / dechreshendo ...

I need a peak and valley, a climax ...

When a film is nothing but 'monotone' for lack of a better word; it leaves me with no emotion. It comes across more as a day in the library:

"Shhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh ..."

-

Not too say it must be Star Wars (on the contrary) but even a film like Close Encounters of the Third Kind takes one for a ride. 2001 has 1 speed; First Gear and nothing else.

And never do we even care about the character's. If it is symbolic of man, shouldn't we even care for one second ? HAL has more of a personality (at least he is a ruthless bastard) than our astronaughts it seems.

-

I do find it a deeply moving piece of filmmaking, very personal and visionary .... but the ho-hum existence of the entire film experience leaves one to ponder sleeping instead.

-

Star Wars Space Opera ? No no no. Nothing that bouncy; but mix up the arrangement Stan

-

In closing? There are parts of this film I truly appreciate and love; but overall ... it has always left me wanting more emotion and soul.

[Elton]

LOL...the light will dawn upon you oneday...just like Dave Bowman.http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Sith/2001select.jpg

But eternity has no peak and climax...

[J.R. Hudson]

2001 is about eternity ?

(It really is open for debate and speculation!)

-

Are you implying that eternity is in the form of the Soul and/or the Starchild (The Spirit of man?) ....

I'm 36. I already got it. :happy:

-

But no, no, no my friend. I will not one day suddenly go 'Hey, I like the pacing on this film!'. I didn't like as a child, as a teenager nor in my late 20's .....

[Deepfocus88]

Here's a dissapointment...
Mad Max Beyond Thunderdome!

Mad Max - Fierce, down and dirty, gritty filmmaking.
The Road Warrior - Kinetic and powerful, awesome.
Beyond Thunderdome - What the F*ck was that?!

Absoulutely hands-down the first movie that came to mind. When did it come out, 84? I think I was going into 7th grade. Well anyways, I made my dad take me to see it. I was so amped up over the Road Warrior, there was no way it could suck. Boy, was I wrong.
I think this was my first letdown experience at the movies, probably the worst. I remember walking out of the theatre and my dad saying, "That wasn't a very good movie." I certainly couldn't offer up much of an argument.
In retrospect, I've forced myself to try and like the movie, and it's not terrible...But it just doesn't "fit in" with the balls-out nature of first two. I blame it on those damn kids.

[Elton]

2001 is about eternity ?

(It really is open for debate and speculation!)

A vague synopsis isn't it? How Kubrickian of me...;)

-


Are you implying that eternity is in the form of the Soul and/or the Starchild (The Spirit of man?) ....

I'm 36. I already got it. :happy:

Something like that. I believe it's about an eternal progression of the intelligence and the spirit of man. Of course, it took encounters with an advanced alien intelligence to prod us along, but so be it.

If the scene of Dave's encounter with the infinite/monolith and his aging in "the eternity room" doesn't spell it out, then what does?



But no, no, no my friend. I will not one day suddenly go 'Hey, I like the pacing on this film!'. I didn't like as a child, as a teenager nor in my late 20's .....

This I understand. But my point is that the pacing is appropriate for the subject matter. It's also enhanced by Lageti's very eerie music, which I think allowed shots to linger on much longer than would otherwise feel warranted.

It's still one of the greatest sci fi's. That's my story and I'm stickin' to it!

[Elton]

Absoulutely hands-down the first movie that came to mind. When did it come out, 84? I think I was going into 7th grade. Well anyways, I made my dad take me to see it. I was so amped up over the Road Warrior, there was no way it could suck. Boy, was I wrong.

Beyond Thunderdome was somewhat disappointing, but I've even grown to like some things about it over the years.

In '84, easily the biggest disappointment was Dune.

But you know what, it's kind of a guilty pleasure at the same time; who can forget this memorable character?: http://www.realm.cc/upload/Elton/Sith/DuneFrame5Sting.jpg

[J.R. Hudson]

Thunderdome has really grown on me over the years. Really underrated.

It is a huge step away from the darkness of the first two; but maybe this one is more about hope and the future.

I thought Tina did an outstanding job in it, and the characters much deeper than the first two. The Thunderdome battle, the Gulag and Wheel 'Bust a deal; face the wheel!' and the usual Max getting screwed in the end ...

(The Beginning and End Theme are great.)

In the end ? Yeah, I wish it kept it dark roots intact. It was definately catered too the Summer Crowd overall.

-

[They Live]

I wanted to believe that Oliver Stone could make a good, swords and sandal epic with Alexander, but man did that stink. One of the few movies I've been too where people booed. One guy started begging that Alexander would die already, out loud, near the end of the movie. No one cared, actually, most of the audience laughed. What made it worse was that I read a book about Alexander the Great just so I would have some background on it all. Great book. Made the movie even worse since I knew what it could've been.

[Deepfocus88]

[QUOTE=John_Hudson

(The Beginning and End Theme are great.)

-[/QUOTE]

"One of the Living" is a great song, and it works so well as the opening credits are rolling....Quite a departure from the opening music of the first two movies.

[specialed]

As long as we're on Kubrick, A Clockword Orange is another one of those movies i got a lot more out of than i expected. I borrowed my uncles copy about a month ago and its been living in my dvd player ever since.

I know it's hard to think that i didn't expect much from such a classic, but what can i say...

I'm 21. I was raised on die hard and ghostbusters.