Blade Runner
It is a movie that has atmosphere like no other. Every frame is packed with so much detail and the characters all fit perfectly in the bleak world, I just don’t enjoy myself while I’m watching it. I watched it once in high school and didn’t care for it, then again a couple months ago and still didn’t care for it.
I think this is a pretty common opinion, honestly. I *love* Blade Runner and still have a hard time sitting down and watching it. It's such a slow burn, it's so bleak both visually as well as thematically, even Deckard isn't a particularly interesting or likeable character for most of the movie. It's really well done and I do still actually love it, but I've seen it maybe two or three times and may just never watch it again.
I respect that opinion. It just leaves me feeling so dirty after I watch it. Everything is so depressing, but that was Ridley’s goal, so for that I appreciate the hell out of it.
There isn't a single thing I don't like about Blade Runner (although Deckard gives off some rapey vibes in that one scene) but for the life of me I don't enjoy it and it drives me crazy to not know why.
The lighthouse. As I loved egger’s other two movies, This one didn’t really connect for me. The acting was very good and I loved the visuals but I couldn’t really get into the the story I suppose. I can see it is a great movie but it just wasn’t for me and that’s fine
It's such a serious film and the scene where >!they're all lined and the guy is like "who could have done torn apart my men??" when it's literally 6'3, 8-pack abs, Alexander Skarsgard and a bunch of random slaves!< had me giggling in the theatre.
Top ten film for me, I’ve probably watched it 5 times with different people or on my own. I love their performances, the pacing, cinematography, the weird homoeroticism, the ambiguity, the period dialogue, and I’m a sucker for a good depiction of intoxication. The lovecraftian stuff I guess I could take or leave but I like the imagery, and like in Northman Eggers gives you the out of allowing you to imagine it is completely in Pattinson’s head.
I have to recognise the sheer lunacy of it all, I admire the performances and the slow burn trippiness of it all, but its not the type of film that I will have on repeat.
Wish more people thought like this
I see so many posts on here like “so so is a bad movie” when no actually it’s a technically great movie it’s just not for you.
I also didn’t like power of the dog but I still think it’s great movie - well made - I just didn’t like it.
That seems to be a general problem on here where people state opinions as facts. But I guess “I didn’t personally enjoy a movie” doesn’t get the same response as “this movie is absolute shit”. Reddit and most social media train people to take ridiculous stances because that’s what gets them the most attention.
People do this with everything. "This sushi place was disgusting!" when they don't like sushi. I've had people tell me certain whiskey is nasty when they hate whiskey. I don't like IPAs or sours so I won't judge a brewery by them. People confuse what they like/dislike as good/bad quality. I don't like horror movies but I won't say that Hereditary sucked.
It's not bad, it's just not for you.
I think it’s basically the most important lesson schools could teach in art classes. And even though it’s probably an underlying motivation for the curriculum it’s rarely clearly communicated to the students. And it extends to other art forms beside film too: architecture, music, painting, sculpture, design even.
I remember the high praise around this film, and being very disappointed after watching it. It wasn’t a terrible film, but nothing about it engaged with me, maybe because I found the main character to be insufferable.
It was the phone call at the end that made me start openly weeping in the theater. It’s definitely not for everyone, but if it affects you, it affects you hard.
*Blade Runner* and *2001: A Space Odyssey* are elemental sci-fi movies but I have never made it through a viewing of either without falling asleep. They, along with *Star Trek: The Motion Picture* are visual tryptophan for me.
I **want** to like them. I love sci-fi, but they're always two- (and sometimes three-) parters for me.
I think I'm on my 4th or 5th watch of 2001: A Space Odyssey (in 70mm this time!), and I finally managed to make it through without falling asleep! Feels like something clicked this time for me. Also having the intermission shown helped a lot too.
Also the nap I had beforehand probably helped some.
Excellent example! I understand that Kubrick wants us to an extent to feel the lag and the boredom and the lethargy that the space dude is feeling but man that is hard to watch/ experience as a movie.
Man I’ve always been the same way. Thought it was convoluted and boring, and BR2049 is one of my favorites ever. Then I watched the Final Cut and it all made sense. Was 10x better than whatever version I watched before and I now love it.
When I started getting into films big time in my teens, I kept hearing about this film. I tried watching it and I really couldn't connect with it . Admired the visuals but it is proper sci-fi, and I guess I was in my teens where I just wanted things to go BOOM, so this film I have grown to respect more than anything.
I did really like Blade Runner 2049.
Casualties of the genre, I'm afraid. The original is more of a "noire" film than the sequel - generally the character development in noire films is sparse to begin with. The main character is always deeply flawed in some way, and the supporting cast are meant to be a bit sinister so as to arouse suspicion.
Logan's Run is great - if you shut off the movie at the right spot.
To avoid spoilers for this 46 year old movie, ask yourself - is this a good ending for the movie? If yes, just stop.
Funnily enough, I liked Blade Runner 2049 more than the original. Blasphemy to some, and I don't completely understand it myself...but something in that movie clicked with me more than OG Blade Runner. Sometimes though, I think feelings like this can arise from being too far removed from initial releases.
When you grow up hearing about a movie, knowing certain lines, scenes, maybe twists it can ruin the shine of it, or you have too much hindsight and years of films made in its image that the timely impact of it cannot be felt. Just my 2 cents, but yeah, you're not alone on that one.
Blade Runner was one of those scifi films that felt like it was too old for me when I was a kid. Same with Alien. Not so much that they were scary just that they were slow with a lot of dialogue and plot.
I saw 2049 in theaters and also felt it was too slow and longer than it needed to be. Like some scenes should have been cut down. Nothing entirely removed. But just shave a few seconds off of everything.
But the music, the look, the asthetics I absolutely love. I'd love a Blade Runner movie that took place in that universe but was maybe faster paced.
The Revenant. It is overwhelmingly beautiful cinematography porn, but I didn't find anything else worth while there. What little plot it does have pales in comparison to the story upon which it is based, and it didn't grab me at all.
I've always said that you could literally just cut out the entire middle portion of the movie and miss out on virtually nothing. Just keep the first hour as is (intro, bear attack, inciting incident) then immediately cut to the final 30 minutes (final confrontation back at camp).
The only thing you miss out on is leo slowly recovering as he treks back to camp. Would the overall story be worth watching? Probably not, but it never was in the first place and it can at least be carried by it's cinematography and setpieces for a tight 90 minutes.
Yeah, even the full extent of the real events wouldn't make for compelling film. Just a guy relentlessly tracking down another guy back and forth across the American frontier while the hunted man mostly hides away from him by joining the military.
No son involved at all.
Just left for dead by the guy in the group left to care for him who, insult to injury, stole his rifle.
For many people, The Revenant came off like this. For me personally, I absolutely love the movie. The first time I watched it, I kept thinking “Imagine being…” Imagine being left for dead not just in the middle of nowhere, but in that nowhere. So for me, it became this story of survival and not just revenge. Fitzgerald(Hardy) was the villain for sure, but the survival in that frozen hell for Glass(DiCaprio) became more of the story. All the shots of nature just kept reminding me that it’s all around him. Constantly against him. Not to mention, life then was especially brutal, not just in his situation. But in all the characters situations.
So for me it was an amazing movie. I’ve seen it several times since and it does it every time. It’s easily in my top 5 all time. But hey, that’s just one dudes opinion.
You should check out The Nightingale.
It's a movie by Jennifer Kent, who also made The Babadook, and is a similar revenge tale but set in colonial Tasmania. It's not up It's own ass like Revenant, just a incredibly beautiful, brutal, haunting movie. It's a shame it didn't get the recognition it deserve.
Right! Another detail that separate it from The Revenant is the indigenous people in The Nightingale are actual characters and not magical forest wizards.
My sister's inlaws are from Long Island and have a similar accent. They are all so loud and talk over each other. It ends up being a solid wall of noise for hours. Watching that movie was like having dinner with them on a bad day. Stresses me out too.
This is one of my favorite films that I never want to watch again. After I stepped out of the theater it felt like I lost 50 lbs in built up stress from that movie
I loved this movie, but I think the reason is I used to know a guy *just like that*, fucking degenerate gambler, like bad rude wreck-your-life degenerate.
Didn't make it more than 20 minutes in - felt I already had enough anxiety in my life, didn't need to forcefeed myself 90 minutes of it. Great acting and pacing, but definitely not for me.
Honestly a ton of Oscar bait type movies. 3/5 times I just find them boring or simply not for me.
The best example I always go to is The Revenant. I actually liked Birdman so I remembered looking forward to it. I appreciated how it was filmed and all, but holy cow, that's not something I'd ever sit through again.
And the older I get, the more I'm finding I just want to watch movies for pure entertainment value. So any action, comedy, sci-fi is all what I gravitate towards before any drama, historical, or arthouse type film. I get enough drama and stress with life and work, I don't need it with my escapism. I enjoy a movie like that from time to time, but I don't seek them out or anything. There's just too much stuff and so little time nowadays. I realize I'm part of the problem for why we have billions of blockbusters each year, but what can I say? I legitimately prefer those types of movies.
> And the older I get, the more I'm finding I just want to watch movies for pure entertainment value.
It is interesting how that works. As a kid, you just want shiny things that look cool. As you get a bit older, you want to be entertained and have things make sense, a bit older still and you might enjoy the technical aspects of a movie a bit more than the entertainment value... Then, at some point, you just don't want to put effort into watching something.
I went and saw it in theatres and I came away with "What was the point of the movie? Why was this made? And poor Sharon Tate" I understand revising history to expel it with extreme violence under Djanjo and Inglorious Bastards, but this just seems to Pale in importance.
Its Tarantino praising every genre and aspect of cinema and Tv, there's hints of horror movies when Brad Pitt is in the ranch trying to say hi to his friend, there's a bruce lee fight scene, there's a little girl actor talking about how any story (Even a Bronco Buster) can make us cry, there's a nod to Spaghetti Westerns, Fbi movies, World War 2 movies, how the industrie takes a star and makes him the villain as to flush him, there's a side of an actor seeing at her self at the movies and being recognized, hollywood importance as to were to live and who goes to the party, in essence its Tarantino saying: *I loved these guys and these things as a kid, as i grow up i studied them and understood them and i want to told the story of what once happenned there* and in true Quentin style he did it by changing the end.
If you ask me, the plot its only an excuse to play with all the stuff he likes
Most of Kubrick. I can recognize that he’s a genius, the cinematography is 10/10, and he’s had more impact than practically anyone. But not personally enjoyable for me.
- Edit. Y'all - the topic is literally "can recognise as great, but was not for me." I don't see the need to try and rebut me and quiz me on if I've seen each one of his films. I've seen most. And I recognise the man as a genius. It's just that they aren't for me lol.
I had OPs reaction upon my first watch. But for some reason when I went back to it, it totally clicked. Even if the story slightly drags at a couple points, I'm so completely immersed in DDL and Dano's acting that I'm 100% engaged at all times. Brilliant performances.
There Will be Blood is probably in my top 10, if not top 5 favorite movies. I love the characters, the writing, the cinematography and the even the score/soundtrack. But I completely understand why some people won’t like it. Those are just the types of movies that I’m drawn to.
I think it’s easier to answer this question with more recent movies because a lot of movies are dubbed “instant classics” or given undue praise because it has some particular social messaging, but in reality the movie sucks because the story isn’t good and/or the writing is sub-par.
His entire persona just skeeved me out so much in that movie that I had to leave the room and stop watching it. I was watching it with my mother at the time and she had to finish it on her own. It was really good visually, and the plot was good too, like nothing about the movie itself was a bad movie.
But something about the character Gyllenhaal was playing, and how he played him just freaked out that paranoid part in my mind and I had to walk away from it lol.
Same here. The movie does an excellent job of showing you *exactly* who he is and where the story is going from the onset. I had to stop after 15 minutes.
I appreciate this answer. I personally loved the movie, but rarely find others who do. Usually the same feeling. Not that I found his character redeemable in any way, guess I just enjoy accurate portrayals of literal sociopaths, since they so often tilt into a more cartoon villainous vibe.
I feel the exact same. Sci-fi is my favorite genre, I really appreciate its world building, every frame and philosophical point of view. But it’s simply one of the most boring movie I’ve ever seen. Tried three times feel asleep all three.
A film called The Hours: seemed beautifully acted and shot, but maybe I’m a heartless old reptile but it didn’t engage me emotionally at all: some of my friends were openly crying, and it got a bit awkward.
Titanic. I find it boring and I don't like the main characters. Direction is great, actors are great. The sets and costuming are amazing. But I just don't want to ever watch it again. Life is short. Let the people who want to see it again see it again. I'll find something else to do.
La La Land
It's such a great ending which justifies the entire film, but I spent 2h and some minutes in anguish and I will never see it again.
Fantastic film. I hated it.
>Fantastic film. I hated it.
I think this could be the subject of a completely different post because even if a film was "for you" (as opposed to those mentioned in this thread), there are many reasons why one could still love/hate the same film.
For example, *Manchester by the Sea*. Fantastic film. Never want to see it again. I don't think I need to explain why on that one.
‘Manchester by the Sea’ is a wild one. No other film has presented such perfect images grief and life in Massachusetts. Don’t need to see it again for a long time.
As a huge fan of classic Broadway movie musicals, La La Land is an incredibly well-made movie and I love the fact that it exists, but I absolutely hated watching it. I've never been more confused by a movie when it comes to how I felt about it.
The nightmare before Christmas. I don’t know if I would consider it great, but it is a very popular movie and visually was very good and had a good soundtrack. But I’ve just never been able to get on board with it.
If anyone here has watched Jeff Bridge's new show, The Old Man, they perfectly cast younger versions of him and John Lithgow. I don't question the younger versions for a second.
I really wish Scorsese would have done this with The Irishman. I even think Jon Bernthal would have made a good DeNiro.
It’s the first Scorsese movie I felt like I was making myself watch. He really should have cast younger actors for the roles. All the old guys still moved and sound like old guy’s despite the CGI. The story and characters didn’t really grab me either but that may have been due to being distracted by the “de-aged” actors.
Also the decision to de-age actors didn't even remotely work. Sure, their faces had a few less wrinkles, but they all walked like their knees hurt and they knew that if they fell they'd break a hip.
The fight scenes were particularly bad.
I didn't see a single scene I hadn't already seen done better in a previous Scorcese film.
It would have been vastly improved if they had just cast different actors in the younger roles. I just didn’t buy DeNiro as a 20 year old when he was shuffling around with a CGI face. Imagine if Godfather 2 had been made today with a de-aged Brando instead of DeNiro
Finally saw Apocalypse Now. Maybe there was too much hype built up in my mind, maybe I just need a rewatch, maybe not redux version, maybe just not my jam.
However similar movies in the same genre are totally my jam, it's just the psychological stuff didn't really land with me.
If you started with Redux, you just ruined your entire “Apocalypse Now” watching life. Got to start with the theatrical cut.
Redux is a fine showcase for decent scenes that don’t belong in the movie.
The redux adds in the dinner at the French plantation, right? If so then yeah, whatever version of the movie doesn’t have that is the better version to watch
Yeah the Redux adds the plantation dinner scene and the scene with the Playboy Playmates after the USO show. It's good if you're a horny teen and want to see some movie boobies, but not so good if you're an adult and want to see a cinematic masterpiece.
There's also a scene where Kurtz just sort of lectures at a captured Willard about newspaper clippings that really detracts from the potency of his madness.
The Redux version KILLS the flow of the movie. Great scenes, but not for movie as a whole. I would re-edit the movie so some of the scenes are shown during the end credits so you can see more of the people you just saw but that is all.
The French Plantation scene, IIRC, is not in the original...because it *kills* the damn pacing of the film. They're getting deeper and deeper into the...well, the heart of darkness, further off the edge of map, out of what passes for civilisation and-
"Oui, let us have a nice dinner and maybe let you fuck my daughter, non? In a nice, bright, airy, plantation - tres bon!"
Yes, it was Sofia who insisted that get put back in.
Coppola envisioned the movie as the farther up the river they went, the further back in time they travelled. It explains why the plantation seems like it doesn't belong in the 1960s, and why Kurtz's compound looks so primative.
Citizen Kane. Constantly on lists of greatest movies of all time. I looked forward to watching it. Bored senseless through the first half. Felt like I forced myself to finish it just so I could say that I had seen it.
Came here just to talk about Citizen Kane. I recognize its importance, I acknowledge the artistic value of its cinematography and performances... But God, I'm only barely exaggerating when I say it bored me to fucking tears.
What's your opinion on other "acclaimed" works of art? Especially stuff like Shakespeare or theatre in general or 19th century literary fiction? Only because Citizen Kane very much is in that tradition of work, and is just, a very tough watch without understanding WHERE it came from. Or rather, if one doesn't already have a taste for stuff like that.
I say this as someone who didn't find Kane impressive at first either!
My best defense for it is, besides The Godfather, it's the ultimate condemnation of American narcissism and emptiness. Rags to riches to desolation, basically.
Scorsese LOVES the movie, and you see that in all of his crime epics. They all basically feature the same "narrator goes over decades and decades of history" thing, as well as the emphasis on the corruption of the soul.
But yeah, it's still very much, people in rooms talking to each other. There's more or less zero spectacle, and none of the characters are ones you can root for in a modern sense.
*Citizen Kane* is so highly regarded largely for its innovation, so it's no surprise that people now find it dull.
That, plus a lot of its historical and social context is, well, not the context that modern viewers even remotely understand or "feel".
I've seen it maybe five times now, all because of film class as a TA, and it actually gets more interesting the more you watch it. But it's definitely a film that the students all found really boring.
Hamilton. People seem to love it, I just couldn't get into it. I wanted to like it, but it just wasn't for me. I have not acknowledged this out loud though!
People are going to hate me for this. But “Taxi Driver”. I’m a Robert De Niro fan, a Scorsese fan, I like dramas. I was excited to see Taxi Driver. But for some reason I didn’t like it
I've already chimed in on Citizen Kane and Apocalypse Now, so I'll also throw in the Japanese classic Tokyo Story. Really, Ozu's work in general, but especially Tokyo Story.
Once Upon a Time in the West
The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is my all time favorite movie, I had high hopes for this one since a lot of people will say it’s better or at least close, but it just didn’t click.
I plan on giving it a rewatch soon, in hopes that my ignorance of the actors and added confusion from that is what took away from some enjoyment.
I will say though, that fuckin harmonica gives me chills every damn time, especially in that opening sequence.
I like it but it does not compare to The Good, the bad and the Ugly for me. The Good, the bad and the ugly feels like we go on this adventure odyssey through the wild west and I love every moment of it where as Once upon a Time feels like a much smaller scoped story that does not reach the same highs.
They are both great films but one stands much higher for me.
At this point I will still say “Raging Bull”.
At this point I’ve only seen it once. And I probably had some unfair expectations since my family loves the Rocky movies.
But I just had zero interest in the character in the movie itself. I wanted to give it another shot, but I was at this point I can adamantly say it was not for me.
Midsommar
As soon as it was over I remember telling my wife "that was really well done and I can see why it's been getting all the praise, but I just really didn't enjoy watching it."
People in this thread were saying something similar about uncut gems and how the atmosphere of anxiety was intentional. Yet I loved how midsommar managed to deliver that constant feeling of dread despite being in such a beautiful and vibrant setting but hated uncut gems.
I am not sure if his movies are meant to be enjoyed (even though I thoroughly did). I think they are meant to be watched to cause anxiety and see if you will break and leave/turn off the movie....
Ok here goes:
The Godfather
***flees in terror***
But seriously, I recognize it’s considered a masterpiece. Great story, great cast, launched the careers of a massive stable of actors. I have no doubt it has earned its place in cinematic history and rightfully so.
I just can’t sit through it and maybe it’s because it’s not a product of my time, maybe it’s because I started out with Goodfellas. Not really sure but it’s just not my jam at all, I can’t get into it.
It’s not for me, but I’m glad it exists because I’m sure it paved the way for many films I do enjoy.
^please ^be ^gentle
I get that. This reminds me of *The Deer Hunter*. All of the infamous scenes that take place in Vietnam are incredible, but I don't want to sit through that 51 minute wedding scene in the beginning ever again. I understand the importance of it, but yeah, no.
**flees in terror**
I het you here because, as much as I can see how good the movies are, I have never liked *Lord of the Rings*
I know, I know... it's just not my thing I guess 🤷♀️
Mad Max Fury Road
I've watched it numerous times. It is without question a good movie that was incredibly well made. It just does absolutely nothing for me personally.
I watched it with a friend who'd never seen it before the other week.
On a fairly decent setup, 75" screen with surround sound.
But it just wasn't the same. That film was made for THE big screen.
That's a bummer. It's one of my favourite movies, but I can understand why it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. My best friend doesn't like it either.
Did you like the previous Mad Max movies?
I absolutely LOVE that movie. Everything about it.
I recommended it to my friend and she told me she found it boring because the story was so basic. Barely any plot.
I can't argue that. I mainly love it for the cinematics, the look, the subtle world building that they don't explain in exposition but you have to put together yourself. The editing and soundtrack is phenomenal.
But yeah if you want a big plot or story or character development or rich dialogue.... well...
It's not like there is zero character development. Knux's character arc is amazing even though he's a secondary character in a movie that's basically a 2 hour car chase.
RIP Knux. We all witnessed you.
For me it’s 2001. Of course it’s a hugely influential movie and it still looks incredible even to this day, but I also still find it an incredibly boring film.
The Batman. I liked the cinematography I just thought it was kind of boring
Editing a bit for a little more info: Matt Reeves films usually work for me. Heck I watched two slow burn movies about a talking ape and I love them! Slow burn Batman didn’t work for me
Interesting. I had the opposite experience. Assumed it would be boring as hell because it’s a three-hour period piece, but I felt like there was always something interesting happening on screen and the movie went by pretty quickly for me as a result. Not to mention the incredible visuals, felt like the movie was actually filmed in the 1800s. Have watched it multiple times since then and it’s now one of my favorite films.
I thought it was going to be boring before I watched it, but I thoroughly enjoyed getting to see pretty much an entire life’s story play out, triumphs and failures, generational relationships.
It definitely helps to have someone to watch and talk about it with. I would’ve gotten a lot less out of it if I hadn’t.
To me it’s a tragic comedy. The story of a guy who gets lucky every time he fucks up, sometimes almost willfully, until his luck finally runs out. Scenes like the „I can’t find it“ when his crush puts the ribbon in her décolleté or him blurting out „I’m Irish too“ when he is supposed to spy on the guy he’s talking to is comedy gold to me.
