What successful or popular movie that many loved you just HATE?
What successful or popular movie that many loved you just HATE?
Rules: explain why
Ready player one.
That has to be one of the cringiest movies I've seen, is tries so hard, too hard with it's "WE LOVE YOU NERD, YOU'RE SO COOL FOR PLAYING GAMES AND GETTING THIS 80S REFERENCE" message and the whole "corporation bad, the people good" narrative seems written for toddlers... The fan service feels cheap and adds nothing to the story.
Finally, they trying to make the people believe that very attractive girl with a barely visible red tint spot on her face is "ugly"... Like wtf?
Yet it received decent reviews plus being one of the most successful movies of that year.
I like these threads when people complain that “old classic movie” is formulaic and trope ridden or unoriginal… seemingly forgetting these films set the tropes, formulas and genres that all subsequent film makers hopped-on. That’s why, in retrospect, it appears clunky.
In another similar thread somebody said the band Queen were boring… yeah, maybe now. But fifty years ago when they first released? Not so much.
Not one comment in here about Lord of the Rings.
Which I agree with. Amazing movies. Glad everyone's on the same page.
For me, it's James Cameron's Avatar. Visually stunning, especially for its time, but the story has to be the most cliche, predictable, boring, lazy piece of writing to ever have existed. It's like they held an environmentally conscious 11 year old at gun point and made them write a story. The cigar chomping military guy working for corpos wants to pilfer a beautiful planet for its resources with disregard for the native populations that live there. Where have I seen that before? Oh yeah, ALL AROUND ME, EVERY FUCKING GOD DAMN DAY. Get an original idea.
Fuck this stupid piece of shit dumbass movie. It's intellectually insulting. It's a disgrace.
/endrant
Pretty much all of the Avengers films.
They aren’t engaging in any way. The characters are unintelligent and full of self importance. The whole franchise is Just loud noises and shark jumping.
I find nuggets in them. Iron man 3 had issues, but I was fascinated by the portrayal of Tony stark's ptsd after the battle of new York. Sure, seeing a bunch of robots is fun, but it's not really engaging. The intersection of everyday life, mental trauma, and super powers and responsibilities is fascinating to me.
I mean they're silly by default. They are not supposed to be high art. I like half of the MCU. Raimi spiderman Is as silly yet I consider it a masterpiece of a film, 2 even more.
In the spirit of this post, drag doesn't like Spider-Man 2. The first half of the movie is just watching Peter suck at his life and be punched down down down. It's torture porn. No wonder he lost his mojo, being Spider-Man sucks. And if Peter isn't Spider-Man, then people die in burning buildings. Peter's arc is realising that he needs to intentionally ruin his life and suffer, because the alternative is worse.
It's maybe a good piece of ethical philosophy and it makes us admire Peter, but it's just fundamentally unfun and depressing.
My problem is witg cg fights. I feel like I'm just watching a three hour long cut scene.
Kind of agree with you. I liked it until endgame, but it was a downward slope afterwards
I liked the MCU, at first, but it had no business continuing after End Game.
I feel the same. Everything up until Endgame had some entertainment value. Most of what's after is a low-quality cash grab
With so many a-list actors, they all get different story arcs, and fight for screen time, so there isn't time to tell a nuanced or interesting story, and when they're together it's just an orgy of showing off how cool they are
It makes me feel snobbish to say you have to be literally juvenile to enjoy it. I just don't get it. There's no suspense at all, no surprise in anything. They're all boring, intelligent characters. Even as films aimed at kids they're bad, but I'm eternally surprised at the traction they get with 20s-30s..
Marvel movies. Yes all of them. They're trash. It's just cgi slop, badly written one-dimensional characters, cliché tropes, formulaic stories, plotholes bigger than meteorcraters and brainless action sequences. A cashgrab.
A saw a couple; I gave them a fair chance. They're all the same. The appeal is beyond me. Brainrot at its finest.
Deadpool.
I’m not sure if I absolutely hate it, but I definitely don’t get the hype—especially with Deadpool and Wolverine. There were some funny bits, but I feel like most of it is almost Family Guy-tier reference humor.
The plot feels as unimportant as ever—there are no real stakes or anything significant going on. It’s all about the "jokes," fourth wall breaks (which get tiresome almost immediately), and Ready Player One-level "recognize the character" moments.
Maybe the last part is the biggest reason why I don’t connect with it. I’ve never really been into comics outside of film and television. But I feel like that shouldn’t be the main driving force for a movie anyway—or at least not for a good movie. Like, Ready Player One was fun, but not good.
Saw.
It is on the very tiny list of movies that I am actively angry I watched because I'm never getting that time back. It is one of the single worst movies on "Tell don't show" that I felt like I was being actively gaslit by the writers because what they were telling was opposite of what they were showing.
"Jigsaw tricks people into killing his victims" says the cops, and says all the people watching the movie. NO. He kills people and gives them a potential for a way out. Setting up a maze with cutting wire and a door sealing off if you don't make it in time isn't "tricking someone" it's killing them with extra steps. It's like blaming fucking landmine victims "Well if they didn't step there they'd be okay". Legit the logic that movie gives I find my blood pressure rising just going into it again.
And the ending. I guess spoiler if you haven't seen the movie, I'm not gonna bother to figure out the formatting for it so here's your warning to stop reading. The surprise twist was why my friends made me watch this movie, the logic above was explained and how clever Jigsaw was they said I'd like it. I'm not a horror guy but I love Scream because holy fuck it was clever and well done. Saw, the victims are looking for where Jigsaw is watching them and I just said "He's the dead guy in the middle of the room." and questioned why would I come to that so early in the movie my reasoning was simple. It was a dumb movie that was up its own ass so much to say that it was clever that was the obvious "clever" haha we got you option it could be. Anything else would have actually been clever.
I compare Scream and Saw so much. Scream is a very clever movie masquerading as a dumb movie that deconstructs a genre and pulls of a fantastic twist that if you didn't see it coming will shock you and when you go back there's all sorts of clues. Hell, part of the twist is realizing they put thought into the killer instead of just "slasher villain #85" that the genre had done for so long, but if you know what's happening the movie is winking with you with such amazingly dumb and clever things like "He's behind you Jamie". Saw is a dumb movie that masquerades as smart, it wants to be clever and philosophize at you and wants to pull off a twist that is unearned because there's no clues for the twist, so unless you watch a lot of movies and realize this one is up its own ass, of course you're going to be surprised. It's like a guy who built a tesla coil and (think he) knows how it works and no one else does so he shows up in a cheap top hat and a wand and expects everyone to applaud like he's David Copperfield. Sure, everyone loves tesla coils, but that reaction is unearned.
From what I understand from others who've seen the rest, even what little cleverness goes away on the character and it just becomes a show to watch more elaborate ways to see people get hurt. It's the only way I can comprehend that the series is loved by as many as it is. I work in healthcare, I can see plenty of that on the day to day basis.
James Cameron’s Avatar series.
Then again… Does anyone actually like it? It seems to have all this online hype when it’s such a boring visual spectacle.
It’s like the opposite of the other Avatar franchise, which wasn’t a commercial hit, and seems less popular on paper, but seems to have a massive cultural impact.
Harry Potter.
Before JK went mask off, I had dropped the books about half way though for being increasing annoyed with how they ended. Never any change to the status quo except Harry actually regressing in character development. I watched the first movie, but that was around when I dropped the books and never looked back.
I was able to just quietly keep my opinions to myself, but with with JK becoming increasing unhinged with both her tweets and books, I haven't felt the need to be polite with the "separate the art from the artists" types. Especially when they just assume that you're a fan if you don't correct them.
Interstellar. That ending was so unbelievably dumb that I can't even stomach the rest of the movie thinking about it.
I know it's got rave reviews, a stacked cast, Nolan directing. Plenty was pretty, cool concepts, high stakes scenes. But that ending... shudders
honestly, i disagree. i really don't see the big problems with the ending. i actually even like it.
the library (called a tesseract in the movie) is constructed by the future humans, who have control of 5d space, and who include Murphy, who actually lived in the room connected to the tesseract. it's built to look like that, so Cooper, a 3d being, can actually understand it. it's basically stretching out time and gravity into a 3d space. the library is not something the black hole made up because Cooper loves Murphy (which i thought what happened on my first watch), it's what the future humans made with the help of the black hole. love ties thematically into it, 'cause Cooper loves and knows Murphy so well, he knows how to tell her the quantum data from the black hole, or something. and Cooper, or the future humans for that matter, can't say or do anything directly, 'cause in the past, they're only able to affect gravity (and because of the construction of the tesseract, Cooper can only control the gravity of that one room.) the reason for why the future humans don't go just directly do it themselves is explained as them not being able to pinpoint a specific space, or time for it, which is why Cooper, who can traverse the tesseract for a specific point in time and space in that room to tell Murphy the quantum data, which allows the future humans to do all of the crazy 5d stuff.
anyway, sorry for the rambling. Interstellar is my favourite movie, and i really love even the ending of it. multiple scenes, including the ending, make me bawl like a baby, like no other movie has done to me, and i love all the hard sci-fi it has. sci-fi so hard, that physicists learned something new about black holes, because of the equations used to make the black hole cgi in it.
That's very valid but there's one thing I don't understand : how can the ending affect the whole experience? To me that's like saying "sex is meh because the shower afterwards is boring". Don't know if I'm making sense lol
To me, most endings are mediocre because endings are just very hard to write. It is very rare to have both the elements for a great story, and the setup for a great ending. In that context I feel like investing too much on the ending hurts the whole experience, whereas a weak ending just hurts the last ten minutes.
I didn’t like the ending, it seemed like kind of a big letdown. I don’t remember it, I just remember being surprised at how bland it was when the rest of the movie had me on the edge of my seat.
For me interstellar suffered from it's hype. i expected a great, innovative movie and found it... okay.
Interesting opinion. The ending of Interstellar made me cry like a baby. Shit was great.
For me I really hated the audio in that movie. It was the most stereotypical Nolan BWOM crap throughout and yet the dialog was whisper quiet.
Oh and the plot was just Contact again…felt really unoriginal
To me, it's one of those movies that seems like it could have been great, and as you say it had cool concepts and high stakes scenes. But there were just too many places where the characters were dumb, and they had to be dumb in order to make the story work, and then story itself is pretty weak. To me, it's not a terrible movie, but I've never understood all the hype around it.
Yes. Fucking yes. That movie and everyone in it is so dumb, I wonder who the people raving about this hot garbage are.
I was done with this movie from the start. The story about setting the table differently because of the dust?! GTFO That’s why cabinets have doors on them! I was too miffed after that
Napoleon dynamite was fucking garbage and don't think it should have ever existed. No humor and barley anything. Honestly feel like the movie rubber was better
What?!?
What?!?
As an older millennial, that movie was a work of art. I was about 20 when I seen it, stoned, and I couldn’t stop laughing.
It really was popular because its humor was so “fresh.” This was just before internet/youtube culture took off and most Americans hadn’t seen such a dry, peculiar film about their own culture. I fucking love it but it’s certainly not for everyone, that’s for sure.
I wonder... is it because you have little/no experience with small town America? I loved Napoleon Dynamite partly because it's somewhat nostalgic for me. The movie appeals to people who grew up in the sticks and knew people like Napoleon Dynamite.
I grew up small town America, older Millinial, I'm the demographic for that movie.
I couldn't finish the movie.
100% respect your opinion. This isn't me telling you you're wrong, just sharing my experience with the movie.
When my wife and I first watched it, after we finished, we looked at each other and were like, "what the fuck did we just watch?". We thought it was awful.
The next morning we were quoting it and laughing our asses off at the utter absurdity of the movie. We now both love the movie.
Edit: grammar and stupid autocorrect
Hard disagree, lol. That’s a classic.
I tried to watch it a couple of times and never finished it. Apparently, it's a fairly divisive and hard-to-predict pick for recommendation systems as well.
I only watched it once and it was just terrible. I would maybe give it another shot, I don’t really remember it much anyway.
Ready Player One was so bad, but this is a rare instance where the book is worse than the film. At least the film has visuals the book is just cringe and rememberberries.
Agreed. That book was recommended to me by a few fellow sci-fi book fans, so I gave it a shot. Couldn’t get through it. It read like a 6th-grade kid’s fanfic about the 1980’s. Bad writing, bad dialogue, ham-fisted plot.
Yeah, if OP thought the movie was heavy on the “good job being a teenager in the 80s!” content, they should steer well clear of the book.
The thing that baffled me about that movie was how many "startups" used it as reference for what they were trying to create. Like, did I watch the same movie? Real life was so shitty they had entire blocks of people living in trailers mounted to each other vertically. They used the matrix or whatever it was called to escape. And you want to create that for real?
Why don't we turn the world into a real life Mad Max while we're at it.
Why don’t we turn the world into a real life Mad Max while we’re at it.
Have you been around the car culture?
RPO is bad, yes. But Spielberg is a good director and that's why the movie is at least entertaining. I hate-read the book, but I still enjoy the movie.
Agreed. The movie is just a fun action film wirh no brainpower needed. If you go into it with no expectations it’s fine.
The book? The author insists on yanking you out of the story with listicles of callbacks and references to obscure ‘80s shows or whatever. The main character is just an ass, and is also conveniently capable of meeting every challenge thrown at him despite being an impoverished basement dweller. The book became a slog of contrivances to get from A to B with “Aren’t all these retro references cool?” jammed in at every opportunity.
Wasn't it supposed to be bad though? Maybe I misunderstood, but I thought people liked it because it was ridiculous and campy.
Yeah, the book was meant to feel a bit cringey, because the story is told from the perspective of a teenage gamer obsessed with pop culture. It's the entire reason he wins the egg hunt, because he's always got these obscure references floating around his head.
Very weird take. Everyone I've ever talked to loves that book. I honestly cannot picture any conceivable reality where the movie was better than the book.
Elf.
Once you’ve seen the first 3 minutes and get the premise, then the entire rest of the film is so predictable in its jokes and situations that I derived absolutely zero pleasure from watching it and it just grated the entire way through.
Films can be funny because the initial premise leads to really entertaining, unexpected or clever situations… or a film can super straight up and shallow in its humour.
I really don’t get why Elf is so incredibly popular.
ITT: people using the downvote button as an "I disagree" button when the entire point is to name popular movies that you dislike. Sort by controversial for the real answers, I guess.
For me it's Alien. Maybe because I'm not a horror movie buff, but I do like sci-fi and yet it just didn't really do anything for me. I somehow found Prometheus to be more engaging.
Oh wow, complete opposite here - I thought Prometheus was hot garbage.
"Hey everybody, let's just remove our helmets in this totally unvetted environment, we're all scientists but trust me, this is supes safe!"
"Aw look at the little alien snake, so cute, better get real close!"
"I'm clearly showing symptoms of exposure to some alien pathogen, but let's just hide it from the entire crew, including my girlfriend, who I will be fucking."
"Oh, a huge ring is rolling toward me and I'm gonna get crushed, better keep running in a straight line!"
I mean, come on.
Both can be true.
I never watched alien growing up, and only half-watched it with a girlfriend (sorry, good movies are great but... Boobs vs stereotypical teenager watching a movie....)
By the time I watched the movie fully, it just held no scare factor for me.
And so many dumb choices were made in Prometheus, it's hard to take the people seriously when everyone is acting like children who have never been in space or a dangerous situation before.
angry upvote
But honestly, fair. Alien is a 50-year-old movie, so when viewed with a modern lens it might not seem to be anything special.
Part of the legendary status of Alien is just how influential it has been. Before Alien, a horror-scifi movie would be some schlock about flying saucers piloted by men in gorilla masks terrorizing Hollywood. Audiences certainly weren't expecting a psychosexual thriller about forced oral insemination and mpreg.
And the android! Robots in movies were walking vending machines, and yet the robot in Alien is just some guy until he starts to malfunction. Plus in the context of the franchise, it makes you distrust every single android in each subsequent movie, and might even leave you guessing who else in the cast could be a robot in disguise.
Other movies have done it better since then. We all stand on the shoulders of giants after all. And the funny thing is, a lot of the time when you look back at the movies that spawn the tropes, they don't seem that impressive because they haven't been totally refined yet.
I have a soft spot for Alien, it's my favorite in the franchise. It relies so heavily on practical effects, it's got those retro-futuristic computers which I adore, and the smart woman saves the day (sort of) after all the dumb men tell her she's wrong. And yet despite what I just said, I don't think anyone is actually very dumb, the characters are all quite human and I understand and relate to their motivations.
It's a movie that feels far more modern than it is. You might even forget that it's fifty years old until you see that explosive finale in gloriously bad 70's CGI
I also liked Prometheus. It's not the best in the franchise but it's certainly not the worst, and it doesn't deserve as much hate as it gets in the community
I was with you until you implied Prometheus was likeable because at least it's not the worst.
I loved how Alien brought together horror and science fiction. If it didn't do anything for you, as you admit that you're not into horror, then fair enough.
Now, I'll throw in here that I can't abide Aliens. To me, it betrayed the horror elements of Alien, making it more akin to some dumb action movie with some added schmaltz thrown in. Unlike many, I actually consider Alien3 the better film than Aliens (certainly not Alien), in that it does try to bring back the horror elements and darkness in a different way. Still, I can understand why many deride that film. The Assembly Cut does make amends, and is possibly worth watching if you didn't care about the theatrical version.
I do really think the horror is what kills it for me, just not my genre of choice. And it's not that I'm against things being scary, but I just never vibe with the format of most horror films. Same with horror games.
I also do see all of the faults that people pointed out with Prometheus, and I'm not going to really call that movie "good" either. But I think what makes it appeal to me a bit more is the worldbuilding. Alien is more understated and throws you into a well-imagined sci-fi universe that leaves a lot to be inferred, but Prometheus has a lot more of the "grand worldbuilding" type of atmosphere to it that had me really interested in what I was actually seeing.
FWIW I'm using the downvote button as a "You didn't explain", "That's a band not a movie", "That's a show not a movie", "That's a genre of animation, not a movie" button ;p I'm definitely clicking it far more often that I typically do =p
It's wild how many people can write but not read.
Speaking of downvotes, I don't think comments in a moderated forum should even have a downvote button. Every situation where a comment can be legitimately downvoted, like spam or bigotry or trolling, the comment should just be reported and removed by a moderator, instead.
People's intuition about downvoting is simply that it's the opposite of an upvote because that's how it is presented in the UI. That might make sense for articles, but not for comments.
You didn't list one of the main uses of a downvote: lowering the visibility of poorly made or unfitting content. If you believe that a post or comment does not contribute to or belong in the community or discussion, your only recourse in most places is to downvote. Yeah ideally mods would remove every such post but that ignores the fact they are few in number, often absent, and generally follow their rules to the letter instead of moderating on vibes.
Downvoted
Disney's Hercules.
Because it completely butchers greek mythology. Of course, that's to be expected from a kid's movie (especially Disney) but I've been a greek mythology fan from an early age and this movie really disappointed me as a child.
Zeus being a caring father?
And a loyal husband ha
This was a really popular opinion at the time if I recall.
Counterpoint: it's one of the better Disney movies IMO. The gospel soundtrack slaps, and Danny DeVito, James Woods, and Susan Egan are all perfect in their roles.
Also, I blame Meg at least in part for my lifelong weakness for skinny dark-haired sarcastic women. But that's on me.
I'm not sure if you're saying my opinion was popular at the time- I've never met anyone in person who agreed with me, not then and not now either. Occasionally some people say, "ok, I get what you mean" but they don't really share my opinion. Most of the times I get "what? Hercules? Such a great movie!".
And fair enough, I'm not saying it's a bad movie, simply that I was thoroughly disappointed which isn't the same. Objectively the art direction is really good, the voice acting and animation is solid, and yes the soundtrack was also objectively good but unfortunately not my type, what can I say. It's just not a movie for me.
The cycle:
Step 1: (as a child) "wow this movie was great, I love Greek stuff!"
Step 2: learns a ton about Greek mythology over the next many years due to interest sparked by the movie
Step 3: (likely as a teenager or older, re-watching it one day) "holy shit this movie is absolutely nothing like Greek mythology, why did I ever think it was good..."
I've rewatched some of the old Disney classics and I was thoroughly disappointed by Hercules. I personally don't care that much about the mythological accuracy of it but it was just kind of meh my memorys of the movie were much better.
The Greatest Showman is a masterclass in style over substance—a glittery spectacle that sacrifices depth and integrity for catchy tunes and flashy visuals. Beneath its feel-good facade lies a shallow, formulaic narrative that romanticizes P.T. Barnum’s exploitative history while failing to give meaningful voices to the marginalized characters it claims to celebrate.
The musical numbers, though undeniably infectious, feel jarringly modern and out of place, prioritizing audience pandering over authenticity. Despite its popularity, the film’s sanitized themes and lack of emotional nuance reveal it as more empty circus than cinematic triumph.
If you’re looking for substance, you’ll find the tent empty.
Forest Gump. The 1994 Best Picture nominees were some of the most highly competitive the Academy has ever had, and they went with the one that was just a straight-up terrible fucking movie. It has no value except as nostalgia bait for Americans and propaganda for those who want to believe in the myth of American individual exceptionalism.
Its musical score is also probably the worst thing I've ever had the misfortune of performing in an orchestra. Dull and repetitive.
And its most famous line is straight-up bullshit. I've heard the book does it differently, but the movie puts "something that kinda sounds deep to a 14 year old" over a level of rationality that stands up to 20 seconds of thought from an average person. A box of chocolates tells you precisely what you're going to be getting.
A box of chocolates tells you precisely what you're going to be getting.
This is probably one of the weakest arguments against this movie—and there’s plenty to criticize. Labeling the chocolates was not always a common practice. It’s something mass produced chocolates started to do. There was a time people bought from a confectioner and there wouldn’t be labels. That’s the context of the line. You can criticize this line but the labeling isn’t the problem.
The book is WILD! Gump goes to space, there's a lot more racism and sexism in the book, and Gump doesn't come off as a lucky mentally challenged, but overall nice guy. He ends the book looking like a racist asshole, and criminal, IIRC. I read the book as a teenager after seeing the movie and that was the first book that I decided that the movie was actually better.
It has no value except as nostalgia bait for Americans and propaganda for those who want to believe in the myth of American individual exceptionalism.
If anything, Forrest Gump is a satire of The American Dream^^^TM
Only guy to have such a successful life without doing anything unethical is a mentally challenged, politically unaware, and extremely lucky, who does everything he's told without questioning it.
Can’t help but love that you’re criticizing the line as faux-deep when it was delivered by someone with a mental disability.
Yeah, but a lot of the point is how despite being mentally disabled, he's supposed to have deeper insight into things. That's certainly how the cultural perception of the movie is. The problem is that the "insight" he has and which both the movie itself and the cultural memory of the movie treat as genuinely meaningful is actually fucking dumb.
I had listened to the audio book before I saw the movie. The movie is so off the mark on the ridiculous life of Forest Gump. My favorite part of the book is that Jenny leaves him, she doesn't die, she leaves him because he becomes a major pot head.
There's a YouTube video that's like "What if Forrest Gump took place in modern day."
And it's wonderful, he gets beaten up during the George Floyd protests by police and thinks it was because he called for a cab not knowing calling for a taxi was illegal. (The cops misheard him and thought he shouted "ACAB"), then later he decides to go on vacation to the Capitol because he's a patriotic American and he's always wanted to see it, he goes there and meets other excited patriots who seem to be having some kind of a party (It's January 6th 2021)
Some Nolan stuff.
Inception: I understand it, it's just extremely convoluted and dumb.
Oppenheimer: It's a movie with 95% dialogue, and he decided to put loud droning music under every conversation so you can barely hear the people talking.
The dark knight trilogy: I just can't take batman seriously in it. The voice is so silly, and the pointy ears just look really out of place in this very serious take.
Anyway, I do like some of Nolans movies, these are my pet peeves.It's a movie with 95% dialogue, and he decided to put loud droning music under every conversation so you can barely hear the people talking.
The audio mixing in his movies is genuinely terrible. If you aren't watching them with subtitles, you're probably missing half the plot because of background noise.
