HorseFilms
Look ma no hands
I'd like to say that the Lord of the Rings movies sucked, but I couldn't stay awake long enough to make that statement.:evil:
"Great" Movies that Suck
- Thread starter Pen Cap Chew
- Start date
oneinfiniteloop
Veteran
I don't know if I can say that these movies really "sucked", but they did disappointment me. I don't know if it was all the hype, but...
King Kong & Chornicles of Narnia.
I rewatched King Kong the other night and I like the movie, but it just has some major annoyances in there. One being the constant use of these large sweeping helicopter shots on Skull Islan, and well, everywhere else. I think they were ill-placed and overused. Some of the dialogue was weak here and there, but that was more in the style of the 30's, I guess.
Eh, I liked it, but some things just let me down. The Spider Pit sequence was awesome, I'll have to give him that.
Narnia, I'll have to watch it again, but it kinda just meandered for me in the theater.
King Kong & Chornicles of Narnia.
I rewatched King Kong the other night and I like the movie, but it just has some major annoyances in there. One being the constant use of these large sweeping helicopter shots on Skull Islan, and well, everywhere else. I think they were ill-placed and overused. Some of the dialogue was weak here and there, but that was more in the style of the 30's, I guess.
Eh, I liked it, but some things just let me down. The Spider Pit sequence was awesome, I'll have to give him that.
Narnia, I'll have to watch it again, but it kinda just meandered for me in the theater.
Jeremy Ordan
Major Contributor
I'm a fan boy when it comes to Star Wars so I can't say that they sucked. There are a couple of other films that I thought were meant to be great but sucked (I'm going through the AFI Top 100 List)
Gone with the Wind
2001: A Space Odyssey
West Side Story
Amadeus
The Jazz Singer
-Jeremy
Gone with the Wind
2001: A Space Odyssey
West Side Story
Amadeus
The Jazz Singer
-Jeremy
dustino
Well-known member
Aw, man, I loved Amadeus. Haven't seen it in a few years, though - it's going in my Netflix queue, thanks for reminding.
2001 - agreed wholeheardedly. And Do the Right Thing is in my top ten favorite films of all time. Should have gotten an Oscar - but that could be said every year. The Oscars are fun to watch, but I sure don't think they represent the best films made in any given year.
2001 - agreed wholeheardedly. And Do the Right Thing is in my top ten favorite films of all time. Should have gotten an Oscar - but that could be said every year. The Oscars are fun to watch, but I sure don't think they represent the best films made in any given year.
krestofre
Knight of the Holy Order
Man, why is everyone down on 2001? I admit that in some ways it's a bit of literary and mental masturbation, but what a great film. And take it in terms of context. At that time no one had seen space. No one. There was no moon landing. But Kubrick took us there in amazing detail. I watch that film regularly, it's one of my all-time favorites, and I'm still blown away by how real that film looks.
And my last argument for how great 2001 is: Elvis stole the theme music. :laugh:
To each his own, I'm just sticking up for the film. :thumbsup:
And my last argument for how great 2001 is: Elvis stole the theme music. :laugh:
To each his own, I'm just sticking up for the film. :thumbsup:
Jeremy Ordan
Major Contributor
That's what's great about this thread, one person's poo poo is another person's gold. Look at the Devil's Rejects or Clerks or Kill Bill or American Beauty or Gladiator or Titanic debates that have taken place.
I know a lot of people are really high on The Patriot, but personally I thought it was nothing more than Braveheart in America, rather than "Unite the Clans" it was "Unite the Militia". I thought that sucked when I looked at the similarities.
I also thought Passion of the Christ sucked because it portrayed itself as historical yet was completely fabricated and full of holes.
Furthermore, I also thought that Spartan sucked. I know a lot of people love Mammet and think that he is brilliant beyond belief (and Glenngarry Glen Ross did ROCK!), but still, this was just stupid and it sucked too.
