Films most people love but you think are garbage

[Davetello]

Thought this might be an interesting and even mildly amusing thread.

One that stands out for me is American Psycho. I have an interest in serial killers and I like C Bale but this just seemed an incoherent movie. But it's been a while since I've seen it so perhaps my opinion would change.

[ssjup81]

Pulp Fiction. It's not garbage, I just don't like it.

[Davetello]

Pulp Fiction. It's not garbage, I just don't like it.

This is what I mean, I really love Pulp Fiction, so in this sense it works the opposite way. I can probably see why people would dislike it though.

[Warhorse]

Drive. Wow, what a serious let down that movie was, and it had me so pumped with the trailers and reviews.

[CyberCubed]

All those Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies. I don't think they're terrible but my god are those movies boring. All this dull lore and wizards and little short people...bores me to death.

Seriously how do people get into that Tolkein stuff? It's like those old 80's dungeons and dragons nonsense or Elder Scrolls.

[Candy Kappa]

D&D isn't just 80's stuff. It's still living well and strong.

[Leo656]

Unbelievable. Unbelievable.

[CyberCubed]

To be honest I'm not that big a sci-fi fan either, but I love Star Wars, the good Star Trek shows/movies, and some other select sci-fi movies that have heart to them.

Not to fond of all those generic alien invasion movies though that star Tom Cruise or Bruce Willis or some other bald headed space marine.

Also I hate any movie Leonardo Dicaprio or Matt Damon are in. Those two people feel like twins separated at birth and all the movies they're in deal with emo drama and often homosexuality for shock value.

[TheSkeletonMan939]

To be honest I'm not that big a sci-fi fan either, but I love Star Wars, the good Star Trek shows/movies, and some other select sci-fi movies that have heart to them.

Same. The Undiscovered Country is my favorite.

[Leo656]

Did Bruce Willis suddenly get a reputation for fighting aliens? You're thinking of terrorists. Bruce Willis fights terrorists, or other criminals masquerading as terrorists. I'm not sure how many aliens Tom Cruise fights, either. I think it was just that one time.

You seem a little confused.

[Cure]

Tom Cruise has fought aliens in Edge of Tomorrow, War of the Worlds, and Oblivion.

And yeah, that Matt Damon and his emo movies. Especially the Bourne Trilogy. Full of homosexuality, too. It's true.

[DarkFell]

Did Bruce Willis suddenly get a reputation for fighting aliens? You're thinking of terrorists. Bruce Willis fights terrorists, or other criminals masquerading as terrorists. I'm not sure how many aliens Tom Cruise fights, either. I think it was just that one time.

You seem a little confused.

And here I figured Willis got his rep for kicking some a** and doing a few comedic movies. Beating up aliens didn't come to my mind either.

As for your thread, I would have to say..

"Hi, I'm Chucky..WANNA PLAY?"

.. Child's Play. *I dunno if people love it but it probably does have a decent sized horror movie cult following.*
The first movie is alright, then I think it got stranger in the latter movies. *Both Bride (and Seed) of Chucky were just waay out there for me.*

[CyberCubed]

I enjoy Men in Black mainly because it's a comedy. Most of these alien movies take themselves too seriously and/or videogames do it better.

I'd rather play the Mass Effect trilogy then watch 20 generic alien movies. You get better stories in a videogame.

[Mzx10484]

Transformers. Never got into that stuff!

[Leo656]

I confess not being entirely up to speed on the complete works of Tom Cruise. But he's definitely not who comes to mind when I see the words "bald-headed space marine", either. :lol:

[Prowler]

Lost in Translation. One of the most boring movies I've ever seen. Just because Scarlett is hot doesn't mean she's a great actress.

As far as animation films go, I disliked Princess Mononoke. Found it boring and preachy.

[ZariusTwo]

Everything related to Shrek after the second one. Including the shorts.

Most of the Marvel cinematic universe is overrated weak sauce, but Guardians of the Galaxy in particular gets worse each time I watch it.

[CyberCubed]

Guardians of the Galaxy is overrated. People are just glad it worked and didn't bomb, but it was't really that interesting. One dimensional villains and the story felt like they were breaking out of prison for half the movie.

[Gunpowder]

Every movie starring Will Ferrell (that I've seen) - aside from Elf, because that was the only time he actually had to change his personality to fit the role.

[Kingoji]

Nolan's Batman Trilogy is horrendous. As are the two Amazing Spider-Man movies. Star Trek reboot is watchable, as long as you don't have any interest in Star Trek. The Transformers movies are a f'king train wreck. The only time I have ever left the cinema feeling offended on an intellectual level. Guardians Of The Galaxy is good fun, but the way people have gone nuts over it makes me like it a little less (speaking as someone who knew who Rocket Raccoon was and loved him since even before TMNT happened).

In fact, pretty much any time anyone insists that I will love a thing it makes me want to actively avoid it.

[ToTheNines]

300. All my friends love it, but I hated it.

[CyberCubed]

Citizen Kane. I'm sorry I wasn't born a century ago.

[Cure]

Citizen Kane. I'm sorry I wasn't born a century ago.

Haha, OK. I can agree with this.

[T-U-R-T-L-E POWA!]

Citizen Kane is my favorite movie of all time. By far. The movie that I don't like and most people do is probably Planes, Trains, and Automobiles. Also anything my M. Knight. Talk about a one trick pony. Sheesh.

[Peanut]

All those Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies. I don't think they're terrible but my god are those movies boring. All this dull lore and wizards and little short people...bores me to death.

Seriously how do people get into that Tolkein stuff? It's like those old 80's dungeons and dragons nonsense or Elder Scrolls.

Aren't you into bullsh*t superhero trash? You want to talk about boring nonsense.

[Leo656]

...I enjoy all of those things about equally, but Cubed's derisive dismissal of the entire swords & dragons genre definitely made a distinct acidic vomit taste rise up in my throat. Pretty sure that was one of his "attention" posts.

[Netkeeper]

Yeah, especially when he brought up popular things like D&D and Elder Scrolls. I'm not a huge fan of high fantasy myself, but I can appreciate both of those things, and LotR. [Also, the Hobbit is my favourite book. The movies seem to be pretty good, but are horrible at being adaptations and are really just cash-grabs but I do like them regardless].

On topic, though, while I don't necessarily consider it garbage, I don't really like Avatar.

[raph27]

All those Lord of the Rings and Hobbit movies. I don't think they're terrible but my god are those movies boring. All this dull lore and wizards and little short people...bores me to death.

Seriously how do people get into that Tolkein stuff? It's like those old 80's dungeons and dragons nonsense or Elder Scrolls.
Okay, I can understand not liking Hobbit, but LOTR? Really?
For me it's Caddyshack. Bill Murray's great, but the rest isn't.

[Leo656]

I'unno if "most people" like 'em, but I genuinely don't get the appeal of the "Fast & Furious" movies. It's like, "car porn". I'unno, maybe it's just that I don't think they needed twenty of 'em. Maybe that's what bugs me. Not really sure.

[CyberCubed]

Aren't you into bullsh*t superhero trash? You want to talk about boring nonsense.

Most superhero stuff is fun though, does it need to be thought provoking? All the LOTR stuff and others in its genre has me in tears.

I also really dislike elves, orks, trolls, gnomes, and everything like that associated with the genre. I can tolerate dragons though, since dragons are always cool.

[Gorilla Grodd]

Hobbit/LOTR for me as well, but I'm not going to go as far as saying the entire fantasy genre is bad (I <3 Game of Thrones/ASOIAF). It's just not something I'm always in the mood for. High Fantasy stuff is so prevalent in videogames that I usually get my fill and don't bother seeking it out in books or movies.

But in all fairness I've never really given the LOTR films the chance they deserve. I've just never been able to sit down and watch them all the way through without taking breaks. Especially the first movie since all of the quiet scenes in The Shire with quiet writing and crackling fire wood just triggers my ASMR like crazy and puts me to sleep.

Harry Potter was much the same way for a long time until I finally sucked it up and gave the movies a chance. I ended up liking the books and movies a lot and I'm a little disappointed that I didn't give it a chance until years after the Hogwarts hype died down.

It's difficult for me to think of movies that people rave about that I didn't like since I usually end up not seeing them. It's a lot easier to list TV shows since it's a lot more common for me to catch bits of episodes here and there of popular shows that I just can't stomach.

[Netkeeper]

I didn't get into Harry Potter until most of the hype died down myself, and I could get my hands on all the books. But I'm used to getting into things that aren't video games late, so I just tell myself "at least I wasn't there for the worst of the fandom wars".

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Nolan's Batman Trilogy is horrendous. As are the two Amazing Spider-Man movies. Star Trek reboot is watchable, as long as you don't have any interest in Star Trek. The Transformers movies are a f'king train wreck. The only time I have ever left the cinema feeling offended on an intellectual level. Guardians Of The Galaxy is good fun, but the way people have gone nuts over it makes me like it a little less (speaking as someone who knew who Rocket Raccoon was and loved him since even before TMNT happened).

In fact, pretty much any time anyone insists that I will love a thing it makes me want to actively avoid it.

I thought everybody hated the Transformers movies. Although I am curious to know why you personally hate Nolan's take on Batman, if you don't mind me asking? Same for Amazing Spider-Man.

Anyway for me, all of the X-Men movies, including Days of Future Past, whatever the movie is called. With the exception of Hugh Jackman and Patrick Stewart, the casting for these movies are just off to me. I really don't like Hallie Barry as Storm. Days of Future Past was a movie people loved and I disliked. Kitty Pryde with the ability to time travel?! Really?! The only X-Men movie I enjoyed was First Class. That was good.

Now as I said above, a lot of us dislike the Transformers movies. But people seem to like the first one. While I agree that it is the best, that's still not saying much. I'm just not a fan of Shia LeBouf's character and I still dislike the Transformers' characterizations in this movie.

[shuriken]

Jaws. I get and don't think it's trash but I never got into it. I would watch 20-30 minutes of it before doing something else.

[DarkLightDragon]

Where the Wild Things Are. I wouldn't call it garbage per say, but I really just couldn't get into it. And this coming from someone who loved the book as a kid.

I hear almost everyone praise it for being so "deep" and "complex" for a supposed kid's movie, but I just found it to be an absolute bore to watch and left me scratching my head when it was done like, "WTF did I just watch and can I have the time I wasted watching it back?"

[blindturtle02]

I'unno if "most people" like 'em, but I genuinely don't get the appeal of the "Fast & Furious" movies. It's like, "car porn". I'unno, maybe it's just that I don't think they needed twenty of 'em. Maybe that's what bugs me. Not really sure.

I hear ya on the F&F movies, Leo. Never been a big car fan. I kept falling asleep through those, but I got away with it. Almost as much fun as the time I accidentally conked out in class and got away with it. I really love my blindism super power.

Let's see. As for me, I've never gotten into Napoleon Dynamite. Gave it a shot, but just didn't find it funny. I don't consider the movie to be garbage, but don't feel like we need a "films everyone loved but that you think are just okay," thread. I liked Jon Heder as an actor though, if that makes sense. Looking forward to hearing him in TMNT 2012. I feel the same way about Frozen. Saw that recently and thought it was just okay, although It seemed to me as if Disney was trying hard to make up for however many years they went without putting songs in their movies. And I like musicals pretty well. I'll try diligently to come up with a movie I consider to be garbage, but right now I'm just hungry.

[ProactiveMan]

I don't like The Matrix. It's obviously better than it's sequels, but I find the original movie pretty tedious. I also have a strong disdain for Interview With a Vampire.

[Warhorse]

To be honest I'm not that big a sci-fi fan either, but I love Star Wars, the good Star Trek shows/movies, and some other select sci-fi movies that have heart to them.

Not to fond of all those generic alien invasion movies though that star Tom Cruise or Bruce Willis or some other bald headed space marine.

Also I hate any movie Leonardo Dicaprio or Matt Damon are in. Those two people feel like twins separated at birth and all the movies they're in deal with emo drama and often homosexuality for shock value.

Django Unchained is one of the best movies from Tarrentino.

And here I figured Willis got his rep for kicking some a** and doing a few comedic movies. Beating up aliens didn't come to my mind either.

As for your thread, I would have to say..

"Hi, I'm Chucky..WANNA PLAY?"

.. Child's Play. *I dunno if people love it but it probably does have a decent sized horror movie cult following.*
The first movie is alright, then I think it got stranger in the latter movies. *Both Bride (and Seed) of Chucky were just waay out there for me.*


And one of his best comedic roles, he didn't even show his face! Look Who's Talking!

[Prowler]

I'unno if "most people" like 'em, but I genuinely don't get the appeal of the "Fast & Furious" movies. It's like, "car porn". I'unno, maybe it's just that I don't think they needed twenty of 'em. Maybe that's what bugs me. Not really sure.
I personally don't care about them because I'm not into cars or motor sports. Also, not a movie, but that's the same reason why I don't care about Top Gear at all.

But since there's plenty of car enthusiasts out there, it's no wonder that Fast and Furious movies are so popular.

[Cure]

But since there's plenty of car enthusiasts out there, it's no wonder that Fast and Furious movies are so popular.

That's like saying only cat enthusiasts can enjoy The Lion King. They're movies made for a wide audience which is why they make so much bank.

[Warhorse]

I personally don't care about them because I'm not into cars or motor sports. Also, not a movie, but that's the same reason why I don't care about Top Gear at all.

But since there's plenty of car enthusiasts out there, it's no wonder that Fast and Furious movies are so popular.

Hmm, I'm not a car enthusiast, I just enjoy seeing Vin Diesel acting like a bad ass on the big screen.

[The Stryker]

I honestly enjoy the story in the Fast movies.

It's dumb, it's loud, it barely makes sense. But it's really fun and entertaining. The newer movies are barely about cars even so I don't know where that is coming from.

[Cure]

Also the characters have a certain charm.

[Prowler]

That's like saying only cat enthusiasts can enjoy The Lion King. They're movies made for a wide audience which is why they make so much bank.
Well, lions aren't cats despite being felines. I don't care about dogs but I find wolves cool, per example. I get what you mean, though.

I've only watched one of the FF movies and didn't care to check out the rest of them. So no idea if the newer ones are slightly different or not.

[TigerClaw]

I don't understand the appeal of Quentin Tarantino movies, the hardcore movie fans enjoy those movies, But I don't think his films appeal to a mass audience. They are usually overly violent and vulgar.

[Prowler]

I don't understand the appeal of Quentin Tarantino movies, the hardcore movie fans enjoy those movies, But I don't think his films appeal to a mass audience. They are usually overly violent and vulgar.
I've only seen Inglorious Basterds and liked it, so I can't comment on that.

They don't? Aren't movies like Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill loved by millions? It's not like they're movies that went under the radar...

[TigerClaw]

I've only seen Inglorious Basterds and liked it, so I can't comment on that.

They don't? Aren't movies like Pulp Fiction and Kill Bill loved by millions? It's not like they're movies that went under the radar...
His movies are too violent and vulgar for my taste, I seen violent movies and vulgar movies before, But his films takes it to extremes that makes me uncomfortable.

[Sumac]

I rarely see movies that many people loved as outright garbage.
I can find them uninteresting, but it's my personal taste and claiming that something that I find boring is garbage is quite awkward in this case. It's my personal problem - I just don't get them.

Like I absolutely don't find anything of interest in slasher and horror movies. They failed to impress / scare me, when I was little kid and I don't find them any more impressive / interesting nowadays. I don't understand their appeal and the only thing, that can make me waste my time on them is to enjoy make-up and special effects. But even this grow old quite fast. If I want to be really scared or disgusted, I watch news on TV.

[Gorilla Grodd]

I rarely see movies that many people loved as outright garbage.
I can find them uninteresting, but it's my personal taste and claiming that something that I find boring is garbage is quite awkward in this case. It's my personal problem - I just don't get them.

Like I absolutely don't find anything of interest in slasher and horror movies. They failed to impress / scare me, when I was little kid and I don't find them any more impressive / interesting nowadays. I don't understand their appeal and the only thing, that can make me waste my time on them is to enjoy make-up and special effects. But even this grow old quite fast. If I want to be really scared or disgusted, I watch news on TV.

Yeah this is pretty much my feeling on everything. I never got the fascination people have with dogging things other people enjoy.

Ghost movies like Paranormal Activity and all of the dozens of knock offs seem to be really popular with people and they go on and on about how scary they are. Meanwhile they just bore the piss out of me. But I don't make a habit of trashing them.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

The Shrek movies
Guardians of the Galaxy
Iron Man 3
Thor 2

[ssjup81]

I don't understand the appeal of Quentin Tarantino movies, the hardcore movie fans enjoy those movies, But I don't think his films appeal to a mass audience. They are usually overly violent and vulgar.Same for me. This is how I feel. His films just aren't for me.

[pandaderek]

I don't understand the appeal of Quentin Tarantino movies, the hardcore movie fans enjoy those movies, But I don't think his films appeal to a mass audience. They are usually overly violent and vulgar.

I really like his movies, but, I watch a lot of gory and violent Japanese movies, especially old Japanese gangster films with Takeshi Kitano (my favorite Japanese actor). A lot of Tarantino movies are heavily influenced by eastern movies, which is why he's fresh, to many in the west. But, he still does a great job, even if his style isn't original, like many think.

So, it could be that your movie taste is more accustomed to westernized styles, whereas, eastern films are far less direct, where it includes a lot of detail in the picture, especially, gory and symbolic details.

[Lethal Lullaby]

Twilight Saga. Just ugh. >_<

[snake]

Twilight Saga. Just ugh. >_<

Most people love that?

[Kanon]

All Resident Evil and Underworld movies

I think they made them just to have an excuse for their Zombie/Vampire -shooting games.

[ssjup81]

I really like his movies, but, I watch a lot of gory and violent Japanese movies, especially old Japanese gangster films with Takeshi Kitano (my favorite Japanese actor). A lot of Tarantino movies are heavily influenced by eastern movies, which is why he's fresh, to many in the west. But, he still does a great job, even if his style isn't original, like many think.

So, it could be that your movie taste is more accustomed to westernized styles, whereas, eastern films are far less direct, where it includes a lot of detail in the picture, especially, gory and symbolic details.But his films still feel vulgar and overly violent for the sake of being vulgar and violent.

[TheBlueTurtle1]

The new Godzilla film, talk about boring:roll:

[Prowler]

I really like his movies, but, I watch a lot of gory and violent Japanese movies, especially old Japanese gangster films with Takeshi Kitano (my favorite Japanese actor). A lot of Tarantino movies are heavily influenced by eastern movies, which is why he's fresh, to many in the west. But, he still does a great job, even if his style isn't original, like many think.

So, it could be that your movie taste is more accustomed to westernized styles, whereas, eastern films are far less direct, where it includes a lot of detail in the picture, especially, gory and symbolic details.
Maybe movies like Kill Bill and such have some Asian influence, but I don't think movies like Inglorious Basterds have. It didn't feel like a Japanese movie at all to me.

[Lethal Lullaby]

Most people love that?

Sadly many of my old friends loved it. Actually a lot (not all) of preteen girls love it. xD

[TigerClaw]

But his films still feel vulgar and overly violent for the sake of being vulgar and violent.
Yeah, I feel like his movies are just being violent and gory for the sake of it, For the shock value, Which isn't my cup of tea

[plastroncafe]

I'm going to take this as movies that I didn't like in addition to didn't find compelling for some reason.

There are a bunch of movies I didn't like, but that were quality in their design and execution.

Crash is the first movie that comes to mind. It won several Academy Awards and to this day I have absolutely no idea why. The performances were...there, and the direction...I mean, it had a director. But it didn't do anything that really blew me away.

Worst of all it was yet another movie in the EVERYTHING IS CONNECTED/Holistic trope that I'm just tired of seeing.

Everything doesn't always connect so crisply, and it's really cloying when movies keep insisting that it does.

I'M LOOKING AT YOU, AMAZING SPIDER-MAN.

[Prowler]

Crash is the first movie that comes to mind. It won several Academy Awards and to this day I have absolutely no idea why. The performances were...there, and the direction...I mean, it had a director. But it didn't do anything that really blew me away.

I watched that in class back in HS. It came across as forced and as trying too hard.

[Wesley]

Nolan's Batman films
The Shawdank Redemption
Mean Girls

[Jephael]

I never cared much for Star Trek. It just didn't appeal to me. Ironically though, I enjoy Star Wars, but I'm more of a casual fan.

[neatoman]

Avatar, expensive but pretentious and stupid.

Also the Jackson Lord of the Rings movies, I know the books are these long epics with a billion things happening in them with a lot story, characters and mythology and all that, but the way they tried to translate into movies did not work in my opinion. Maybe if it was a TV show so they could have broken everything down into smaller episodes, but as movies it comes across as 9-12 hours (depending on the version) of dragging bleakness. Maybe the individual movies should have been the more standard 1 1/2 hour movies instead of 3 hours each?

[Prowler]

I never cared much for Star Trek. It just didn't appeal to me. Ironically though, I enjoy Star Wars, but I'm more of a casual fan.
Funny, I'm the opposite.

[pennydreadful]

Avatar, expensive but pretentious and stupid.

Also the Jackson Lord of the Rings movies, I know the books are these long epics with a billion things happening in them with a lot story, characters and mythology and all that, but the way they tried to translate into movies did not work in my opinion. Maybe if it was a TV show so they could have broken everything down into smaller episodes, but as movies it comes across as 9-12 hours (depending on the version) of dragging bleakness. Maybe the individual movies should have been the more standard 1 1/2 hour movies instead of 3 hours each?

If you're not gonna do a faithful adaptation of the source material, why even bother - just do another movie altogether.

The LOTR movies did have problems, but those were mostly related to Jacksons' portrayal of the elves (ie, he got them all wrong) and him trying to put in weird horror moments that didn't work (like his rendition of the scene with The Mouth of Sauron and the way he just turned it into laugh fodder).

The books are an epic trilogy - it only makes sense for the movies to be epic in scale. If people can't be bothered to read the books, I don't really feel bad when they don't "get" half the stuff in the movies. Movie adaptations aren't meant to be Cliffs Notes for the non-literary.

That probably came out sounding harsher than intended, but it's a pet peeve of mine.

[Leo656]

^^ I totally get and agree with a lot of that, 100%. The flip side is, though, there still are a ton of movies that work a LOT better if you have no idea what the source material is like. I'd argue a lot of Marvel movies and comic book movies in general are like that. I honestly think if you know the source, it expands your experience, but sometimes it ruins it, too, when one spends all their time analyzing what wasn't there or what was changed. Like, I really enjoy most of the Marvel movies, but I haven't read a dozen Marvel books combined in my lifetime, I don't think. And I feel pretty safe in feeling it's better off for me that way, because plenty of people know the books backwards and forwards and can list a million things the movies "screwed up", but if you can get past those things, the movies themselves remain very well-done movies for the most part.

I mean, the Chris Reeve "Superman" film is about as far from the actual comics in 1976 as anything, really. Despite being so revered for "faithfulness", the only thing they kept faithful was the suit, the very bare bones of the backstory, and the Tone of it all. Krypton and the reasons for its destruction, the visuals of it, the reason for the S shield, the crystals, Jor-El's portrayal, Luthor's portrayal... pretty much everything people love was entirely made up *just* for that movie. And yet, it's considered one of the best and most "faithful" adaptations ever. Granted, that's mostly by people who never read the comics, but still. And it's a great movie; if anything those changes made the source material *better* because the books started discarding stuff that didn't work and borrowing heavily from the movies.

And let's not forget Tim Burton's "Batman" and "Batman Returns", which, while very good Tim Burton films on their own, they're terrible adaptations of Batman and his universe. But they're still great movies and everyone rightly loves them, because they got a lot of The Important Stuff right. Mainly, heart and tone. You have to try and retain the essence of the source, at least, or the rest of it and the changes you make will break it, as we saw with the new TMNT movie. That's a case where, I'd argue, they just did a bunch of things to be Different not at all because it would be Better, but JUST because it would be Different. And since the movie itself could have been about any other characters besides TMNT, it could have been about freakin' Power Pack and would still be just as poorly-written and poorly-made, everything they did to make it "fresh" just made it worse.

