You must log in or register to comment.
Valerian and the City of a Thousand Planets.
Absolute snoozefest with possibly the worst cast leads in modern history.
This was universally panned, so I don’t think you hit the prompt.
I respect your opinion and fully disagree.
Gravity.
Literally the only movie I’ve ever turned off part way through. Youd think that the producers would have, i don’t know, accurately depicted the force the movie is named after.
Did you think The Martian was similarly problematic?
Mind to elaborate?
Sure thing!
The scene where George Clooney dies is just stupid wrong. https://youtu.be/9La4T6GBsLA
Once Sandra catches his broken teather he comes to a complete stop. The line is taught, so effectively they’re both moving in roughly the same orbit as the station they’re attached to. That means they’re also moving at the same speed as the station. The net forces at that point for Clooney’s character are effectively zero (not exactly zero as there is still a bit of atmosphere causing drag at iss heights).
In real life, he’s “safe” in that scenario. In the movie, some magical force continues to be applied to him which ends up overpowering his grip, which was totally fine seconds before, and he falls to his death.
I dont know if the science gets better after that, never watched past it.
I see where you are coming from.
I would interpret that as still some residual force being there but dampened by the parachute lines (meaning a ruler would still see movement relative to the station) and thr amount of screen time couldnt show them drifting away from the station. This would be confirmed by the taut line and the “recoil” after Clooney let loose.
But the force for the amount of time shown is still too much to be logical.
Uwe Boll’s “Alone in the dark”
I rented that movie, and it was so bad that half way through it I turned it off. When I went back to the rental store they offered me my money back.
I said no. Because some lessons have to be painful in order to learn from them.
Super Mario Bros (1993) - it is just horrible, the only good thing about the movie is that it has a practical Yoshi puppet.
Braveheart
I haven’t watched it since Mel Gibson was revealed to be a giant POS but King Steven is by one if my favorite characters of all time.
Such a quotable movie
New Dune.
I was gonna ask why so I could provide a counter argument, but then the question specifically asks for a movie you will never be convinced is good. So I won’t bother lol.
I gave them an updoot for answering the question even though my personal opinion is that the two new Dune movies are top 10 movies of all time.
Nothing appeals to everyone, and I dislike a lot of critically acclaimed movies and other media because while they just don’t resonate with me. Top Gun Maverick was a mediocre retread of so many movies that came before it that while it was well executed from a technical perspective, I found it forgettable and don’t understand the hype.
BladeRunner - is like they wrote the screenplay based on the excellent source novel, then cut most of the ideas out, leaving only things that make no sense. Rick Deckard is a terrible detective, and only wins the final confrontation because Roy Batty… just gives up? I recently decided that my teenage self might have been wrong and rewatched it… nah, still terrible.
The directors cut/final cut does improve the plot line but admittedly the original movie is more vibes than substance. I think a lot of the “neo-tokyo” cyberpunk aesthetic we take for granted had tropes which originated in this film.
I’m pretty sure my recent rewatch was the director’s cut. The theatrical release must have been indecipherable. I hear what you’re saying about the cyberpunk aesthetic - the visuals were the best thing about this movie. I would thoroughly recommend scifi buffs reading Do Androids Dream of Electric Sheep by Phillip K. Dick - it’s an excellent (and not overly long) dystopian novella that has so many layers and themes (that Blade Runner largely omitted).
I think the best way to experience a blend between the two is either the graphic novel of “Do Androids Dream […]” or the Blade Runner PC adventure game, which fleshes out the story.
Oooh, there’s an Androids graphic novel?!
There is!
Anything that comes from Marvel. Overrated CGI tripe.
Since you phrased it ambiguously, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is amazing.
No Country For Old Men.
I was actually really enjoying the whole cat and mouse thing until the main fucking character died off-screen.
How does nobody ever talk about how shitty that “plot twist” is? It’s not clever. It’s not entertaining. It’s just bad storytelling. They don’t even show you a good shot of him to convey what actually happened. My girlfriend and I had to rewind it twice because it was so fucking stupid and made so little sense.
That’s actually how I feel about most of the Coen Brothers’ movies. The classical narrative structure exists for a reason. It’s a good framework for telling a story that makes sense.
Sometimes there’s a good artistic reason for diverting from that and telling the story in an unconventional way. Other times it’s just pretentious auteur garbage.
This might come off as pretensions, but you should trust the writers more. The movie, and book, are very well written, and if something doesn’t make sense, you should consider that you missed something.
I’ll say this, Llewelyn Moss is not the main character. The movie doesn’t start or end on him. He doesn’t change or evolve as a character. How he died isn’t the point.
It helps to focus on what Anton Chigurh said about rules, and what the Sheriff says about what he is willing to die for.
If you want me to just spell out the theme, I can do that to, but I think you would enjoy it more if you trust the movie.
Yeah, I’ve heard that before, about how Llewelyn isn’t the main character. Not trying to be rude to you, but that sounds like bullshit. He’s the character I’m rooting for. If the main character isn’t the character I’m rooting for, then that doesn’t sound like an enjoyable movie.
If you’re saying Chigurh is the main character: he doesn’t grow either.
If you’re saying Tommy Lee Jones is the main character (which I’ve heard before), then I’m going to strain my eyes from rolling them so hard. He doesn’t at any point interact with the plot. That’s not good writing.
I get the Coens are doing it differently. They’re not following the rules for how stories should be told. But different isn’t the same as good, and the way they told the story was needlessly confusing and pretentious.
I always find it useful to use food as a metaphor to describe how I feel about movies. If No Country For Old Men were a meal, it would be expertly seasoned and cooked, with one extra ingredient that doesn’t belong there and detracts from the whole thing, like if you made a perfect steak and drenched it in liquorice sauce.
And it would be served on a scrap of driftwood, or in a fishbowl, or on literally anything other than a plate. Everyone around me would be raving about the side dishes while I’m wondering why my meat tastes like shit.
You can include themes in a movie and still tell a coherent story. Try this: remove the theme. Is the movie any good? Is the plot entertaining, and does it make sense? No, it’d be really awful, and the inclusion of a theme doesn’t excuse that.
It is obvious that the themes of the movie were lost on you, and that is ok. It takes time to understand a movie, then you might not get it completely. I had to watch the film 3 times before I got it. You are far to confident in your judgement. If you did understand the film, you wouldn’t be say the Sheriff was disconnected from the plot. Everything in the movie was done with intent, and you didn’t pick up on that, which, again is ok. Just please DO NOT say that it wasn’t without purpose. You just failed to get it, and that happens all the time, especially to me. I hate to think about all the times I complain about a book or movie only for friends and colleagues to point out the obvious details I missed.
Not trying to be rude to you, but that sounds like bullshit.
In film, you can tell who the driving character is by seeing which character believes a lie and how they are forced change because of it. The Sheriff is the only character with an arc.
He’s the character I’m rooting for
I believe that this movie’s theme attacks you personally, and is having the intended effect. Once he dies, that should tip you off to the movie was about something else, and give you more context to the events of the film.
He doesn’t at any point interact with the plot
The Sheriff is the only character who changes.
They’re not following the rules for how stories should be told.
They DO follow the standard story structure.
and the way they told the story was needlessly confusing and pretentious.
It was confusing, because they challenge your assumptions and established predictable cliche. They do follow a normal story structure, just not normal cliche.
You can include themes in a movie and still tell a coherent story. Try this: remove the theme. Is the movie any good? Is the plot entertaining, and does it make sense? No, it’d be really awful, and the inclusion of a theme doesn’t excuse that.
I don’t know what you’re trying to say here, but theme is the most important element.
In short, you should be more open minded. You didn’t get the movie, that’s ok. I don’t think most video essays on youtube or reviewers get it either. But frankly, it’s extremely well written, and it would be a measure of bad judgement if you dismissed it as senseless. I’ll be clear, you didn’t get it. The movie is amazing, and it will take thought to understand it, and not everyone is in a position in their life to get it. But some day, I hope you will, and the first step is to believe it is possible that you didn’t get it, and to have trust in other people.
So often I hate mainstream movies, but this isn’t it. This movie doesn’t waste a single shot.
If it follows a standard story structure, then what was the climax?
I think I’m very open-minded about movies. For example in the mid-aughts I dragged my girlfriend to like five different Coen Brothers movies before I decided that I really just don’t like them. For another example, I even like mainstream movies.
Isn’t it possible I do understand it, and I just don’t like it? I’ve put enough thought into it. I see the themes. I don’t think those things outweigh the poor plot structure.
You can say No Country has a coherent plot, but it doesn’t in the sense I’m talking about.
Skimming through the movie, I would say about 1 hour 39 minutes into the movie is the climax. The Sheriff enters the hotel Llewelyn was murdered in, not knowing if Anton is there. In the previous scene the local cop told him that Anton showed up two nights in a row to the scene of the crime, and the Sheriff went in knowing this. Every choice comes with risk. He took his final chance and survived, but not in tact.
When the movie starts, the Sheriff talks admirably of old cop stories, before saying; “I always knew you had to be willing to die to even do this job, but I don’t want to push my chips forward and go out and meet something I don’t understand. A man would have to put his soul at hazard. He would have to say, ok. I’ll be part of this world.”
By the end, everyone told him times have changed, except Uncle Ellis who says it has always been this way. People die, the world is chaos. Everyone is one coin flip away from death, even Anton who suffers a car accident no fault of his own. People frequently mischaracterize Anton as the manifestation of death, but he’s not; he manifestation of chance. I picked up on this on a rewatched when he missed a shot on a still bird.
The Sheriff tells of the dream he had of his father going ahead, to prepare a fire for when he got there, before then waking up. To me, he has awoken to the truth; there is no justice, no happy endings, every has their time, and it’s a fools work to worry about it, but he’s now a lost man.
Rewatch the movie with this in mind, and I think you’ll enjoy it far more.
Do you not like any movies or shows where the main character is the bad guy? The Sopranos is my all time favorite show but I’ve never rooted for Tony. Breaking bad is great too but I still never rooted for Walter White.
You really never rooted for Walt? You didn’t hope that he’d make the right decision? You didn’t find a little guilty pleasure in the satisfaction of a bad deed done well?
If not, then why did you even watch the show?
I’m fine with rooting for a bad guy. But no, I don’t enjoy stories that only have irredeemable characters that I can’t root for.
Besides, Javier Bardem won the Oscar for Best Supporting Actor, which doesn’t usually go to main characters.
But ok, even if Llewelyn wasn’t the main character, he’s the central character of the plot. His death resolves the main storyline in the movie, and it happens off screen. That’s not good storytelling.
Personally no i never rooted for Walt. Don’t get me wrong I still enjoyed his character and the show overall but I figured him to be a pretty bad guy from the start. Sometimes I just enjoy a show even when all the main characters are bad people. It’s Always Sunny in Philadelphia is another example from a completely different genre. Most episodes end with those characters in a bad predicament based solely off of their poor actions, but that’s what makes it interesting to watch for me. I would feel like a shitty person of i rooted for them because they are incredibly shitty people. Another example i can think of is Narcos. That show was wildly popular, but there’s no way anyone can justify rooting for Pablo Escobar.
Anyway I guess that’s all beside the point of why you may not like No Country for Old Men. I haven’t seen that movie in a long time so I can’t recall many details. But I can still appreciate reading your thoughts on what makes for good storytelling. There’s really no right or wrong as far as I’m concerned, everyone has their preferences.
Did you read the book? I haven’t seen the movie or read the book, but I just read mcarthys the road and it was excellent, no country is next on my list. Hopefully the book can redeem it for you, but if it’s all a sour taste just read the road. It made me realize the point wasn’t an explanation about what did happen or what would happen, he was exploring the relationship of father and son through what was happening.
That’s probably a good point, but yeah, I don’t need to read a book to try to salvage a movie I didn’t like. There’s just no time for that.
The Dark Knight Rises. Not only is it a bad Batman movie, it oddly has a pro cop message. Also, I can’t take Bane seriously at all with that ridiculous voice.
All of Nolan’s Batman movies were heavily pro-cop. Watch TDK again: the day is saved by illegal surveillance, and Batman faces no consequences for using it.
That’s a valid point. I just remembered the pro-cop messaging feeling more overt in Rises, though it has been a while since I’ve seen them all.
I also have a soft spot for The Dark Knight because of Ledger’s performance.
Prior to Rises, most of the Gotham cops were depicted as extremely corrupt, though. Gordon was something of an exception, although even he looked the other way for his corrupt co-workers
This is how I felt about all the Nolan Batman movies, except it was Batman himself I couldn’t take seriously because of Bale’s ridiculous Cookie Monster voice. I think I burst out laughing in the theatre when I first heard it.
deleted by creator
Snowpiercer. It was highly rated on Rotten Tomatoes and from the poster I thought it stared U2’s The Edge, so I took a chance. That was the dumbest shit I’ve ever seen.
I suppose a movie in which they spend half of the time running through sleeper cars wouldn’t have conveyed the same message about classism.
Time to fight the army of goon in an empty car that seemingly serves no purpose than to host a large violent brawl, now it’s time to walk through the sleeper car for all the goons you fought, now it’s time to walk through the kitchen car for the goons, not it’s time to walk through the laundry car for the goons. Oh look, it’s a rich person party car, what a weird thing to have at all in any context, are they aware the world has ended? Now time to go through the partier’s sleeper car, then the partier’s kitchen car, then the partier’s laundry car…
Almost all of Will Ferrell’s movies, but especially Talladega Nights, a stupid movie about stupid people doing stupid things according to a stupid script. It’s one of two movies I’ve ever walked out on (the other being Splice, which is just gross). Stranger Than Fiction is the only good movie with Will Ferrell in a starring roll.
Edit: Splice not Split
Do you feel that way about Megamind, too?
I’ve never seen Megamind so I’ll reserve judgement.
Fair enough. It’s a fun movie in my opinion.
The only Will Ferrell movie I’ll watch again is Anchorman. Because yeah, in most cases the humor in a Will Ferrell movie is just screaming inappropriate things.
I’ve got a similar problem with Ben Stiller. He is by far the worst part of Night in the Museum. We get a bunch of cool and funny stuff happening only to have it slam to a halt so we can have some “Excuse me, Mister sir, but you, shouldn’t um.” May god damn Ben Stiller to work in an obscure plumbing fittings retailer followed by retirement in obscurity.
Stranger Than Fiction is by far Ferrell’s best work, because it’s the only film of his where he doesn’t act like an insufferable man-child.
I wish he would play it straight in more films. He’s actually a decent actor when he doesn’t act like a fucking idiot.
Such a wonderful, weird and heartfelt film. I absolutely love it.
Zoolander?
Zoolander is a great movie.
Mugatu isn’t a starring role and Will Ferrell plays the part well. If he was playing Zoolander the movie wouldn’t be anywhere near as good.
but why male models?
Are you serious? I just told you.
I like how david duchovny and ben stiller just rolled with his forgetting his lines. It is such an iconic moment in film history.
But that’s the point of Talladega Nights, no? It’s meant to be stupid, silly, and absurd. It’s not a drama, it’s a comedy about race car drivers.
Like if that’s your opinion, fine, im not trying to change your mind. But walking out on a comedy cause you thought it was too stupid is like closing a book because it had too many words.
IMO good comedy is more than stupid people acting silly, that’s an incredibly reductive view of the genre. Comedy should be clever and play to more than just the basest impulses. Even a comedy about stupid people can be smartly written. An example brought up in this thread is Zoolander. It’s silly and absurd, but it’s also smart, even though the characters are stupid. Talladega Nights is just stupid.
Mane I thought you were gonna say Office Space or like a West Anderson film as a “smart” comedy, not Zoolander lol. I wouldn’t necessarily call that high brow compared to Talladega Nights, but I haven’t seen it in quite some time so could be misremembering. I get what you’re saying though- a lot of the Will Ferrell comedies use really stupid visual laughs (or dead obvious lines) instead of anything that would require thinking a lil.
Office space is also good, Wes Anderson movies tend to be a little up their own ass for my taste. Zoolander works as a better comparison due to the intelligence level of the characters being about the same as Talladega Nights while the quality of the writing is much higher.
I was trying to think of one and was thinking I haven’t really experienced intensely hating a movie that other people loved. Then I saw someone comment Avatar… that was one of the most overhyped events I’ve ever experienced. I don’t care about the entire Marvel franchise, but I’m sure someone could convince me of their merits. No one’s going to make me see Avatar as anything but rehashing an old story with annoying 3D gimmicky visuals.
Gone With The Wind
Good Lord some of the answers in this thread. I first thought this was like an unpopular opinion community. Is this all just Edge Lords trying to say the most popular and well regarded movies they can?
Yeah it’s pretty funny. Most of these are just “it’s overrated” complaints, which is not the same as a film being iredeemably bad. Feels like a lot of these people just hate being exposed to opinions that differ from their own, so over time these overrated films have morphed into a 1/10 atrocity in their head despite none of their issues with them actually reflecting that level of hatred. You could definitely make a compelling argument for many of these films being good, and the only reason these people wouldn’t be convinced is because of their aforementioned personality flaw.
