• 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

Neglify said:
Juno
Click to expand...
OHHHHH yes, how could I have forgotten... what a piece of crap that was... :p
 
i hated juno too also with john travolta in the news lately this reminds me I never liked Saturday night fever
 
The "Dollars" trilogy. Fallen asleep while watching each one, no joke. Scarface. Seems like everyone who praises this movie doesn't get the message the movie makes (money and power doesn't buy happiness). Not gonna say why I didn't like Avatar since everyone else said it for me. Though I'll say this, I believe Cameron works best when his preachy messages in his films are done more subtly like Terminator 1. Before Avatar I felt T2 was beating us over the head with preachy-ness. I was wrong, lol.

For the poster that said "Once you understand the twist in '6th sense" everything makes sense, once you know the twist in 'Fight Club' nothing makes sense", I feel that they both have the same plot device, the film is told from the character's perspective, and certain liberties are taken for what the audience sees to help set up the twist. In 6th sense's case, it's only once the reveals are made that we see that Willis doesn't notice the truth (bookcase blocking doorway, for example). We don't know what happened to Willis during the months between the first 2 scenes. Nor do we see how Willis was assigned the job, talks to other people besides the kid, or does regular daily things like shower, get dressed, eat sleep, etc... With Fight Club it's even easier, the character is crazy, and thus we don't know what really happens.

The Dark Knight. That noise that we hear throughout the film (it sounds like buzzing) bothers me. Bale's Batman voice is too much for me to take him seriously (though I LOVE all the parodies that have come from it). I didn't like how Ledger's voice was always changing. The film was so long that it felt like 2 movies. And because the movie wants to be taken so seriously, plot holes like cutting to the next day after Batman saves Rachel while Joker and his henchman are still at the party with all the helpless civilians, it irks me. All it needed was one shot of Joker and co. getting into an elevator and the doors shutting (intercut while Batman and Rachel are falling), and I'd have no problem with this part of the movie.
 
I love the Dark Knight, but I think it's slighly overrated. Deserved a best picture nomination!
 
tylerdurden389 said:
The "Dollars" trilogy. Fallen asleep while watching each one, no joke.
Click to expand...

Completely agree. I tried to watch The Good, the Bad and the Ugly recently. This film is in IMDB's Top five??

tylerdurden389 said:
Scarface. Seems like everyone who praises this movie doesn't get the message the movie makes (money and power doesn't buy happiness).
Click to expand...

Yep. I always see people buying posters of Scarface because "he's so cool." I'm thinking, you do understand he's a villain, right?

tylerdurden389 said:
For the poster that said "Once you understand the twist in '6th sense" everything makes sense, once you know the twist in 'Fight Club' nothing makes sense", I feel that they both have the same plot device, the film is told from the character's perspective, and certain liberties are taken for what the audience sees to help set up the twist. In 6th sense's case, it's only once the reveals are made that we see that Willis doesn't notice the truth (bookcase blocking doorway, for example). We don't know what happened to Willis during the months between the first 2 scenes. Nor do we see how Willis was assigned the job, talks to other people besides the kid, or does regular daily things like shower, get dressed, eat sleep, etc... With Fight Club it's even easier, the character is crazy, and thus we don't know what really happens.
Click to expand...

That was me. :) And, sorry, but I'm still going to have to disagree with you. Everything in Sixth Sense is carefully shot so that the audience makes assumptions about what's happening, but the second time through, a different interpretation is possible.

You're right that we don't see Bruce Willis get assigned to the case, etc. That's the point. The audience isn't shown everything so that we can make assumptions, and then eventually get a better understanding. Bruce Willis never does talk to anybody but the kid. The movie still makes sense when we know that.

(I'll grant you the doorway, but that was a minor detail, not everything on which the plot hinges. I think Shayalaman just put that in there to help people catch on quicker visually to what was happening.)

So, as I said, in Sixth Sense we don't see everything. In Fight Club, we do see everything, and then the information gets contradicted later when it's no longer convenient for the filmmakers. It cheats in a way that Sixth Sense doesn't.

We see Ed Norton and Brad Pitt beating the snot out of other, and other guys wanting to get in on it. Then later we see what really happened - Ed Norton beating himself up in a parking lot. We're still supposed to believe that other guys want to get in on it, but that would never happen. They'd laugh and call him a crackhead; maybe they'd call the police. But they wouldn't be inspired by him.

Then after seeing several scenes from the movie acted out a second time with Ed Norton doing everything, the filmmakers violate their own rule. We see through the monitor hooked up to a security camera - an impartial observer - that Ed Norton is being dragged around by an outside physical force (thrown downstairs, etc.). He's not doing it to himself; it's clearly something being done to him. For that to be the case, Brad Pitt would have to be a poltergeist, not a figment of Ed Norton's imagination.

And remember, this is from a security camera, not from inside Ed Norton's head, so we can't just say, "Well, he's crazy."

As if all that weren't bad enough, at the end Ed Norton shoots "himself" in the head, meaning that Brad Pitt dies. But wait . . . he only shot himself in the cheek! If that were the case - if he just faked it - then Brad Pitt would know it, too. If he really shot himself in the dead, then they'd both be dead. It's an absolute cheat on every level. Epic fail.

