PDA

View Full Version : Movies you always wanted to see that dissapoint



Ltlabner
02-07-2008, 05:07 PM
Right or wrong, I've always thought Cannonball Run was supposed to be a funny movie. Not comedy genious or anything but at least amusing.

So when I saw it for $5 at Wall-Mart I picked it up. I got all snuggled up under the blankie with some pop-corn and my dog and prepared to be amused.

Wow. That movie sucked. I turned if off about 1/2 way through.

Quibble over whether Cannonball Run was supposed to be funny, but in my mind at least, it was a movie that was always on my "I gotta watch that sometime" list and turned out to be a total dissapointment.

Got any other movies that you finally got to watch only to be horrably dissapointed?

Scrap Irony
02-07-2008, 05:11 PM
The Shining. Slow, not nearly as spooky as the book (though the twins in the hallway were cool), and Jack being Jack.

Yawn.

Yachtzee
02-07-2008, 05:15 PM
Right or wrong, I've always thought Cannonball Run was supposed to be a funny movie. Not comedy genious or anything but at least amusing.

So when I saw it for $5 at Wall-Mart I picked it up. I got all snuggled up under the blankie with some pop-corn and my dog and prepared to be amused.

Wow. That movie sucked. I turned if off about 1/2 way through.

Quibble over whether Cannonball Run was supposed to be funny, but in my mind at least, it was a movie that was always on my "I gotta watch that sometime" list and turned out to be a total dissapointment.

Got any other movies that you finally got to watch only to be horrably dissapointed?

If you didn't watch that one when you were 12-14 years old, it's probably not going to be funny for you. It's one of those films that just doesn't age well. It was also made in an age when people got great pleasure out of watching handsome everymen in fast cars getting one over on the "Smokeys," before everyone became concerned about crazy people leading cops on high-speed chases and endangering the public.

RichRed
02-07-2008, 05:16 PM
I'm sure The Graduate was a big deal when it came out but I finally saw it for the first time recently and it bored me to tears.

MrCinatit
02-07-2008, 05:17 PM
I agree - Cannonball Run is freaking horrible. It is like one giant drinking party.

While Birth of a Nation introduced many cinematic firsts, the film itself is one of the most blatantly racist films ever made - and a pure embarrassment to watch.

I actually find quite a bit of Gone With The Wind to drag on.

The Titanic could not sink fast enough for me.

Mario-Rijo
02-07-2008, 05:20 PM
Striptease, Enuff said! ;)

westofyou
02-07-2008, 05:22 PM
East of Eden and Giant - James Dean... YAWN...

Ltlabner
02-07-2008, 05:22 PM
If you didn't watch that one when you were 12-14 years old, it's probably not going to be funny for you. It's one of those films that just doesn't age well. It was also made in an age when people got great pleasure out of watching handsome everymen in fast cars getting one over on the "Smokeys," before everyone became concerned about crazy people leading cops on high-speed chases and endangering the public.

Doesn't age well is right.

I found Smokey and The Bandit to be pretty funny and still do (good god, can't believe I just posted that) and it was generally the same movie. Of corse, Gleason killed in it and Reynolds "sly guy" act was a bit newer and fresher. It's a bit more kitch, if you will which gives it some sort of weird charm.

CBR just struck me as some movie excs trying to cash in on S&B and figuring if they just dropped enough stars into the project it would kill. I never did figure out the Roger Moore thing. Was he Seymour Goldfarb, Jr pretending to be Moore. Or was it really supposed to be Roger Moore. In the end, I just didn't care.

pedro
02-07-2008, 05:23 PM
Cannonball run was just an excuse to wear jumpsuits and do coke.

I thought "Easy Rider" was horrible.

RichRed
02-07-2008, 05:34 PM
I thought "Easy Rider" was horrible.

Me too. Another total bore.

Handofdeath
02-07-2008, 05:40 PM
Right or wrong, I've always thought Cannonball Run was supposed to be a funny movie. Not comedy genious or anything but at least amusing.

So when I saw it for $5 at Wall-Mart I picked it up. I got all snuggled up under the blankie with some pop-corn and my dog and prepared to be amused.

Wow. That movie sucked. I turned if off about 1/2 way through.

Quibble over whether Cannonball Run was supposed to be funny, but in my mind at least, it was a movie that was always on my "I gotta watch that sometime" list and turned out to be a total dissapointment.

Got any other movies that you finally got to watch only to be horrably dissapointed?

First off, if Wal Mart was selling it for $5, that should have tipped you off. There actually was a Cannonball II movie made that is considered to be even worse. I saw them both a long time back and I thought they were pretty good. I bought them both years later at Wal Mart for about the same price you paid and they sat in my house for 7 years and I never watched them once.

westofyou
02-07-2008, 05:43 PM
Being in Journey was just an excuse to wear jumpsuits and do coke.


I fixed that for you

Ltlabner
02-07-2008, 05:46 PM
First off, if Wal Mart was selling it for $5, that should have tipped you off.

WM has a bunch of movies on the cheap. Terminator 2 was on sale for $5. Does that mean it sucks too?

I think their price levels for movies is something like $5, $7.50 and $13.50 and then you get into the new releases and whatnot.

There's plenty of good movies in the "cheep" section.

Rojo
02-07-2008, 06:02 PM
I heard a lot of hype about Donnie Darko -- the great twisted classic that was overlooked because of Sept 11th. Meh. It felt like the work of film student who mashed a bunch of movie ideas together.

I felt the same about Leaving Las Vegas and Rushmore. I've never bothered with any other Wes Anderson movies. I leave "cool' to the kiddies, I want a good flick.

Roy Tucker
02-07-2008, 06:05 PM
Most any movie with Adam Sandler or Chris Farley in it. For that matter, any movie with a SNL cast member from the last 10 years.

They do great at the box office, lots of people say its great, I go and I never laugh. Even once. *Never* laugh. Gratuitous stupidity.

Rojo
02-07-2008, 06:06 PM
East of Eden and Giant - James Dean... YAWN...


They have nothing on Dr. Zhivago, a cinematic valium.

Rojo
02-07-2008, 06:07 PM
Most any movie with Adam Sandler or Chris Farley in it. For that matter, any movie with a SNL cast member from the last 10 years.

They do great at the box office, lots of people say its great, I go and I never laugh. Even once. *Never* laugh. Gratuitous stupidity.

Dude was always more "energy" than "funny" and now he's neither. Take the first sitcom offer you get Adam.

Handofdeath
02-07-2008, 06:10 PM
WM has a bunch of movies on the cheap. Terminator 2 was on sale for $5. Does that mean it sucks too?

I was being facetious. I guess you missed that.

BUTLER REDSFAN
02-07-2008, 06:21 PM
1983--Superman III--the one with Richard Pryor-UGH!!!!

redsfanmia
02-07-2008, 06:25 PM
Mean Streets and Serpico top the list for me.

Puffy
02-07-2008, 06:27 PM
Dr. Strangelove.

TeamCasey
02-07-2008, 07:04 PM
Solaris!

I wanted to stick a fork in my eye from boredom.

TeamCasey
02-07-2008, 07:07 PM
Mulholland Drive

GAC
02-07-2008, 07:28 PM
WM has a bunch of movies on the cheap. Terminator 2 was on sale for $5. Does that mean it sucks too?

Everytime I hit WMs I stop by that $5 DVD bin/rack. I've picked up a lot of solid older movies for $5. I just bought Amadeus.

We were at work the other day taling about comedies and Up In Smoke entered the conversation. Found it at WMs on the cheap.

As far as movies that disappoint.....

There have been a lot that were either nominated for, or won, Oscars where I couldn't see what the hype was all about - Titanic, English Patient, Out Of Africa, are examples.

Falls City Beer
02-07-2008, 07:45 PM
Mulholland Drive

David Lynch is utter garbage. And this was a great big Gla******-full of it.

KronoRed
02-07-2008, 08:09 PM
Pulp Fiction, what a boring crap fest.

Falls City Beer
02-07-2008, 08:21 PM
Pulp Fiction, what a boring crap fest.

Quentin Tarantino is awful, too.

GAC
02-07-2008, 08:26 PM
Quentin Tarantino is awful, too.

I completely agree. I hear people brag on this guy all the time and I have yet to see anything by him I've liked.

Has anyone seen his latest? Death Proof.

Other then Platoon, I've never been enamored with Oliver Stone either.

Rojo
02-07-2008, 08:27 PM
Pulp Fiction, what a boring crap fest.


You really thought it was boring? I like iconoclasts but......boring?

Rojo
02-07-2008, 08:30 PM
There have been a lot that were either nominated for, or won, Oscars where I couldn't see what the hype was all about - Titanic, English Patient, Out Of Africa, are examples.

I was going to mention Out of Africa. If Dr. Zhivago is white noise, OOA is at least summer storm.

Degenerate39
02-07-2008, 08:31 PM
Star Wars 1-3

That's all I can think of right now but there are plenty more.

Rojo
02-07-2008, 08:34 PM
Star Wars 1-3

That's all I can think of right now but there are plenty more.

edit, I thought you meant the chronological first three or, nevermind.

nate
02-07-2008, 08:35 PM
Billy Jack - I thought it was gonna be a Hapkido-fest. Instead, Crapkido.
Solaris - It was so boring my wife actually _didn't_ fall asleep

Rojo
02-07-2008, 08:37 PM
Billy Jack - I thought it was gonna be a Hapkido-fest. Instead, Crapkido.



Billy, Billy Jack, gobbles 'em down and the plate comes back for more Billy Jack.

Or am I confused?

KronoRed
02-07-2008, 08:43 PM
You really thought it was boring? I like iconoclasts but......boring?

It went nowhere and took forever to get there

CrackerJack
02-07-2008, 08:46 PM
The Doors Movie

The last 3 Star Wars movies

Rojo
02-07-2008, 08:48 PM
It went nowhere and took forever to get there

Its about storytelling, thus the title. I was entertained, especially the part where the main characters are lost as to what to do after shooting the kid and decide they better get to the writer's house.

Dom Heffner
02-07-2008, 08:51 PM
For me. Leaving Las Vgas was the worst film I've ever seen. What a waste of time. Movies like that are great for actors, but they leave the audience wanting to get sober.

Born on the Fourth of July had the same effect on me. Great performance, but it was so real I wanted out of the wheelchair at the end of the movie.

I don't go to movies to be depressed.

Dom Heffner
02-07-2008, 08:52 PM
And those last 3 Star Wars movies, indeed, were awful. They were like watching video games.

Falls City Beer
02-07-2008, 08:59 PM
Boogie Nights

Falls City Beer
02-07-2008, 09:02 PM
Its about storytelling, thus the title. I was entertained, especially the part where the main characters are lost as to what to do after shooting the kid and decide they better get to the writer's house.

I didn't think it was boring, exactly. Just awfully self-congratulatory. I just want the director to get out of the way and tell a story.

Ltlabner
02-07-2008, 09:36 PM
I found a copy of a Pink Panther movie that I had not seen. I picked it up and tossed it on the "view when you have time" pile.