I guess he refuses to use ADR but also films with an imax camera which is about as loud as a lawnmower. So all the dialogue needs to be extracted from all that noise and it sounds like shit.
Nearly all Nolan stuff. His movies are cold and impersonal, and his characters are just dull (and he can't write a woman character that's not one dimensional). I can't remember the name of any of the characters bar the main ones. I feel like that's his main job and he can't do it. Everything else in the movie has a team of people (sound, lighting, design etc) but his area is always the let down.
That Bane movie was one of the most comically bad I've ever seen. Terrible acting, ridiculous plot points, dozens of plot holes.
I think Nolan is good at putting things together, but he lacks emotion and depth.
Bane:
Mhhphhm hmmph mugghhh hnnnph!
???
i disagree on atleast one movie: Interstellar. it is absolutely devastatingly emotional, atleast for me.
the scenes where Cooper sees his kids growing up without him after coming from the water planet, and the ending sequence when he goes into the black hole and the tesseract will never not make me bawl out like a baby.
Nolan is so overrated his Batman trilogy sucked except Heath Ledger as the joker. Everything since the WW2 film he did has been overly pretentious.
Snowpiercer. The movie was just a weak attempt at socio-economic metaphor, with an absolutely terrible premise, bad effects, action sequences shot mostly in the dark, weird pacing, and goofy characters. It seemed like a live-action Anime, and I hate Anime. I sat through that movie, the whole time wondering how and why it got such great reviews.
The show does a better job, but the premise itself is such a stretch
I felt like I was taking crazy pills while watching it as I tried to reconcile what I was experiencing vs what I heard from others.
Oof. I love that movie. I thought it was extremely well chorographed. The fight scenes were awesome. Weird how opinions differ.
The socio hierarchy stuff is the point of the movie. Well done metaphor. Thought provoking even if you hate the exposition.
I will eat your best tasting babies for not being in line with the movie critic hierarchy. Back of the train with you.
Nothing wrong with metaphors.... Until they are so dull and ridiculous as if thought up by a sixth grader doing a lit assignment. Snowpiercer is that. That's all it is. There is nothing profound on insightful or interesting or new. That's all it is: the embodiment of a really dull metaphor. Just my opinion of course.
Saving Private Ryan
I like Spielberg, but compared to others in the war drama genre like Band of Brothers or Full Metal Jacket, SPR is laughably bad.
The tone of the movie, trying to be more inspirational than realistic, was awkward at best. Acting was pretty mediocre, probably because the script and characters were 1 dimensional.
It completely disregards the historical context of the war. You could watch this movie and learn absolutely nothing about the history of WWII.
Now Band of Brothers. That was some amazing retelling of true war stories. It wasn't trying to be inspirational. It was just honest about the chaos and brutality of war. That made it harrowing heartbreaking, infuriating, and inspirational all at once.
Titanic.
The hype here was insane, when I finally saw it the experience was.. underwhelming. Such a boring slog of a movie, mediocre CGI when disaster finally struck and that stupid end.. Get on the piece of wood that is obviously big enough to hold you both, you dolt.
Only upside is that I watched it on TV, so apart from some hours of my life I'll never get back it didn't cost me anything.
I went into Bridge to Terabithia at 11 years old excited to watch two kids have a fantasy adventure and I still haven't forgiven it
THIS! Me and my mom thought it was a fun fantasy story from the commercials. The kids going into the forest into another realm of fantasy creatures. All of that in the commercials was just 1 scene in the movie, and the rest was boring or heartbreaking. I will never forgive their marketing team.
Okay but like the whole point I feel is that tragedy is impossible to avoid. It's supposed to be a slap in the face. If you haven't forgiven it, then the film achieved its goal.
Read the book in 4th grade, due to the marketing I did not have any interests seeing the film but judging by your comment it seems they more or less kept in line with the source. It is not a happy story.
My ex would cry just bringing this movie up. She made me watch it but I was around 23-24 so I don’t remember it.
Your friend Leslie is dead
The John Wick series
Watched them all over the course of a weekend - its the same fucking moving over and over and over and over again. The amount of disbelief I needed to suspend got exponentially larger so by the time I got to the last movie I just couldn't take it anymore. There is no real plot or any development of characters, it's just implausible fight scene after implausible fight scene.
I think if I put a few months between each movie I wouldn't have this opinion - on their own the movies can be mindlessly entertaining but all together was too much for me.
2001: A Space Odyssey was rightfully not well received when it was first released. It is incredibly well crafted in terms of visual effects and has about 30 minutes of great, tense sci-fi in it. Shame about the other six hours (perceived) of tedium. Even in the late 60s people in ape costumes smashing things while the soundtrack goes aaaAAAaaUuuAaa wasn't interesting for more than a minute, don't even get me started on the stewardess, docking, moon journey or the damn screensaver. Which, yes, is iconic, but 20 minutes?
It does make sense that people would get high before subjecting themselves to this and then put on a Pink Floyd album during all the tedious scenes.
2010 is a better movie. It starts with dialogue and knows when slowing down increases tension.
It's kind of interesting how the reasons people dislike things range from "it sucks" to "here is a carefully constructed argument showing why the film's thesis promotes toxic ideas of etc etc"
Also interesting when someone's reasons for hating something are someone's reason for loving it. Like a review says "It's full of sad gay shit" and one chunk of people are going to boo and the other are going to perk right up.
Inglourious Basterds.
However much I liked all the Tarantino flicks before this one, I just cannot get into Inglourious. Also, everything Tarantino made after that movie is also tainted by the same uneasy feeling I get. If pressed to guess why, I'd say he took the stories out of the 'now' and transported them to other times and places, which just does not seem to agree with me.
For me, Inglorious plays like a short film anthology and its praise comes from how good some of those shorts are. The opening (farm) scene and the bar scene are masterful examples of suspense. I never praise the film as a whole, but I will always praise those two scenes.
And the scene where Hans Landa perfects his English. "It's a bingo! Is that how you say it? It's a bingo?"
And the infamous Arrriverdurrchi scene. Etc. It's pretty full of memorable moments but I do agree with you in general.
I think Basterds was his first movie that casually re-wrote history, which threw off the movie's tone for me. Like a historical "what if" movie. And every movie he's done since then has the same feel to me now.
Tarantino films are a process of him masturbating over old movies and extracting pleasure in people not getting all of his references
And having a foot fetish and constantly casting himself on scenes with feet or racist comments.
Not necessarily hate, but did not like as much as the rest of the internet: Oppenheimer
The moment I left the theater, I thought it should have been longer. Yes, I think an already 3hr film should be even longer. Just torture the audience at this point. But I thought that there was just so much stuff to cram into that 3hr length, there was not enough room for the story to breath, even if those stories were needed to paint a better picture of Oppenheimer's life, morals, and conflicts.
I'd still recommend it to people. If anything, it's still a visually well directed film. But if you aren't a physics/history buff, you might not enjoy the story as much.
In my opinion, a better history based movie would be The Imitation Game. Much more focused story, even if some aren't historically accurate.
I thought the nuclear explosion was pretty disappointing. It was hyped up so much and it's just like, a normal explosion zoomed in. It didn't look like a nuclear bomb went off to me.
Exactly this. You can't hype up an audience to that degree and make them sit through 3 hours without showing them something theyve never seen before. And at this point you can't just Nolan your way out by making the blast larger than life, because I think by now we possibly all imagine it bigger than it actually was. But what you can do is some sort of trippy shit where the blast goes on for ages, where it ripping things apart is shown in some sort of artistic and novel way, perhaps something emphasising an old world is being torn apart and this is a new nuclear age. ANYTHING. except a half hearted blast that looked and felt like half hearted CG. And the irony is the production team went out of their way to avoid using CG. It was just immensely unsatisfying and rushed and all the momentum of the film was lost. It just didn't feel momentus enough.
If they'd been bolder they've have culminated with the bombing of Hiroshima and shown the horror in some new terrifying light..
If you know the actual story of Oppenheimer, you know the movie is garbage. It made it about this mostly fictitious investigation before Congress because of a pretty feud
It made it about this mostly fictitious investigation before Congress because of a pretty feud
Hmmmm
Was J. Robert Oppenheimer stripped of his security clearance due to his Communist ties?