So, in a long and complicated way, I'm saying that I agree with you that there's really no point in adapting things if you're going to skew too far away from it, BUT, a lot of times when stuff is tweaked or changed it can really make a better experience for everyone. It depends on the execution, really.

[pennydreadful]

Agreed, Leo - it's definitely down to the source material in question. When it comes to comics, I say go for it... but one does not simply condense a 1000+ page piece of classic fantasy literature into a 90 minute movie (Had to make the obvious joke. :P). The Crow's film treatment deviated in several major ways from the original graphic novel, but the changes were made to enhance the main feel and message of the comic book. And hey, there'll never be a finer comic book movie than The Crow, as far as I'm concerned. I get that some things have to be tweaked when you change the medium by which you're telling the story.

I just think if people can't commit to a long story, they may as well watch something else - why dumb down a perfectly good story? All those extra pages in the books aren't there just for the sake of filler - they're part of the story, the characters and the world-building. You can't compress LOTR, and doing it as a tv series would be completely unfeasible from a budget perspective - it just couldn't be done. Game of Thrones, you can adapt - it's mostly a political-based fantasy series with predominantly human characters... LOTR is an epic good vs evil story filled with elves, men, dwarves, orcses (thousands of orcses), ents, numerous other fantasy creatures huge sets, even huger battles - they could barely manage to do the Battle of Blackwater on tv (with one ship and 400 extras), let alone the Battle at Helms Deep.

I mean, I could complain about PJ's treatment of the movies for an aeon, but give the man his due, when he got it right - he got it right, he got it really right. I'm a purist when it comes to those novels - there'll always be things I'll be unhappy with, but by and large he did a good job. But there's no way you could cut out any more of the theatrical releases than they already did.


*exhale*

Tolkien are sirius bizness. :lol: Sorry, but I get a little nutty about those books - I've read the whole trilogy at least once a year every year since I was 7 years old. It drives me crazy that there are people out there who think watching the movie replaces the need to read the novels. It's not the same thing at all.

[Leo656]

Not gonna lie, I appreciate and love that all that exists, but frankly, those books are too nerdy even for me. :lol: God bless the dude for going so full-on balls-deep into the fantasy genre and creating such a fully fleshed-out universe, and double-bless anyone who actually enjoys reading it all. And I love fantasy and I love to read. But that stuff is just so densely-packed with D&D geekery that I can't get through it all. :lol: The movies were custom-made for people like me. I love all of that stuff... but in much more manageable doses.

Basically, the world contains way too much porn for me to be sittin' around readin' Lord of the Rings. Priorities and all that. :lol: But like I said, I'm very glad it exists and I'm glad people are so into it; if I ever finish reading it, it'll probably be when I'm deep into middle age, and until then, the flicks suit me fine. :)

[DarkFell]

You're right Pen - a lot of novels aren't the same as the movies. It, Watchers, - these are awesome movies in their own right but they aren't totally faithful to the books.
It and Watchers had different scenarios not mentioned in the movies.
It seems rare that the books and the movies follow each other "hand in hand".

Just a heads up about the LotR movies - a lot of people in my hometown were doing lots of groaning at how long the movies were while they were still in the theaters. Maybe there is hope for the novels yet.

[pennydreadful]

You're right Pen - a lot of novels aren't the same as the movies. It, Watchers, - these are awesome movies in their own right but they aren't totally faithful to the books.
It and Watchers had different scenarios not mentioned in the movies.
It seems rare that the books and the movies follow each other "hand in hand".

Oh hells yes - you're so on the money about Watchers... and I can't even tell you how hard I wince at what Kubrick did to The Shining. :cry: My second-fave King novel ever, and it got totally mangled. On the flip side, Kubrick did a fairly decent job on A Clockwork Orange's adaptation, so maybe it's a trade-off.

I'm of the view that movies are good, books are good - but the two are very different animals, and you need to always be conscious of that when you're doing an adaptation. And if a movie adaptation drops the ball, swotty little nancies with their library cards (like me) are gonna b*tch it up on the internet. :lol:


Not gonna lie, I appreciate and love that all that exists, but frankly, those books are too nerdy even for me. God bless the dude for going so full-on balls-deep into the fantasy genre and creating such a fully fleshed-out universe, and double-bless anyone who actually enjoys reading it all. And I love fantasy and I love to read. But that stuff is just so densely-packed with D&D geekery that I can't get through it all. The movies were custom-made for people like me. I love all of that stuff... but in much more manageable doses.

http://media3.giphy.com/media/bTTB8Ws2FuZzO/200_s.gif

Kayla, there's something I gotta tell ya. Um... I was a geek in high school. I had really short hair, I played "Dungeons and Dragons", I had a bug collection, I ate my boogers. My name's not Chaz... it's Chester, and I understand if you don't love me anymore.

:P

[Leo656]

You make me snicker.

[pennydreadful]

Dude, you're meant to tell me you were editor of the school magazine! :P

[Leo656]

Well, I sincerely apologize. Monday is Leg Day, and I am indeed quite tired. :)

Also, your post was at 4:20 (EST). Haaaa-haaaaa. That also makes me snicker. Feels somehow appropriate.

[TigerClaw]

The same can be said about films, That many critics love, But are hated by the movie going audience, and those films end up bombing at the box office, despite being critically acclaimed and such.

[Peanut]

And if a movie adaptation drops the ball, swotty little nancies with their library cards (like me) are gonna b*tch it up on the internet. :lol

I will never understand this bullsh*t. A movie adaption existing doesn't make the books disappear. I read a lot of books and I've never been upset at a movie adaption. Ever. A book and a movie adaption are two entirely different things and the sooner you seperate them the happier you'll be. The people around you will be happier, too. There's nothing worse than a pretentious book snob looking down their nose at a movie adaption they feel is beneath them, because after all THEY had the enormous BRAINS required to read a whole book with no pictures!

[pennydreadful]

Pretentious is as pretentious does. But hey, feel free to take one line out of everything I've said on the subject and be overly aggressive about it.

[plastroncafe]

Really never been upset at a movie adaptation?
Ugh, I have been.

Constantine.

Not a bad movie, not a great one either, but it wasn't a bad movie.
What it was crap at was being an adaptation of "Hellblazer."
Which...is what it was supposed to be doing.

I've nothing wrong with changing things to suit the director's specific needs, because honestly if I wanted to see a movie that was verbatim the book...I'd just read the book.

I want a director to DO something with the text, keep the themes that made the book great even at the expense of the details.

Now I'm no Tolkien Scholar, in fact I hadn't read the books prior to that first opening teaser trailer where they're all coming over the top of the mountain, but I thought Jackson did a fairly decent job of keeping the themes intact.

I'll take "Fight Club" and "Harry Potter and the Prisoner of Azkaban" over "Watchmen" and "Harry Potter and the Philsopher's Stone" any day.

[Leo656]

I love Watchmen. I got to see Malin Ackerman's nipples AND her O-Face. I'm good. :tgrin:

[plastroncafe]

Even Doctor Manhattan's Blue Peen, or the awesomeness that was Jackie Earle Haley, couldn't save that movie from being all style and no soul.
Having said that, the trailer and opening credit sequence were amazeballs.

[Xiewin]

Well GOTG for me, obviously.

1 dimensional characters, an un-interesting/rushed story, forced comedy and unearned character relationships. It's pretty much in the same league as the current ninja turtle movie for me. Nothing but more hollywood garbage.

[Leo656]

Even Doctor Manhattan's Blue Peen, or the awesomeness that was Jackie Earle Haley, couldn't save that movie from being all style and no soul.
Having said that, the trailer and opening credit sequence were amazeballs.

:lol: We'll agree to disagree. I saw some of the drafts where the writers were getting further away from the book to "Do Something" with the material, and good god, it would've been awful. Not a good idea in the bunch.

