Docfaustino Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Sure. Citizen Kane is artistically, possibly the greatest film of all time. But did you enjoy it? Any list, any opinion of the finest films of all time are quite similar. Same general consensus. Godfather is great. So is Chinatown. So is Lawrence of Arabia. But even classics aren't for everybody. In a society where your taste in films can reflect your sophistication, at times it's easier to side with the majority when you yourself do not agree. To quote Peter Griffin. Didn't like the Godfather. It insists upon itselfGood joke. Everybody laughs. Fargo: The Coen Bros. have some kind of genius that has never been mimicked. It could be coincidence, it could be intentional, it could be an inside joke that the brothers find funny. The majority of their films don't hit you the first time. On its release, how many of us really liked The Big Lebowki? It was panned and forgotten. On subsequent viewings, many realized it was one of the finest comedies within the past decades. With Fargo, the same is supposed to be true. It's supposed to be a classic. No film has been selected for national preservation so quickly after release. I've watched it many times. Some say the humor is in the Sarah Palin accents, the semi-comedic violence, the ineptitude of smalltown criminals, the commentary on human nature. But none of this really struck my funny bone. Raging Bull: Let me start by saying, I am a big Scorcese fan. More so than most. I believe Taxi Driver and Goodfellas are two of the finest and most narratively layered films of all time. These three films are seen as a trilogy, a string of classic Scorcese films. But whereas Taxi Driver is a commentary on isolation and social rejection, still debated today. And Goodfellas seamlessly packs 5 hours of information into two hours of film, more and more details revealed on subsequent viewings. Raging Bull is simply a hard-hitting story. Nothing more. You can say it doesn't need to be, the realism and direction are incredible. But I can't help but find it inferior when the film can only be viewed on one level. Scarface:Don't get me wrong. I love Scarface as much as the next guy. But the public opinion has become inflated due to its popularity in "gangsta" culture. How many teenagers with Scarface posters hang them on their walls out of appreciation for the film. Now how many do so because rap culture has made the film hip and relevant. Avatar: Groundbreaking special effects. But the plot is naueseating. It's "Dances with Wolves", with blue people instead of aliens. I do have to praise the films use of buzz words to gain popularity, though. __________________ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fnorg Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Half of Marty Scorsese's catalog bores me to death, the other half thrills me, so there's that... I can't see why Blade Runner gets so much love, it didn't do much for me ( though Deckard is totally a replicator, right?). Donnie Darko gets faaar to much praise for what it is. It suffers from the same disease Scarface or Fight Club do - OK movie with a godawful fanbase. It felt like a huge giant pretentious, depressed circlejerk. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darthYENIK Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 To me, you can't consider a film (or any medium in art) classic, unless it holds up to time. If people still talk about it and appreciate it twenty, or thirty years later, it's officially a classic. That said, Deer Hunter. People rave about this movie, they've been doing it for decades. Sure it's probably the most intense and suspenseful movie of all time. But aside from those tense moments, it's boring as hell. The first half hour to an hour is way too long. And I think that's what really gets to me. Sure there probably couldn't be those suspenseful parts without the slow build up. It's just not worth it to me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fnorg Posted May 5, 2011 Share Posted May 5, 2011 Yeah, that's always been my main gripe with that movie. I really do like it, but it could be a good 45 minutes shorter. The first hour or so is a bunch of manly men doing manly things. It hardly moves the story forward at all. It's just... There. The first act could easily have been 30 minutes shorter without losing any major momentum in the rest of the story. It's pretty well cemented that those guys are good friends, and I'm sure the viewer would have appreciated their friendship all the same even if it weren't for those useless 30 minutes. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raptomex Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Fight Club Lord of the Rings series Harry Potter series SAW series Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Voodoo Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Fargo is a hell of a lot funnier to you if you either live in or know people from the north central US. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Floro Solo Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Saw, Harry Potter (specially number 6, what a piece of sh*t), Avatar Pretty much the films that have been said before. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vercetti27 Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 Avatar is a great shout. As soon as he met the female I knew exactly what direction it was heading in. I found the emotion way too forced as well. SAW too. Its just sick, sadistic violence . Not funny, clever or really that scary- harrowing, but not scary Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makeshyft Posted May 6, 2011 Share Posted May 6, 2011 The Saw films were... acclaimed? Uh... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Docfaustino Posted May 6, 2011 Author Share Posted May 6, 2011 Fargo is a hell of a lot funnier to you if you either live in or know people from the north central US. I happen to have a girl from Michigan staying in my house right now. I understand the appeal a bit more, but it still doesn't reach me. A bit unrelated, but I watched Mean Streets today, an early Scorcese flick. Surprised this didn't reach the heights of Raging Bull. It's raw, yes. But in its own way, Raging Bull was raw as well. A film doesn't need the cinematic polish if its telling such a story. You bring up a good point, Gronf, about the fanbase of certain films. The point of Scarface has NEVER been money, "hoes" (so to speak), and gold-plated Cadillacs. The fact that Tony destroyed the lives of everyone around him, AS WELL AS his own really should have said it all. Unfortunately, modern rappers of our day will never understand that. Nor will 12 year old potheads. No offense to 12 year olds, some of you can be very intelligent. I actually support Blade Runner's place in various Best-Of lists. The opening scene grips you, and until the sappy Roy speech at the end, really keeps your interest. Whether they realize it or not, the "I've seen things" speech is what damages its appeal. Cyberpunk has never been done better. But it is very, very flawed, I'll give you that. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
thebreak Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 Harry Potter films. The movies try too hard to shrink the books into 2.5-hour movies, making them look rushed. I'm not even a fan and I find the films hard to sit through because I have read the books prior. And, the acting of the main child characters in the first couple of movies is TERRIBLE. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ChossenOne Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 I can't see why Blade Runner gets so much love, it didn't do much for me ( though Deckard is totally a replicator, right?). Sorry ... that's Replicant. But that've might been misspelled on purpose. In which case, the joke's on me. But yeah, I think he was one. And it certainly makes it a better movie if he was infact a replicant. The Star Wars movies. I'm not a big fan, and I don't know why they're always at the top of "Best movie" lists. Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I thought it was boring. Inglourius Basterds. Mainly because Tarantino seems to get more pretentious with every film. And I doubt he'll ever make a better movie than Jackie Brown again. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fnorg Posted July 3, 2011 Share Posted July 3, 2011 I can't see why Blade Runner gets so much love, it didn't do much for me ( though Deckard is totally a replicator, right?). Sorry ... that's Replicant. But that've might been misspelled on purpose. In which case, the joke's on me. But yeah, I think he was one. And it certainly makes it a better movie if he was infact a replicant. No, that was just me being stupid. Guess that just goes to show how much of an impression the movie made on me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus. Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 Just gonna go ahead and get this out there, but I've never been able to sit through any of The Godfather films. Albiet the last time I tried was many many years ago, but I certainly tried, and failed. The whole mafioso theme wholly uninterests me (barring the LFM, of course ), and despite the solid story structure and all its facets, I couldn't seem to identify with any of the characters and so I was bored. One of these days I'll sit down again and give it a go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Robinski Posted July 4, 2011 Share Posted July 4, 2011 I've said it before and it's still true: I just don't get the Coen Brothers' films. It's the humour, it often seems like a mixture of dark humour and lolrandom stuff and it's just not something I can appreciate. Most of their films that I've seen are alright despite that, being made well in other aspects, but I've been told many times that Burn After Reading was amazing. It wasn't, it was terrible and trying way too hard. On a bit of a tangent: I can't see why Blade Runner gets so much love, it didn't do much for me ( though Deckard is totally a replicator, right?). Sorry ... that's Replicant. But that've might been misspelled on purpose. In which case, the joke's on me. But yeah, I think he was one. And it certainly makes it a better movie if he was infact a replicant. I've always thought it presented a more interesting situation if he wasn't. In that case, you've got the cold emotionless real human hunting down these robots who are more human than he ever is in the entire film. To be honest, I thought that was entirely the point (but I can see it was intentionally left open to question). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mister Pink Posted July 5, 2011 Share Posted July 5, 2011 (edited) Just gonna go ahead and get this out there, but I've never been able to sit through any of The Godfather films. Albiet the last time I tried was many many years ago, but I certainly tried, and failed. The whole mafioso theme wholly uninterests me (barring the LFM, of course ), and despite the solid story structure and all its facets, I couldn't seem to identify with any of the characters and so I was bored. One of these days I'll sit down again and give it a go. Wow, man. I'm very surprised to hear that coming from you. I'm glad you mentioned it was a good few years ago because there could be a good chance you'd appreciate it now. It's been a good while since I've watched it but I do remember my first time seeing it and thoroughly enjoying it. For me, the family