Films that sucked, but everyone else liked...
- Thread starter Warped9
- Start date
Okay, as someone who just watched "Casablanca" for only the second time in my life (first time was about 8 or so years ago), I feel compelled to respond to some of the criticisms. I agree, it's not as flawless as many say it is. I remember the first time I watched it, like a big softie I adored it and thought it was perfect just because I felt the love story was so strong and I was in a really 'romantic mood'.
Watching it for a second time, I now feel that the love story still works beautifully, but there's a lot of other stuff in there that's kind of crappy that I conveniently ignored when I saw it for the first time. All the stuff about World War II and the suppression of freedom of the press by the Nazis going on during that period isn't all that interesting and I found myself getting frustrated during those parts, waiting for the movie to get back to the romance.
As for the end,
MF, I thought I was the only person on the Internet who had a problem with "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"! I thought it was good and even moving at times, but Jim Carrey's character bored me and I do not understand the cult following it has online. It shot way up the IMDB top 250 right away (and stayed there), was named top movie of the decade by The Onion A/V Club (usually a great place for intelligent and informative analysis and reporting on modern movies), and apparently inspired many to declare themselves huge fans of the characters and start websites about them.
While I didn't think it was horrible, I was very disappointed by it. Part of the reason is because I loved "Adaptation" so much. That movie deserved to win the best screenplay Oscar much more then what Charlie Kaufman wrote right after it, and it was more worthy of ESOTSM's cult following too. I think people embraced the wrong movie. I consider "Adaptation" one of the top 5 movies of the past decade. I was incredibly excited by what Kaufman would come up with next, and when I saw it, I felt really let down.
Watching it for a second time, I now feel that the love story still works beautifully, but there's a lot of other stuff in there that's kind of crappy that I conveniently ignored when I saw it for the first time. All the stuff about World War II and the suppression of freedom of the press by the Nazis going on during that period isn't all that interesting and I found myself getting frustrated during those parts, waiting for the movie to get back to the romance.
As for the end,
I still believe it works wonderfully and makes sense. I think the point was that Rick was about to get in a lot of potential trouble with the law (despite his new friendship) and he had to let her go not only because her going with Victor would help a worthy cause, but also because it would ensure her safety. It's a classic love story development of having to let the one you love go even though you want her to stay with you because that's the only way she can be happy and free. He sacrifices their love so that she can be okay, as staying with him, she'd be caught up in the same trouble he's in.
MF, I thought I was the only person on the Internet who had a problem with "Eternal Sunshine of the Spotless Mind"! I thought it was good and even moving at times, but Jim Carrey's character bored me and I do not understand the cult following it has online. It shot way up the IMDB top 250 right away (and stayed there), was named top movie of the decade by The Onion A/V Club (usually a great place for intelligent and informative analysis and reporting on modern movies), and apparently inspired many to declare themselves huge fans of the characters and start websites about them.
While I didn't think it was horrible, I was very disappointed by it. Part of the reason is because I loved "Adaptation" so much. That movie deserved to win the best screenplay Oscar much more then what Charlie Kaufman wrote right after it, and it was more worthy of ESOTSM's cult following too. I think people embraced the wrong movie. I consider "Adaptation" one of the top 5 movies of the past decade. I was incredibly excited by what Kaufman would come up with next, and when I saw it, I felt really let down.
Pearl Harbour.
If I remember correctly, it was popular back in the day. Boy, that film sucked so badly.... it was cheesy, overblown, historically impossible, corny.... the acting was awful and the actors had no chemistry with each other. Appalling. Waste of resources.
If I remember correctly, it was popular back in the day. Boy, that film sucked so badly.... it was cheesy, overblown, historically impossible, corny.... the acting was awful and the actors had no chemistry with each other. Appalling. Waste of resources.
Casablanca has one major point of nonsense: The ironclad letters of transit are from de Gaulle. You know, the leader of the Free French? Why is his signature sacrosanct to the Nazis and Vichy French? It'd be like having get-out-of-Guantanamo free cards provided you got bin Laden's signature, it's a staggering error.
Otherwise, well, you just don't fool around with another man's wife. It's the Right Thing to Do, you know. See also: Brief Encounter.
Children of Men was alright. There, I said it. It was alright. I don't want to see it a second time. Michael Caine was wasted in his role, it wasn't terribly interesting. Eh. 2006 was a great year for genre flicks 'cause of Pan's Labyrinth and A Scanner Darkly, and this wasn't bad really, but it's the other two I got on DVD.
Otherwise, well, you just don't fool around with another man's wife. It's the Right Thing to Do, you know. See also: Brief Encounter.
Children of Men was alright. There, I said it. It was alright. I don't want to see it a second time. Michael Caine was wasted in his role, it wasn't terribly interesting. Eh. 2006 was a great year for genre flicks 'cause of Pan's Labyrinth and A Scanner Darkly, and this wasn't bad really, but it's the other two I got on DVD.
See, I thought Pan's Labyrinth was the movie that was 'all right' that year. Advertising empahsized the expensive fantasy elements, but when I finally saw the film, the parts which focused on the reality of the Spanish civil war were much more interesting to me, and the fantasy sequences almost gratuitous.
But I thought Children of Men was enjoyable first due to the level of detail that was put into the world, though I like it for other reasons. I could make the same statement for Blade Runner, though, which you aren't big on either.
A Scanner Darkly was a great film, though. No argument there.
But I thought Children of Men was enjoyable first due to the level of detail that was put into the world, though I like it for other reasons. I could make the same statement for Blade Runner, though, which you aren't big on either.
A Scanner Darkly was a great film, though. No argument there.
Oddly enough, my big problem when I first bsaw Pan's Labyrinth was the civil war element. It just seemed a trifle overblown. It made more sense after listening to the commentary; the Civil War is actually as much of an exploration of fantasy archetypes as the fantastical world (the Phalangist foster father is the ogre in the real world; the ogre in the fantasy world is the Pale Man).
But yes, Children of Men did a pretty credible and creditable job of world-building, no argument there.
But yes, Children of Men did a pretty credible and creditable job of world-building, no argument there.
Children of Men was great. You guys are nuts.
That's why years later it's been swept under the rug and forgotten.
I personally think it was because everybody was still riding high on Sarah Michelle Gellar as "Buffy" thing.
If you had put a no name actress in the role and the film would have gone by unnoticed.
Pearl Harbor
It's a proper name. None of those British/Canadian extraneous U's thankyouverymuch.
That's why years later it's been swept under the rug and forgotten.
Clearly not as people are still talking about it.
Really? I remember "Pearl Harbor" being resoundly panned from the day of it's release onward.
Pearl Harbor
It's a proper name. None of those British/Canadian extraneous U's thankyouverymuch.
My bad. Sorry!
Oh, don't I remember correctly? Did it flop? I thought it was a commercial success, what with that Faith Hill song and all that.
Pearl Harbor
It's a proper name. None of those British/Canadian extraneous U's thankyouverymuch.
My bad. Sorry!
Oh, don't I remember correctly? Did it flop? I thought it was a commercial success, what with that Faith Hill song and all that.
I think it made it's money and then some, but I don't remember anyone saying it was any good.
It did have that outstanding F/X sequence though, which made it awesome to see in the theater.
[yt]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Sv1niwxQgoY[/yt]
Yes I remember, I watched it at the cinema.
So.... people think it sucked, but it made money. Well, anyway. I hated it. With a passion.
So.... people think it sucked, but it made money. Well, anyway. I hated it. With a passion.
If I wasted good hard earned money on it, you damn sure I'm gonna remember it.That's why years later it's been swept under the rug and forgotten.
Clearly not as people are still talking about it.
I still can't understand why people thought In a Scanner Darkly was such a great flick.
Word!
If it wasn't for Robert Downey Jr. and Winona's animated boobs, I would have fallen asleep.
Agree, I normally like rotoscoping but thought it was overused here. Towards the end it started to make me kind of nauseous. I see what they were trying to do- exaggerate the animation style to illustrate the mental breakdown of the main character. Still nauseating, however.