If they HAD to make the movie - and they were going to no matter what - then doing it strictly Paint-By-Numbers is as good as it was ever going to get, in my opinion. The movie we got was the best possible movie they could or would have made, so frankly, since they HAD to... I'll enjoy what we got and thank Azathoth (Who Waits...) that it wasn't worse. :)

[shuriken]

I love Watchmen. I got to see Malin Ackerman's nipples AND her O-Face. I'm good. :tgrin:

Haha yeah. I can't hear the song alleluyah without thinking about that scene now. forever burned in the back of my mind. Either way watching that in a theater with my girlfriend at the time led to fun times. SOOOO yeah that movie for me=fun times.
I think it gets a lot of hate but it's decent.
Ooooh American Graffiti. Holy s**t was that boring. There was a time about 3 years ago when I wanted to see each of AFI's top 100 movies and after that one I just couldn't.

[pennydreadful]

I'm dragging this thread back to life because I have a confession to make and this is the appropriate place to do it:

I can't stand Nolan's Batman movies.

There, I said it. It's out in the open now. :lol:

[Leo656]

That is pretty wacky.

Although I'm the Lone Wolf who thinks "Begins" is actually the best stand-alone film in the bunch. Partly because it fits neatly into just about every Batman continuity without contradicting anything, while "Dark Knight" goes completely off the rails to do its own thing. Which it does in an entertaining way, but I've never been sold on killing off a major villain like Two-Face five minutes after his creation, for example, and a lot of other little things in that flick.

Much as I like DK, I think people over-sell it because "Joker is in it!" and the strength of Ledger's performance. I don't actually think it's either a better Batman movie OR a better "movie" movie than Begins. I think they're about equal quality but Begins, to a "Purist", is the best Batman movie anybody is ever gonna make.

I know romantically people also fetishize the Perfectly Adequate 1989 movie, but when you're as Totally Over Tim Burton as I am, it's easy to see the ton of things "wrong" with it. Always worth a watch, though. And they did have a better Bat-suit.

[ScrewtheMirageTMNT]

-Dawn Of The Planet Of The Apes
-Edge of Tomorrow
-X-Men: Days of Future Past

They were so boring and formulaic. I am including these because of how many movie critics dug them.

[Katie]

I'm dragging this thread back to life because I have a confession to make and this is the appropriate place to do it:

I can't stand Nolan's Batman movies.

There, I said it. It's out in the open now. :lol:

I agree. The second one was the only tolerable one.

I also didn't like Guardians that much. I don't understand all the comparisons to Star Wars or why everyone goes nutty for the soundtrack. I like all the music, but it was awesome before the movie. In fact the movie kind of ruined that music for me for awhile.

Also, the movie was resolved with a dance off and the care bear stare moment.

Just not my idea of a great movie.

[Whatswiththeheadbands?]

I'm dragging this thread back to life because I have a confession to make and this is the appropriate place to do it:

I can't stand Nolan's Batman movies.

There, I said it. It's out in the open now. :lol:

For the most part, I agree with you.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I'm dragging this thread back to life because I have a confession to make and this is the appropriate place to do it:

I can't stand Nolan's Batman movies.

There, I said it. It's out in the open now. :lol:


I'll second it. The first was OK, but I just HATED Heath's Joker- WAAY too much "psycho" and not enough "clown". I much preferred Jack's take, which to me balanced Joker perfectly. I also loved Mark Hamil's voice-acting in B: TAS, so I felt that between Jack and Ledger, Jack did it FAR better. His humor was still macabre and sadistic, but funny. Heath's Joker was NOT funny. AT ALL. I get that Joker is a complete psychopath, but he's also got style and panache, class, and a sense of irony. As Joker himself once said (in a crossover comic with Carnage, of all people!) "Anyone can butcher. A true artist does it with STYLE!" And that, I feel is the difference between Burton's Bat-flicks, and Nolan's. Jack as Joker actually got the style part right! (And he was STILL a sick little puppy....)

[Leo656]

Well, yeah, you're "right"... if you never or barely read comics and thus can't realize your idea of the character is actually Completely Backwards.

S'okay, it happens. They've only gone out of their way to state, "Joker's NOT a clown, he's a psychopath", like, a million times in the books over the years. No, really, I'd have to look it up, but I promise you, those exact words have been spoken in that exact same order by more than one main character. "Style" is one thing, but he's not a comedian. He skins people for fun. He doesn't do "camp". He's Evil. He's not "funny".

Jack Nicholson wasn't playing The Joker, he was playing Jack Nicholson In Clown Face. Which was fine, because Tim Burton also wasn't making a Batman movie, he was making a Tim Burton movie starring a guy dressed kinda like Batman.

The movie and everybody in it were fine. It's a good movie in and of itself. But if anyone is basing their idea of Batman's universe or the characters off of That Movie, then I'm sorry, but You're Wrong. Those characters appear that way ONLY in those films, and thus are in no way "definitive".

I had issues of my own with Dark Knight and Rises, but Ledger's Joker was "The Joker" as he actually "exists" within the larger fiction. That's the Joker of the books, the ongoing "official" media. That's the fact. Nicholson's portrayal was Fun and worked fine for the movie it was in. It was also Completely Inaccurate. Them's the breaks.

[CylonsKlingonsDaleksOhMy]

Man, seeing you guys hate on some movies I love is really depressing me! :tcry: But this IS the internet, so it's not like I didn't know what I was getting into. :tlol:

There are a number of trending film franchises that I can't stand or have no interest in:

1. Spiderman (Amazing or the original trilogy)
2. Planet of the Apes
3. Thor
4. Transformers
5. James Bond
6. Star Wars (original trilogy and prequels)

[MsMarvelDuckie]

Well, yeah, you're "right"... if you never or barely read comics and thus can't realize your idea of the character is actually Completely Backwards.

S'okay, it happens. They've only gone out of their way to state, "Joker's NOT a clown, he's a psychopath", like, a million times in the books over the years. No, really, I'd have to look it up, but I promise you, those exact words have been spoken in that exact same order by more than one main character. "Style" is one thing, but he's not a comedian. He skins people for fun. He doesn't do "camp". He's Evil. He's not "funny".

Jack Nicholson wasn't playing The Joker, he was playing Jack Nicholson In Clown Face. Which was fine, because Tim Burton also wasn't making a Batman movie, he was making a Tim Burton movie starring a guy dressed kinda like Batman.

The movie and everybody in it were fine. It's a good movie in and of itself. But if anyone is basing their idea of Batman's universe or the characters off of That Movie, then I'm sorry, but You're Wrong. Those characters appear that way ONLY in those films, and thus are in no way "definitive".

I had issues of my own with Dark Knight and Rises, but Ledger's Joker was "The Joker" as he actually "exists" within the larger fiction. That's the Joker of the books, the ongoing "official" media. That's the fact. Nicholson's portrayal was Fun and worked fine for the movie it was in. It was also Completely Inaccurate. Them's the breaks.

Actually, I have thought (much after the fact, mind) that Jack is closer to the comics I HAVE read (the crossover with Carnage being one) than Ledger. Not to mention Hamill's version, which though toned down, was also pretty darned creepy at times. Both seem more suited to a guy calling himself Joker and killing people in creative ways (Jack's hand-buzzer springs to mind, or the "Joker-Fish" ep from B: TAS- I later found out that one was based on a comic issue- so naturally I had to hunt it down. The only real difference was that he killed the patent-office guy.) than a guy who resorts to cutting his own face like some suicidal emo. He's psycho, sure, but he's a creative and gleeful psycho in very version but Nolan's I've ever seen. The issue with Carnage (they traded enemies in hopes of finally beating Bats and Spidey, respectively) had him using explosive jack-in-the-boxes. For kicks. Except that he got pissed when Carnage just wanted to kill Bats by hacking him to pieces- and then promptly turned on him to warn the pair! Because he was disgusted by Carnage's lack of "class" as a killer. That, to me, speaks volumes to who he is- and it's NOT the Nolan Joker. An unrepentant murderer he may be, but he apparently has standards- and Carnage just didn't measure up, LOL! Even beating Robin to death had its own macabre sense of giddy fun to it- for him at least. He's brutal, but still has fun with his work! I didn't see ANY of that in the Nolan film. He just seemed more like Charles Manson in make-up to me. Or maybe Ed Gein.....