Yes. The controversial Oppenheimer security hearing at the heart of both the movie and the book on which it is based took place in 1954 toward the end of McCarthyism, a campaign that targeted suspected Communists and Communist sympathizers. Oppenheimer's hearing was conducted by the United States Atomic Energy Commission (AEC).
Yes, I think an already 3hr film should be even longer. Just torture the audience at this point.
Admittedly I haven't watched it, but at this point wouldn't it be a better idea to divide it into two parts?
It would, but it also probably would be a bad idea to do so. How many people would come back for a part 2 of a documentary film? I think not a lot.
Oh I have another one. Thor Ragnarok. People loved it because they liked the Thor character and found his earlier films too dull or something, but I loved that they were unapologetically serious about themselves, using comedy in ways that felt very authentic to the characters.
But Ragnarok? It came out later the same year as this excellent essay about bathos, and it was dripping in it. I was hyper tuned to the problem with bathos, and it leaned even harder into that took than nearly any other MCU film did.
What sucks so much is that it had the bones of a really good dramatic story. The Bruce Banner/Hulk storyline had built up over multiple previous films, and come the climax of this film it's established that he's in Bruce form now and has enough control to stay that way, but if he transforms into Hulk it'll be a big deal and he may never be able to be himself again. So they arrive in Asgard at the climax of the film and it's pretty urgent. In a dramatic moment you can see him steel himself to make the sacrifice; he jumps out of their aircraft onto the rainbow bridge, clearly intending to transform into Hulk to fight Fenris.
…and he splats. Faceplants on the bridge. Still in human form. It's played for laughs. The ultimate conclusion of Hulk's story in this movie and probably the most important moment of his arc over the entire MCU to this point, and it's undercut by a joke. Not even a very funny one. A slapstick joke that would make Charlie Chaplin cringe.
And it means nothing, because the very next shit, he's transformed anyway and throwing Fenris around like a doll.
Not to mention it undermines the verisimilitude of the movie. I can suspend my disbelief in these movies pretty hard, but Bruce Banner, in human form, is meant to be painfully average, physically speaking. He should have died from that fall, given he didn't transform. That's certainly not the worst thing about the moment, but it is was the sprinkling of salt on top of the wound that just made it that little bit worse.
That moment was the worst bit, but the film as a whole was full of lazy humour and bathos, and it was really just the worst example of what was wrong with a lot of MCU movies at the time. I was shocked to hear so few people came away disliking it in the same way I did.
Bruce did die from that fall, but they established in the first avenger movie that he can't die, anytime he does, the Hulk takes over and heals.
And the problem is further minimized when smart hulk is revealed with no effort at all in the next film. I hated it.
I also liked the slightly more serious Thor in the former movies, even though the second one was shit and I have watched it twice and don't remember anything from it....
Ragnarok was OK, good even but it was the first step into making Thor a comedic joke character that occasionally does hero stuff. I could live with Ragnarok, but Love and Thunder showed that they completely lost it and don't get what made Thor worth watching. There was some funny jokes in that movie, but apart from that the entire thing feels like a parody of Thor to me. It's all turned too unserious, which removes any weight from the moments in the movie. Feels like the IQ of everyone just keeps dropping every movie at this point.
I'm sorry but all the previous Thor movies (and the one after this) are ASS. Ragnarok is the only good Thor movie.
On a vaguely similar note, God of War: Ragnarok was hot garbage that had shit gameplay and worse plot and was a Marvel wannabe (also I detest marvel shit)
The only God of War games I've played are the first two, on PS2, which is the only console I've ever had (well, apart from the Wii, which barely counts).
Literally everything Taika watiti touches turns to shit. I don’t understand his appeal. He’s like a 14 year old in the head that can’t take anything seriously. I know if I’m watching one of his shows or movies it’s just going to be lame joke after lame joke and then at some point he will remember he needs to get a story in and rush everything.
Also, I can’t stand anything JJ Abram’s touches. I know a lot of people say that now post StarWars disaster, but I remember being very disappointed when I heard he was directing the first sequel and people were acting like I was crazy. I absolutely hate his “mystery box” story telling because I either never cared about “item A” or I know the payoff for discovering what “item A” actually is I’d going to be lame.
Also, I can’t stand anything JJ Abram’s touches. I know a lot of people say that now post StarWars disaster, but I remember being very disappointed when I heard he was directing the first sequel and people were acting like I was crazy. I absolutely hate his “mystery box” story telling because I either never cared about “item A” or I know the payoff for discovering what “item A” actually is I’d going to be lame.
Part of the problem is that Abrams has no idea what's in the box. Basically his entire career was writing the first act of a story with some mystery to solve, handing it off to someone else to finish, then, when they ask what's in the box, he tells them, "I dunno, figure something out."
Literally everything Taika watiti touches turns to shit
Apart from the two Thors, the only Waititi I've seen was Jo Jo Rabbit, which I thought was incredible. It's a shame someone capable of touching that subject in such a sensitive yet humorous way could turn around and be supportive of genocide elsewhere. But yeah I don't like either of his Thor movies.
As for Abrams, I completely agree that his mystery box style is terrible. I actually was hopeful when it was announced he'd be doing Star Wars though, especially when it was going to be only the first film, and we didn't know that there was no planning ahead. I thought that the studio as a whole would rein in his mystery box style by insisting on a plan across 3 movies. And as much as I hated Abrams' Star Trek films, I thought that their action style might work well for Star Wars in a way it didn't work for Trek. So I was reasonably hopeful, and I don't even think I was too let down by the first movie per se. The problem came when he returned for the third movie and revealed that there were no good answers for the mysteries set up at the start (which, admittedly, itself came about because the mysteries had been set up in the first one without thought for how to resolve them). Fuck mystery boxes.
Wtf is wrong with you. I hope you get eaten by the swear wolves, when the vamps bring you as food to the masquerade party, Steve.
100% agree with you. There's a lot of stinker Marvel movies but Ragnarok is really where they started sucking pretty consistently (with a few exceptions like GOTG 3). I fucking hated that movie almost from the start and felt like I was taking crazy pills afterwards when I saw people's opinions on it. Fortunately I had a couple other dudes at work who agreed with me that I could vent to. Then the last Thor movie came out and everyone was saying the same shit about that one that I was saying about Ragnarok and I'm just confused.
Then the last Thor movie came out and everyone was saying the same shit about that one that I was saying about Ragnarok and I’m just confused
OMG YES. I just don't understand it. I didn't love the 4th Thor movie, but it seemed to me like it had all the same problems that Ragnarok did. If anything, I was happy that it walked back the Jane Foster erasure that Ragnarok had committed. But everyone thought it was terrible even though it did most of the same stuff as the movie they all loved.
The nightmare before christmas. IDK maybe i've been exposed to it too much but I have never gotten an ounce of enjoyment watching the movie. The songs are lame and the plot is mind numbingly simple, you know so the kids can follow. So many people in my life just love it and want to make watching it every year for both halloween and christmas a tradition thing. I don't want to be a kill joy so I power through it every year. Im so tired of it though, How many more times do I have to hear that barrage of stupid disney sing songs just to spend time with my loved ones? "WhAt's ThiS TheRes WhitE Stuff EverYWHEre!" Fuck you jack skellington you sheltered prick. Its called cocaine and its how santa and his elves get shit done. Now travel around a few other holiday trees and do some world building so Disney can pump out a half baked sequel else they might go for a live action remake starring photorealistic cgi stitched together corpses.
Oppenheimer.
It's probably an interesting movie, but holy shit each shot is less than 3 seconds long and it just cuts around to different camera angles every 3 seconds for 2 hours...
Not only was this making me feel physically sick and disoriented, but this erodes tension in the film and is completely unnecessary. You don't need 14 shots of someone walking down a damn hallway or having a think, you need one (1).
Take all that shit out and you're probably left with a story worth actually telling.
The Big Lebowski
Interminably dull. Watching it made sense of why the people bigging it up were stoned..
That's just like....your opinion man
Sorry I just can't agree with this one. Stoned or not, that movie is absolutely fantastic. I'm trying to do some mental gymnastics to empathize with people who disliked it....but I can't....movie is just one of the best. There's no getting around it :-/
That's a fair criticism. It's the anti-noir which by definition means that the mystery isn't smart or sexy. It's a bunch of idiots and coincidences that resolve their problems through happenstance. I happen to be one of the people who finds those idiots unbelievably engaging. Honestly there's a lot of similarity to Seinfeld
Obligatory "well that's just like, your opinion, man."