Summer blockbusters suck in general, but I don't think many people consider them great films.
-Jeremy
I know a lot of people are really high on The Patriot, but personally I thought it was nothing more than Braveheart in America, rather than "Unite the Clans" it was "Unite the Militia". I thought that sucked when I looked at the similarities.
I also thought Passion of the Christ sucked because it portrayed itself as historical yet was completely fabricated and full of holes.
Furthermore, I also thought that Spartan sucked. I know a lot of people love Mammet and think that he is brilliant beyond belief (and Glenngarry Glen Ross did ROCK!), but still, this was just stupid and it sucked too.
Summer blockbusters suck in general, but I don't think many people consider them great films.
-Jeremy
J.R. Hudson
Spirit Animal
Let me touch on some of these:
Now remember, we are talking about films that were suppossed to be GREAT.
Films like Narnia anb King Kong I don't think fall into the category by anyone
Good Will Hunting ? Loved it.
Gone with the Wind ? Lame. Before my time obviosuly.
2001: A Space Odyssey? Definately Lame.
West Side Story? I do not see the appeal. A genrational thing.
Amadeus? Loved it. F Murray Abraham alone is worth the price of admission.
The Jazz Singer? Who thinks this is great?
New Star Wars ? The epitome of sucktitude. Hoovers X 100 Sqaured. But I think only the SW Geeks actually think they are great anyways.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate 2001. Boring. If I want to fall asleep Ill turn this on. Kubrick was definately masturbating with this.
The Patriot is great popcorn stuff. I don't think it is like Braveheart anymore than Samurai was. Similiar lines ? Of course, but not blatant.
Who can't like the moment when Mel goes nuts and axes the Redcoat ?
Now remember, we are talking about films that were suppossed to be GREAT.
Films like Narnia anb King Kong I don't think fall into the category by anyone
Good Will Hunting ? Loved it.
Gone with the Wind ? Lame. Before my time obviosuly.
2001: A Space Odyssey? Definately Lame.
West Side Story? I do not see the appeal. A genrational thing.
Amadeus? Loved it. F Murray Abraham alone is worth the price of admission.
The Jazz Singer? Who thinks this is great?
New Star Wars ? The epitome of sucktitude. Hoovers X 100 Sqaured. But I think only the SW Geeks actually think they are great anyways.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hate 2001. Boring. If I want to fall asleep Ill turn this on. Kubrick was definately masturbating with this.
The Patriot is great popcorn stuff. I don't think it is like Braveheart anymore than Samurai was. Similiar lines ? Of course, but not blatant.
Who can't like the moment when Mel goes nuts and axes the Redcoat ?
OregonDank
Well-known member
alot of people think Training Day is great...i personally think it's a steaming pile...Denzel is completely unbelievable as a "thugged-out" cop...IMHO of course
setarcos
Well-known member
This is a general comment on perspective and one's ability to "get it" from my POV of course. Take no offense please if you have a different view.
Music land:
I grew up with Beatles, Led Zep, Deep Purple, Jimmy Hendrix, Pink Floyd, Queen, etc.
(whatever was "in vogue" in those days). Classical music was nothing but a constant irritation. Opera? I felt like breaking anything around me with a baseball bat to "stop the noise". Same went for violin music. Couldn't stand it.
I watched Amadeus in 1986 and I hardly made it to the end. Silence for 13 years. 1999 I happened to watch it again and.... I clicked! I got "hooked" on classical music and that was an irreversible process to this day (God bless Milos and the whole crew). Nevil Mariner (the conductor) is now SIR Nevil Mariner (hint). I still enjoy "Hotel California" and such but... the perspective has changed.
Mozart was the first to "get me" and break my thick ear skin. Others followed. As I started listening more and more, the perspective and taste have changed. I had/have a 6 CD collection of Beethoven's string quartet works. It took me over one year to "get it". I slept at night 6 months on that music and I got it (and learned to love it from that point onward)
Fine tunning one's taste is a rather lengthy process. Breaking the ice could be ever harder. How can one improve if one is offered abundant junk? (food, program, books, no name cloth, cars, etc) and his mind is manipulated? (Brain washed that is!)
From the above example into movies. For some a movie "sucks" for others is an absolute beauty. As Mark Twain said: the faith of a joke is not up to the mouth telling the joke, but the ear that's listening" (add Homer Simpson's classic “hehehe... I don't get it” ). Some may have not reached a certain level to "get" one movie or another, others may be beyond that level and therefore the same movie sucks.
Eh... I watched Braveheart, Amadeus, One Flew over..., My Fair Lady, 2001 and other movies countless times with more and more pleasure while skipping “the flavor of the day”. IMO, by judging an Oscar movie/or decision we are only evaluating our understanding relative to the finest. If we doubt the finest film makers opinion, what's left? I know sometimes there are politics involved as well, but the academy can not afford to loose credit over poor decisions.
Confucius said: don't use canons to kill mosquitoes. I dare to add: don't take your tooth ache to a psychiatrist (he may think you are nuts).
Who else should give out the Oscars? The crowd? The crowd has the wallet vote (pondered in the Academy's decision) but that's only one aspect and that could be influenced and manipulated merciless by media (Blair witch project, The passion of the Christ, etc).
What other factor comes to mind (about movies)is timing:
Think of the audiences level in those days when the movie was out and awarded!
Some stories were "in tune" with that "present" (Modern Times) but reached far beyond those days into human nature while others just captured the flavor of the relatively recent events (All quiet on the western front).
Now, we see all those movies with different eyes. We watched them, learned from them, we shoot and edit like never before. And we judge them.
Can WE do better? Do WE do any better than the ones we don't like?
Music land:
I grew up with Beatles, Led Zep, Deep Purple, Jimmy Hendrix, Pink Floyd, Queen, etc.
(whatever was "in vogue" in those days). Classical music was nothing but a constant irritation. Opera? I felt like breaking anything around me with a baseball bat to "stop the noise". Same went for violin music. Couldn't stand it.
I watched Amadeus in 1986 and I hardly made it to the end. Silence for 13 years. 1999 I happened to watch it again and.... I clicked! I got "hooked" on classical music and that was an irreversible process to this day (God bless Milos and the whole crew). Nevil Mariner (the conductor) is now SIR Nevil Mariner (hint). I still enjoy "Hotel California" and such but... the perspective has changed.
Mozart was the first to "get me" and break my thick ear skin. Others followed. As I started listening more and more, the perspective and taste have changed. I had/have a 6 CD collection of Beethoven's string quartet works. It took me over one year to "get it". I slept at night 6 months on that music and I got it (and learned to love it from that point onward)
Fine tunning one's taste is a rather lengthy process. Breaking the ice could be ever harder. How can one improve if one is offered abundant junk? (food, program, books, no name cloth, cars, etc) and his mind is manipulated? (Brain washed that is!)
From the above example into movies. For some a movie "sucks" for others is an absolute beauty. As Mark Twain said: the faith of a joke is not up to the mouth telling the joke, but the ear that's listening" (add Homer Simpson's classic “hehehe... I don't get it” ). Some may have not reached a certain level to "get" one movie or another, others may be beyond that level and therefore the same movie sucks.
Eh... I watched Braveheart, Amadeus, One Flew over..., My Fair Lady, 2001 and other movies countless times with more and more pleasure while skipping “the flavor of the day”. IMO, by judging an Oscar movie/or decision we are only evaluating our understanding relative to the finest. If we doubt the finest film makers opinion, what's left? I know sometimes there are politics involved as well, but the academy can not afford to loose credit over poor decisions.
Confucius said: don't use canons to kill mosquitoes. I dare to add: don't take your tooth ache to a psychiatrist (he may think you are nuts).
Who else should give out the Oscars? The crowd? The crowd has the wallet vote (pondered in the Academy's decision) but that's only one aspect and that could be influenced and manipulated merciless by media (Blair witch project, The passion of the Christ, etc).
What other factor comes to mind (about movies)is timing:
Think of the audiences level in those days when the movie was out and awarded!
Some stories were "in tune" with that "present" (Modern Times) but reached far beyond those days into human nature while others just captured the flavor of the relatively recent events (All quiet on the western front).
Now, we see all those movies with different eyes. We watched them, learned from them, we shoot and edit like never before. And we judge them.
Can WE do better? Do WE do any better than the ones we don't like?
setarcos
Well-known member
wow, it took me two hours for the above post and meanwhile 5 other new posts popped up. I ....am.... getting.... slower.... and ....slower....
my... mind....is.... gRoWing....
Good afternoon gentleman.
My wife (nurse) made a staggering discovery:
She observed (over time) the behavior of Alzheimer patients and a few days ago, she "clicked" : they sound like HAL from 2001. All that's left is memories from youth, tunes from those days, etc. Primary info like DOS vs. Windows.
Yeah... sing it for me HAL!
dAiZy.. dAYSZiY....... (lol)
my... mind....is.... gRoWing....
Good afternoon gentleman.
My wife (nurse) made a staggering discovery:
She observed (over time) the behavior of Alzheimer patients and a few days ago, she "clicked" : they sound like HAL from 2001. All that's left is memories from youth, tunes from those days, etc. Primary info like DOS vs. Windows.
Yeah... sing it for me HAL!
dAiZy.. dAYSZiY....... (lol)
ExtremeSleuth
Veteran
I thought Mission Impossible 2 was going to be better than it was. I like it, it's entertaining, but it could have been a LOT better.
The big one that comes to mind was The Hulk. It could have been a GREAT comic book movie, but it just sucked bad!!! I mean really bad...
The big one that comes to mind was The Hulk. It could have been a GREAT comic book movie, but it just sucked bad!!! I mean really bad...
Jeremy Ordan
Major Contributor
Dan that was an extremely point on post, but I still must reply to one aspect...
I always thought it was "He who goes to bed with itchy backside wakes up with stinky finger"
-Jeremy
dan said:
I always thought it was "He who goes to bed with itchy backside wakes up with stinky finger"
-Jeremy
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
I would agree that Good Will Hunting is way overrated, and I agree with Barry_S that Crash was just...wow, I cannot believe that the actors even kept straight faces through that turd.
But to go way back, personally I have always thought Citizen Kane WAY overrated too. I know it was supposed to be ground-breaking and all, and I kind of wished I could've been there for the whole Hearst flap over it. But it's not like the greatest movie of all time or anything.
But to go way back, personally I have always thought Citizen Kane WAY overrated too. I know it was supposed to be ground-breaking and all, and I kind of wished I could've been there for the whole Hearst flap over it. But it's not like the greatest movie of all time or anything.
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
thank you dan. your thoughts on music relate to my experience with cinema. in my teens i couldn't get enough of Tony Scott. True Romance, Revenge, even Days of Thunder were counted amongst my favorite movies. Then, i heard Martin Scorsese's commentary on a Criterion laserdisc of Taxi Driver. Suddenly a veil had been lifted. i began to understand the "language" of film and of its potential to communicate human experience via aesthetics.
This opened my eyes to the sort of films I had dismissed earlier. I found I was beginning to understand what Kubrick was doing, what the French New Wave was about, and why Citizen Kane is revered as a milestone of technique, et cetera, et cetera. My appreciation for world cinema has only continued to evolve toward a more refined aesthetic. I can still enjoy films designed purely for entertaining mass audiences, but the films that mean the most to me, the ones that have a real impact on my intellect and emotions, explore (to some degree) a certain kind of transcendental humanism (breaking the waves, blue white red, lilya 4-ever, rosetta, werckmeister harmonies). If i had been shown these films when I was 19, I would have failed to recognize what was being communicated. i didn't have necessary acumen to understand them.
obviously, i catch a lot of flak for the films i like to watch. many people are not interested in this and dismiss it as pretensious or cinematic masturbation. although, masturbation to me would better describe the short-lived thrills provided by mainstream cinema. but now i'm digressing and mixing metaphors.
i'm not sure why so few understand how deeply these films can touch me. but i understand some people are only interested in the "art" of entertainment, while I and a few others continue seeking the art of human experience.
so with that being said. I like the ideas behind 2001. the idea of evolving beyond the usefulness of our tools (a bone, a spacecraft, language, our own bodies). but the execution of that film can make it a trying experience to watch. the "wonder" of the space docking scene, for example, just doesn't hit us the way it did in 1968. so now, its just painfully long.
This opened my eyes to the sort of films I had dismissed earlier. I found I was beginning to understand what Kubrick was doing, what the French New Wave was about, and why Citizen Kane is revered as a milestone of technique, et cetera, et cetera. My appreciation for world cinema has only continued to evolve toward a more refined aesthetic. I can still enjoy films designed purely for entertaining mass audiences, but the films that mean the most to me, the ones that have a real impact on my intellect and emotions, explore (to some degree) a certain kind of transcendental humanism (breaking the waves, blue white red, lilya 4-ever, rosetta, werckmeister harmonies). If i had been shown these films when I was 19, I would have failed to recognize what was being communicated. i didn't have necessary acumen to understand them.
obviously, i catch a lot of flak for the films i like to watch. many people are not interested in this and dismiss it as pretensious or cinematic masturbation. although, masturbation to me would better describe the short-lived thrills provided by mainstream cinema. but now i'm digressing and mixing metaphors.
i'm not sure why so few understand how deeply these films can touch me. but i understand some people are only interested in the "art" of entertainment, while I and a few others continue seeking the art of human experience.
so with that being said. I like the ideas behind 2001. the idea of evolving beyond the usefulness of our tools (a bone, a spacecraft, language, our own bodies). but the execution of that film can make it a trying experience to watch. the "wonder" of the space docking scene, for example, just doesn't hit us the way it did in 1968. so now, its just painfully long.
Last edited:
Blaine
Mr. Hollywood
cygnet74 said:
cygnet74 said:
Perhaps the reason some think you pretentious might have something to do with your attitude that people who like something different than you are only interested in the "art" of entertainment while you, being at a higher intellectual level (?), continue seeking the art of human experience.. Sounds kind of pretentious to me.
setarcos
Well-known member
Yeah.. that's what I said, idealizing the whole situation and getting politics out of the way. In real life; are the finest film makers that ones that do make the best movies, the ones that ADVERTISE it best (beat the drum loudest) or the ones judging them after years of practicing the craft??
Define the
Define the
Last edited:
Zak Forsman
Major Contributor
then you misinterpret me. by "art of entertainment", i refer to the skills, talents, and craft that goes into making films with broad appeal. i make no judgement on their value to our culture. and still, for finding a select few films that touch me in a way most mainstream movies can't, i am pretentious? films that reveal the human experience are very important to me. they give me something i value. i'm not putting down anyone who doesn't seek the same thing because everyone's ability to recognize and interpret what's being communicated by a particular film is different. we don't all have the same faculty for understanding cinematic aesthetics in the same way because we all learned to appreciate film differently. ask yourself why its so gratifying for you to call me pretentious?Blaine said:
Last edited:
Mark Harris
Pain in the ass
Oh yeah, 2001 I do like. It's weird and stiff and very cold. But Kubrik is a pretty cold filmmaker in general. However, I am mesmerized every time I see it. It's about the best Sci-Fi movie I've ever seen. I guess I can get why people don't like it, but...