• Most new users don't bother reading our rules. Here's the one that is ignored almost immediately upon signup: DO NOT ASK FOR FANEDIT LINKS PUBLICLY. First, read the FAQ. Seriously. What you want is there. You can also send a message to the editor. If that doesn't work THEN post in the Trade & Request forum. Anywhere else and it will be deleted and an infraction will be issued.
  • If this is your first time here please read our FAQ and Rules pages. They have some useful information that will get us all off on the right foot, especially our Own the Source rule. If you do not understand any of these rules send a private message to one of our staff for further details.
  • Please read our Rules & Guidelines

    Read BEFORE posting Trades & Request

Highly Rated Movies You Don't Like

I like TPM more than Solo. I haven’t seen ROTS in so long that I wouldn’t be able to tell you.
 
This thread has reminded me that Minority Report is amazing, and I should get a blu of it someday. :D
 
suspiciouscoffee said:
I don’t like The Godfather. And I went in expecting a masterpiece, because that’s all I’d ever heard. Then I saw it, and I just… didn’t get it, I guess. It looked nice, it was put together well, but I just didn’t care about anyone or anything in it.
Click to expand...

I've only seen it once on a laptop, back in college, and I thought it was fine. Not as good as Goodfellas, though, to be fair, I saw that one theatrically. Haven't felt the urge to revisit Godfather since, though.
 
suspiciouscoffee said:
I like TPM more than Solo. 
Click to expand...

The rest of the staff can confirm that I'm suppressing an urge to ban someone tonight.  It wasn't going to be you, but now I'm thinking it should be.
 
I just glanced at Rotten Tomatoes' 200 Essential Movies to Watch as a source for this list. I'm sure there is more, but this will probably be controversial enough ;)

Citizen Kane (1941) - I just don't see why this is a good movie. Terrible story, not fond of the acting or the cinematography.
Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs (1937) - The animation is just plain bad. Sure it was good for its time, but this movie just doesn't hold its weight anymore, imho.
On the Waterfront (1954) - Not a fan of Marlon Brando. I've tried to watch this movie a few times. Just not my thing.
The Manchurian Candidate (1962) - Again, not a fan of the acting in this one. While the story was intriguing, the presentation was too abstract and you were just dropped in the middle of this one and expected to just go along with it.
Casablanca (1942) - I've watched it before, but can't remember anything about it other than I felt it was long.
Ghostbusters (1984) - While it was an A-list cast for its time, I just don't get excited about ghost/horror/comedies.
Wonder Woman (2017) - Lots of buzz on this one, but I thought it was a lot of flash and a tired rehashed story with excessive cgi.
2001: A Space Odyssey (1968) - Too long. Too odd. Not enough pay off.
Shrek (2001) - Never really liked this one. Not a fan of the animation or the humor.
Gattaca (1997) - It was ok, but nothing to write home about.
 
Seems like the staff should worry about themselves before thinking about banning me.
 
suspiciouscoffee said:
Seems like the staff should worry about themselves before thinking about banning me.
Click to expand...

I was joking.  I'm not sure I understand your post though.
 
suspiciouscoffee said:
Seems like the staff should worry about themselves before thinking about banning me.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure it was a joke.
 
Yeah it was a joke about the post immediately above mine. Seriously Digimod, 2001 is a masterpiece.
 
Ohhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh

6.4/10
 
Since 2001 has been brought up multiple times I’m going to state what I would assume is the obvious. It isn’t meant to be a thrill ride. It’s meant to evoke the nature of traveling practically alone through the void of space for a very long time. If you’re experiencing boredom during the movie, I’m pretty sure that’s intentional.
 
That makes it even worse!
 
TVs Frink said:
That makes it even worse!
Click to expand...

Yeah, you’re either onboard with that sort of thing or you aren’t. It’s no Con-Air!
 
Moe_Syzlak said:
TVs Frink said:
That makes it even worse!
Click to expand...

Yeah, you’re either onboard with that sort of thing or you aren’t. It’s no Con-Air!
Click to expand...

Having Nicholas Cage in it would definitely make it worse. The issue is that it's trying to be artsy. Interstellar is the better 2001. It has a plot. It has character development, it has purpose. 2001 is lacking in all of those areas, imo. Even 2010 at least had a plot.
 
DigModiFicaTion said:
Moe_Syzlak said:
TVs Frink said:
That makes it even worse!
Click to expand...

Yeah, you’re either onboard with that sort of thing or you aren’t. It’s no Con-Air!
Click to expand...

Having Nicholas Cage in it would definitely make it worse. The issue is that it's trying to be artsy. Interstellar is the better 2001. It has a plot. It has character development, it has purpose. 2001 is lacking in all of those areas, imo. Even 2010 at least had a plot.
Click to expand...
OMG. You’re dead to me, Dig! :) Interstellar is the worst. And 2001 is a masterpiece. 2001 definitely has a plot. But it’s meant to be experienced, rather than read linearly like a standard plot.
 
Moe_Syzlak said:
OMG. You’re dead to me, Dig! :) Interstellar is the worst. And 2001 is a masterpiece. 2001 definitely has a plot. But it’s meant to be experienced, rather than read linearly like a standard plot.
Click to expand...

I experienced it and thought it was pretty out there, painfully slow and ultimately uninteresting. The only real interesting parts to me are the scenes surrounding Hal and their implications. Saying something is the worst is an easy subjective claim. Do you care to share any evidence?
For their times, both are visual masterpieces. BUT, where 2001 is all about the "experience" as you call it, Interstellar doesn't have to rely on you getting it. At it's core it's survival and love. 2001 is......I don't know....how perhaps man goes from ape to human to star baby....but in an avant garde sort of way?

In terms of Citizen Kane, I didn't care for his character. He's self-absorbed, self-centered, cold, and just not someone that I care to spend time analyzing. He is not the kind of person I would aspire to be. That drives a lot of my like/dislike of films. If I admire a character and their quest for goodness, then I'll give them a shot. If there aren't any redeeming qualities about them or their path, since they're fictional, they aren't worth wasting time on.
 
Possessed said:
jrWHAG42 said:
How can you not like Citizen Kane?
Click to expand...

I don't understand it either.
Click to expand...

Much in the same way that I don't care for Picasso. Many people love his work. I don't. Some people like green apples, others red apples. Some even like ketchup on their eggs, while others choose to be vegetarians. That's the beauty of life. Art is just another palette of flavors and we all have our individual likes and dislikes.

In terms of Citizen Kane, I don't care for the character. He's cold, self-centered and self-absorbed. There's no real gain that I can take away from the story. I have desire or aspiration to be like him, so naturally I don't value the character or the movie. Characters, resolution of conflict, preservation of innocence in tragedy, championing for human rights, the pursuit of becoming better. Those are the things that make me like a film.
 
You're not supposed to like Kane himself.  It's supposed to be tragic that he turned out to be an asshole.  Hence Rosebud, a childhood wasted, innocence lost.  Something like that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom