ChiefsPlanet - Movies and TV Movies that don’t get respect??

Page 7 of 10

« First

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page

ChiefsPlanet (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/index.php)

- Media Center (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/forumdisplay.php?f=2)

- -

Movies that don’t get respect?? (https://chiefsplanet.com/BB/showthread.php?t=223986)

HC_Chief

03-03-2010 10:26 PM

American Psycho is another I'd like to submit.

Some of the best dark humor you will ever find. Perhaps "not respected" is a bit loose in this application, same with A Clockwork Orange: perhaps "underappreciated" is more accurate? Again, due to subject matter IMO.

Props to jidar for listing Fifth Element! That movie was awesome. I went in with very low expectations and walked out entertained and impressed. Hell, I still watch it and find it to be awesome; like a sort of campy Blade Runner in many aspects.

I, too, enjoyed Chronicles of Riddick. It wasn't great, but it had some cool moments. Not as good as Pitch Black IMO, and that may be why it is not getting much respect: people expected it to be a follow-up on par with it precursor; it simply isn't. That doesn't make it bad.

blaise

03-03-2010 10:36 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jidar (Post 6574310)

I read the book with the missing chapter and a forward by Burgess where hes goes on about how his vision was altered in the American printing of the book.
Frankly I think the book was improved by removing the last chapter (and that goes for the movie too). Burgess claims that the final chapter is required in order to show Alex changing and growing otherwise it's not truly a novel, but to me that section was so unbelievable and cliched I really thought it diluted the books impact by including it.

I don't see how it's cliche. I think the book and movie both work, with or without the final chapter, in different ways. I don't agree that the final chapter dilutes it, or that it was unbelievable. It just shows that despite all the attempts to change Alex's way of thinking what actually ends up changing him is time. I guess you could say it dilutes the impact of the novel if you wanted the impact of the novel to differ from what Burgess wanted, but the author decided what impact he wanted the book to have. If he wanted the impact to be just be about droogy sort-of ultraviolent behavior he would have cut it, but obviously he wanted the ending impact to be that people can just naturally grow beyond that sort of behavior.

007	03-04-2010 04:24 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by rockymtnchief (Post 6573209)

I hadn't seen it in quite a while and caught it again a month ago. I still liked it as much as the first time I saw it.

Another flick I like, but don't hear much about from others, is 'Frequency'. Probably because I always wonder what I would do if that kind of situation was presented to me. I'd be telling my dad to bet the house on Buster Douglas and invest it in Microsoft.

Frequency is my entry into this as well.

Fire Me Boy!

03-04-2010 06:10 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jidar (Post 6574288)

I'm generally annoyed by movie critics and can't ****ing stand movie snobs, because of that I could make a big list here.
but here are just a few:

Chronicles of Riddick
Euro Trip
The Fifth Element
The Matrix Sequels

All of these are movies that aren't perfect, but they're fun and enjoyable. The world (and Internet forums in particular) is full of people who love to hate on things like this in some vain attempt to appear cultured or discerning I guess. **** that shit, I'd rather go through life trying to find the good in things instead of pointing out the bad and in my experience enjoying movies like this doesn't make me enjoy the truly great movies any less.

If you don't emerge from having watched one of these movies and considered it a net positive, that doesn't make you smarter than other people. All it means is that you've mastered the unique gymnastics required to shit in your own mouth - to dilute your own joy, or the prospect of joy. I don't ever want to be smart enough to learn that trick, and I suspect I'm in no danger. I'm old enough now to settle for the merely good, which I recognize is grotesque and counter-revolutionary.

Haven't seen Chronicles or Euro, and I love the Fifth Element. But the 2nd Matrix was meh, the third was awful.

Fire Me Boy!

03-04-2010 06:38 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 6574349)

Umm..yes its bad. I saw it a few weeks ago on some random cable channel.

Its awful.

It can't be all bad - it's 67% on Rotten Tomatoes.

rad	03-04-2010 07:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by HC_Chief (Post 6572977)

Never seen it "praised to the skies". It is typically hidden in the "bizarre" section in video stores. When referring to Kubrick, it's typically 2001 (technically amzing but boring) or that godawful tom Cruise/Kidman abortion.

It is labeled as a "cult classic" by most. That puts it in the same category as Evil Dead series. To the majority of typical movie watchers, my bet is it doesn't even rank in the top 100.

To me, that means it is not receiving the respect it deserves. The most probable cause is the content; it is too "icky" and "graphic" and "horrifying" for your run of the mill mouthbreathers. ;)

It's #47

http://www.imdb.com/chart/top?tt0066921

#46 here

AFI
Recognition:

100 YEARS…100 MOVIES #46
100 YEARS…100 THRILLS #21
100 YEARS…100 HEROES & VILLAINS #12
100 YEARS…100 MOVIES – 10TH ANNIVERSARY EDITION #70

ChiefJustice

03-04-2010 07:04 AM

Contact

From the Carl Sagan novel....I know this movie has some hokie parts,but,I love this movie.Jodie Foster was great and seeing John Hurt and Tom Skerrit together again is nice.

Taps

Kids take over a military school after they hear it will be closed down.George C. Scott,Sean Penn,Timothy Hutton...and,Tom Cruise,with his best line..."It's beautiful man....it's ****ing beautiful"

Miller's Crossing

I think this was like the 3rd of the Cohen brother's movies.Gabriel Byrne is the man and Albert Finney is still an artist with a Thompson.A highly underrated movie.

patteeu

03-04-2010 07:40 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy! (Post 6575168)

It can't be all bad - it's 67% on Rotten Tomatoes.

Then how can you say it doesn't get the respect it deserves? In my book, at 67% it's highly overrated. But of course, you're entitled to your opinion. :)

Fire Me Boy!

03-04-2010 08:25 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by patteeu (Post 6575201)

Then how can you say it doesn't get the respect it deserves? In my book, at 67% it's highly overrated. But of course, you're entitled to your opinion. :)

It gets dogged ALL the time. I was frankly surprised at the RT rating.

Deberg_1990

03-04-2010 08:41 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Fire Me Boy! (Post 6575247)

It gets dogged ALL the time. I was frankly surprised at the RT rating.

Actually, its professionally made....looks good, etc.....

Its biggest crime is that its boring and forgettable. IMO the worst kind of movie.

Fire Me Boy!

03-04-2010 08:44 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Deberg_1990 (Post 6575266)

Actually, its professionally made....looks good, etc.....

Its biggest crime is that its boring and forgettable. IMO the worst kind of movie.

:eek:

"Boring" and "forgettable"? Pacino got an Oscar nod for that performance!

Frazod

03-04-2010 09:28 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ChiefJustice (Post 6575178)

I like all three of these movies a lot, especially Miller's Crossing. Far and away the best thing the Coens have ever done, and YES THAT INCLUDES THAT STEAMING PILE OF CRAP NO COUNTRY FOR OLD MEN.

blaise

03-04-2010 09:35 AM

I'd like to nominate No Country for Old Men.

Frazod

03-04-2010 09:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by blaise (Post 6575358)

I'd like to nominate No Country for Old Men.

Good call. It certainly doesn't get any respect from me. :mad:

raybec 4

03-04-2010 10:14 AM

Man on Fire
Payback
True Romance

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:31 AM.

Page 7 of 10

« First

Show 80 post(s) from this thread on one page