I think you hit the nail on the head answering OP’s question, sorry you didn’t like it! To be fair it wasn’t popular when it came out and became a cult classic in the 00s. I think it captures an absurdist side of America of the 90s (not to mention starring Buscemi, one of my favorite actors)… bowling alleys for social meet ups, roughneck Vietnam vets, drug-slipping Porn kingpins. I watch it maybe a couple times a year when I have a hankering for a White Russian :)
I was looking for this answer.
I tend to like these "slow" types of movies, like Napoleon Dynamite. Maybe it's because I find the characters unrelatable I don't like it? I was honestly waiting for the good part, but every part that was even mildly interesting, I just... Didn't care about any of the characters and didn't care about whatever was happening.
How do you feel about other Coen brothers movies?
I up voted you bcz I want others to see how wrong and correct you are.
Fwiw, I wasn't sure about it at all, first time round. Liked it more the second time and every time since.
I always think of The Big Lebowski as a Fletch remake.
Pretty much every Nolan film, with the disclosure that I stopped watching his movies after Inception. His films are always well-acted and well-produced, but the scripts are just… dumb? They take themselves way too seriously and carry this air of highbrow intellectualism while being riddled with plot holes and contrivances. Not to mention the crypto-fascist messaging.
He’s like Zack Snyder, but he pulls it off well enough that critics buy into it. It drives me crazy when I see his name mentioned alongside great auteur filmmakers like Kubrick and Scorsese.
Mortal Engines. I have not read the source materials.
Amazing concept, fantastic visuals, weak story, weak characters. Apparently just accidentally spliced in the end of Return of the Jedi instead of finishing the movie.
Any marvel movie. I just do not get the appeal. The only people who like it seem to like it way too much. Most of them are also grown ass children.
Kill Bill. Boring as fuck.
The Crow. I refuse to elaborate.
Pretty much anything from Kevin Smith except Mallrats and even that I'll admit was dumb but I liked it as a young teenager.
Deadpool. Juvenile humor from the king of "I'm in a movie because I'm unbelievably charming"
Not a movie (well maybe there is one?) but I absolutely hate The Trailer Park Boys. I just don't get it. It's not funny, at all. It's not my thing at all. I've been hated on for this opinion but I don't care, it sucks.
On that same note, It's Always Sunny in Philadelphia. Same reason tpb sucks to me.
Lord of the rings. So boring.
This thread is fun though. I enjoyed reading everyone's opinions, especially those I disagree with.
Ready player 1 - oh yeah, I agree with you. Garbage film. Just an excuse to do fan service. I viewed it like a music video or clip compilation. It was neat to see all the random franchise together on the big screen but worthless as a narrative. I enjoyed it like I enjoy godzilla films, turn brain off, watch the spectacle.
I hate Avatar (blue cat people). Dances with Wolves but Halo. It was pretty! However people seem to act like it was an actual film and not a tech demo. They literally called the mineral unobtanium. It's a meme. Smh.
Titanic.
Why? Hmmm, hard to say. Seems obvious to me. I'm totally ok with a love story but I don't really care for romance stories. Let me explain the difference to me. I'm not saying this is a formal definition. To me a love story is drama and romance is melodrama. It felt more like melodrama to me.
And to interest the men, let's throw in a disaster flick. If people fall off the boat and hit the propeller on the way down, men will love it and women will love the rest. No pandering at all.
Plus screw the priceless gem, just toss it overboard.
A Christmas Story
I have never been able to watch the whole thing. Ralphie's whining and dull life was just unpleasant. I didn't really like any of the characters. Nothing in it was entertaining except for the kid and the pole. It was just a slog. I think the furthest I ever got was at a scene about a parade?
It seems like this is a really popular movie but I just never saw the appeal.
American Hustle.
I’ve never been so aware that I was watching a movie with actors on set in my life. I was so distracted by the sensation that eventually I completely lost the thread of the plot and wasn’t even sure who was scamming who anymore by the end. Then it went on to the Oscars lmfao.
Luckily Amy Adams won be back over with Arrival!
I know I'll get shit, but Pulp Fiction sucks. It's not about anything, Bruce Willis adds nothing to the film at all, and it's confusing to watch without having any real reason to be or payoff.
The worst part is that it's one of those things where if you don't like it, the fans just belittle you and claim you're "Just not smart enough to get it man." or they'll be passive aggressive about it. "Oh it's okay, my ditzy blonde girlfriend doesn't get it either." or "Not every movie can be about guns and shit, I know you stopped paying attention after the opening."
It's a shame because it was hyped up to me as one of the best movies of all time, and I try to watch it thinking this time it will click, this time I can see what the fuss is about.
And each time, it's just as terrible as I remember for all the same reasons as last time.
While on this subject It's a TV Show and not a movie, but I legitimately believe Andor is one of the worst pieces of Star Wars media ever created and if given the choice I'd sooner watch the Holiday Special because at least it's entertainingly bad. Instead of being a god damn hour straight of characters marching like they're at a military parade just to get to a boring shoot-out at a heist where everyone dies, only unlike when everyone dies in the heist in Rogue One, I don't shed a single tear because everyone involved with said heist has done absolutely nothing but bitch at Andor for not being "one of the cool kids" so if I'm feeling any emotion it's annoyance that my time getting to know these losers was completely wasted and relief that such unlikable characters are dead.
But hey, at least it only ruined Cassian Andor, it could have ruined someone who's been in more than one movie like Book of Boba Fett did. Ya know what Boba Fett's "book" is called in this show; Character Assassination: A How-To Guide
I don't know how you ruin a character who's done nothing but say "He's no good to me dead" in one movie, and have a retconned-in-most-continuities death in the next, but leave it to Disney's second Dark Age to find a way. But hey, at least every one agrees that Book of Boba Fett is trash instead of kissing the ground it walks on like Andor. So there's that.
Andor is a show so bad that there's a character named Cyril who's entire existence is dedicated to scenes where he eats Cereal. Absolute trash.
Anyway getting back to how the pulp of orange juice is more fun to watch than Pulp Fiction, Quentin Tarantino is a hack who sucks at every aspect of film making that isn't writing dialogue. Resevoir Dogs was okay though.
Alien Romulus
This movie seems to get a lot of love for some reason. I understand the bar was set really low by Prometheus and Covenant but that's not an excuse.
Romulus is just a collection of greatest hits from all the previous movies. None of the beats were new or original. Not a single protagonist or element added to the story in a meaningful way. None of the main characters are memorable in the slightest (compare to the phenomenal characters in Alien or Aliens). It was just so...bland
Spirited Away
No consistent world, cringy behaviour of the main character, love story out of nowhere, you can't have a plot twist if you didn't have any previously established lore. It felt a bit like a dream that was trying to take itself seriously as an actual story.
Spirited Away, and to some degree all Ghibli stuff leans very heavily on a shared cultural Mythos. It doesn't do exposition in the same way that zombies or angels aren't explained; everyone knows that stuff because we all grew up with a million references.
how dare you
Upvote
Why?
Edited my comment
i agree with you, and i pretty much felt the same the first time i watched it. plus, Chihiro feels like a very reactive character, driven from one errand to the next, and nothing feels really earned.
however, my opinion changed a little bit, because i got to see its theatre adaptation on stage. this is more or less my first time seeing a stage play, so it was a very new, and different experience for me. basically it is a big make believe, because unlike film or animation, what you can do with props on stage is very limited. i had to try very hard to turn the analytical part of my brain off, otherwise the whole thing will just be ridiculous. and that somehow made it a lot more enjoyable.
so i guess what i am trying to say is, don't think too hard about it? 🤷
I gave up on spirited away half way through it.
Ghibli it's very hit and miss for me, it's either really amazing or really tedious and boring.
It's weird, because I loved Spirited Away upon first watching it. But I can't do it anymore. It's like you say, a dream with no consistency. I let it fool me once, but now I'm lucid and see through the facade.
That's not to say I think it's bad, per se. It's still beautiful, and fascinating, and has a great score... But for me personally it has no re-watchability for precisely the reasons you mention.
HOT TAKE
hella disagree upvote
I don't hate it, but I can't understand the wider appeal of it, Nightmare Before Christmas. I don't understand why people think the Jack and Sally relationship is so great. She pines away and he's to self absorbed to even notice that she is a girl. And there are people who to this day still make it their entire personality. It is a decent movie, and I like the music, but it's not that great.
Oh it's worse. I read the book and it was very sad. And the movie was clearly changed from the book for sake of IP laws, reminding us of how sorry our own dystopia is.
It really needed an Oh Brother Where Art Thou ending where Wade and the gang fail to win but get well-off enough from their exploits and are seen by the public as leaders of the revolution against IOI's monopoly, and the capitalist system as a whole.
One of IOI's sixes gets the final key but when he signs the contract, it locks him out. The OASIS controlling stock remains in escrow pending ?????? with IOI as the default benefactor when... something future undisclosed event happens.
Which would set it all up for RP2.
It's one of those books like the Harry Potter series in which it feels more like it was intended to be easy-to-market, but is not very strong as a story.
Probably most films by Darren Aronofsky. Pi and The Fountain are some of the worst movies I've seen. Feels like someone's artsy shroom trip. I dislike most "artsy" movies without a coherent story.
Also a lot of horror classics bores me to death. For example The Omen, Poltergeist, The Exorcist.
The Omen, Poltergeist, The Exorcist.
Makes sense. Those were groundbreaking at the time, but the ground has been broken, repaved and built into a massive skyscraper now.
Requiem for a Dream still slaps tho
If you mean like slapping a puddle of diarrhea, then I agree. IIRC the movie's style was so annoying and the plot so boring that it's a small miracle I managed to finish it in the first place.
And the soundtrack, it freaking slaps
I've always felt like Darren Aronofsky makes great movies but absolutely sucks at ending them. Every movie of his, that I've seen, I've enjoyed up until the last 5-10 minutes. He just makes the most depressing endings, that make me regret watching the movie.
I honestly can't stand the vast majority of popular movies. They also keep getting longer and longer, and I already struggle to sit through an hour and a half long movie
Alita Battle Angel was such a disappointment. After years of people telling me how good it was I finally caved in and watched it on Netflix. What an absolute statement to mediocrity that movie is.
Realistically, who was the target audience for this movie?
The narrative was all over the place. Even Christoph Walzs presence couldn't save that movie. The most laughable part of movies like that is always people trying to escape the slums and systemic oppression but then the slums look 10 times better then most of our real world suburbs. People wearing quality clothing, kids playing games in the streets, big houses and apartments, advanced technologies and scifi medical care, markets with fresh food etc. and a few criminals roaming the streets at night, boo fucking hoo. Yet the story tries to sell me that this is the worst fate possible and the only way out is up to the riches. Also the main character is a bigger Marry Sue than Rey from Star Wars. I knew how the movie is going to end after the first 5 minutes. The only surprising part is that they are trying to stretch this pile of trash over multiple parts.
I also don't understand the praise the animation received. Yes it's well animated, but this isn't 2008, where CGI was still in it's infancy. It not looking like trash, would be at least expected - not something to loose tour marbles over.
Maybe next time Hollywood picks a Manga to turn into a movie, they should pick something with more substance. Edge of Tomorrow is prove that it can be done.Everything star wars is unwatchable. Most Disney is cringe too, but not instant switch away.
The princess bride, mostly because everyone my age won't shut up about it. By the time I saw the movie (I think I was 16?) it was like watching a string of cheesy memes.
Also, it's a wonderful life is so frustrating and depressing, the "happy ending" just doesn't cut it.
Tolkein.
I tried watching the new tolkein Rohirrim movie. There were clues I would hate it already, but they started with one of those 'tolkein songs' like by elves or whatever ~one of the ones where he's like modeling the dialect on some euro language and being a nerd with glasses in the library holding up a schematic of what he just made and being like, "it's music". So it started with that and I was done. did not get past opening song.
Inception. Hard to explain why. Interesting visual fx with a weird plot played by admittably world class actors.
Rogue One: A Star Wars Story.
Absolute incompetence start to finish. Low IQ fans go "Woooo! Vader's a BADASS!" ignoring how it completely fucks up the opening of Star Wars.
All star wars for me is bad. Rogue one at least was cool and for ONCE Vader didn't looked like a joke to me.
How does it completely fuck up the opening of star wars?
That's not the same Vader who is revealed in those open moments of Star Wars.
What, did he pop a valium in between movies and mellow out all the sudden?
It makes Leia's bald faced lie that she's on a diplomatic mission even more audacious.
Drag likes it.
I upvoted you because it's my favourite star wars film and I've never heard anyone dislike it
It get's a lot of hate, especially from armchair critics. I'm an armchair critic myself, but I truthfully do not understand the hate. Everytime I rewatch Rogue One, I try to find reasons to hate it, but it's pretty watchable if you ask me. People hate Jin and complain that her character and motivations make no sense, but I disagree. Her decisions are logically consistent with what she learns about her father as the movie progresses.
Anyway, I enjoy it every time I watch it, which is far more than I can say for the vast majority of Star Wars movies and shows produced in the 21st century.
Genuinely curious. How so?
Vader's argument with Leia goes out the window if he literally watches them fly away with the Death Star Plans.
Same with the argument on the Death Star when he chokes the guy out... "Bitch, I was in the same hallway with them, I just... didn't grab them... for... reasons."
It's funny, the one thing you specifically called out is the one part of it I did like. The connection to the beginning of A New Hope is great. But I didn't like pretty much any of the rest of the movie, including the rest of the final sequence. Especially that nonsense with the non-jedi Jedi.
I really liked Rogue One, except for the Vader bit. Really unnecessary fan service, which didn't fit with the rest of the film IMO.
I understand most of this view. Most the movie is pretty bad. I do think it makes a fitting transfer to ANH though.
The only thing it messed with was one line about Bothan spies?
That line was about the second death star from RTJ.
Bothan spies was Jedi, not Star Wars. :)
The Matrix
I thought it was tedious, self-satisfied nonsense. Some impressive visual effects and a bit of half-baked philosophy did not a good movie make. Everything about it seemed to be focused on being cool, rather than telling a decent story.
The matrix trilogy is an excellent story. And I cannot agree with you. I'm sure you don't wanna hear an essay about it though. Everything fits so well and it's full of significance. The ending of it was brilliant.
They fucked up with that cringe 4th movie though
Each to their own I guess. I enjoyed the ending, because that meant it was over ;-)
Do you mean just the first one or the trilogy as a whole?
I thought the first one stood up far far better on its own rather, many things left unsaid, rather than the rest which tried to fill out the story, and not too well
I mean the first one, as I've never seen the others :-)
I get that many people do like it, and that's all good, but I dislike how it often seems to be verboten to say even the slightest negative thing about the film.
The matrix is good precisely because they don't spoon feed everything to you.
Ferris Bueller's Day Off. What a stupidly overrated movie.
Into the Wild. So much potential in this story and general theme, but cinematically so overloaded with pathos and clichés. Overly scattered storytelling, restlessly leaping through space and time leaving no pause to connect with nature. The film has its strengths but a lot of people I know mentioned it as one of their favorites and couldn’t accept that I found it rather mediocre. (Didn’t hate it though. So sorry for being off-topic)
Literally every thor movie OTHER than Thor Ragnarok. They're just stale and full of lore that I don't care about, also the older ones are so dark I can't see anything. Ragnarok is SO funny to me and I was hoping Thor: Love and Thunder (the sequel) would be like that too but it was just too lore heavy for it to really latch onto me :(
Perhaps I just have the brain of a 12 year old that laughs at a guy getting hit in the head with a big rubber ball but like I'm in the movie for a good time, not note taking 😭Ragnarok and Guardians Of The Galaxy feels like fun short story books that's like 200 pages and has images while the others feel like the 4th book in a series that's like 500 pages each.
that being said I know hardly nothing about the marvel universe past basic stuff, so it's probably just me 😅
(also I don't know box offices, I just know what my peers opinions are on them)The Batman. Robert Pattinson is not that great of an actor and I still can’t unsee him as that stupid vampire. I know he doesn’t care of the role either, but it really ruins the flow trying to imagine him as Bruce Wayne but all I can see is that cringey vampire. And then it’s just another fucking Batman movie as if we haven’t already had 10 other ones played by 12 different actors already, not including the TV show adaptations and cartoons too. DC needs to seriously stick with one adaptation and go with that or make some about some of the lesser known comic characters.
I know it’s the one that is more closely aligned to the comics and he is actually being a detective. But it was so boring and uninteresting.
I remember sitting in the theater and I kept checking my watch for when it would be over. I was with other people and also was curious how it would end. But it kept dragging on much longer than it should have.
I’ve tried rewatching it since but I still can’t get into it.
The Batman Animated Series had both a Batman that's primarily a detective that's not that good a fighter and it was still engaging and entertaining without being so slow.
Then again that show was driven by a dream team from the voice actors to the music and art direction. Sad to say WB cut down on budget animation half way in and it really shows.
That movie is so slow and boring. Not terrible but can't touch the greatness of Nolan's trilogy. It has better colours, that's about it.
I always felt like The Batman was just a boring remake of The Crow.
I thought the Batman was meh, but I reckoned that was partly because I'm not into comics and their storytelling. I couldn't get into those Sin City movies mainly for that. And I enjoyed Chinatown, it's not a noir knock. Or maybe it is, I dunno.
I enjoyed Pattinson in Good Time and The Lighthouse. I think he did with the role what could be done. I also think it's difficult to come out from under a series like Twilight.
Kubrick's version of The Shining. Most likely, I would feel differently had I not read the novel first, but the reduction of the story to a Nicholson-show pisses me off to the point where I cannot enjoy it for what it is. I'd rather endure the over four hours of less brilliant screenplay of the 1997 version.
I hate Lord of the Rings. Well, I don't hate it. I just don't understand why people love it so much (not "why everyone loves it", but "when one person loves it they love it more than anything else"). I don't consider the story all that enjoyable, especially for the movies. I definitely don't consider it rewatchable.
Like, I'm the target demographic. I was 16 when the first one came out. I played DnD and Magic the Gathering. Warcraft 2 was one of my favorite games. Mages and Orcs are something I've always had in my life since as long as I can remember. My parents read the Hobbit to me and I had read fellowship and two towers at some point around 11 or 12. But the movies? They just don't connect with me. And I've never had anyone be able to put into words what it is that makes it click for them.
i read this and nobody wrote about Shutter Island? it was so so bad i hated it. I hated how people said it was so clever. it was one of the only movies that I spotted continuity errors and mistakes on the first watch in the theatre. and I do NOT believe those mistakes were intentional. the movie was so obvious is the "clever bits" that it tried to do that these mistakes were just not in the same lane. the movie tried to be an Aranovsky movie, but Scorcese is not that director.
The Substance
It looks like everyone involved felt like they were making something super deep and meta. The plot fully relies on every character making the worst and unrelatable choices imaginable. Insteadt of deconstructing the sexist, male gaze the camera revels in it and all that is accompanied by the most nervegrinding disney-esque sound design.
Nosferatu, the one that just came out, is very well done. It's also just Nosferatu: Again.
I was very bored watching the movie because it's the same story I've heard before many times. Those 2 hours and 12 minutes dragged hard.
I strongly agree with you OP, about Hollywood. They can't put actually ugly people in the movies so they try to act like someone is ugly when they are a complete stunner.
Another thing, in movies and TV shows they keep saying "you look tired", to actors who look competely normal and really good. No difference at all from their normal looks. And yet, they keep doing that shit. Once you think about this, you get annoyed every time it happens.
Ok my movies are:
Oppenheimer. Such a boring movie and everyone loved it.
Gravity. George Clooney is a charming clown in space, doesn't fit the story at all, and everyone liked it.
Probably more, but those are the absolute top rated ones that I don't agree with the public on.
I learned, back in the 1990s, how to spot a movie I won't like. So for me it's The Edge (about a thoroughly dislikable protagonist who we're supposed to admire just because he's played sympathetically by Anthony Hopkins) and Accidental Hero (aka Hero, a satire so brimming with sickly earnestness that it fails completely at satire).
My wife and I are huge fans of the Ready Player One book and we could not watch the movie. Literally stopped it. I tried a few more times to resume it but I kept having to stop. I finally finished it on my eight or ninth session.
if you think that movie was bad, you have no idea how painful it is for someone who loved the book.
I've heard the book it's even worse 🤷🏽♂️
I saw that comment and find it suspect. If they didn't like the book, it seems masochistic to watch the movie. If they didn't like the movie, why read the book? It has always been popular to hate on the book because it is definitely a Gen-X nostalgia circle jerk, regardless of what else it brings to the table.
My point was that if you hated the movie, you likely would have hated it triple if you liked the book.
The book is objectively trash. I didn't even finish it. The story is trash. The writing is trash. The characters are forgettable. Its just a bad, bad book.
Poor Things
I saw nothing but praise for this thing and have no idea why. None of the characters are relatable, their take on female empowerment is creepy and gross, and almost every male character is either evil or a simp. This is like a weird fourth wave feminist Frankenstein porno.
I did not like Chernobyl one bit. Well while it was good at some points, the scientific inaccuracy was just too much to bear.
That little cut in the shoe? Yeah, it’s impossible to die from that.
Blade Runner.
Maybe it was more impressive when it came out, but I watched it for the first time a few months ago and it was shockingly below my expectations for the reputation it has. Confusing plot, forgettable characters, a (very cool! yet) shallow, uninteresting setting.
I had heard that famous "tears in the rain" monologue some time before watching the movie and thought "wow, that was awesome. I can't imagine how much better it is with all the depth and context that the movie will add." Nah, it's from a character who we know basically nothing about and comes out of nowhere with no connection to any part of the story-- if anything, the context of the movie detracts from the cool monologue by turning it into a "what is this guy even talking about" moment.
Thematically it had potential with questioning the line between the humans and human-like robots, but they don't go anywhere interesting with it. When it's a theme that's been explored by everything from Ghost in the Shell to Fallout 4 to Asimov, I'm gonna need at least a molecule of interesting development to happen before my jaw drops.
2/10, not recommended.Diehard. What boring, macho-worshiping crap. Can't even watch it ironically.
The book was some good ass "turn your brain off slop". The movie tried its hardest to turn your brain off by force.
That movie was a mistake, but then it made a lot of money and that's all the goal was.
Didn't even watch Ready Player One the movie because the audiobook was just as cringey, and it was read by Wil Wheaton of all people. I like his work with boardgaming (tabletop), but something about his voice just so well represented the blatant fan service-ness of the whole thing, I hated every minute of it.
As for popular movies that I hated? I don't feel THAT strongly about it, but I was just kind of meh on Sonic 3. I wasn't even expecting a masterpiece, but it seems like there's been enough online hype that made it seem like it was going to be better than expected. It was just whatever. My kids liked it well enough, so I'm probably not the target audience anyways, I've played many of the Sonic games, but I'm not nostalgic or a Sonic nerd or anything. It was a sub-par movie with a handful of funny lines.
I don't know if it's a popular movie, but Ghibli's Ocean Waves is one of the worst movies I've watched recently. Nothing really happens and jumping between the protagonists memories and present time was confusing at first. But most importantly the main romance is incredibly unlikable. I don't know if it's just what 90ies pop-culture expected (young) women to be like, but looking at it now she resembles someone with serious psychological issues who compensates by being manipulative and cold.
Lord of the Rings.
I understand and respect the seminal role LotR (Book) has as a fantasy work. I have to, as a fantasy nerd myself.
I also believe that those three movies that everyone loves could be edited down into one and not much would be lost.
God DAMN do those films drag ON and ON and ON.
The books, too, drag on like Tolkien was being paid by the individual word. Thankfully with books I can set the pace at which things go.
Parasite.
It was a bad movie with no clear theme or message. It felt like it didn't know what it wanted to be comedy drama, thriller or horror.
I felt like shit walking out of the theater.
Mean girls.
ET, Ghost Busters, Back to The Future, Anything Marvel, DC apart from Joker. And many more.
