Movies We Didn't Like.

[Shawn Mielke]

I actually manage to not see many bad movies these days. I have a sixth sense for them at this point, in combination with a "life is too short" attitude. Most films are quite shallow and plod along like novels or Three's Company. Most of cinema can be classified as Stupid Human Tricks, as far as I'm concerned.
Let's see, what's come up in recent days...

Scarface - wow, insatiably worthless drivel. Why do we do this to ourselves?

Naqoyqatsi - total failure as cinema. Thumb in eye symbolism and distracting image effects. This failure matters to me because the first two in the trilogy, particularly the first, have had such a lasting, positive, and profound impact on me as an artist and thinker and participant in Life.

I'm running short on my list! That's good, right? It means I've chosen to focus on what really matters most to me. Have we started a thread for this area yet? I'll look around.

[Robert Knecht Schmidt]

Speaking of The Sixth Sense... I've often thought that the best way to watch Shyamalan films is on VHS in fast-forward.

[Phil French]

Any "video game" movies suck. "Natural Born Killers" is a movie I have never been able to sit through and I have sat through some god awful flicks. I'm pleased to see that there are some fellow Kubrick haters to be found. I didn't like "Chicago". I never have liked musicals, but "Moulin Rouge" was even worse. Was it really a musical? What the hell was that anyways?

[Shawn Mielke]

Kubrick had a positive influence on me in my adolesence, but I feel I've pretty much outgrown him. I do like Barry Lyndon quite a lot, though.

[Mike Butler]

"No flame intended..."
I know, that's cool, I'm just being generally pre-emptive here.

"I agree that there are no right or wrong answers here."
That's what I like about this thread.

Ok, here's another sucky movie: "Glengarry Glen Ross." Just really depressing and annoying.

[Steve McDonald]

There's a tie for the two worst movies I ever saw. "Joe Vs. the Volcano" and "Lust in the Dust". Everyone who appeared in either of those should be ashamed for being tricked into having such a degrading mark on their filmographies. Of course, the maker of Lust in the Dust, deliberately tried for it to be the worst movie of all time and was hugely successful. How sad that the other one apparently was intended to have some redeeming qualities.

Steve McDonald

[Brent Ray]

Here's my list of movies that most people like, but I really didn't find impressive at all:

- Goodfellas (another mob movie.... what else is new?)
- Lawrence of Arabia (loved the first half, but I wanted to kill myself as it dragged on and on)
- Resevoir Dogs (flat and dull... I'm really not a Tarantino fan)
- Donnie Darko (Although in this community I'm probably not alone)

and I'm really gonna get it for this one, but....

- Citizen Kane

I thought it was boring to be honest. Yes it was monumental in reshaping the art of cinema, and it has tons of redeeming qualities, but I seriously fell asleep the first time I saw it. I just wasn't very impressed considering it's the #1 movie on AFI's 100 best list.

I'm sure there are others but this is all I can think of for now. For some reason, people absolutely love these movies and I just didn't find them very enjoyable to be honest. I won't bother mentioning the B-movies I don't like because it's pretty obvious that most people don't like them.

[Joe Carney]

This thread reminds me. All you folks should go to Ray Carneys' site and read his thoughts on American Cinema, how most movie critics are clueless dilletantes and what he feels good independent cinema is.

While he is p#ssing you off, remember..
He isn't trying to get you to agree with him. He is trying to get you to think for yourself and be honest.

He also understands how difficult it is to think outside the limited universe that commercial film making has been shoving down our collective throats.

One of the reasons I like him is because he is so strongly against ideoligcal films. They are nothing more than propaganda. Advertising for the self rightious set(pick one, left or right). He (like me) believes extremist ideologies destroy real art. (whether it's political, or religious).


btw, if all you want to do is make low budget versions of Hollywood movies, I wouldn't recomend reading his stuff.

He is also the foremost authority on John Cassavetes.

Believe it or not, many of you have similar sentiments to his.
It's nice to see that.

http://people.bu.edu/rcarney/

[Joshua Starnes]

Carney makes some decent points about breaking the rules of storytelling to tell new stories, but he also makes the classic iconclast mistake that good art must be complex art. What the hell is wrong with a good story well told anyway? He also makes the classic mistake of labeling Hollywood films mass produced art when they're not. They're art produced by masses.


As to films I like but no one else does:

I don't know. I really, really like the Star Wars prequels. A lot.

I don't know what else. Of stuff I've seen on this list - I love Shawshank, I love Joe Vs. The Volcano I think it's Hanks best movie. I'm more or less indifferent to the Matrix sequels - they're fun to watch if you don't think about them too much. Love The Godfather. Love Deer Hunter, though it is certainly not my favorite Vietnam movie. And I haven't yet seen a Tarantino movie I didn't like. Same with Lynch.

And I may be alone on this, but I did really like Donnie Darko.

The worst movie I've seen in the last decade or so was Batman & Robin. I was with some other people so I couldn't leave, but I did get up and stroll around the theater a bit, and didn't care what I'd missed.

Felt about the same for Godzilla and The Postman. I didn't hate Titantic, but I was awful bored by it, the dialog and the acting were so bad. The same with Braveheart. Between that and The Passion, Mel Gibson has used up his lifetime's share of slow motion, the over crank should be permanently removed from his camera. I know there's stuff I've seen that I thought was overrated, but I can't think of it right now. Didn't care for About Schmidt too much. It was just so obvious and condescending.

[Joe Carney]

I have strong disagreements with some of his conclusions also. He is sometimes given over to outrageous statements intended to upset more than educate. His dismisive attitude about movies dealing with the Holocaust is unforgivable.
He tends to reject the influence of outside forces and the impact they have on our lives. For him, it's the inward journey, the ever growing minutae of the inner self. blah. Most people really aren't that deep. Most people lie to everyone and about everything many times during their lives. Most people already know that and they don't want to pay 10 bucks to be reminded of it on the screen.

Even the philosiphers know there is difference between self discovery and selg absortion.


But I agree with his assesment that hollywood films talk down to their audiences telling them when to laugh, cry, jump,scream, be sad, be glad....Hollywood doesn't trust the public to figure things out for themselves, and over the years the public has bought into it.
Hollywood rarely produces art. They are in the entertainment business. Nothing wrong with that.

Art isn't about being beautiful or even complex. It's about redefining the boundries of what is normal. many times it's starts out rather ugly and confusing until enough people start to get it. And art shouldn't be for the elite or the snob, it should be for everyone, even though not everyone will understand it.

I think it is entirely possible to add depth , discovery and meaning to a genre film if done right.

Which is why I laugh when clueless dillitants criticize Kubriks' 2001 or movies like BladeRunner or
Get upset over Cassevetes 'Woman Under the Influence' because the characters are flawed and very real and like most people, sometimes very unlikeable.
Those people want movies to be their rah rah affirmation about theire own shallow lives.

I mean reading one post where someone 'grew' out of Kubrik tells me they never got him in the first place.

We haven't even begun to list all the bad movies.

[Yi Fong Yu]

re: quentin's best.
i think kill bill (the whole thing) is his magnum opus (thus far). i didn't like all 3 of his other works as much as kb cause kb had heart (literally) between uma the mother and the child. i think it's quentin growing up. i didn't get res dogs, pulp hoopla, jackie brown was extremely slow.

Chris,
oh i absolutely agree with you chris, the problem with modern film+stage is that everything is so anti-everything, so negative. for a REALLY good musical check out Silk Stocking (50s). it not only had good musical numbers but excellent dialogue/story. you+thewife will luv it i garauntee it... but it can be rented in places like netflix not your local video store.

<<<-- Originally posted by Chris Hurd : The wife and I absolutely loathed Chicago.*snip*-->>>

Rob, people who luv the matrix trilogy (all 3) falls into a SMALL minority of people. you're the first person on the internet i know who liked all 3, CONGRATS! you should pick up some of the books they have on the matrix. very interesting, especially baudrillard. i still believe (which is a theme driven home by oracle @end of revolution) that the matrix trilogy is the most "philosophical" films ever made.

<<<-- Originally posted by Rob Lohman : I actually liked the whole Matrix trilogy, especalliy since I started
reading more into all kinds of stuff. I didn't like all of it, but mostly-->>>

[Joshua Starnes]

i think it's quentin growing up. i didn't get res dogs, pulp hoopla,

Pulp Fiction is about Grace. That's all you need to know.

[Cleveland Brown]

The Blair Witch Project.

Stupidest F(&%n movie I have ever seen. Great Marketing. Horrible Movie. I can't believe they sold millions of tickets. How the hell do you get lost in the woods in a couple of hours in broad daylight. Then that 5 minute scene where we look up that crying b!$%es snot hole for five minutes. Actually that part was one of the most horrifying things I have ever seen.

Just for the record, you are all allowed to bash my movies when I get around to them. That would at least imply that you watched them. How about another thread about movies that are cool.

[Steven White]

I think the Matrix sequels failed because they spent too much time with unimaginative cliche characters in the "real world" and thus lost the narrative drive of the story focused on The One. I think if you took the Matrix sequels and edited out 90% of what didn't involve Neo, you could end up with a well conceived film. The theme of peace and spiritual enlightenment at the end is inspired, if not exceptionally well acheived.

I loathe the Kubrick films - most recently saw Dr. Strangelove, and thought "Gee, this movie would be supremely funny if they didn't keep going to these drawn out-still shots that eliminate any sense of comedic pacing." The material was still funny beyond that, but there's no excuse for poor editing.

[Keith Loh]

There was a cinephile hoo haw about the issuing of the 'director's cut' of Sam Fuller's "Big Red One" at the local cinematheque. One of the people I trust who is a big cineaste said it was on his best of list this year.

Well, I remember seeing it as a kid and I loved war movies but I think I gave it a fair grade then and I give I was pretty disappointed.

This was everything I hated about war movies growing up.

Not enough realism (blood and guts, proper heavy equipment, tactics), cliche characters and drawling narration.

It dragged on and on. There were some funny scenes but it was a big snore mostly. I liked the bare bones structure of it with the parallel German sergeant character but it wasn't tightly integrated.

People who have seen the appearance of authenticity in "Saving Private Ryan" would probably be appalled at this, even given "SPR's" story problems.