politics and violence from the 5 families is intriguing. The families were going through a time of change. Watching the straight Michael Corleone who didn't want to be involved in crime been sucked in because of a hit on someone close to him but not only been sucked in being extremely clever and effective with his new role. I mentioned in a old topic about The Deer Hunter too that I didn't really get it's praise. I even read some reviews and essays people had for college and stuff on it and still think I must be missing something. EDIT: Dare I say, I forgot to mention Mullholland Drive or most of David Lynch's work. It's just don't enjoy it like other people so profoundly seem to do. I've enjoyed some scenes of films but otherwise no. Maybe I don't get all the refrences or just 'get' his work. Edited July 5, 2011 by ThePinkFloydSound ＲＵＢＢΣＲ░Ｊ♢ＨＮＮＹ （スオッ） Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Vega LVI Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Scarface is one movie that is so overrated it's disgusting. I cannot believe people of images of Tony Montana on the hood of their cars, on their front doors and even as the tile alignment in their pool. What's next? Tattoos of him on their damn for head? Very ridiculous. I could never get fully into the movie and halfway through, I just want to finish my Corn Pops and go to bed. Raging Bull is an excellent movie about boxing great, Jake Lamotta. Robert DeNiro plays a role that suits him well. It is a nice switch up from a mobster. The fact that it is black and white really provides a great feel for the movie as it mainly takes place in the early to mid-20th century. Avatar is a movie that I cannot appreciate. The graphics and effects were mind boggling, I do admit. But that is not the entire movie. I thought the plot and dialogue was a bit sleepy and I thought the characters were not fully developed. And honestly, it is a bit confusing. Back to the Future is one of my favorite films, believe it or not. It plays as a nice sci-fi epic and as a comedy. Christopher Lloyd has a brilliant part as well as Michael J. Fox. I love the witty dialogue and situations that Marty McFly and Doc Brown fix themselves into. It is a very great family movie. Plus, there is three of them! Gone With the Wind is considered one of the greatest movies ever. For me, I found it very exhausting as it is long as hell. I mean the plot and situations were good, but it was too tiring and very time consuming. It just wasn't for me. Goodfellas is a wonderful mobster movie, starring Ray Liotta, Robert DeNiro and Joe Pisce. I watch it whenever it is on and I never get tired of the humor and great layered dialogue that it possesses. The plot is very good and the way they build up to new scenes makes the movie very suspenseful. The Wizard of Oz without a doubt is a classic. But, seriously... How many times can you watch it? I've seen it so many times I can mouth the words. I think it is a great movie, but it has its faults, such as so-so acting and sleepiness. Also, if you notice that guy hang himself in the movie, you'll be sh*tting bricks. Trust me. The Godfather is an excellent film. Marlon Brando, Al Pacino and Robert Duvall are the aces of this movie. I admit, some scenes go on a little too long, but it is still one of the greatest mafia movies to every be made. Even though the first two movies are classics, the third one can commit suicide for all I care. Well, these are just a bit of my thoughts on films I have seen... Your feedback? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cactus. Posted July 13, 2011 Share Posted July 13, 2011 Just gonna go ahead and get this out there, but I've never been able to sit through any of The Godfather films. Albiet the last time I tried was many many years ago, but I certainly tried, and failed. The whole mafioso theme wholly uninterests me (barring the LFM, of course ), and despite the solid story structure and all its facets, I couldn't seem to identify with any of the characters and so I was bored. One of these days I'll sit down again and give it a go. Wow, man. I'm very surprised to hear that coming from you. I'm glad you mentioned it was a good few years ago because there could be a good chance you'd appreciate it now. It's been a good while since I've watched it but I do remember my first time seeing it and thoroughly enjoying it. I know, I owe it another viewing one of these days. I think it was also the slow pacing (from what I can remember) that turned me off as well. And its length certainly wasn't enticing me to stay put But yeah, one of these days.. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 (edited) As a Laserdisc movie collector, I came across a version box set that for the historical significance and the fact it's an all time classic, That being Gone with the Wind, should coax me to just buy it, but I've little interest. I also still had to debate with myself about getting The Sound of Music on DVD, 40th Anniversary Edition I found used. It was $2 as all DVDs are at the Goodwill store, but I just wasn't sure about collecting it. I viewed it in school as a kid. I would like to see To Kill a Mockingbird again, even though I'm opposed to black and white films. For me, my defacto favorite after 1984 was The Terminator! haha As for Blade Runner, would it matter if it's the Director's Cut or not? I first saw the Harrison Ford voice-over, which since I like hearing him, was not a problem for me, as a kid it was perhaps a bit more self-explanatory as to what's going on in the story. I can't recall ever finishing it, saw most of it long ago and I have the LD out here from a recent purchase. As for Mulholland Drive with Nick Nolte, I saw that not too long ago, it was on TV here, and I enjoyed it, but it's hardly a classic, it just has good actors and some humor I appreciated Edited July 21, 2011 by Slamman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makeshyft Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 Can I just ask why you're opposed to B&W films, Slamman? I've seen a few members say the same thing, and I find it a curious stance, especially coming from a educational background in film and screen history/theory. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 I don't like the crude colorization, and I respect some of the art that comes out of using B & W, but mostly the reasoning is budget, shooting Black and white film was always less money for the production, and that is not something that's taken lightly, however, in the Digital A/V days now, things can be shot with other factors in mind. The same theory I have about sound, you hear in STEREO, or SURROUND, and you see in color, the World around you. I find it more realistic, lifelike and often rather amazing to see something old in color, when it does happen. The availability of color the further back in time you go is rare and scarce Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makeshyft Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 (edited) Oh, I get you on crude colourisation. I think that films should remain untouched. So, on that aspect, we agree. Now, are you opposed to contemporary films that are shot in B&W, or greyscale in general? Because it wasn't always about budgetary constraints, you know. Technicolor was an amazing step forward in the art of movie-making, but it certainly wasn't the standard for a while after its release. I can think of a slew of films, noir especially, which just look better in their original black and white. You get such sharp contrast -- it's amazing. I guess what I'm saying is that black and white was just the standard for the early days of cinema, and I don't understand how people can be opposed to it. That was what filmmaking was. Edited July 21, 2011 by makeshyft Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
UNRATED69 Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 The Star Wars films. I have never been able to get into them, and have tried on several occasions. The problem is that, for the most part, they are so damn boring, that it's impossible to actually follow it. Sure, there are a few scenes that I find bearable, the iconic ones mostly, but as a whole I find them completely pointless. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted July 21, 2011 Share Posted July 21, 2011 (edited) Oh man, boring? Star Wars?? I don't equate the two. The original I saw with my family in theatrical release, that's how old I am, don't let TRIPMILLS hear you say that! ^ As for black and white for art, Roger Ebert on his At the Movies show with Gene Siskel back in the day did a show specifically about color versus B and W films, as I said, with most exceptions... like Dead Man with Johnny Depp, I could appreciate the film completely in it's intended presentation, but to have it in color for me wouldn't lessen how much I like that film... Edited July 21, 2011 by Slamman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
LittleBlueTroll Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 The Kings Speech, i dont really know what i was expecting from this but it seriously bored the sh*t out of me, im not sure how it won so many awards Its one of them films i wish i could un-watch. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
makeshyft Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 The Kings Speech, i dont really know what i was expecting from this but it seriously bored the sh*t out of me, im not sure how it won so many awards Its one of them films i wish i could un-watch. It was a buddy film. Simple as that. It's been done before. Better, too. I'd take Rain Man over it anyday. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Darrel Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 Avatar I remember everyone talking about it EVERYONE! The story was boring as hell, and the special effects didn't interest me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted July 22, 2011 Share Posted July 22, 2011 The Kings Speech, i dont really know what i was expecting from this but it seriously bored the sh*t out of me, im not sure how it won so many awards Its one of them films i wish i could un-watch. It was a buddy film. Simple as that. It's been done before. Better, too. I'd take Rain Man over it anyday. It's a REAL story, and people found it touching and that they could relate to it, you have to think of it in terms of a bio-pic, like REAL life itself, it's not going to be a Thrill a Minute Plane Ride...as the saying goes Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
cidamelo Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 Oh I usually love the acclaimed movies.... But Avatar is terrible!! I just can't see it........ I see a lot of people criticizing Blade Runner but I love it... one of the best photographies I've seen Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Slamman Posted July 23, 2011 Share Posted July 23, 2011 Photographies? You mean "Cinematic Experiences"? hahaha As to movies we'd mentioned, I decided to ask about the CAV Deluxe Letterbox Box-set LaserDisc GONE WITH THE WIND, and they said they'd let me make an offer on their LDs being sold as well, so I decided, WTH, Got that one and BULLETT with Steve McQueen, that LDs so old the disc label came off both sides!! And Cid! I got Blade Runner's Director Cut on LaserDisc, are you familiar with that videophile home format?? They give me a lot of heat for mentioning it, but it's the best analog versions for home Theaters Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now