There were a couple of Pink Panther movies I thought were pretty well done (and some that were crap). They weren't masterpieces, but enjoyable. But in any event, I was jazzed to watch one I hadn't already seen.

Turns out that Peter Sellers died before the film was finished. So the movie is about him disappearing and then there are a bunch of flashbacks (which were just sceens from previous movies cut and pasted into place). Basically it was the same clips of him falling down and being an idiot that I had already see 1,000 times.

MWM
02-07-2008, 09:55 PM
The Big Lebowski. One of the dumbest movies ever made. I can't believe I wasted two hours watching.

George Anderson
02-07-2008, 10:06 PM
"Wedding Crashers"....just dumb!!

Caveat Emperor
02-07-2008, 10:13 PM
"Friday the 13th" - not only was it stupid, but at no point did a dude in a hockey mask show up to kill people.

We did a marathon of horror movies one year in college, and it was a world of disappointment.

More recently: "Meet the Parents." I don't think I laughed once the entire time.

Johnny Footstool
02-07-2008, 10:16 PM
The Matrix 2 & 3 almost made me wish the original Matrix had never been made.


The Big Lebowski. One of the dumbest movies ever made. I can't believe I wasted two hours watching.

Agreed. What an absolute mess.

And I feel the same way about "Fargo".

But "Pulp Fiction" and "Boogie Nights" are cinematic masterpieces -- two of the most important and influential films of the 90s.

Danny Serafini
02-07-2008, 10:21 PM
Pulp Fiction was awful. The bits with John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson together were really good, but the rest was unwatchable.

Falls City Beer
02-07-2008, 10:30 PM
Pulp Fiction was awful. The bits with John Travolta and Samuel L. Jackson together were really good, but the rest was unwatchable.

Self-aware, tried much too hard.

Fargo on the other hand was excellent. Just real enough to be excruciating and cringeworthy (who among doesn't know a schlemiel like the WH Macy character), but fantastical enough to be completely disorienting and jarring.

I agree though that Big Lebowski was a bit of a letdown after the greatness of Fargo.

There Will Be Blood was pretty overwrought too. And I had high expectations for it. Wes and Paul Thomas Anderson need to go away. They ain't Ole Anderson, that's for sure.

Probably the best movie I've seen the last 4 months is Eastern Promises. Very engrossing.

Sean_CaseyRules
02-07-2008, 11:27 PM
A.I. was THE worst movie of all-time!!! I wish that the company would pay me time and a half just to watch the stupid movie!


I agree with FCB, Eastern Promise was awesome!

pedro
02-07-2008, 11:33 PM
I thought Fargo was brilliant.

I think A.I. would have been good had Kubrick finished it. That ending that Spielberg tacked on was pathetic.

BuckeyeRedleg
02-07-2008, 11:39 PM
Good call on Dr. Zhivago.

Betterread
02-08-2008, 12:05 AM
My dad loved John Wayne - he made such a big deal out of his movies. He built up these movies so much that when video came out and he could rent them, he would "lets watch John Wayne movies tonight". When I sat through these movies as a boy, I thought he may be the most inarticulate, inexpressive man that existed. I wondered what was wrong with me to think that way, after all my dad liked everything he did. So I never said anything - I just watched the movies. Now that I'm older and I see my dad less often, I'm glad I kept my opinion to myself.

cincinnati chili
02-08-2008, 02:05 AM
Wow. I will not be counting on some of you to recommend movies for me.

I loved Mulholland Drive, and I'm not a big david lynch fan. Didn't understand twin peaks. Usually think he's weird for weird sake.

Loved Pulp Fiction and Jackie Brown. So I can't say I agree about Tarantino being bad. I had no desire to see Kill Bill, but I suspect that if I forced myself to watch it and brave the bloodshed it would have something redeeming.

I loved Boogie Nights, Magnolia, and everything I've seen by PT Anderson.... even the Adam Sandler one.

Loved the Big Lebowski.

---

Here's my overrated list:


I was very disappointed by the first Matrix, and wouldn't have considered seeing the other ones.


Say Anything did nothing for me, and I like John Cusack a lot.


Thelma & Louise did nothing for me. I prefer the proverbial "chick" flick to watching two of my favorite female leads stooping to the cliches of male action leads.

Crash. Can't believe so many people liked this one so much. While I enjoyed snippets, I thought it was a disturbingly shallow and hyperbolic in its treatment of racial prejudice. It was praised for precisely what I thought it lacked.

pedro
02-08-2008, 02:47 AM
I thought the Matrix was weak.

Brutus_the_Red
02-08-2008, 05:16 AM
The Talented Mr. Ripley - i actually fell asleep IN the theatre.

1492 - 4 vhs tapes of terrible

Once Upon a Time in Amerca - i was told this was the best mob movie ever made... i failed to see it the same way.

Rocky Horror Picture Show - all my friends have some strange obsession with it. i've been to the "cult" viewings at the Neon in Dayton on numerous occasions. and i have hated it every time.

Eyes Wide Shut - boooooorrring....

Traffic - for the subject matter and whatnot, Requiem for a Dream was a FAR better and more gripping expose on drugs

And most everything made by Woody Allen... I guess I just don't get him. At all.

TeamCasey
02-08-2008, 05:44 AM
Probably the best movie I've seen the last 4 months is Eastern Promises. Very engrossing.


Cool. I just picked that one up for about 3 bucks.

Ltlabner
02-08-2008, 07:05 AM
I'm not a big Sci-Fi fan, but I did like the first Matrix. After seeing it I was interested in seeing the sequels.

Wow. Went from interesting concept, new special effects, involved story line and good visuals to....well....some sort of horrable high-school film project in Matrix II and Matrix III.

I've always wanted to see Butch Cassedy & The Sundance Kid. My parents always talked it up and mentally I had it stored away as a film I should probably watch someday.

WRONG. It was just plain dumb. At least The Sting had it's moments, but BC&SK was just a rambling, unconnected romp pretending to be a cowbow comedy.

Ltlabner
02-08-2008, 07:09 AM
Cannonball run was just an excuse to wear jumpsuits and do coke.

I am still giggling over this line.

I'm sure the person in the next hotel room is woundering what sort of idiot or serial killer is in the adjacent room.

nate
02-08-2008, 07:38 AM
Cannonball run was just an excuse to wear jumpsuits and do coke.

I think the coke came first. Nobody _starts_ with the jumpsuit.

cumberlandreds
02-08-2008, 08:14 AM
Ghostbusters was a bust for me. I remember going to the theater anticipating a very funny movie. But hardly chuckled throughout the show.

The Descent was pretty bad too. I thought it would be good but the creatures they came across in the cave were just laughable,IMO.

Sweeney Todd, a more recent movie, was a little disappointing. A little too much throat slashing for me. But I guess you should expect that in a Tim Burton movie.

durl
02-08-2008, 09:02 AM
The Star Wars prequels. Absolutely horrible. Nice special effects but the acting and writing were terrible. They never fit with the original 3. Then Lucas had to add "young" Anakin to the last scene of episode 6 with Yoda and Obi Wan??

They're not the worst movies ever made but in trying to mesh with 3 classics, they fall dismally short. If this is the best Lucas could come up with, they should have never been made.

chicoruiz
02-08-2008, 09:03 AM
Psycho is a few great moments separated by long periods of utter boredom.

I was totally amped to see American Beauty- it was supposed to be a masterpiece. What I saw was an artsy pretentious mess in which the teenagers understand more about life than the adults- which is what moviemakers do to pander to the demographic group that goes to see movies.

I like Clint Eastwood, but The Bridges of Madison County annoyed the hell out of me. Lots of people who live in rural America are bright, funny, interesting people, but in this movie everyone is a one-dimensional, narrow-minded boob except the lead couple. In fact one of the basic themes of the movie is the tragedy of the Meryl Streep character having to live in the country where, of course, everyone is too stupid to live in the city.

TRF
02-08-2008, 09:38 AM
Dr. Strangelove.

you sir, are a cad. That's a GREAT film.

"I don't avoid women Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence."

I love that movie.

TRF
02-08-2008, 09:44 AM
My wife and I are Johnny Depp fans. Well, her more than me, but we both agree that the Astronaut's Wife is the biggest piece of crap ever. Well that and anything with Theresa Russell in it.

RFS62
02-08-2008, 10:12 AM
you sir, are a cad. That's a GREAT film.

"I don't avoid women Mandrake, but I do deny them my essence."

I love that movie.


He's a cad and a bounder. Dr. Strangelove was a classic.

Man, I loved a bunch of the films getting hammered here.

Mulholland Drive is a piece of art. Startling visual images and it makes you think. Not for everyone, for sure.

Pulp Fiction, Big Lebowski and anything the Coen brothers have ever done, Boogie Nights.... loved them all.

And I never saw the big attraction in The Matrix, much less the sequels.

Keneau has the acting range of a mop.

Dom Heffner
02-08-2008, 10:21 AM
"Friday the 13th" - not only was it stupid, but at no point did a dude in a hockey mask show up to kill people.

Jason didn't show up until part 2 and didn't get the hockey mask until part 3, which was originally released in 3-D.

It would be tough to watch that one now without being disappointed. It would look horrible on video, because nearly a tenth of the shots are designed so some sort of action is coming right towards you to milk the 3-D effect. It would be truthfully terrible to watch. Not that it was a masterpiece in 3-D, but it was well worth the money to see the effects. The scene where Jason gets the hockey mask is one I'll never forget, simply because he shoots a harpoon right at the camera. Awesome.

The best "Friday" movies are parts 3 and 4, and after that the series got just plain weird.

RichRed
02-08-2008, 10:22 AM
I didn't like the Big Lebowski either. I even watched it twice to see if I was missing something. Nope. People are always quoting from that movie and I'm just not getting why it's funny.

Loved Fargo though.

Meet the Parents has to be one of the most overrated comedies ever.

Dom Heffner
02-08-2008, 10:26 AM
I didn't like the Big Lebowski either.

You have to be stoned to get it.

westofyou
02-08-2008, 10:31 AM
You have to be stoned to get it.

Or have a couple Lebowskis in your life (or past life)

klw
02-08-2008, 10:34 AM
Legends of the Fall

Chip R
02-08-2008, 10:49 AM
1983--Superman III--the one with Richard Pryor-UGH!!!!


But if there were no Superman III, there would be no Office Space.

Danny Serafini
02-08-2008, 11:12 AM
I liked the original Matrix, but the second one was a massive disappointment. I never bothered with the third.

I friend of mine was a huge Schwarzenegger fan back in the day. He actually had a calendar where he was marking off the days until they released The Last Action Hero. We still mock him over that one.

GAC
02-08-2008, 11:38 AM
Watched The Fountain w/ Hugh Jackman a few weeks ago. Well.... I tried to watch it anyway. Suffered through about 45 minutes of it before I realized I had no idea what was going on and turned it off. Simply horrible.

I never cared much for 2001: A Space Odyssey

sonny
02-08-2008, 11:55 AM
The Star Wars prequels. Absolutely horrible. Nice special effects but the acting and writing were terrible. They never fit with the original 3. Then Lucas had to add "young" Anakin to the last scene of episode 6 with Yoda and Obi Wan??

They're not the worst movies ever made but in trying to mesh with 3 classics, they fall dismally short. If this is the best Lucas could come up with, they should have never been made.

My God you couldn't be more right. The only redeeming quality of those movies was Ray Park's swordplay.

Highlifeman21
02-08-2008, 11:55 AM
Meet Joe Black

Vanilla Sky

John Tucker Must Die

Bring It On

Spiderman

Spiderman II

Spiderman III

WebScorpion
02-08-2008, 12:05 PM
Scarface.

I hate that blankin' movie! All they blankin' did was run around blankin' saying the word blank! Oh yeah, that and snort lots of coke and kill people. I'm sorry, but the movie glorifies all that I despise in this world. :thumbdown

Chip R
02-08-2008, 12:09 PM
Citizen Kane

westofyou
02-08-2008, 12:16 PM
Citizen Kane

Seen on the big screen makes that movie, the little screen squeezes out the beauty of the film making, the farther we get away from the Hearst era the less impact that film wields.

Chip R
02-08-2008, 12:41 PM
He's a cad and a bounder. Dr. Strangelove was a classic.



Yeah, but it wasn't The Cutting Edge.

pahster
02-08-2008, 12:46 PM
Scarface.


Agreed.

The Departed: Not a terrible movie, but I didn't think it was all that great. It had a pretty weak script. Stellar cast, though.

Pulp Fiction: I liked the non-linear story telling, acting, and directing, but felt that the story just wasn't there.

Star Wars episodes 1-3: Ugh.

X-Men 3: Why? WHY?!

Rojo
02-08-2008, 12:52 PM
Psycho I was totally amped to see American Beauty- it was supposed to be a masterpiece. What I saw was an artsy pretentious mess in which the teenagers understand more about life than the adults- which is what moviemakers do to pander to the demographic group that goes to see movies.

Thank you.

Raisor
02-08-2008, 12:57 PM
Yeah, but it wasn't The Cutting Edge.

DB Sweeney is a man among men.

klw
02-08-2008, 01:09 PM
Star Wars episodes 1-3: Ugh.



I though Part 3 was actually quite good. A couple of flaws but I enjoyed it and much better than part 1.

Raisor
02-08-2008, 01:13 PM
I though Part 3 was actually quite good. A couple of flaws but I enjoyed it and much better than part 1.


Episode I's saving grace was the lightsaber fight, which was worth the price of admission alone. Jake Lloyd probably should have been sent down river in a basket like Moses though. Sure, he might have become a prince of Egypt and leader of the Jews, but he probably wouldn't have been cast as Anakin.

durl
02-08-2008, 01:28 PM
X-Men 3: Why? WHY?!

Yep. Good call. I forgot about that one. Horrible movie. Disappointing story, characters, plot, you name it...

Rojo
02-08-2008, 01:29 PM
Never been sure why Fargo gets the kudos it does. It was a good movie, maybe a very good movie but it didn't have a big impact on me.

I liked The Big Lebowski, but its an extremely flawed movie, so I understand not liking it.

O Brother was utter crap.

I also get not liking Mulholland Drive but I thought it was awesome -- I couldn't look away.

Raisor
02-08-2008, 01:32 PM
O Brother was a utter crap.



You, sir, will not be getting a christmas card from me this year.

Rojo
02-08-2008, 01:37 PM
You, sir, will not be getting a christmas card from me this year.


If its any consolation, I love the soundtrack.

RichRed
02-08-2008, 01:48 PM
If its any consolation, I love the soundtrack.

Not only is the soundtrack great, the dialogue had an almost lyrical rhythm to it. Clooney's pretty darn funny in it, to boot. I love that movie.

Caveat Emperor
02-08-2008, 01:55 PM
I friend of mine was a huge Schwarzenegger fan back in the day. He actually had a calendar where he was marking off the days until they released The Last Action Hero. We still mock him over that one.

I must be the only person in America that enjoyed "Last Action Hero" -- it wavers from being incredibly witty to incredibly stupid, but it never fails to amuse me.

Seeing the cutout of Sly Stallone as "Terminator 2" was awesome.

KronoRed
02-08-2008, 01:57 PM
And most everything made by Woody Allen... I guess I just don't get him. At all.

Agreed, another guy who directs movies that are so bad you're supposed to think they are great.

Degenerate39
02-08-2008, 01:58 PM
I must be the only person in America that enjoyed "Last Action Hero" -- it wavers from being incredibly witty to incredibly stupid, but it never fails to amuse me.

Seeing the cutout of Sly Stallone as "Terminator 2" was awesome.

I watch Last Action Hero every so often when it comes on TV. I didn't dislike the movie but didn't care for it either.

bucksfan
02-08-2008, 02:07 PM
"Heaven is a Playground". I was so enthralled with the book Rick Telander wrote by this title that I guess I just knew the movie could not do it justice (that probably goes for a lot of books that get made into movies, eh?). Wel, it fell far short of what I had hoped to see, but the pitctures in my head from the book live on.

M2
02-08-2008, 02:11 PM
The Coen brothers don't leave room for fence sitters. I love 'em, including Lebowski. It's no Barton Fink, which is my favorite of theirs (an unapologetically weird film about the creative process), but Lebowski skewers the film noir genre. It's straight out of Durrenmatt (The Pledge), a look at how your standard "detective" plot would invariably unravel with anything but stock characters.

Anyway, Star Wars 1-3 and X-Men 3 are crimes against humanity. Return of the Jedi was more disappointing, though. Teddy bears fell an evil galactic empire? Please. We should have expected garbage from Lucas after that.

Movies I didn't bother to watch until the end:

9 1/2 Weeks - boring, faux kinky sex
A Simple Plan - Raimi, Paxton and Thornton and yet it was a disaster
Lost in Translation - No plot + no character development = me no likey

And worst Academy Award winner of all time is a tie for me:

Forrest Gump - pure pablum
Titanic - most ... contrived ... plot ... ever

Honorable mention:

Gladiator - don't get me wrong, I can watch this movie all day long. It's nine kinds of cool from a visual standpoint and it's even well-acted, but the plot is atrocious. Caligula made more sense.

Dom Heffner
02-08-2008, 02:15 PM
Seen on the big screen (Citizen Kane) makes that movie, the little screen squeezes out the beauty of the film making, the farther we get away from the Hearst era the less impact that film wields.


I watched Citizen Kane after hearing the accolades- I even read some of Roger Ebert's extensive work on it to prepare myself- and walked away being pretty disappointed.

I imagine for its time it was wonderful- a big, political beauty that must have wowed audiences and critics.

I didn't think it aged well. I watched it in 1997 and it did nothing for me. I can appreciate all Orsen Wells did and it was beautiful to look at (the scene where he stands at the podium giving a speech is awesome and to think there isn't a single person in the "audience"- it's all equipment) but passing time has taken it out of its context, stripping it of its power. I believe Ebert even said he was jealous of anybody who got to see it for the first time because it had such an impact on him when he saw it the very first time. That tells me it was something for its day.

For me, Streetcar Named Desire aged much better, for the simple fact that you can always relate to a screaming lunatic, and Brando's performance for me is king of them all.

But even Streetcar can be a tough viewing simply for the soundtrack. Those old films are hurt by the overbearing string music, which was prevalent in cinematic dramas. It gets to the point of nails on a chalkboard for me.

westofyou
02-08-2008, 02:20 PM
I didn't think it aged well.

Kane is as well known for it's ground breaking film making as the Battleship Potemkin or Birth of a Nation are, and yes they too don't age well. What was once odd and amazing (montage editing, duel story lines, showing the ceiling in a room being filmed, is no blase.

Kane was full of ground breaking things, things that stunned the film world and things that still today looks amazing when compared against it's peers.

IMO Kane is a Film, Streetcar is a great play that was made into a movie

Some of Kanes innovations


Film scholars and historians view Citizen Kane as Welles' attempt to create a new style of filmmaking by studying various forms of movie making, and combining them all into one. The most innovative technical aspect of Citizen Kane is the extended use of deep focus.[10] In nearly every scene in the film, the foreground, background and everything in between are all in sharp focus. This was done by renowned cinematographer Gregg Toland through his experimentation with lenses and lighting. Specifically, Toland often used telephoto lenses to shoot close-up scenes. Anytime deep focus was impossible — for example in the scene when Kane finishes a bad review of Alexander's opera while at the same time firing the person who started the review — Toland used an optical printer to make the whole screen appear in focus (visually layering one piece of film onto another). However, some apparently deep-focus shots were the result of in-camera effects, as in the famous example of the scene where Kane breaks into Susan Alexander's room after her suicide attempt. In the background, Kane and another man break into the room, while simultaneously the medicine bottle and a glass with a spoon in it are in closeup in the foreground. The shot was an in-camera matte shot. The foreground was shot first, with the background dark. Then the background was lit, the foreground darkened, the film rewound, and the scene re-shot with the background action.

Another unorthodox method used in the film was the way low-angle shots were used to display a point of view facing upwards, thus allowing ceilings to be shown in the background of several scenes.[11] Since movies were primarily filmed on sound stages and not on location during the era of the Hollywood studio system, it was impossible to film at an angle that showed ceilings because the stages had none. In some instances, Welles' crew used muslin draped above the set to produce the illusion of a regular room with a ceiling, while the boom mikes were hidden above the cloth.

One of the story-telling techniques introduced in this film was using an episodic sequence on the same set while the characters changed costume and make-up between cuts so that the scene following each cut would look as if it took place in the same location, but at a time long after the previous cut. In this way, Welles chronicled the breakdown of Kane's first marriage, which took years of story time, in a matter of minutes.

Dom Heffner
02-08-2008, 02:31 PM
IMO Kane is a Film, Streetcar is a great play that was made into a movie


I guess it's all in what thrills you. Big movies can be really great, but performances are what get my tail in the seat.

I'm probably alone in this- but what Marlon Brando did in that movie is far greater than film techniques and effects (again, just for me.)

A performance like that without the help of the camera, lighting, props, etc. has always gotten to me more.

westofyou
02-08-2008, 02:33 PM
A performance like that without the help of the camera, lighting, props, etc. has always gotten to me more.

That's why it's called acting and film making is light and shadows, combine the two and you get movies.

Rojo
02-08-2008, 02:34 PM
The Coen brothers don't leave room for fence sitters.

I'm on that fence. I liked most of their stuff but think they overreach at times. They're almost like a scene-chewing actor who's fantastic if you get him contained.

Rojo
02-08-2008, 02:35 PM
I watched Citizen Kane after hearing the accolades- I even read some of Roger Ebert's extensive work on it to prepare myself- and walked away being pretty disappointed.

Hard to imagine NOT being disappointed after that build up.

TRF
02-08-2008, 02:36 PM
Independence Day.

So see this alien race comes to earth, destroys all the major cities and they are taken down by the Fresh Prince and The Fly wielding a Mac notebook. The aliens never see it coming, even though they are telepathic. then the fresh prince out flies the entire alien armada after a few days training in one of their fighters that crashed on earth 50 years earlier.

Ltlabner
02-08-2008, 03:08 PM
I was sorta let down by Peter Kings wack at King Kong. I guess my bar was set pretty high after the Lord of the Rings and I thought maybe he could put an intresting twist on the classic movie. Maybe a new angle? Maybe tell the same story but do so in a breathtaking manner?

Nope.

Cheesy CG, Adrian Brodie and Jack Black trying not to tell a fart joke.

At least the hottie was nice to look at....but still not worth $9 and 3 hours. And still a let down.

durl
02-08-2008, 03:25 PM
Lost in Translation - No plot + no character development = me no likey

That's one that served to remind us (once again) that critical acclaim simply means that ONLY critics and the Hollywood elite will like the film. Throughout the movie, my wife and I were wondering "what's the point?" and by the end of the film we realized there never was one.

Rojo
02-08-2008, 03:34 PM
That's one that served to remind us (once again) that critical acclaim simply means that ONLY critics and the Hollywood elite will like the film. Throughout the movie, my wife and I were wondering "what's the point?" and by the end of the film we realized there never was one.

I'm neither and I liked it.

NYMoose
02-08-2008, 03:36 PM
I'm neither and I liked it.

I liked it also, there was so much said between the characters that was non-verbal.

Ltlabner
02-08-2008, 03:37 PM
Wild Hogs

I was totally jazzed to see the all-star cast weave it's magical spell over the unsuspecting audience.

Instead I saw the grumpy doctor from Scrub's butt.

Edit: All late Friday afternoon goofing around aside, Ray Liota can still play a psycho badass quite well.

klw
02-08-2008, 03:40 PM
Independence Day.

So see this alien race comes to earth, destroys all the major cities and they are taken down by the Fresh Prince and The Fly wielding a Mac notebook. The aliens never see it coming, even though they are telepathic. then the fresh prince out flies the entire alien armada after a few days training in one of their fighters that crashed on earth 50 years earlier.

I loved how at the time Mac's were not compatable with PC's but hey they can work with Alien computers.

klw
02-08-2008, 03:44 PM
Generally I am now concerned about any movie (nonaction) which has more than 6 american name actors. This generally wreaks of actors doing a friend a favor. Especially true if one of the actors is also the director. The rule of 6 does not seem to apply to British films but that just could be the truly bad ones just don't come over.

GAC
02-08-2008, 03:51 PM
While I enjoyed Silence Of The Lambs and the Dr. Hannibal Lecter character, I thought the sequels were weak and nothing more then an attempt to milk as much money out of that character.

redsfanmia
02-08-2008, 04:56 PM
1942 was a major disappointment.

klw
02-08-2008, 05:10 PM
1942 was a major disappointment.

So was 1492 :)

M2
02-08-2008, 05:13 PM
So was 1492 :)

Beware any film billed as 1924.

Joseph
02-08-2008, 05:31 PM
Beware any film billed as 1924.

What about 4192?

TRF
02-08-2008, 05:33 PM
I loved how at the time Mac's were not compatable with PC's but hey they can work with Alien computers.

That's the part that was believable.

TRF
02-08-2008, 05:34 PM
Grand Canyon kinda sucked.

klw
02-08-2008, 05:37 PM
What about 4192?

I'd wager it would be no good.

Roy Tucker
02-08-2008, 05:41 PM
I loved how at the time Mac's were not compatable with PC's but hey they can work with Alien computers.

At the time that movie came out, I was debugging a network driver that was crashing a major customers main email server (Boeing). I cannot emphasize how hot this trouble ticket was and how much of a headache this was.

And then I go watch this movie and a Mac is seamlessly integrated with some alien network and servers. I almost threw my popcorn at the screen. Ruined the movie for me.

Boston Red
02-08-2008, 05:44 PM
What about 4192?

How much would Pete charge to sign the DVD case?

paintmered
02-08-2008, 06:01 PM
At the time that movie came out, I was debugging a network driver that was crashing a major customers main email server (Boeing). I cannot emphasize how hot this trouble ticket was and how much of a headache this was.

And then I go watch this movie and a Mac is seamlessly integrated with some alien network and servers. I almost threw my popcorn at the screen. Ruined the movie for me.

That's kinda how Top Gun is for me.

KronoRed
02-08-2008, 06:07 PM
That's kinda how Top Gun is for me.

The Mig-28? ;)

redsfanmia
02-08-2008, 06:41 PM
How much would Pete charge to sign the DVD case?

It would be worth more if he didnt sign it, the guy signs everything.

paintmered
02-08-2008, 06:43 PM
The Mig-28? ;)

Among many other things in that movie...

Interestingly, over 20 years after "Top Gun", the Navy still flies the F-5 (the "MiG-28" in the movie) for dissimilar air combat training. It's always fun to look at U.S. planes in Soviet paint jobs.

http://www.warbirdphotos.net/aviapix/PostWW2/Fighters/US-PostVietnam/F5-F20-Tigershark/MK-f5eti.jpg

marcshoe
02-08-2008, 08:37 PM
Dr. Strangelove.


I felt that way the first time I saw it, when I was around 20. I had grown up a Peter Sellers fan (I can't count the number of times I had watched "The Mouse That Roared", which I haven't seen now in decades), and I finished the movie having laughed very little and understood even less.

Then I watched it again a couple of years later, and this time, I got it. Since then I have watched it over and over, and it's now in my all-time top five.

As far as movies that disappointed me, I'll go with The Patriot. Hey, let's throw in as many disasters and unconsciounable acts as possible! Who needs realism when you can have melodrama!

M2
02-08-2008, 09:27 PM
Grand Canyon kinda sucked.

The film itself was fairly blah, but it has a major saving grace in the form of Mary Louise-Parker.

pedro
02-08-2008, 09:56 PM
I think the coke came first. Nobody _starts_ with the jumpsuit.

:lol:

RedEye
02-08-2008, 10:20 PM
Garden State - sentimental, indie drek
Little Children - obvious voiceover over-explains the movie
Shakespeare in Love - are you kidding me?
Love Actually - Worst. Romantic. Comedy. Ever.

GoReds33
02-08-2008, 10:24 PM
Epic Movie. I just saw it on HBO the other day, and it was horrible. It had one or two good laughs in the whole thing.

RedEye
02-08-2008, 10:29 PM
Nacho Libre - Jack Black in tight pants does not a comedy make.

TRF
02-08-2008, 10:32 PM
I felt that way the first time I saw it, when I was around 20. I had grown up a Peter Sellers fan (I can't count the number of times I had watched "The Mouse That Roared", which I haven't seen now in decades), and I finished the movie having laughed very little and understood even less.

Then I watched it again a couple of years later, and this time, I got it. Since then I have watched it over and over, and it's now in my all-time top five.

As far as movies that disappointed me, I'll go with The Patriot. Hey, let's throw in as many disasters and unconsciounable acts as possible! Who needs realism when you can have melodrama!

I loved Dr. Strangelove the first time I saw it, about the same age.

And big time agree on the Patriot. My wife love Fight Club, I'm not a fan. I hated 8MM.

Master and Commander really disappointed me. And yet I own it. On the flip side I LOVED Kingdom of Heaven. The music in that film alone is enough to make me watch it.

GAC
02-09-2008, 10:05 AM
Not only is the soundtrack great, the dialogue had an almost lyrical rhythm to it. Clooney's pretty darn funny in it, to boot. I love that movie.

I love that flick as well, as well as Fargo. Pretty off-the-wall stuff. Another one was Reiner's The Princess Bride.

How anyone can't like those movies is....

"INCONCEIVABLE!"

http://keitholbermannisevil.files.wordpress.com/2007/03/wallace-shawn-vizzini.jpg


One movie that took me years to see, and even then I had a hard time sitting through it, was Costner's Dancing With Wolves. Blah!

Why does he have to make such lonnnnng movies.

Add Waterworld, Robin Hood: The Prince of Thieves, and The Postman to that list also.

Stewie
02-09-2008, 10:12 AM
I thought "Easy Rider" was horrible.

I just saw that for the first time a couple days ago, and was not impressed at all. Maybe when it came out it was good, but it just did not hold up at all almost 40 years later.

marcshoe
02-09-2008, 10:17 AM
Shakespeare in Love was mentioned. Agreed. I read Shakespeare for fun (and also enjoy Tom Stoppard plays), and I hated the movie. I thought that Joseph Fiennes was about as miscast as anyone I've ever seen.

Also, I tend to dislike Robert Altman movies, especially Nashville and Popeye (I'm not sure it's possible to enjoy Popeye). I did like Gosford Park (nice feel to it, a little different than most of his movies) and Prarie Home Compainion (still too Altman, but GK made it worthwhile, as did the performances). I'm not going to mention MASH for fear of being called a cretin.

Dom Heffner
02-09-2008, 10:29 AM
the dialogue had an almost lyrical rhythm to it.

They are masters that way. No Country for Old Men was a like a poem to me- it could have been about bingo night at the VFW hall and I would have been just as drawn.

ThatPitchIsDunn
02-09-2008, 10:29 AM
I completely agree. I hear people brag on this guy all the time and I have yet to see anything by him I've liked.

Has anyone seen his latest? Death Proof.

Other then Platoon, I've never been enamored with Oliver Stone either.

I don't necessarily agree with his views, but JFK and Born on the Fourth of July were incredible dramatic (if not entirely true) storytelling. JFK is as good as it gets for me.

ThatPitchIsDunn
02-09-2008, 10:33 AM
Going back a few pages, I'll agree with Highlifeman on Meet Joe Black. Why....did.....they.....talk.....so.....slowly.... ..in.....that....movie?

I'll submit Dante's Peak as well. Pierce Brosnan and a volcano! This will rock, right?

Or I could fall asleep in the theater.

Highlifeman21
02-09-2008, 11:19 AM
Going back a few pages, I'll agree with Highlifeman on Meet Joe Black. Why....did.....they.....talk.....so.....slowly.... ..in.....that....movie?

I'll submit Dante's Peak as well. Pierce Brosnan and a volcano! This will rock, right?

Or I could fall asleep in the theater.

I've always been amazed by Meet Joe Black.

Decent cast. Brad Pitt, Anthony Hopkins, Claire Forlani, Marcia Gay Harden.

Easily one of the worst movies any of them did.

Anthony Hopkins, freakin' great in my book, but wow was he abysmal in the movie, but then again maybe it was the movie that brought him down? How can he be so great in so many other movies like A Bridge Too Far, Silence of the Lambs, Howards End, Dracula, Chaplin, The Innocent, The Remains of the Day, The Road to Wellville, Legends of the Fall, Amistad, The Mask of Zorro, Hannibal, Red Dragon, and The Devil and Daniel Webster? Granted, I'm not saying those movies were good, per se, but he was good in them.

He must have needed the money when he did Meet Joe Black.

GoGoWhiteSox
02-10-2008, 09:09 PM
Pearl Harbor. That movie dissapointed me on many levels.

Plus, I don't get what the big deal is about Quentin Tarantino movies. I didn't care for Resovoir Dogs, I didn't care for Kill Bill 1 & 2, and I didn't care for True Romance. The only one I thought was okay was Pulp Fiction, but even that movie was needlessly long.

Don't even get me started on Minority Report.

Strikes Out Looking
02-10-2008, 09:30 PM
You guys are a tough crowd--O Brother is one of my favorite movies of all time, as is Pulp Fiction (even though Tarintino hasn't made a decent movie since).

But my entry has to be Risky Business--and since then I've dreaded seeing Tom Cruise in any movie (even though he has had 3 good movies to my count--Rain Man, Color of Money and Born on the Fourth of July--of course the last one of those was aobut 20 years ago).

Redsfaithful
02-11-2008, 04:32 AM
Wow. I will not be counting on some of you to recommend movies for me.

No kidding, I think I've lost count of how many of my favorite movies have been mentioned.

Lost In Translation for one, that's one of my favorite movies of the past few years. I wish Scarlett Johansson would do something else half as good.

I get the feeling there are a few people in this thread who disliked movies more for what they contained (language, violence) than what they were, which is fine, point just being everyone approaches things differently.

I mentioned this in the other movie thread, but I wanted to see The Fountain with Hugh Jackman for like a year, finally got it on Netflix, and barely got through it. There's a cult following with this movie so it obviously speaks to some people, just not me. Gorgeous visuals though, but I really found it excruciating.

Dom Heffner
02-11-2008, 05:23 AM
The Fountain with Hugh Jackman

One of the worst movies I have ever seen.

klw
02-11-2008, 10:05 AM
I've always been amazed by Meet Joe Black.

Decent cast. Brad Pitt, Anthony Hopkins, Claire Forlani, Marcia Gay Harden.

Easily one of the worst movies any of them did.



Joe Black has a classic scene in it where Brad Pitts character is hit by a Taxi. There is a dummy that is used which goes flying. Fakest looking prop in movie history. Hilarious. Even worse than Eddie Murphy's stunt double in the scene at the dining club in Beverly Hills Cop.

pahster
02-11-2008, 10:10 AM
I mentioned this in the other movie thread, but I wanted to see The Fountain with Hugh Jackman for like a year, finally got it on Netflix, and barely got through it. There's a cult following with this movie so it obviously speaks to some people, just not me. Gorgeous visuals though, but I really found it excruciating.

I enjoyed it, but it was very abstract. I can understand why many wouldn't like it.

Caveat Emperor
02-11-2008, 01:23 PM
I've seen hundreds of movies in my life, good and bad, but somehow I'd missed seeing "The Godfather" until last night.

There was a movie that absolutely did not disappoint. Years and years of "I can't believe you haven't seen this, you've gotta watch it" and I still walked away impressed.

Falls City Beer
02-11-2008, 01:32 PM
I've seen hundreds of movies in my life, good and bad, but somehow I'd missed seeing "The Godfather" until last night.

There was a movie that absolutely did not disappoint. Years and years of "I can't believe you haven't seen this, you've gotta watch it" and I still walked away impressed.

The Godfather delivers--anytime, anywhere. Deserves every syllable of its hype. Great story, great depth, great acting,--all that without one dull or slow moment. It's difficult not to judge every drama that you see after The Godfather by the self-same.

Gainesville Red
02-11-2008, 01:45 PM
Have you seen Godfather Pt. II?

I think it's just as good.

About a month ago I did the same thing you did. I'd put up with, "I can't believe you haven't seen that" for long enough.

I went to Books A Million and bought the book, read it over a week or so and used the next Sunday to watch parts I and II. Excellent, excellent movies. I loved DeNiro in the second. I skipped part III. Didn't want to leave a bad taste in my mouth.

By the way, to anyone that enjoyed the movies and likes to read, I'd suggest checking into the book. It's every bit as good as the movie. Probably better.

redsfanmia
02-11-2008, 02:17 PM
Have you seen Godfather Pt. II?

I think it's just as good.

I think Godfather Pt II is the superior film to Godfather.

Chip R
02-11-2008, 02:27 PM
I think Godfather Pt II is the superior film to Godfather.


I think an argument can be made for that.

Caveat Emperor
02-11-2008, 03:02 PM
Have you seen Godfather Pt. II?

I think it's just as good.

I got the box set for Christmas, so I'll be watching Pt. II sometime in the next few days.

Edskin
02-11-2008, 05:17 PM
Hearing people say they didn't like the Big Lebowski pains me in my heart.

TeamCasey
02-11-2008, 07:35 PM
I've seen hundreds of movies in my life, good and bad, but somehow I'd missed seeing "The Godfather" until last night.

There was a movie that absolutely did not disappoint. Years and years of "I can't believe you haven't seen this, you've gotta watch it" and I still walked away impressed.

Best movie ever.

vaticanplum
02-12-2008, 10:42 AM
I've seen hundreds of movies in my life, good and bad, but somehow I'd missed seeing "The Godfather" until last night.

There was a movie that absolutely did not disappoint. Years and years of "I can't believe you haven't seen this, you've gotta watch it" and I still walked away impressed.

In my family you have to watch the Godfather with my grandparents when you turn 15. It takes at least six hours because they stop the movie every three minutes to tell stories. Then a couple of weeks later you go through the whole shebang again with Godfather II. (Godfather III is exempt, however, as they hate it.) I love both those movies.

My family also has annual Scarface (the Pacino remake, I think) parties which they open with a big plastic chainsaw. I have actually never seen either Scarface thought.

The worse movie I ever saw, ever, was Finding Forrester. I still rue the money I spent on that one. I wasn't expecting much out of it though so I don't know if it really qualifies for this thread. Meet the Parents is a good one. Hated it. One movie that I think I was supposed to love and just didn't was The English Patient. Great actors, great story, and just eye-gougingly boring.

Chip R
02-12-2008, 12:19 PM
One movie that I think I was supposed to love and just didn't was The English Patient. Great actors, great story, and just eye-gougingly boring.


Are you really Elaine Benes? ;)

vaticanplum
02-12-2008, 12:36 PM
Are you really Elaine Benes? ;)

I do. not. get. Seinfeld references. And yet they just continue to be made on this board and everywhere else in life.

If we had a thread of great TV shows that people hate, Seinfeld would top my list.

Cyclone792
02-12-2008, 12:44 PM
Hearing people say they didn't like the Big Lebowski pains me in my heart.

Mr. Lebowski, this is Bill Salinger of the Southern Cal Bowling League. We received an, uh, an informal complaint that a member of your team - a Walter Sobchak? - drew a firearm during league play. If this is true, of course, it contravenes a number of the leagues by-laws and also Article 27 ...

dman
02-12-2008, 02:51 PM
The Thin Red Line. After Saving Private Ryan was such a standout movie, all of these people were saying Thin Red Line was going to be on par with Ryan, and nothing could be farther from the truth. Long, boring, and downright sucky.

TRF
02-12-2008, 02:54 PM
Gettysburg. wow was that bad. I really wanted it to be good too.

Any movie in which Harrison Ford plays a villain is a bad idea to me.

I love westerns but can't stand Silverado. Can't sit through it.

GoReds33
02-12-2008, 02:55 PM
I do. not. get. Seinfeld references. And yet they just continue to be made on this board and everywhere else in life.

If we had a thread of great TV shows that people hate, Seinfeld would top my list.I agree 100%. I just never liked the show. I am usually a fan of funny tv shows, but it just wasn't my kind of funny.

TRF
02-12-2008, 03:01 PM
I agree 100%. I just never liked the show. I am usually a fan of funny tv shows, but it just wasn't my kind of funny.

I've noticed a lot of women don't get Seinfeld or Monty Python. One or the other usually. My wife likes Seinfeld, but does not understand MP.

westofyou
02-12-2008, 03:05 PM
Ughhhh Monty Python... I think it was funny for about ten minutes in the 70's, I was there... it hasn't been very funny since.

vaticanplum
02-12-2008, 03:09 PM
I've noticed a lot of women don't get Seinfeld or Monty Python. One or the other usually. My wife likes Seinfeld, but does not understand MP.

I don't think it's a matter of "get", I think it's a matter of taste. I thought Seinfeld was terrific the first couple of seasons when it really was what it was purported to be: a show about "nothing". After that, it became a self-reverential show about inside jokes -- which is one reason, I think, that it's so frequently quoted: the lines are instantly recognizable because they were used in various forms over and over and over again. That just loses luster with me pretty fast. Very unoriginal.

TRF
02-12-2008, 03:33 PM
Ughhhh Monty Python... I think it was funny for about ten minutes in the 70's, I was there... it hasn't been very funny since.

i was there too. Can't get enough of it. I watch Holy Grail about 5 times a year. Benny Hill I never understood.

westofyou
02-12-2008, 03:35 PM
i was there too. Can't get enough of it. I watch Holy Grail about 5 times a year. Benny Hill I never understood.

Benny Hill is the gateway drug to British Comedy.... as sad as that may be.

M2
02-12-2008, 03:44 PM
Ughhhh Monty Python... I think it was funny for about ten minutes in the 70's, I was there... it hasn't been very funny since.

I'm not sure it would be possible for me to disagree more.

And in that vein, here's Sir Digby Chicken Caesar:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Mf7r8R1zqXY&feature=related

Rojo
02-12-2008, 03:47 PM
Monty Python's funny. Their fans, OTOH, can be a bit much.

I like Seinfeld, Simpsons and MP, but I'm all for a moratorium on references.

TeamCasey
02-12-2008, 03:47 PM
The Oscars always sucks me into movies that I find myself disappointed in. (Lost in Translation was one of them).

Gosford Park, The Hours..... (Taking a glance at the dusty side of my DVD shelf).

Every now and them they point me to an obscure gem and I forgive them. :)

Rojo
02-12-2008, 03:53 PM
The Oscars always sucks me into movies that I find myself disappointed in. (Lost in Translation was one of them).

Gosford Park, The Hours..... (Taking a glance at the dusty side of my DVD shelf).

Every now and them they point me to an obscure gem and I forgive them. :)

How about Chariots of Fire? I hear its on a double-bill with Out of Africa at Guantanamo.

TeamCasey
02-12-2008, 03:54 PM
I love epic movies - Braveheart is just outstanding. I probably watch it 10 times a year.

..... then you run into ones that could be epic. The stories are good but they just don't cut it. (i.e. - Troy and The New World). I didn't totally hate them but they aren't great like they should have been.

TeamCasey
02-12-2008, 03:56 PM
Loved Out of Africa!

TeamCasey
02-12-2008, 03:57 PM
I guess I like testosteroney movies. ;)

TeamCasey
02-12-2008, 03:58 PM
I like Seinfeld, Simpsons and MP, but I'm all for a moratorium on references.

but are you sponge-worthy?

JaxRed
02-12-2008, 04:17 PM
Toepick

TRF
02-12-2008, 04:20 PM
Toepick

bwahahahahaha

The Cutting Edge is a guilty pleasure.

ochre
02-12-2008, 07:23 PM
I remember being pretty disappointed with Harlem Nights when I saw it in a theater. It was back when Eddie Murphy was still, generally, pretty funny.

My all time disappointment, at least in regards to movie theater movies, was Highlander 2. I really liked Highlander; Highlander 2 made me like it less.

pedro
02-12-2008, 07:27 PM
dude, there can only be 1.

no wonder the second one sucked.


I remember being pretty disappointed with Harlem Nights when I saw it in a theater. It was back when Eddie Murphy was still, generally, pretty funny.

My all time disappointment, at least in regards to movie theater movies, was Highlander 2. I really liked Highlander; Highlander 2 made me like it less.

pahster
02-12-2008, 07:35 PM
dude, there can only be 1.

no wonder the second one sucked.

And the third one. And the fourth one.

Caveat Emperor
02-12-2008, 08:09 PM
Mr. Lebowski, this is Bill Salinger of the Southern Cal Bowling League. We received an, uh, an informal complaint that a member of your team - a Walter Sobchak? - drew a firearm during league play. If this is true, of course, it contravenes a number of the leagues by-laws and also Article 27 ...

Yeah...well...that's, like, your opinion...man.

cincinnati chili
02-14-2008, 01:43 AM
The Oscars always sucks me into movies that I find myself disappointed in. (Lost in Translation was one of them).

Gosford Park, The Hours..... (Taking a glance at the dusty side of my DVD shelf).

Every now and them they point me to an obscure gem and I forgive them. :)

I agree about the Hours.

I loved Gosford Park, but I can see why people didn't like it. I actually went and saw it again about 2 days after the first time, wanting to hang out in that big amazing house for a while longer. Robert Altman movies were made to be seen/heard with a great sound system and absolutely in the theater. I realize we all have lives and have to rent/cable most movies, but I think he more than any other director loses stuff on the small screen. The overlapping dialogue isn't for everyone, and you catch things the second time around.

Nashville and the Long Goodbye are great movies, all but forgotten except by the snobbiest of film snobs.

MWM
02-14-2008, 02:38 AM
I refuse to admit that the Godfather III was ever made. It just didn't happen.

Degenerate39
02-14-2008, 11:57 AM
They've been showing the Planet of the Apes series on AMC lately so I'll have to say I'm disappointed with Planet of the Apes 2-5 and the remake that came out a few years ago.

redsfanmia
02-15-2008, 05:06 PM
They've been showing the Planet of the Apes series on AMC lately so I'll have to say I'm disappointed with Planet of the Apes 2-5 and the remake that came out a few years ago.

The second one with the nuclear weapon worshiping mutants was ok, the the one where the two apes went back in time to the
1970's was pretty cheesy and I dont think I have seen the rest. The original Planet of the Apes is one of my top 10 favorite movies ever.

Rojo
02-15-2008, 06:20 PM
The second one with the nuclear weapon worshiping mutants was ok, the the one where the two apes went back in time to the
1970's was pretty cheesy and I dont think I have seen the rest. The original Planet of the Apes is one of my top 10 favorite movies ever.


I tried to get a friend to name his band, "Damn Dirty Ape" and he wouldn't bite. Moron.

Chip R
02-15-2008, 06:30 PM
I tried to get a friend to name his band, "Damn Dirty Ape" and he wouldn't bite. Moron.


That would have been outstanding. :lol:

Rojo
02-15-2008, 06:58 PM
That would have been outstanding. :lol:


Great minds and all that.

KronoRed
02-15-2008, 08:04 PM
The second one with the nuclear weapon worshiping mutants was ok, the the one where the two apes went back in time to the
1970's was pretty cheesy and I dont think I have seen the rest. The original Planet of the Apes is one of my top 10 favorite movies ever.

They got worse, the 4th was set in LA and had the apes, led by Khan, rebelling :D

TRF
02-15-2008, 08:47 PM
Odd numbered Star Trek films

The first one kinda sucked, the second ROCKED!

the third was dumb, the fourth arguably the best. The fifth was the worst, the sixth a close second to the fourth.

weird how it worked out that way.

Caveat Emperor
02-16-2008, 02:47 PM
Odd numbered Star Trek films

The first one kinda sucked, the second ROCKED!

the third was dumb, the fourth arguably the best. The fifth was the worst, the sixth a close second to the fourth.

weird how it worked out that way.

It's all about the Nuclear Wessels. ;)

The first Star Trek movie doesn't really bother me. I think I'd have hated it if I paid to go see it, but watching it on TV really feels like watching a really long episode of the original series. I guess that's what they were going for.

FWIW, the odd-even theory held up even into The Next Generation cast movies (Generations: Sucked, First Contact: Rocked, Insurrection: Sucked), right up until the last one -- which was even numbered and still sucked.

pedro
02-16-2008, 03:31 PM
I tried to get a friend to name his band, "Damn Dirty Ape" and he wouldn't bite. Moron.

I tried to get my friend to name his band "The Mr. French Connection". Same result.

http://www.the-trades.com/hprice/DVD/FamilyAffair1Stillcap.jpg

redsfanmia
02-16-2008, 04:16 PM
I tried to get my friend to name his band "The Mr. French Connection". Same result.

http://www.the-trades.com/hprice/DVD/FamilyAffair1Stillcap.jpg

I love it.

UKFlounder
02-16-2008, 07:45 PM
Two that did not live up to all they hype I had heard about them were Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and Blazing Saddles. Both had funny moments, but overall were just not what I had hoped for. Even Young Frankenstein was a bit of a let down (which is strange because I liked Mel Brooks movies such as Spaceballs, Robin Hood Men in Tights and History of the World Part I. Maybe it was because I had not had so many people bragging on them & building up my expectations.)

pedro
02-16-2008, 07:51 PM
Two that did not live up to all they hype I had heard about them were Monty Python and the Holy Grail, and Blazing Saddles. Both had funny moments, but overall were just not what I had hoped for. Even Young Frankenstein was a bit of a let down (which is strange because I liked Mel Brooks movies such as Spaceballs, Robin Hood Men in Tights and History of the World Part I. Maybe it was because I had not had so many people bragging on them & building up my expectations.)

I find Mel Brooks humor to feel very "dated". The same holds true for Monty Python.

cincinnati chili
02-16-2008, 08:19 PM
I find Mel Brooks humor to feel very "dated". The same holds true for Monty Python.

I find the same thing with early Saturday Night Live stuff. So much of the stuff was original at the time, but it's been imitated to the point that it's become cliche.

Dated or not, I love Mel Brooks.

Rojo
02-16-2008, 10:23 PM
I tried to get my friend to name his band "The Mr. French Connection". Same result.

http://www.the-trades.com/hprice/DVD/FamilyAffair1Stillcap.jpg

Love it.

BCubb2003
02-17-2008, 03:31 AM
I don't know you people!

Actually, Chili and '62 are pretty close to my reactions, although I'm such a glutton for movies that I don't get crushed from the bad ones. I usually find something interesting. I love the Coen brothers, although the quirkiness does get a bit thick, and P.T. Anderson, although I always feel miserable afterwards, and Tarentino can be fun, if you know he's just making these for the video store clerk he used to be. I also like Spike Lee, because he does more in one line that most directors have the nerve to do in a whole movie, and I think George Lucas forgot what he knew best when he made Star Wars 1, 2, and 3, but if he'd made them first, they'd be huge anyway, in the 70s and 80s, and he'd be the David Lean of science fiction.

If you don't like Solaris, you should see the original Russian version. It's even worse. I never got into all the hobbits and Harry Potters, or The Matrices.

One I liked that everyone else hates: Elizabethtown. Maybe it was the Ale8.

One everyone else loved that I didn't much care for: Shawshank Redemption. Maybe it was the theater.

GAC
02-17-2008, 04:38 AM
Has anyone seen the re-re-make of Invasion of the Body Snatchers with Nicole Kidman called The Invasion? Rented it the other day. Thank God I didn't go to the theaters to see this.

It was more like a Assault rather then an Invasion.... to one's intellect.

I think the only movie I ever saw here in that I liked was The Others.

redsfanmia
02-17-2008, 11:48 AM
Has anyone seen the re-re-make of Invasion of the Body Snatchers with Nicole Kidman called The Invasion? Rented it the other day. Thank God I didn't go to the theaters to see this.

It was more like a Assault rather then an Invasion.... to one's intellect.

I think the only movie I ever saw here in that I liked was The Others.

Went to see it because it was my wife's turn to choose the movie. It was in a word horrible.

Scrap Irony
02-17-2008, 03:44 PM
Oh, Superbad was just that. Hated McLovin and the entire crew. Saw Roper on television explaining that this movie was this generation's Fast Times at Ridgemont High. If that's true, God help this generation.

Spitball
02-17-2008, 04:39 PM
I find Mel Brooks humor to feel very "dated". The same holds true for Monty Python.

Mel Brooks' early movies and the Monty Python movies were satire from the 1970's. They were extremely humorous and relevant expressions in that era. Times have changed so the humor doesn't have the same timely edge.

mound_patrol
02-17-2008, 05:44 PM
The Village has to be the most over-hyped movie ever. Big waste of money.

pedro
02-17-2008, 06:16 PM
Mel Brooks' early movies and the Monty Python movies were satire from the 1970's. They were extremely humorous and relevant expressions in that era. Times have changed so the humor doesn't have the same timely edge.

I know. I am almost 40 after all.

Spitball
02-17-2008, 06:44 PM
I know. I am almost 40 after all.

Actually, I was agreeing with your post to UKFlounder. It wasn't intended to sound like a lecture. :)

Deepred05
02-19-2008, 02:25 AM
For me. Leaving Las Vgas was the worst film I've ever seen. What a waste of time. Movies like that are great for actors, but they leave the audience wanting to get sober.

Born on the Fourth of July had the same effect on me. Great performance, but it was so real I wanted out of the wheelchair at the end of the movie.

I don't go to movies to be depressed.

I was supposed to have a small part in the movie "Leaving Las Vegas" Nicholas Cage's brother replaced me at the last minute. :)
After this review it is probably a good thing huh?;)
I did however get to meet Elizabeth Shue. Charming young lady.

BCubb2003
02-19-2008, 04:40 AM
I was supposed to have a small part in the movie "Leaving Las Vegas" Nicholas Cage's brother replaced me at the last minute. :)
After this review it is probably a good thing huh?;)
I did however get to meet Elizabeth Shue. Charming young lady.

I don't know. I don't think he captured the essence of "Dealer." I think you might have been the missing piece of that movie.

HumnHilghtFreel
02-19-2008, 05:27 AM
On a day a few years ago when I was home sick from school, I sat through "The Postman."

All I can say about it was that it felt very very long and I'm still not sure why I watched the whole thing.

Raisor
02-19-2008, 09:01 AM
Oh, Superbad was just that. Hated McLovin and the entire crew. Saw Roper on television explaining that this movie was this generation's Fast Times at Ridgemont High. If that's true, God help this generation.

See, I loved Superbad. The wife and I laughed though the whole thing.

OldRightHander
02-19-2008, 09:58 AM
I have been disappointed by the recent crop of historical movies. When was the last really good historical epic that we've had? Every time one came out I got pretty excited only to be let down. Troy, Alexander, Kingdom of Heaven...all of them let me down one way or another. That's a shame, because those are my favorite kind of films.

pahster
02-19-2008, 11:45 AM
See, I loved Superbad. The wife and I laughed though the whole thing.

It was surprisingly sentimental, too.

TRF
02-19-2008, 12:16 PM
I have been disappointed by the recent crop of historical movies. When was the last really good historical epic that we've had? Every time one came out I got pretty excited only to be let down. Troy, Alexander, Kingdom of Heaven...all of them let me down one way or another. That's a shame, because those are my favorite kind of films.

I loved Kingdom of Heaven. the music alone is enough to make me watch it over and over. Troy sucked, didn't even bother with Alexander. I'm looking forward to 10000 BC. Does that count?

TRF
02-19-2008, 12:20 PM
Have I mentioned The 13th Warrior?

One of my all time favorites.

OldRightHander
02-19-2008, 12:21 PM
I loved Kingdom of Heaven. the music alone is enough to make me watch it over and over. Troy sucked, didn't even bother with Alexander. I'm looking forward to 10000 BC. Does that count?

10000 BC might be interesting. I didn't think Kingdom of Heaven was lousy or anything, just that for some reason I can't put a finger on, it just didn't quite do it for me. Maybe it was the way they hype movies these days that makes it hard for any of them to live up to the billing.

Johnny Footstool
02-19-2008, 06:15 PM
Oh, Superbad was just that. Hated McLovin and the entire crew. Saw Roper on television explaining that this movie was this generation's Fast Times at Ridgemont High. If that's true, God help this generation.

Aside from the comic-relief cops, "Superbad" was the most accurate depiction of high school life ever rendered on film. It was "Dazed and Confused" without the need for contrived melodrama. It was high school kids doing what high school kids do -- getting loaded, trying to get girls, searching for some kind of identity.

Dom Heffner
02-19-2008, 06:34 PM
Oh, Superbad was just that. Hated McLovin and the entire crew. Saw Roper on television explaining that this movie was this generation's Fast Times at Ridgemont High. If that's true, God help this generation.

You know, I sort of felt this way, too after Superbad. I liked it, but I was a little letdown for some reason.

What is funny is so subjective, and most of the movies in this genre are so bad that this one could seem like a gem to most critics.

The movie was hilarious up until a point but it didn't sustain. It stinks when you find yourself enthralled in something so funny and then all the air gets let out.

Superbad went from being a classic to a movie whose whole was less than its sum. A few classic scenes filled with some humor that anybody on this board could write.

I don't think the comparison to Fast Times is all that off. That really was a movie that missed the mark by a hair for me as well, though the scenes with Spicoli and the teacher are classic.

Mr. Hand: "Mr. Hand, will I pass this class?' Gee, Mr. Spicoli, I don't know! You know what I'm going to do? I'm going to leave your words right up here for all my classes to enjoy, giving you full credit of course, Mr. Spicoli."

Spicoli: Alright!

redsfan1966
02-19-2008, 08:25 PM
Wedding Crashers was such a major disappointment for me...I heard so much about how funny it was and how it was probably my type of comedy and Wham!--only one laugh the whole 90 minutes--the Godzilla remake with Matthew Broderick was also a letdown--as was Pearl Harbor and The Thin Red Line....

Raisor
02-19-2008, 09:47 PM
Wedding Crashers was such a major disappointment for me......


Yet another one I love.

Raisor hearts the Fratpack.

sonny
02-19-2008, 11:00 PM
The Blair Witch Project. I came in so excited to see the majesty of the film but came out tired and bored.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2008, 09:42 AM
My biggest beef with most Hollywood-backed comedies of late is the focus-group feel of most of them; they are so often overly-tidy, overly-formulaic and in the effort to move the audience along with tremendous haste from joke to joke, the sense of timing is brutally lost. Some comedies do benefit from this triphammer pacing, but most don't. I can say for certain that the original Vacation or Revenge of the Nerds would never make it past the first edit in today's Hollywood market.

vaticanplum
02-20-2008, 09:45 AM
My biggest beef with most Hollywood-backed comedies of late is the focus-group feel of most of them; they are so often overly-tidy, overly-formulaic and in the effort to move the audience along with tremendous haste from joke to joke, the sense of timing is brutally lost. Some comedies do benefit from this triphammer pacing, but most don't. I can say for certain that the original Vacation or Revenge of the Nerds would never make it past the first edit in today's Hollywood market.

Test audiences. They go through so many screenings from the very first edit on that I believe they completely lose sight of the bigger picture of the film. It's literally: which joke gets a laugh, which doesn't; keep, delete. I think it reduces a movie to a line of jokes rather than keeping a focus on the complete whole, which certainly plays into what you're saying.

bucksfan2
02-20-2008, 09:50 AM
Wedding Crashers was such a major disappointment for me...I heard so much about how funny it was and how it was probably my type of comedy and Wham!--only one laugh the whole 90 minutes--the Godzilla remake with Matthew Broderick was also a letdown--as was Pearl Harbor and The Thin Red Line....

That is one of the few movies that I was excited to go to and wasn't disappointed. I think it is one of the funniest movies to come out in a long time.

M2
02-20-2008, 12:32 PM
Oh, Superbad was just that. Hated McLovin and the entire crew. Saw Roper on television explaining that this movie was this generation's Fast Times at Ridgemont High. If that's true, God help this generation.

I remember hearing that same basic complaint leveled at Fast Times. It got slammed by critics and columnists and parents, who complained it glorified a morally bereft pack of teens, who had little to do with teens in the real world. Being a teenager I thought it only teased at how gonzo we'd become.

I haven't seen Superbad, but I get the feeling the objections are along the same lines.

DoogMinAmo
02-20-2008, 12:35 PM
X2, Wedding Crashers and Knocked Up

Falls City Beer
02-20-2008, 12:36 PM
Test audiences. They go through so many screenings from the very first edit on that I believe they completely lose sight of the bigger picture of the film. It's literally: which joke gets a laugh, which doesn't; keep, delete. I think it reduces a movie to a line of jokes rather than keeping a focus on the complete whole, which certainly plays into what you're saying.

That's got to be right. Just watch a movie like, say, Dog Day Afternoon. Pay attention to the pacing, all the "excess" footage, the lazy, hot-1970's summer motion of the characters and the action, the odd, sometimes disjunctive or "unnecessary" dialogue. It has a wonderful, shaggy, human appeal to it. It would never, ever survive today's Hollywood market. Maybe that's a good thing, I don't know. But I love Dog Day Afternoon precisely for its peculiarities, quirks, and asymmetries.

Chip R
02-20-2008, 12:41 PM
That's got to be right. Just watch a movie like, say, Dog Day Afternoon. Pay attention to the pacing, all the "excess" footage, the lazy, hot-1970's summer motion of the characters and the action, the odd, sometimes disjunctive or "unnecessary" dialogue. It has a wonderful, shaggy, human appeal to it. It would never, ever survive today's Hollywood market. Maybe that's a good thing, I don't know. But I love Dog Day Afternoon precisely for its peculiarities, quirks, and asymmetries.


You think a movie with its subplot themes could be made today or would it be too risky to get financing for?

Falls City Beer
02-20-2008, 12:46 PM
You think a movie with its subplot themes could be made today or would it be too risky to get financing for?

It probably depends on the director. If a guy has a ton of hits under his/her belt, he/she likely have the leverage to do something longer, more idiosyncratic (Coen brothers come to mind). But if you're a young pup, no way your 2 1/2 hour long movie gets funding unless it is edited tighter than a drum, and even then, it's highly unlikely.

Roy Tucker
02-20-2008, 12:51 PM
You think a movie with its subplot themes could be made today or would it be too risky to get financing for?

Nah, I think we live in the ADD generation.

westofyou
02-20-2008, 12:52 PM
That's got to be right. Just watch a movie like, say, Dog Day Afternoon. Pay attention to the pacing, all the "excess" footage, the lazy, hot-1970's summer motion of the characters and the action, the odd, sometimes disjunctive or "unnecessary" dialogue. It has a wonderful, shaggy, human appeal to it. It would never, ever survive today's Hollywood market. Maybe that's a good thing, I don't know. But I love Dog Day Afternoon precisely for its peculiarities, quirks, and asymmetries.

That style of cinema was not a prevalent one for very long, the realism of the 67 - 82 era was a reflection of the current culture and reaction to the prior one. One rooted in realism for the sake of realism. I love that style, was weaned on it and appreciate it.

But the ET's of the world demanded that style be pushed back into the art houses. Mostly because it bored the regular theater goer more and more as the 70's moved on, it became almost a deluge of movies that made you think... and feel (crappy most of the time) So let's thank The Unmarried Woman, Foxes, Lifeguard and American Gigilo for making us all feel seedy whilst eating popcorn.

Roy Tucker
02-20-2008, 12:52 PM
Come to think of it, Napoleon Dynamite was a movie that many went ga-ga over and I just didn't get it.

Watched it a couple times with the kids and the parts that they were rolling on the floor on, I was sitting there saying "what?, is that supposed to be funny?".

Chip R
02-20-2008, 12:59 PM
It probably depends on the director. If a guy has a ton of hits under his/her belt, he/she likely have the leverage to do something longer, more idiosyncratic (Coen brothers come to mind). But if you're a young pup, no way your 2 1/2 hour long movie gets funding unless it is edited tighter than a drum, and even then, it's highly unlikely.


I was thinking mainly of the sexuality themes but the length would be a problem. Of course having Al Pacino as the star then since he was red hot at the time. I think it could be made today as an independent film.

vaticanplum
02-20-2008, 01:07 PM
I was thinking mainly of the sexuality themes but the length would be a problem. Of course having Al Pacino as the star then since he was red hot at the time. I think it could be made today as an independent film.

Yeah, I was going to say that I think it depends on the studio. Ironically, most of the "independent" studios are actually backed, somewhere down the line, by a major production company, but the production companies use them as their outlets for lower-cost films that don't need to recoup billions of dollars and thus can afford to take a few more risks.

The problem that I see is that if a film with Dog Day Afternoon's themes were to be made today, it would be made by a smaller company but would run a risk of being made for shock value. Movies today can be very risque, especially independent ones, but sometimes I feel that they're risque only to be risque. In the end, they just have to be in the right hands. But then, I don't want to romanticize the past too much -- those movies probably had to be in the right hands back then too. How many crappy 70s shockers do we just not remember? Maybe DDA was an exception too, I really don't know.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2008, 01:28 PM
Yeah, I was going to say that I think it depends on the studio. Ironically, most of the "independent" studios are actually backed, somewhere down the line, by a major production company, but the production companies use them as their outlets for lower-cost films that don't need to recoup billions of dollars and thus can afford to take a few more risks.

The problem that I see is that if a film with Dog Day Afternoon's themes were to be made today, it would be made by a smaller company but would run a risk of being made for shock value. Movies today can be very risque, especially independent ones, but sometimes I feel that they're risque only to be risque. In the end, they just have to be in the right hands. But then, I don't want to romanticize the past too much -- those movies probably had to be in the right hands back then too. How many crappy 70s shockers do we just not remember? Maybe DDA was an exception too, I really don't know.


I really don't think DDA was an exception. And I pointed out other movies made in the 80s which weren't subject to the same editorial scrutiny, so I don't think it's strictly a phenomenon of the late 60s and 70s. Movies used to breathe somewhat, and not just arthouse kinds of movies.

I'm guessing some of this phenomenon might be attributable to the advent of DVD, with their ability to contain both the theatrical cut and the "director's cut," which allows for a second box office for studios, banking on the consumers' willingness to shell out 20 bucks for 5 minutes of extra footage that was left on the cutting room floor of the theatrical version.

I suspect that it has a lot less to do with ADD than it does the ability to cram as much product into our leisure time as possible. Movies were once "events," not totally unlike plays to some extent. Unless you had a ton of disposable income and time, you just didn't see that many movies in a calendar year; the number of releases nowadays dwarfs the output of 30 years ago.

I think that, like most things, this revolution in filmmaking/watching is driven by technology more than anything else.

vaticanplum
02-20-2008, 01:34 PM
I really don't think DDA was an exception. And I pointed out other movies made in the 80s which weren't subject to the same editorial scrutiny, so I don't think it's strictly a phenomenon of the late 60s and 70s. Movies used to breathe somewhat, and not just arthouse kinds of movies.

I'm guessing some of this phenomenon might be attributable to the advent of DVD, with their ability to contain both the theatrical cut and the "director's cut," which allows for a second box office for studios, banking on the consumers' willingness to shell out 20 bucks for 5 minutes of extra footage that was left on the cutting room floor of the theatrical version.

I suspect that it has a lot less to do with ADD than it does the ability to cram as much product into our leisure time as possible. Movies were once "events," not totally unlike plays to some extent. Unless you had a ton of disposable income and time, you just didn't see that many movies in a calendar year; the number of releases nowadays dwarfs the output of 30 years ago.

I think that, like most things, this revolution in filmmaking/watching is driven by technology more than anything else.

Those are all very interesting points. I think you are onto something. I do know for a fact that the DVD is as much on moviemakers' minds as they're working as the actual cinematic product is.

I was thinking recently about the fact that you watch a movie at home but see a movie at the theater (just as you see a play -- you never watch a play), without exception, really. And I decided that this difference in vernacular is also attritutable to the fact that GOING to the movie theater used to be such an event. "See" to me is an offshoot of "going to see", of setting aside part of your day to do something exciting. Watching just implies that your eyes happened to be directed toward something that's happening.

Chip R
02-20-2008, 01:36 PM
I suspect that it has a lot less to do with ADD than it does the ability to cram as much product into our leisure time as possible. Movies were once "events," not totally unlike plays to some extent. Unless you had a ton of disposable income and time, you just didn't see that many movies in a calendar year; the number of releases nowadays dwarfs the output of 30 years ago.

I'm guessing that, like most things, this revolution in filmmaking/watching is driven by technology more than anything else.

I think that's a great point. But I also suspect that good old fashioned greed plays a big part as well. The shorter the movie, the more times they can show it at the local Megaplex and the more money they can rake in for the movie. Of course there are notable exceptions. All the Best Picture nominees except for Juno and Michael Clayton (by 1 minute) are at least 2 hours long.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2008, 01:36 PM
I think that's a great point. But I also suspect that good old fashioned greed plays a big part as well. The shorter the movie, the more times they can show it at the local Megaplex and the more money they can rake in for the movie. Of course there are notable exceptions. All the Best Picture nominees except for Juno and Michael Clayton (by 1 minute) are at least 2 hours long.

Absolutely.

vaticanplum
02-20-2008, 01:45 PM
All the Best Picture nominees except for Juno and Michael Clayton (by 1 minute) are at least 2 hours long.

That means they're SERIOUS, Chip.

Caveat Emperor
02-20-2008, 01:55 PM
I really don't think DDA was an exception. And I pointed out other movies made in the 80s which weren't subject to the same editorial scrutiny, so I don't think it's strictly a phenomenon of the late 60s and 70s. Movies used to breathe somewhat, and not just arthouse kinds of movies.

I'm guessing some of this phenomenon might be attributable to the advent of DVD, with their ability to contain both the theatrical cut and the "director's cut," which allows for a second box office for studios, banking on the consumers' willingness to shell out 20 bucks for 5 minutes of extra footage that was left on the cutting room floor of the theatrical version.

I suspect that it has a lot less to do with ADD than it does the ability to cram as much product into our leisure time as possible. Movies were once "events," not totally unlike plays to some extent. Unless you had a ton of disposable income and time, you just didn't see that many movies in a calendar year; the number of releases nowadays dwarfs the output of 30 years ago.

I think that, like most things, this revolution in filmmaking/watching is driven by technology more than anything else.

There's also a good deal of pressure to keep running times under control because a long running movie doesn't play as many shows per day. They draw schedules up at multiplexes to always have a break in start times between 5:30-6:00 to let the "night shift" come in and get settled. They also put, at minimum, a 10 minute break in between shows to let ushers clean and reseat an auditorium. Plus, no multiplex is going to start a late show any later than 12:35 (you've gotta let the projectionist go home sometime). As such, run times factor heavily into scheduling.

You can make a 2:30 - 3:00 movie, but that kind of run time means, at best, 3 "evening" (post 6:00 pm) shows per print (6:00, 8:40, 11:20). The same movie, at 90 minutes, could have 5 showings (6:00, 7:40, 9:20, 11:00, 12:35). In a 200 seat auditorium, at 11 bucks a pop, losing 2 shows represents a loss of $4,400 per-print, per night on a sellout flick. When you consider that the average movie opens with roughly 3,000 prints, that's a per-night loss of $13,200,000.

When you're under pressure to open big (when you've got the press and buzz to yourself), asking a studio to immediately give up $26,000,000 in potential Friday and Saturday night sales is a tall order.

Johnny Footstool
02-20-2008, 02:20 PM
I remember hearing that same basic complaint leveled at Fast Times. It got slammed by critics and columnists and parents, who complained it glorified a morally bereft pack of teens, who had little to do with teens in the real world. Being a teenager I thought it only teased at how gonzo we'd become.

I haven't seen Superbad, but I get the feeling the objections are along the same lines.

"Fast Times" the book (by author-turned-director Cameron Crowe) was a well-researched, well-written slice of typical high-school life. The movie was cleaned up significantly, and didn't capture the same realism.

"Superbad" does, at least IMO.

OldRightHander
02-20-2008, 02:43 PM
As far as the length goes, I can understand how more money can be made by more showings, but as a movie fan, if it's a good enough film, I don't even notice if it's long or not. I tend to get absorbed in the film and I don't notice the time go by. If it's a lousy movie, 90 minutes can seem like an eternity.

Falls City Beer
02-20-2008, 03:02 PM
As far as the length goes, I can understand how more money can be made by more showings, but as a movie fan, if it's a good enough film, I don't even notice if it's long or not. I tend to get absorbed in the film and I don't notice the time go by. If it's a lousy movie, 90 minutes can seem like an eternity.

That's a good point. Depending on the director, the studio, or even the audience they have in mind, some studios will go ahead with a longer movie; it's not a hard and fast rule I don't think. But the trend has been toward condensation in general.

Raisor
02-20-2008, 05:35 PM
Come to think of it, Napoleon Dynamite was a movie that many went ga-ga over and I just didn't get it.

Watched it a couple times with the kids and the parts that they were rolling on the floor on, I was sitting there saying "what?, is that supposed to be funny?".



First time I saw it, while I thought it was ok, I didn't understand what the fuss was about.

Second time I saw it, I thought "hey, this isn't that bad"

Third time, and it's the greatest thing ever.

I LOVE ND now, and have seen it a bunch. I couldn't tell you WHY I love it, but I do.

BRM
02-20-2008, 05:49 PM
First time I saw it, while I thought it was ok, I didn't understand what the fuss was about.

Second time I saw it, I thought "hey, this isn't that bad"

Third time, and it's the greatest thing ever.

I LOVE ND now, and have seen it a bunch. I couldn't tell you WHY I love it, but I do.

Is it best to watch it with your pants on or off? I'm sure that makes a difference.

cincinnati chili
02-23-2008, 04:34 PM
Is it best to watch it with your pants on or off? I'm sure that makes a difference.

Taken out of context, this seems like an appropriate question for a very different sort of movie.

redsfanmia
02-23-2008, 06:01 PM
First time I saw it, while I thought it was ok, I didn't understand what the fuss was about.

Second time I saw it, I thought "hey, this isn't that bad"

Third time, and it's the greatest thing ever.

I LOVE ND now, and have seen it a bunch. I couldn't tell you WHY I love it, but I do.

I am the same way with Nap Dynomite. I thought the same thing about the Big Lebowski.

GoReds33
02-23-2008, 09:17 PM
I thought Airplane 2 was going to be good, but it really dissapointed. It had a lot of the same jokes as the first one.

GAC
03-17-2008, 08:13 PM
OK. I rented and watched No Country For Old Men this past weekend. As much as I enjoy the Coen brother's movies, I personally don't feel this was one of their best.

Was it a good movie? Yeah. But I personally don't think it was Oscar winning material.

And I didn't care for the ending one bit.

RedsIn07
03-18-2008, 12:26 AM
Across the Universe, it was hyped up too much by my friends and just fell short, and this is coming from a huge Beatles enthusiast.

Redhook
03-18-2008, 09:09 AM
First time I saw it, while I thought it was ok, I didn't understand what the fuss was about.

Second time I saw it, I thought "hey, this isn't that bad"

Third time, and it's the greatest thing ever.

I LOVE ND now, and have seen it a bunch. I couldn't tell you WHY I love it, but I do.

I feel the same way about NP.

And Pulp Fiction. I didn't PF at all the first time I watched. Maybe because I had to watch it for a college English class. Anyhow, after two more viewings, I realized how awesome it really is. Very clever and very funny.

A movie I just saw that really disappointed me: There Will Be Blood. I absolutely hated it. It was very long and boring and almost pointless. What a waste of time and money. The acting was good, but that didn't help the fact that there was no plot. Awful movie.

I did, however, love No Country For Old Men. I didn't care for the ending much, but I was captivated for the entire film. I look forward to watching it again soon.

Rojo
03-18-2008, 01:38 PM
That style of cinema was not a prevalent one for very long, the realism of the 67 - 82 era was a reflection of the current culture and reaction to the prior one. One rooted in realism for the sake of realism. I love that style, was weaned on it and appreciate it.

But the ET's of the world demanded that style be pushed back into the art houses. Mostly because it bored the regular theater goer more and more as the 70's moved on, it became almost a deluge of movies that made you think... and feel (crappy most of the time) So let's thank The Unmarried Woman, Foxes, Lifeguard and American Gigilo for making us all feel seedy whilst eating popcorn.

Don't get me wrong, there were many great movies in the 70's, and I liked the griminess and ennui, but some of that "realism" was just lazy and self-indulgent.