Anyway, that's my rant. I probably haven't convinced you to agree with me, but it's interesting to talk about, anyway. You keep on loving the movie, and I'll keep on trying to get people to realize that it's a crime against cinema. :p

EDITED TO ADD: Whoops, I didn't notice your screenname before. LOL! Well, now, I REALLY know you're not going to agree with me. :) Still, I hope I gave you some interesting things to think about.
 
tylerdurden389 said:
The Dark Knight. That noise that we hear throughout the film (it sounds like buzzing) bothers me. Bale's Batman voice is too much for me to take him seriously (though I LOVE all the parodies that have come from it). I didn't like how Ledger's voice was always changing. The film was so long that it felt like 2 movies.
Click to expand...

Thank you.
 
No Tom I'm not gonna argue because you're absolutely right. The cameras aren't from Norton's perspective and thus that visual doesn't make sense. Same thing about the ending. I had trouble swallowing the movie's logic for a while but it doesn't bother me anymore. I sometimes wonder how the film would've been received if they had used the book's ending though. To be fair to 6th sense I only watched it a few times on video back in 2000. So my memory is rusty. Anyway, no argument here from me. You made fair, valid points. It's still my 2nd favorite movie ever (Rocky 4 is my #1). And also I can make the same argument towards Fight Club as I did about Scarface. A lot of people who tell me they like it seem to miss this films' message as well. They're only interested in the fight aspects of the movie, and don't really care for the "rejecting society/consumerism" and "anarchy/destroy society" stuff. Makes me wonder if any of these people even watch the 2nd half, lol.
 
I just got bored with Fight Club and gave up around halfway through. Nowhere near as intriguing as Seven, let alone Zodiac.
 
Dark Knight Returns had too many crazy plot points that took me out of the movie. Examples:

Joker threatens to blow up the bridges/tunnels so everyone gets loaded into ferries, which the cops don't even bother to check for explosives.

Joker is able to stuff an operating hospital with enough explosives to completely demolish it. Sneaky.

The ending with Batman volunteering to be the bad guy to cover for Dent, so people won't lose hope. Jeez, come on. Corny, stupid and just unrealistic. Give people some credit to accept that their elected officials might be bad guys. (much more realistic than believing our elected officials are good guys.)
 
tylerdurden389 said:
No Tom I'm not gonna argue because you're absolutely right. The cameras aren't from Norton's perspective and thus that visual doesn't make sense. Same thing about the ending. I had trouble swallowing the movie's logic for a while but it doesn't bother me anymore. I sometimes wonder how the film would've been received if they had used the book's ending though.
Click to expand...

What's the book's ending? (You'll probably want to hide that in spoiler space for everyone else.)

I will say that I absolutely loved Fight Club right up until that confusing ending. And you're right, it's definitely got a deeper meaning than "let's all beat each other up," but most people seem to miss that.

I might even want to say that the film is actually anti-violence - certainly the first 3/4 of it seem to be, if you're paying attention - but having
Ed Norton standing with his girlfriend smiling as all the buildings blow up
kind of undermines that message if that's the case.

I'm really enjoying this conversation, btw. :)
 
The book ends...
with the building they're on the roof of NOT crumbling, because the explosive mixture that Tyler/Brad used "never worked for me" (the narrator). Marla exposes Tyler for the liar he is to the support groups. Tyler ends up in a mental hospital. He thinks he's rid himself of his alter ego (though he never put a gun in his mouth as a 'symbolic suicide', how he rid himself of of his alter ego I don't remember because I haven't read the book in a while) but all the nurses and social workers that care for him keep calling him "Sir", so he knows he's not out of this yet. So the story ends rather open ended, similar to the film.
 
coises! coise m. night for turning sigourney weaver into a block of wood.
 
The Rock. Absolutely horrible. It still remains my litmus test as to whether I should trust somebody's opinion about movies. There is nothing overtly horribly in the acting or directing of The Rock, and yet there is absolutely nothing that makes any sense in the entire movie.
 
geminigod said:
The Rock. Absolutely horrible. It still remains my litmus test as to whether I should trust somebody's opinion about movies. There is nothing overtly horribly in the acting or directing of The Rock, and yet there is absolutely nothing that makes any sense in the entire movie.
Click to expand...

I LOVE The Rock! It's one of those movies I've seen so many times I can't even count. I even used to use a quote from the movie as my e-mail signature. :lol: It's also one of I think only 3 movies that I own on VHS, DVD, and Blu-Ray. You can never go wrong with Nicolas Cage. Bad actor? Yes. But his badness is legendary and morphs into total awesomeness.
 
Tinker, Tailor, Soldier, Spy. A "mystery" which is obscured by bad storytelling and boring characters. Show men walking, walking, walking. Close up to meaningful stare. Hard cut to a page being signed. 20 second close up of the pen. Men shouting suddenly with seemingly no motivation. Men walking. etc. Flashback. Men walking. Flashback - but don't tell the audience, have tiny clues it's a flashback. Character motivations are hinted at, but never explained or fully revealed. Unfortunately a 2 hour movie is not a novel, and the filmmakers didn't understand that.
Oh, and I pegged the mole in the first 15 minutes of the movie. It's not complicated, because for all their attention to detail, the filmmakers were lazy.
I know they were going for "confusion" so that we could feel the sense of confusion and "fog" that the spies feel, but in my opinion it fell completely flat. Rather show us the character's confusion, than make us confused!
 
Thanks for sharing, tyler. Admittedly, the book's ending really isn't very exciting.

And, Neg, thank you for that profound and deeply thoughtful analysis of The Sixth Sense. :p
 
TomH1138 said:
And, Neg, thank you for that profound and deeply thoughtful analysis of The Sixth Sense. :p
Click to expand...

Anytime bro. Any other movies you want me to analyze?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom