Lame Movies To Avoid

[Dr. Gonzo]

Definition of a stupid movie goer

Someone that goes to watch a KNOWN interpetation of a comic book, and complains how unrealistic and or unhistoric it is

Didcha see that Rhino?

My buddy only had one complaint. The Oracle's boobs weren't big enough

I've compared this 300, with the much older film called 300 Spartans, and my only dismay, was they didn't raid the Persian camp in the new version. I liked that part hehe.

Neither film was ruggedly "historical", but it beats the hysterical complaining from weird movie goers hehe.

The worst of the worst of the comic books done on film, is several magnitudes better than the worst of the **** passed off as dramatic interpretations of actual real history. Pearl Harbour for instance, I DO want to knee the director in the balls for that offensive tripe. And Windtalkers, hehehe every time I see an over priced copy of the "special edition" of that DVD I just laugh.

But then people have slagged off on Flags of our Fathers all because it wasn't 2 solid hours of marines getting butchered taking the island. Oh what a pity they focused on some of the drama of the event back in the states.
They claim Letters from Iwo Jima is better, and why, because we got to see that a few of the Japanese troops weren't suicidal fanatics? It's a good thing they didn't film anything back home in Japan, or they likely wouldn't like this film either.

Judgiung by this thread, I don't think most of you guys are actually aware of what a "bad" movie really looks like. Maybe that's something you should be thankful for. You need to be forced to watch The Trojan Women, and Kiss of the Spider Woman back to back perhaps.

Are you trying to say that if people don't like the same movie you do, they're idiots?

Aren't you the guy who like pre-teen anime? And you're judging other peoples taste in film?

Hehe?

 

[wrongway149]

But once you get past the comic book jazz, the movie is actually pretty good. Not Gladiator good, but Troy good (i.e., less depth, more fun).

One of the things I liked about Troy (something that counts as 'depth', I think), was that the fine line between pride and honor (A central theme of the Epic) was portrayed rather well, IMO. The characters weren't as well developed and conflicted as I would have liked (which really made Gladiator for me), but there is only so much one can do in two hours, I guess.

 

[Aries]

Are you trying to say that if people don't like the same movie you do, they're idiots?

Aren't you the guy who like pre-teen anime? And you're judging other peoples taste in film?

Hehe?

Simplistic answer, and the label "preteen anime" is your invention, so I hardly need worry about it.

No, my taste in film is not the deciding factor here, I am not actually espousing MY viewpoint, the films I slagged are generally speaking universally slagged. I am not alone in that respect.

You go right ahead though and continue to foist your idiotic interpretation of anime though, only makes you look as dumb as people claiming wargaming makes you a warmonger, and rolegaming a satanist.

Meanwhile, I will continue to enjoy what I enjoy, and won't really need worry that your puny narrow minded definition matters to anyone. And no, my saying that isn't some sort of worried defense, before you insist upon claiming it as so.

Sheesh, the sexually stunted stuck up intolerant religious nuts are just coming out of the wood work ain't they. Some people just can't handle the fact the world isn't always subject to their limited dogma.

Excuse me now, I'm obviously remiss in attending to raping little girls according to some morons.

 

[Dr Zaius]

One of the frequent complaints voiced by movie critics about Troy was that there were no characters the audience could identify with, and therefore no one to really root for. Nearly all the characters were people will deep ethical issues of one sort or another and this made it difficult to get emotionally invested when any of them died.

I know this was Ebert's complaint. When everyone died at the end, the audience just shrugged and said "Oh well."

Troy had all the elements of a good film, nevertheless it was destined to join that elite group of moives that somehow manage to be less than the sum of their parts.

 

[wrongway149]

One of the frequent complaints voiced by movie critics about Troy was that there were no characters the audience could identify with, and therefore no one to really root for. Nearly all the characters were people will deep ethical issues of one sort or another and this made it difficult to get emotionally invested when any of them died.

I know this was Ebert's complaint. When everyone died at the end, the audience just shrugged and said "Oh well."

Troy had all the elements of a good film, nevertheless it was destined to join that elite group of moives that somehow manage to be less than the sum of their parts.

Coulda been a good trilogy.....

 

[trauth116]

1492: A Conquest of Paradise (I think that was the title) - it was, not surprisingly - a Ridley Scott film, which I have figured out over the years are a real acquired taste. Gladiator was quirky, with a lot of Roman artillery at a field battle... struck me as weird, but then the explosions were not any less weird; the Praetorian Guards just had to be dressed in black -since apparently they had to be identified similarly to the SS (I guess) ... the movie worked for me as I like watching sword fighting flicks- even Star Wars Episode I....

Kingdom of Heaven has been knocked, and I think it probably winds up just being more of the Scott formula - I watched the Duelist last week, and to me it has some decent action and period costumes... but some people are turned off by American accents in French uniforms ... it didn't bother me- and I read that on some of the reviews on the site when I bought it. ...

Then you get to 1492, ironically Columbus is played by Gerard Depardieu, meaning that Columbus has a fairly heavy French accent (which again, didn't bother me) - I made the mistake of going to a theater to see this one - it had to have been in 1992 - I think I fell asleep in there... but I also think it was a really really long movie, and I think I had a cold ... but went anyway. The bad guys -or the evil Spaniards were dressed up like some cheap heavy metal type villains, etc -- I don't know how factual accurate that movies was or wasn't; at the time I had no idea who Ridley Scott was- but even then I assumed, based on the blatant need for "visual cues" for who the "bad guys" were supposed to be - meaning apparently the audience was too stupid to figure it out ... I don't know -- long, boring, not too accurate, and a presumption of audience stupidity.... yeh, sounds like a formula for a dog...

The guy got lucky with Gladiator, financially -and I would like to see more... but then again DvDs can ultimately get fairly inexpensive.

2 cents left at the door well 5 cents Australian - they don't do 1 cent pieces down here.

 

[Jazz]

I watched the Duelist last week, and to me it has some decent action and period costumes... but some people are turned off by American accents in French uniforms ... it didn't bother me- and I read that on some of the reviews on the site when I bought it. ...

.

I enjoyed the Duelists. A good period piece.

Another good mini-series (I know, not a exactly a *movie* and hence OT) is Rielly, Ace of Spies. A good period piece, and good old-fashioned 19th-early 20th century spy stuff. I believe is was made by the BBC? Or Greneda TV?

 

[Dr Zaius]

I don't watch movies like Gladiator to get a history lesson. In fact, anyone getting their history from Hollywood is probably looking in the wrong place for the wrong thing. Hollywood is in the entertainment business, and that means selling tickets not preparing kids for an exam.

Ridley Scott has made some terrific films in his career. Blade Runner, Alien, Gladiator, Black Hawk Down, and Black Rain are all very good films. He seems to do best with sci-fi, although Black Hawk Down was based on real events. He's also made some dogs like GI Jane.

Could Gladiator have been more historically accurate? Sure, but I don't know that it would have made for a better film. A director needs to know whether he is making an entertainment product or an educational product, and Scott seems to understand his place is in the realm of entertainment.

 

[Scott Tortorice]

One of the things I liked about Troy (something that counts as 'depth', I think), was that the fine line between pride and honor (A central theme of the Epic) was portrayed rather well, IMO. The characters weren't as well developed and conflicted as I would have liked (which really made Gladiator for me), but there is only so much one can do in two hours, I guess.

Well said! I completely agree. One thing I would add is that I thought Wolfgang Petersen did an excellent job taking a classical Greek tale and turning it into an American Western. Troy isn't big enough for the both of us!

Don:

One of the frequent complaints voiced by movie critics about Troy was that there were no characters the audience could identify with, and therefore no one to really root for. Nearly all the characters were people will deep ethical issues of one sort or another and this made it difficult to get emotionally invested when any of them died.

For myself, this is something I don't really see. I thought Eric Bana did an admirable job making Hektor a very sympathetic character.

I think Troy is going to wind up right along side 300: both are movies that are just fun to watch time and again. Not perfect films, but tales that admirably capture the imagination with the assistance of an extra helping of testosterone-fueled action.

 

[Avalon]

"What lies beneath" is one of the silliest films I've ever seen. Nice setting, (normally) good actors, but the story line... I was laughing so much at the end I really could have been thrown out of the cinema. Honestly, this guy came back to life just a few too many times.

 

[trauth116]

I didn't say that I didn't like the Duellists, Gladiator, Blackhawk Down (although being a Chicago hockey fan - it hits a little too close to home ), or Kingdom of Heaven.

I was saying that I really did not care for 1492: Conquest of Paradise, and made note of some seeming Ridley Scott idiosyncrasies. Sorry, I got too into stream of consciousness analytical mode.

Also I think for overall presumptuousness, my least favorite film personage is Oliver Stone.