[Leo656]

To me, the guys who wrote the character in the books - consistently, not just non-canon one-shots - are the ones doing the "authentic" portrayal. I definitely see Adams, O'Neal, Dixon, Loeb, and Morrison in Ledger's version. He took it his own way, made it a little more "real", but it was still right off the page. No, he didn't have any exploding jack-in-the-boxes or dynamite-loaded pies but all that silly sh*t came much later in the books, anyway. The original visual of The Joker was to be both horrific and ironic, and only became a "merry prankster" once the Code kicked in and they had to worry about scaring kids. "This guy who looks like a clown is actually going to murder the f*ck out of you, then stay up all night thinking of how he's going to do it to somebody else tomorrow". Jack's version was a little too... "straight". He seemed too much like a guy acting out a personal vendetta and not someone who was actually psychotic. I didn't believe he was insane, it was more "This disfigurement is merely going to free me to act without restraint in a manner I've always dreamed of." Fine, but... Joker's irredeemably F***ing insane, so yeah, that's a different guy. This is the guy who, when he got the power of Mxyzptlk and took over the entire universe, murdered Batman every day just to bring him back to life and kill him in even more brutal fashion the next day. He ate China, literally, as in the entire population of China, he ate them. He's a friggin' lunatic. Ledger's portrayal was more accurate, I'm sorry. I know you don't read a ton of DC, but I'm serious, you can trust my judgment on this, if for no other reason than I've most likely read a few hundred more of the books that are relevant to this particular conversation. :)

It's like Catwoman and the awful "cat" motif with all the purring, or making her as a person someone who's obsessed with cats, none of which is actually "legit" either. People get hung up on a motif and forget where the character came from. She was "Catwoman" because she was a Cat burglar not a "crazy cat-lady". All that stuff gets tacked on by people who don't "get it" and people who don't know any better start thinking it's "official". That's another perfect example, is Pfeiffer's Catwoman. She's most people's favorite, despite being just as "Awful" as Halle Berry if we're going by faithfulness to the source. A fun portrayal? Sure, but that's technically Not the character, like, at all. They still changed everything about her but the name "Selina Kyle". Meanwhile, the version in DKR is a little bit dry, but infinitely more true to the source.

See, some people just don't like the "darker, more realistic' style of Nolan's movies, and that's their prerogative. As a purist, though, I *have* to elevate them far ahead of Burton's movies because 95% of what's in those movies is, for once, right from the books, which for some reason nobody ever does when they make these movies. Style is one thing, and I can understand people not liking the Nolan films' Style, but I'm perfectly willing to settle for a film universe where the characters are actually the same as the ones in the books for a change. Plus, those movies finally made it officially "acceptable" for grown-ups to like comic book movies, so that's plenty enough for me.

Same thing with "Man of Steel". There's a lot wrong with it. There's serious tone and dialog problems. It's also, if we add up all the really obscure references that even I missed the first few times, the Most Faithful Comic Adaptation Ever Made, and by a wide margin. People don't really look into that, mostly because they can't get past the Tone, but I have to give people credit for doing their homework and actually putting the books on screen, whether it's Nolan's Batman, or Man of Steel, or whatever. I can appreciate people like Burton doing "their version" when it's done well, but I'm always going to knock points off for deviation.

It's pretty clear we use a different "grading system", though. See, with Marvel movies, I have to have a different system because I know f*ck-all about those books except what I got from video games and the backs of trading cards. I couldn't possibly apply the same criteria. But I do know enough to know Spidey 3 and X-Men 3 were dog sh*t, and a lot of that had to do with deviating from the source. :P

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I'll agree with the Spidey 3 and x-Men 3, bit, at least. I guess it boils down to which version just felt more in tune with the over-all comic-book world, to me. Burton's certainly IS a comic book movie. Nolan's films didn't FEEL like comic book movies, and it's largely because he went TOO dark, IMHO. It was trying too hard to be gritty, realistic, and dark, and that's just not what a comic movie should be, IMO. Nearly all the Batman material I'm familiar with was at most, a little twisted and freakish, but not dark and gritty to the point where it feels more like a modern attempt at a noir film. With a guy in a bat suit a la the Shadow. Now THERE'S a movie that Nolan should have done! It fits better with his style, actually, now that I think about it.

On a side-note, you know what I'd like to see? A less-campy reboot of The Phantom! Not that I didn't love Billy Zane and Treat Williams, mind (and Kristie Swanson), but I could get behind a newer, more serious version, too.

[Leo656]

I don't mind "darker" because I'm fine with comics and their adaptations being taken out of their "For Children and Man-Children" box. Whether or not they "feel" like comic book movies, they're still Good Movies. They're exceptionally well-made. To me, that counts for a lot more in the big picture. I'm all for anything that makes people stop thinking someone is brain-damaged just because they're over age 10 and still like super-heroes. Most movies in the genre are either Good Super-Hero Movies, or Good Movies Period, but not both. Well, two-and-a-half of Nolan's movies were both (A lot of the third one is pretty busted on a technical level because they rushed it out). There's a reason people insisted, and still do, that Begins and Dark Knight "elevated" the genre. Because for the first time, when you said to an adult contemporary that you were going to a comic book film, they didn't roll their eyes and ask "Why?" Nobody said, "Wow, that was a really good super-hero movie", they just said, "Wow, that was a really great movie." People who ordinarily would treat super-heroes (and especially their fans) with naught but disdain and mockery were suddenly losing their sh*t in the theater because the people making the movies decided that winking at the audience was in no way necessary.

I'm not going to even pretend I don't love and appreciate that. We're kind of sliding backwards now, because too many people tried to ape the "style" and forgot to put a good movie in there too, and so now there's a backlash. But to date, for the most part those are the only "comic book movies" that aren't looked down on by the masses or graded in their own cute little "category". They're Just Good Movies and that's all anyone treats them as, and rightly so. People can go back and forth on whether they prefer This Style or That Style, but let's be honest, nobody is EVER going to pull that off again to that degree. I give them all the credit in the world for that.

[ScrewtheMirageTMNT]

To me, most of the X-men movies are like big budget b movies without the humor. Tobey doesn't sound right for spider-man/peter parker, bad casting, he can act but just isn't quite right. God, no. Nolan doing a movie on the shadow. Him making three batman movies that I didn't enjoy is enough for me.

[Shiro Kame]

2014 turtles. It was #1 in Canada, but the story and stupidity of April and stuff that doesn't make sense, along with Splinter being a bad parent makes me never want to see this movie ever again.

[Amaranthus]

2014 turtles. It was #1 in Canada, but the story and stupidity of April and stuff that doesn't make sense, along with Splinter being a bad parent makes me never want to see this movie ever again.

Trust me. That's not a movie most people love.

[ProactiveMan]

I really dislike Almost Famous. It feels like your dad lecturing you about how much better things were when he was a lad. Get out of here old man, I'm trying to listen to my compact discs.

[Commenter 42]

Nolan films annoy me to no end. The dark knight was his only film I felt deserved the praise it got. Every other film is simply a spiderweb of plot holes.

I really liked Del Torro's style, back when he made Blade 2. It was fresh, at the time. Hell boy was sort of cool, enjoyed the sequel more, but since then? Garbage.

Pacific Rim was simply terrible. I can't figure out what's so exciting? Yes, huge robots are cool, but these huge robots we're not. The story was stupid beyond stupid. The acting was painful. Why anyone would dig this slow, boring film, is beyond me.

[IndigoErth]

I wouldn't say it's garbage, but almost killed me... Les Misérables (2012)

Now I know it's supposed to be this great story and big wonderful artistic thing. I knew people who were excited for it when word got out that there was to be a 2012 film and they enjoyed it, and I recall seeing an older Les Misérables in a class back in school many years ago and that was fine, liked it enough so I figured I'd like this one.

But...I don't know. Maybe I just didn't have the patience for it that day (but of course I forced myself to watch the whole thing on tv anyhow), but just found it the most irritating thing for every frigging word of it to be sung, including all the minor little stuff. Like if you said you were getting your keys or needed to use the bathroom, you'd have to sing those words. Stub your toe? You better be singing those swear words. When the word "the" or "and" or whatever have to be in musical harmony with the rest of the film... kill me now.

[pennydreadful]

I really dislike Almost Famous. It feels like your dad lecturing you about how much better things were when he was a lad. Get out of here old man, I'm trying to listen to my compact discs.

Yeah, I didn't understand the appeal of that movie either. :ohwell:

[Leo656]

I really dislike Almost Famous. It feels like your dad lecturing you about how much better things were when he was a lad. Get out of here old man, I'm trying to listen to my compact discs.

:lol: That's a really good way of putting it. It's okay but I swear, that's another one that's overrated as f***. When I finally saw it, I was like, "Seriously? That's it?" I kept waiting for the "amazing" part and it never came.

[ScrewtheMirageTMNT]

:lol: That's a really good way of putting it. It's okay but I swear, that's another one that's overrated as f***. When I finally saw it, I was like, "Seriously? That's it?" I kept waiting for the "amazing" part and it never came.

This is how I pretty much feel about beloved movies that I'm made to watch. If there isn't one, then there's two to four (good bits).

[Mew]

Star Wars.

[Don Gaddis]

Donnie Darko.

And I've had to endure it several times/ it was forced upon me by two close friends.
They kept going on and on about how much they loved the movie, and I disliked it
so much that I didn't say anything. I just didn't want to hurt their feelings.
Thankfully I've forgotten much of it by now. :).

Inception was another one that I found awful- it received a lot of critical praise
and my best friend seemed to love it. Funny experience: I went over to my friend's
house... She kept talking about the movie and saying how much she thought that I'd
like it, but I just had no interest. "Here, you can borrow it!" she said excitedly, handing
it over to me.

The dvd sat in my car for months. On my next visit to her house, I took it out of
my car and snuck it back into her dvd collection. Unfortunately, she asked if I had watched
it. I told her that I had been busy and never had a chance to. I should've simply told
her that I had no interest in it, because she of course quickly put it on so we could both
watch it together... ughhh.

That thing was torture. I absolutely disliked everything about it. The dialogue was
poorly written, the entire movie was choppy, I couldn't stand two of the main actors/
protagonists, didn't buy the dream logic, didn't care about any of the characters, etc...
to me it seemed to be a movie that was built around special effects, and... something
is wrong with the writing when a viewer is able to discern every plot point before it
happens (that was the case with Donnie Darko for me as well).

Horrible storytelling. HORRIBLE.

[Jester]

First Blood. I finally watched it because I'm going through a bunch of VHS tapes I bought at flea markets, and this particular one had First Blood and Rambo: First Blood Part 2. Maybe I missed it, but what the heck was the problem with those small town bumpkin cops? Had they just left well enough alone, John Rambo would have just moved on and nothing bad would have happened. BUT....they just had to provoke him. Oye.

[Creativemind]

All the Fast and Furious movies. I don't see the appeal of cars and racing. The X-men movies,Sam Raimi's Spider-man movies, and Harry Potter are also things I hate.

[snake]

Nolan films annoy me to no end. The dark knight was his only film I felt deserved the praise it got. Every other film is simply a spiderweb of plot holes.


This. I hate nolan. DKR is a good laugh though.


Star Wars.

How. Why? Explain.

[Jester]

I dunna guys. I loved The Prestige.

[Gunpowder]

Nolan films annoy me to no end. The dark knight was his only film I felt deserved the praise it got. Every other film is simply a spiderweb of plot holes.

Even so, I thought Interstellar was fantastic.

Pacific Rim was simply terrible. I can't figure out what's so exciting? Yes, huge robots are cool, but these huge robots we're not. The story was stupid beyond stupid. The acting was painful. Why anyone would dig this slow, boring film, is beyond me.

This, I can agree with.

[shuriken]

First Blood. I finally watched it because I'm going through a bunch of VHS tapes I bought at flea markets, and this particular one had First Blood and Rambo: First Blood Part 2. Maybe I missed it, but what the heck was the problem with those small town bumpkin cops? Had they just left well enough alone, John Rambo would have just moved on and nothing bad would have happened. BUT....they just had to provoke him. Oye.

That was the whole point of it though. That was the beauty of First Blood. The other three are all 'MERICA F**K YEAH!! But First Blood was like "Really America, this is how you treat guys risking their lives?"

OOH Fast Times at Ridgemont high. Aside from Spicolli I found the whole thing depressing and pointless. If it woulda been 40 + more minutes of Spicolli and Mr Hand I woulda loved it. Jennifer Jason Leigh's character is soooo stupid I wanted her to catch a venereal disease and just go away. That whole pregnancy thing was waay outta left field and left me sad and confused. If that was the point then congrats.

[MsMarvelDuckie]

I feel the same way about Full Metal Jacket. I'm sorry, but after Private "Pyle" offs himself, I just get bored and change the channel. The entire rest of the movie after that is boring and pointless. That goes double for Jacob's Ladder. Never saw the point of it, and it's dull and confusing.

[ProactiveMan]

I feel the same way about Full Metal Jacket. I'm sorry, but after Private "Pyle" offs himself, I just get bored and change the channel.

I agree; the boot-camp stuff is the most interesting part of that movie. The rest is the English countryside trying to pass as Vietnam.

It doesn't.

[Don Gaddis]

All the Fast and Furious movies. I don't see the appeal of cars and racing. The X-men movies,Sam Raimi's Spider-man movies, and Harry Potter are also things I hate.

Same here... especially Harry Potter. I was graduating high school when the Harry
Potter craze started, so maybe I just missed the Harry Potter bandwagon. Then again,
a lot of adults really love those books and films. But more power to J. K. Rowling...
many people discovered the joy of reading through her books.

[shuriken]

I feel the same way about Full Metal Jacket. I'm sorry, but after Private "Pyle" offs himself, I just get bored and change the channel. The entire rest of the movie after that is boring and pointless. That goes double for Jacob's Ladder. Never saw the point of it, and it's dull and confusing.

We can agree to disagree about that one:)
But it really is like two different movies. After Boot camp it's a more standard "horrors of war" kinda movie as opposed to "horrors of isolation and groupthink". I really enjoy it myself, but I have heard quite a few people say the Boot camp stuff is the best part. Kinda like Spicolli... who is essentially the human version of Michelangelo :P
I don't hate the movie Grease, but man does it really irritate me. I have watched it but man. Not a fan. Same with Grease 2 and crybaby. Greasers combined with musical just don't sit well with me.
Except maybe West Side Story.

[bushido]

Pacific Rim was simply terrible. I can't figure out what's so exciting? Yes, huge robots are cool, but these huge robots we're not. The story was stupid beyond stupid. The acting was painful. Why anyone would dig this slow, boring film, is beyond me.

http://media1.giphy.com/media/jzkYKG3cMrIwE/200.gif
The story was not stupid, the acting not painful and it was not boring. You're wrong on everything. Huge defender of Pacific Rim here.

[Leo656]

We can agree to disagree about that one:)
But it really is like two different movies. After Boot camp it's a more standard "horrors of war" kinda movie as opposed to "horrors of isolation and groupthink". I really enjoy it myself, but I have heard quite a few people say the Boot camp stuff is the best part. Kinda like Spicolli... who is essentially the human version of Michelangelo :P
I don't hate the movie Grease, but man does it really irritate me. I have watched it but man. Not a fan. Same with Grease 2 and crybaby. Greasers combined with musical just don't sit well with me.
Except maybe West Side Story.

Yeah, other than Disney cartoons I kind of hate musicals. I can "buy" it in that Disney context, but in a live-action setting it just comes off as too ridiculous. I like "Little Shop of Horrors", but not as much as when I was a kid, and Murray and Moranis were a huge reason I even bothered with it. If I hadn't already been a huge fan of Ghostbusters, I don't think I would have given that movie any time at all.

Actually, I kind of take it back, the "Reefer Madness" musical from about ten years ago was pretty boss. Although not nearly enough Neve Campbell in it. Otherwise though musicals pretty much annoy me.

[shuriken]

Yeah, other than Disney cartoons I kind of hate musicals. I can "buy" it in that Disney context, but in a live-action setting it just comes off as too ridiculous. I like "Little Shop of Horrors", but not as much as when I was a kid, and Murray and Moranis were a huge reason I even bothered with it. If I hadn't already been a huge fan of Ghostbusters, I don't think I would have given that movie any time at all.

Actually, I kind of take it back, the "Reefer Madness" musical from about ten years ago was pretty boss. Although not nearly enough Neve Campbell in it. Otherwise though musicals pretty much annoy me.

^This pretty much. Disney musicals and I guess stage shows are neat, and I can enjoy them pretty easily. I guess Sweeney Todd was mildly amusing too.
Everything else though... not so much.
Gotta check out Reefer Madness

[Leo656]

Gotta check out Reefer Madness

I recommend it. Kristen Bell was pretty hot in it. Amy Spanger, meanwhile, might be the hottest chick with no hooters I've ever seen. The musical/dance number with her gyrating all over the place like a stripper in that little bikini? Good lord. :o

Like it's actually pretty funny, too, but it's the chicks that got me to watch it more than once. I don't own it, I should probably correct that. It's funny that they have Neve Campbell prominently displayed on the DVD cover, but she's got like ONE minute of screen time. :lol:

[shuriken]

Sounds fun
I recommend it. Kristen Bell was pretty hot in it. Amy Spanger, meanwhile, might be the hottest chick with no hooters I've ever seen.

Keira Knightly IMO is the hottest chick with "no hooters". She is just so damn pretty it hurts.
Speaking of which DOmino was pretty bad. Not sure how most people feel about that one though.

[Leo656]

Eh. She's pretty enough, but she needs a sammich. I don't generally go for twigs. She's alright, though.

[shuriken]

Eh. She's pretty enough, but she needs a sammich. I don't generally go for twigs. She's alright, though.

Meh. Some people are just naturally thinner. I got no qualms with that. I'm a fan of different shapes and sizes.:)

[Leo656]

Me too, me too, she's just at the level where it makes me wonder how "healthy" she is. I literally don't have a "type". I love all types of chicks. But some of the ones that are THAT thin just kinda make me nervous. She's good looking, though, don't get me wrong, I just think she'd be better looking if she was 15 lbs or so heavier. That's actually a not a lot. But she does have a really pretty face.

[JakeSully]

Nolan films annoy me to no end. The dark knight was his only film I felt deserved the praise it got. Every other film is simply a spiderweb of plot holes.

I really liked Del Torro's style, back when he made Blade 2. It was fresh, at the time. Hell boy was sort of cool, enjoyed the sequel more, but since then? Garbage.

Pacific Rim was simply terrible. I can't figure out what's so exciting? Yes, huge robots are cool, but these huge robots we're not. The story was stupid beyond stupid. The acting was painful. Why anyone would dig this slow, boring film, is beyond me.

Have you seen his Spanish films Pan's Labyrinth, Cronos and The Devil's Backbone?

[GoldMutant]

Hmm... there's two films that come up to me.

Amazing Spider-Man 2 I hate with a passion, and probably Frozen, though I'm more on Frozen just being a lackluster film to me.

[THGhost]

A lot of the movies mentioned here are simply not loved by most people. :P A lot of them are also actually very good movies that don't deserve to be hated at all.

For me:

Avatar. It's very pretty, and the musical score is impressive, but that's it. Very boring movie. I'm dreading the sequels.

Looper. The plot was completely and utterly ludicrous and didn't make a whole lot of sense. Massive let down.

Drag Me To Hell. Why do Raimi fans love this movie so much? It's everything Raimi strives to avoid! Generic characters, poor acting, the movie is littered with jump scares and there's an over-reliance on CGI. Raimi does great practical effects, so why have a witch's eyes pop out of her head using CGI? http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-confused004.gif

Drive. Wow, what a serious let down that movie was, and it had me so pumped with the trailers and reviews.

This.

His movies are too violent and vulgar for my taste, I seen violent movies and vulgar movies before, But his films takes it to extremes that makes me uncomfortable.

You think QT is extreme? You ain't seen nothing yet! :lol:

I dunna guys. I loved The Prestige.

As did I.

[Warhorse]

I feel the same way about Full Metal Jacket. I'm sorry, but after Private "Pyle" offs himself, I just get bored and change the channel. The entire rest of the movie after that is boring and pointless. That goes double for Jacob's Ladder. Never saw the point of it, and it's dull and confusing.

My favorite character in the movie is in the second half, but I get what you mean, if Animal Mother wasn't in a scene, I got bored too.

[Andrew NDB]

X-Men 2. Venom. TMNT II.

[IndigoErth]

Came up in conversation the other day... Les Misérables (2012).

I don't mind musicals, but I quickly learned that I despise it if everything is sung. Should there have been a line about needing to use the restroom it certainly would have been a lyric and sung as if it mattered.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Gone With The Wind

(Please don’t hurt me for saying this)

[ChosenOne]

Gone With The Wind

(Please don’t hurt me for saying this)

Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.

[Cowabung-Gal]

Frankly, my dear, I don’t give a damn.

:lol::lol::lol:

[LeotheLateBloomer]

Uncut Gems. While I did enjoy Good Times which was done by the same directors, I just couldn't find the appeal of this movie. This is said to be one of Adam Sandler's best performances in years but his character sucks! An idiot who has the opportunity to pay off his debts and what does he do?...He raises the stakes and gambles...and loses. I don't like movies where I'm following a character who does the most stupidest things with and messes with people's stuff only to mess things up. He's not only a slimeball, he's a ****ing dumbass! Nobody likes the bastard. And oh god, his girlfriend was one of the weakest parts of the film and added nothing to the story until maybe the final act. I hear that the anxiety and suspense plays a huge appeal but it's one of those instances where you know where this is going to go.

[IMJ]

Uncut Gems. While I did enjoy Good Times which was done by the same directors, I just couldn't find the appeal of this movie. This is said to be one of Adam Sandler's best performances in years but his character sucks! An idiot who has the opportunity to pay off his debts and what does he do?...He raises the stakes and gambles...and loses. I don't like movies where I'm following a character who does the most stupidest things with and messes with people's stuff only to mess things up. He's not only a slimeball, he's a ****ing dumbass! Nobody likes the bastard. And oh god, his girlfriend was one of the weakest parts of the film and added nothing to the story until maybe the final act. I hear that the anxiety and suspense plays a huge appeal but it's one of those instances where you know where this is going to go.

That movie was one of the first times I saw Sandler genuinely "act". Normally I can't stand "clown comedians" - Sandler, Will Ferrell, John C. Reilly - guys like that. Can't stand 'em.

But Sandler's last few movies have been entertaining. The boss here wanted to watch those two "detective movies" with Sandler and Jennifer Aniston - those were decent too.

[Andrew NDB]

That movie was one of the first times I saw Sandler genuinely "act".

I enjoyed him in Funny People and Punch Drunk Love as well, though I think the latter was a little overrated at the time. It was OK.

[CyberCubed]

I didn't see all of the Lord of the Rings trilogy until fairly recently, and while I can tell they're well made movies, they were just "ok" to me in terms of story? Like I don't think they're bad or anything, but I don't know why so many people consider them the best movies of all time.

Most of the movies felt like a fetch quest of Gollum trying to get the ring from Frodo, and the whole thing kinda goes nowhere by the last movie.

[Barkworm]

Films written by David Goyer. I know his work is very popular but his dialogues regularly make me cringe. Everyone loves Batman Begins but the cheesy one-liners and scenes like the one where Batman repeats Katie Holmes' lame line from earlier in the film and she goes "BRUCE???" completely ruin it for me.

[MikeandRaph87]

2001: A Space Odyssey is lauded as a definitive sci-fi film and all-time classic. I thought it was one of the absolute worse movies that I had ever seen in my life. Ten minutes of claymation apes empowered to evolve by a monolith and a group of astronauts picked off one by one by an AI virus until the last one mutates into a giant space baby to stop it? Groundbreaking technology sure, but the plot is an utter pile of crap.