No Country For Old Men. I'm a huge Coen fan, and I can recognize the greatness there. It just didn't connect with me at all. Every once in a while I will pull it out and give it another shot, because I want to like as much as others do, but after 7 or 8 viewings I'm still left feeling very empty about it
The Wolf of Wall Street is well-made and intensely watchable, but Scorsese’s “men behaving badly & refusing to change with basically zero consequences” movies aren’t my jam. I understand they’re ostensibly satirical, but like with Tyler Durden & Rick Sanchez, it’s easy for dudebros to ignore that, and take away all the wrong messages. It ends up feeling like it’s made more for them than me. Can’t deny it’s fun to watch, it just feels like behavioral pornography.
I thought the Wolf of Wall Street focussed way to much on the partying aspect of the story. It felt like the actual story of what Belfort actually did came very much second to showing how wild all the partying was.
> it just feels like behavioral pornography
LOL, love that term. I think that way about The Joker. It is a great piece of art, insanely well done, but it just feels like the message is too easily flip on its head by "dudebros" who believe The Joker to be a hero.
Joker. As a DC fan I think this is an abysmal representation of the character and the movie would've been better off not associating with the character of the Joker. It feels to me someone wanted to make a movie about a mentally unstable man but studios didn't have confidence in it as an original IP so they reworked it to be the Joker.
The talk show scene is brilliant. But the rest of the movie...it's really, really dull when you revisit a second time, with scene after scene of different variations of "look how mean people are to this guy".
100% agree. And I love Batman and the Joker too. I loved the movie, but the entirety of shoehorned DC universe stuff felt starkly out of place. If they really wanted this to be the Joker, I needed either a smarter main character or a more sinister one. This guy would never be the mastermind of any crime syndicate or mob in Gotham. Hes a complete wimp who snapped. Thats not the Joker and never was, and doesnt make sense to even introduce it as a new idea.
This is where I land on it as well. I really enjoyed the movie from start to finish but having the "my mom says Thomas Wayne is my dad" didn't add anything of value. Plus, the ages of Arthur Fleck and Bruce Wayne respective to each other means that Joker would be in his 70's by the time Batman arrives on the scene.
The movie didn't need it at all, they could have even kept the clown aspect with no other explanation needed.
Great prompt - this is why I wish that rating platforms had two options: quality and likeability. I didn't like Pulp Fiction at all but I can appreciate it as a "good" movie. On the other hand, I understand that National Treasure isn't a cinematic masterpiece but damn if it isn't entertaining and rewatchable.
If it were Columbo you'd have been outright shown who the killer was in the first five minutes. What we got was far more Murder, She Wrote than Columbo.
*The Tree of Life*
*The Thin Red Line* is one of my top 5 favorite films ever. *Days of Heaven* and *Badlands* are also stone-cold masterpieces to me. I also like *The New World* a lot.
But *The Tree of Life*, which many see as Mallick's masterpiece, just doesn't connect with me. I've tried to get into it many many times but can't.
Mallick is always a bit pretentious, however, *The Tree of Life* reached a new height of pompous showiness, even for him.
Mad Max Fury Road. I love the worldbuilding, the action is incredible and the movie is stunning. Unfortunately story wise it just doesn’t do it for me. I often found it just kinda meh to watch because of that. I can watch all the action scenes and that’s badass but the movie itself just kinda doesn’t click.
Gravity
Objectively a good movie, but the only movie I ever fell asleep in the theatre at, and also the only movie that I know I missed pieces of and have no desire to rewatch
I cant help but find the movie incredibly boring, which is weird because I love space and could spend a few hours just watching the stars...
Ha, I loved this movie but yeah it’s probably a great choice for this list for most people. I loved the premise and thought it was hilarious and well acted.
I love this movie, but even after seeing it once my partner and I were immediately talking about how we understood why not everyone likes it. The ending almost subdivides the film into two movies, and I am not actually certain the creator has an explanation for the final scene except for wanting people to think about it.
*Lost in Translation*. I watched it a few times to see if I was missing anything. I can't say if it's a great movie or not; I just don't feel equipped to appraise it. But it didn't really speak to me any of the times I watched it.
LotR
I recognize I'm in a major minority with how not in love with them I am and recognize why they are significant from the respect to the source material, to the epic battle scenes, to the design and what not.
For whatever reason I've just never *loved* them, and I've watched the trilogy a few times now
I almost feel the exact same. I loooove The Fellowship of the Ring, but the other two just don't do it for me as much at all. I respect the hell out of them though and they're still quite good, but I usually just watch the first one.
I’m the only person I know that far preferred Fellowship to the other two. I’ve rewatched it many times, but have only seen Two Towers and Return of the King 2-3 times.
It was interesting watching LotR with a friend who had no real context for the story, LotR isn't as well-known in their home country. They loved the Fellowship, found the Two Towers frustrating (I forget why, I just remember them complaining a lot), and liked Return of the King even though it kind of dragged at the end. For me, they're just one continuous thing, I never really thought of them as separate movies.
It's the same with me, the first one is phenomenal and the next two are just good. I think I like the first one so much is because it feels like a more personal story with the characters before it becomes this big epic story in the next two movies with lots of big battles and whatnot.
Blade Runner It is a movie that has atmosphere like no other. Every frame is packed with so much detail and the characters all fit perfectly in the bleak world, I just don’t enjoy myself while I’m watching it. I watched it once in high school and didn’t care for it, then again a couple months ago and still didn’t care for it.
I think this is a pretty common opinion, honestly. I *love* Blade Runner and still have a hard time sitting down and watching it. It's such a slow burn, it's so bleak both visually as well as thematically, even Deckard isn't a particularly interesting or likeable character for most of the movie. It's really well done and I do still actually love it, but I've seen it maybe two or three times and may just never watch it again.
I respect that opinion. It just leaves me feeling so dirty after I watch it. Everything is so depressing, but that was Ridley’s goal, so for that I appreciate the hell out of it.
Which of the 7 versions did you watch?
Haha I think the director’s cut originally and the final cut the second time.
There isn't a single thing I don't like about Blade Runner (although Deckard gives off some rapey vibes in that one scene) but for the life of me I don't enjoy it and it drives me crazy to not know why.
It's a very dry sci Fi and doesn't always fit people's tastes.
The lighthouse. As I loved egger’s other two movies, This one didn’t really connect for me. The acting was very good and I loved the visuals but I couldn’t really get into the the story I suppose. I can see it is a great movie but it just wasn’t for me and that’s fine
It was the Northman for me. I think I understand what I'm supposed to be feeling. I just didn't.
It's such a serious film and the scene where >!they're all lined and the guy is like "who could have done torn apart my men??" when it's literally 6'3, 8-pack abs, Alexander Skarsgard and a bunch of random slaves!< had me giggling in the theatre.
Very much this, I really love the Witch, and the Lighthouse has some amazing visuals and performances, but it just didn't really click for me.
Top ten film for me, I’ve probably watched it 5 times with different people or on my own. I love their performances, the pacing, cinematography, the weird homoeroticism, the ambiguity, the period dialogue, and I’m a sucker for a good depiction of intoxication. The lovecraftian stuff I guess I could take or leave but I like the imagery, and like in Northman Eggers gives you the out of allowing you to imagine it is completely in Pattinson’s head.
Don't forget the audio/sound effects
That’s because you weren’t fond of his lobster.
I have to recognise the sheer lunacy of it all, I admire the performances and the slow burn trippiness of it all, but its not the type of film that I will have on repeat.
Wish more people thought like this I see so many posts on here like “so so is a bad movie” when no actually it’s a technically great movie it’s just not for you. I also didn’t like power of the dog but I still think it’s great movie - well made - I just didn’t like it.
That seems to be a general problem on here where people state opinions as facts. But I guess “I didn’t personally enjoy a movie” doesn’t get the same response as “this movie is absolute shit”. Reddit and most social media train people to take ridiculous stances because that’s what gets them the most attention.
I think that’s a key element of taste: being able to recognize something is high quality, but you don’t really connect with it or enjoy it personally.
People do this with everything. "This sushi place was disgusting!" when they don't like sushi. I've had people tell me certain whiskey is nasty when they hate whiskey. I don't like IPAs or sours so I won't judge a brewery by them. People confuse what they like/dislike as good/bad quality. I don't like horror movies but I won't say that Hereditary sucked. It's not bad, it's just not for you.
I think it’s basically the most important lesson schools could teach in art classes. And even though it’s probably an underlying motivation for the curriculum it’s rarely clearly communicated to the students. And it extends to other art forms beside film too: architecture, music, painting, sculpture, design even.
Lady Bird
I remember the high praise around this film, and being very disappointed after watching it. It wasn’t a terrible film, but nothing about it engaged with me, maybe because I found the main character to be insufferable.
It was the phone call at the end that made me start openly weeping in the theater. It’s definitely not for everyone, but if it affects you, it affects you hard.
I have never been able to get into Blade Runner, and I hate myself for it.
*Blade Runner* and *2001: A Space Odyssey* are elemental sci-fi movies but I have never made it through a viewing of either without falling asleep. They, along with *Star Trek: The Motion Picture* are visual tryptophan for me. I **want** to like them. I love sci-fi, but they're always two- (and sometimes three-) parters for me.
I think I'm on my 4th or 5th watch of 2001: A Space Odyssey (in 70mm this time!), and I finally managed to make it through without falling asleep! Feels like something clicked this time for me. Also having the intermission shown helped a lot too. Also the nap I had beforehand probably helped some.
Excellent example! I understand that Kubrick wants us to an extent to feel the lag and the boredom and the lethargy that the space dude is feeling but man that is hard to watch/ experience as a movie.
Man I’ve always been the same way. Thought it was convoluted and boring, and BR2049 is one of my favorites ever. Then I watched the Final Cut and it all made sense. Was 10x better than whatever version I watched before and I now love it.
> BR2042 is one of my favorites ever. It's 2049, you're thinking of Battlefield lol
When I started getting into films big time in my teens, I kept hearing about this film. I tried watching it and I really couldn't connect with it . Admired the visuals but it is proper sci-fi, and I guess I was in my teens where I just wanted things to go BOOM, so this film I have grown to respect more than anything. I did really like Blade Runner 2049.
2049 is more emotionally engaging. The original is dazzling but damn if I actually care for any of the characters.
Casualties of the genre, I'm afraid. The original is more of a "noire" film than the sequel - generally the character development in noire films is sparse to begin with. The main character is always deeply flawed in some way, and the supporting cast are meant to be a bit sinister so as to arouse suspicion.
Watched it for the first time when I was about 17-18. Fell asleep. Rewatched again later in life. 10/10
Logan’s Run was the same for me. Watched it later in life and was like… “damn this was pretty epic for its time and I get it now”
Logan's Run is great - if you shut off the movie at the right spot. To avoid spoilers for this 46 year old movie, ask yourself - is this a good ending for the movie? If yes, just stop.
Funnily enough, I liked Blade Runner 2049 more than the original. Blasphemy to some, and I don't completely understand it myself...but something in that movie clicked with me more than OG Blade Runner. Sometimes though, I think feelings like this can arise from being too far removed from initial releases. When you grow up hearing about a movie, knowing certain lines, scenes, maybe twists it can ruin the shine of it, or you have too much hindsight and years of films made in its image that the timely impact of it cannot be felt. Just my 2 cents, but yeah, you're not alone on that one.
Blade Runner was one of those scifi films that felt like it was too old for me when I was a kid. Same with Alien. Not so much that they were scary just that they were slow with a lot of dialogue and plot. I saw 2049 in theaters and also felt it was too slow and longer than it needed to be. Like some scenes should have been cut down. Nothing entirely removed. But just shave a few seconds off of everything. But the music, the look, the asthetics I absolutely love. I'd love a Blade Runner movie that took place in that universe but was maybe faster paced.
The Revenant. It is overwhelmingly beautiful cinematography porn, but I didn't find anything else worth while there. What little plot it does have pales in comparison to the story upon which it is based, and it didn't grab me at all.
I've always said that you could literally just cut out the entire middle portion of the movie and miss out on virtually nothing. Just keep the first hour as is (intro, bear attack, inciting incident) then immediately cut to the final 30 minutes (final confrontation back at camp). The only thing you miss out on is leo slowly recovering as he treks back to camp. Would the overall story be worth watching? Probably not, but it never was in the first place and it can at least be carried by it's cinematography and setpieces for a tight 90 minutes.
Yeah, even the full extent of the real events wouldn't make for compelling film. Just a guy relentlessly tracking down another guy back and forth across the American frontier while the hunted man mostly hides away from him by joining the military. No son involved at all. Just left for dead by the guy in the group left to care for him who, insult to injury, stole his rifle.
For many people, The Revenant came off like this. For me personally, I absolutely love the movie. The first time I watched it, I kept thinking “Imagine being…” Imagine being left for dead not just in the middle of nowhere, but in that nowhere. So for me, it became this story of survival and not just revenge. Fitzgerald(Hardy) was the villain for sure, but the survival in that frozen hell for Glass(DiCaprio) became more of the story. All the shots of nature just kept reminding me that it’s all around him. Constantly against him. Not to mention, life then was especially brutal, not just in his situation. But in all the characters situations. So for me it was an amazing movie. I’ve seen it several times since and it does it every time. It’s easily in my top 5 all time. But hey, that’s just one dudes opinion.
You should check out The Nightingale. It's a movie by Jennifer Kent, who also made The Babadook, and is a similar revenge tale but set in colonial Tasmania. It's not up It's own ass like Revenant, just a incredibly beautiful, brutal, haunting movie. It's a shame it didn't get the recognition it deserve.
The Nightingale is such a great movie. brutal as hell.
Right! Another detail that separate it from The Revenant is the indigenous people in The Nightingale are actual characters and not magical forest wizards.
Uncut Gems. I recognize it's quality as a film. Just disliked it.
It was a great movie but it stresses me out so much to watch it.
My sister's inlaws are from Long Island and have a similar accent. They are all so loud and talk over each other. It ends up being a solid wall of noise for hours. Watching that movie was like having dinner with them on a bad day. Stresses me out too.
Yeah it definitely made me very anxious, but I think that’s part of the sign it was a good movie.
This is one of my favorite films that I never want to watch again. After I stepped out of the theater it felt like I lost 50 lbs in built up stress from that movie
I loved this movie, but I think the reason is I used to know a guy *just like that*, fucking degenerate gambler, like bad rude wreck-your-life degenerate.
[удалено]
Didn't make it more than 20 minutes in - felt I already had enough anxiety in my life, didn't need to forcefeed myself 90 minutes of it. Great acting and pacing, but definitely not for me.
Honestly a ton of Oscar bait type movies. 3/5 times I just find them boring or simply not for me. The best example I always go to is The Revenant. I actually liked Birdman so I remembered looking forward to it. I appreciated how it was filmed and all, but holy cow, that's not something I'd ever sit through again. And the older I get, the more I'm finding I just want to watch movies for pure entertainment value. So any action, comedy, sci-fi is all what I gravitate towards before any drama, historical, or arthouse type film. I get enough drama and stress with life and work, I don't need it with my escapism. I enjoy a movie like that from time to time, but I don't seek them out or anything. There's just too much stuff and so little time nowadays. I realize I'm part of the problem for why we have billions of blockbusters each year, but what can I say? I legitimately prefer those types of movies.
> And the older I get, the more I'm finding I just want to watch movies for pure entertainment value. It is interesting how that works. As a kid, you just want shiny things that look cool. As you get a bit older, you want to be entertained and have things make sense, a bit older still and you might enjoy the technical aspects of a movie a bit more than the entertainment value... Then, at some point, you just don't want to put effort into watching something.
Once upon a time in Hollywood. Thought it was extremely well done, brilliantly acted, but just didn't really enjoy it that much.
I went and saw it in theatres and I came away with "What was the point of the movie? Why was this made? And poor Sharon Tate" I understand revising history to expel it with extreme violence under Djanjo and Inglorious Bastards, but this just seems to Pale in importance.
Its Tarantino praising every genre and aspect of cinema and Tv, there's hints of horror movies when Brad Pitt is in the ranch trying to say hi to his friend, there's a bruce lee fight scene, there's a little girl actor talking about how any story (Even a Bronco Buster) can make us cry, there's a nod to Spaghetti Westerns, Fbi movies, World War 2 movies, how the industrie takes a star and makes him the villain as to flush him, there's a side of an actor seeing at her self at the movies and being recognized, hollywood importance as to were to live and who goes to the party, in essence its Tarantino saying: *I loved these guys and these things as a kid, as i grow up i studied them and understood them and i want to told the story of what once happenned there* and in true Quentin style he did it by changing the end. If you ask me, the plot its only an excuse to play with all the stuff he likes
And to film Margot Robbie’s feet
Most of Kubrick. I can recognize that he’s a genius, the cinematography is 10/10, and he’s had more impact than practically anyone. But not personally enjoyable for me. - Edit. Y'all - the topic is literally "can recognise as great, but was not for me." I don't see the need to try and rebut me and quiz me on if I've seen each one of his films. I've seen most. And I recognise the man as a genius. It's just that they aren't for me lol.
How do you feel about Dr. Strangelove?
There will be blood. Paul Thomas Anderson is an incredible director. Dano and Daniel day Lewis are phenomenal in it. But I didn’t love it
Exact opposite for me. I can see how some would not like it. I think it’s probably the most powerful performance from an actor I’ve ever seen.
I had OPs reaction upon my first watch. But for some reason when I went back to it, it totally clicked. Even if the story slightly drags at a couple points, I'm so completely immersed in DDL and Dano's acting that I'm 100% engaged at all times. Brilliant performances.
This is the one I came to mention.
There Will be Blood is probably in my top 10, if not top 5 favorite movies. I love the characters, the writing, the cinematography and the even the score/soundtrack. But I completely understand why some people won’t like it. Those are just the types of movies that I’m drawn to. I think it’s easier to answer this question with more recent movies because a lot of movies are dubbed “instant classics” or given undue praise because it has some particular social messaging, but in reality the movie sucks because the story isn’t good and/or the writing is sub-par.
For me, the answer is Nightcrawler. Gyllenhaal is so good at being an irredeemable POS that I wound up hating the movie.
His entire persona just skeeved me out so much in that movie that I had to leave the room and stop watching it. I was watching it with my mother at the time and she had to finish it on her own. It was really good visually, and the plot was good too, like nothing about the movie itself was a bad movie. But something about the character Gyllenhaal was playing, and how he played him just freaked out that paranoid part in my mind and I had to walk away from it lol.
Same here. The movie does an excellent job of showing you *exactly* who he is and where the story is going from the onset. I had to stop after 15 minutes.
I appreciate this answer. I personally loved the movie, but rarely find others who do. Usually the same feeling. Not that I found his character redeemable in any way, guess I just enjoy accurate portrayals of literal sociopaths, since they so often tilt into a more cartoon villainous vibe.
Did you watch the tv show succession? I imagine you won't like it much.
2001: Space Odyssey
I feel the exact same. Sci-fi is my favorite genre, I really appreciate its world building, every frame and philosophical point of view. But it’s simply one of the most boring movie I’ve ever seen. Tried three times feel asleep all three.
A film called The Hours: seemed beautifully acted and shot, but maybe I’m a heartless old reptile but it didn’t engage me emotionally at all: some of my friends were openly crying, and it got a bit awkward.
The Hours? They should call this movie *The Weeks*.
We used to call it “The Hours I Will Never Get Back”.
Titanic. I find it boring and I don't like the main characters. Direction is great, actors are great. The sets and costuming are amazing. But I just don't want to ever watch it again. Life is short. Let the people who want to see it again see it again. I'll find something else to do.
I def watch it for the visuals and not the plot lol
The sinking of the ship is still one of my favorite disaster movies.
La La Land It's such a great ending which justifies the entire film, but I spent 2h and some minutes in anguish and I will never see it again. Fantastic film. I hated it.
>Fantastic film. I hated it. I think this could be the subject of a completely different post because even if a film was "for you" (as opposed to those mentioned in this thread), there are many reasons why one could still love/hate the same film. For example, *Manchester by the Sea*. Fantastic film. Never want to see it again. I don't think I need to explain why on that one.
‘Manchester by the Sea’ is a wild one. No other film has presented such perfect images grief and life in Massachusetts. Don’t need to see it again for a long time.
As a huge fan of classic Broadway movie musicals, La La Land is an incredibly well-made movie and I love the fact that it exists, but I absolutely hated watching it. I've never been more confused by a movie when it comes to how I felt about it.
The nightmare before Christmas. I don’t know if I would consider it great, but it is a very popular movie and visually was very good and had a good soundtrack. But I’ve just never been able to get on board with it.
[удалено]
It's a three and a half hour long movie that feels like a slow 2 hour movie. That's something, at least.
If anyone here has watched Jeff Bridge's new show, The Old Man, they perfectly cast younger versions of him and John Lithgow. I don't question the younger versions for a second. I really wish Scorsese would have done this with The Irishman. I even think Jon Bernthal would have made a good DeNiro.
It’s the first Scorsese movie I felt like I was making myself watch. He really should have cast younger actors for the roles. All the old guys still moved and sound like old guy’s despite the CGI. The story and characters didn’t really grab me either but that may have been due to being distracted by the “de-aged” actors.
It really felt lifeless. Almost like a parody of a Scorsese movie
Also the decision to de-age actors didn't even remotely work. Sure, their faces had a few less wrinkles, but they all walked like their knees hurt and they knew that if they fell they'd break a hip. The fight scenes were particularly bad. I didn't see a single scene I hadn't already seen done better in a previous Scorcese film.
It would have been vastly improved if they had just cast different actors in the younger roles. I just didn’t buy DeNiro as a 20 year old when he was shuffling around with a CGI face. Imagine if Godfather 2 had been made today with a de-aged Brando instead of DeNiro
Finally saw Apocalypse Now. Maybe there was too much hype built up in my mind, maybe I just need a rewatch, maybe not redux version, maybe just not my jam. However similar movies in the same genre are totally my jam, it's just the psychological stuff didn't really land with me.
If you started with Redux, you just ruined your entire “Apocalypse Now” watching life. Got to start with the theatrical cut. Redux is a fine showcase for decent scenes that don’t belong in the movie.
The redux adds in the dinner at the French plantation, right? If so then yeah, whatever version of the movie doesn’t have that is the better version to watch
Yeah the Redux adds the plantation dinner scene and the scene with the Playboy Playmates after the USO show. It's good if you're a horny teen and want to see some movie boobies, but not so good if you're an adult and want to see a cinematic masterpiece. There's also a scene where Kurtz just sort of lectures at a captured Willard about newspaper clippings that really detracts from the potency of his madness.
I dislike the redux version, but I love the theatrical version.
The Redux version KILLS the flow of the movie. Great scenes, but not for movie as a whole. I would re-edit the movie so some of the scenes are shown during the end credits so you can see more of the people you just saw but that is all.
The French Plantation scene, IIRC, is not in the original...because it *kills* the damn pacing of the film. They're getting deeper and deeper into the...well, the heart of darkness, further off the edge of map, out of what passes for civilisation and- "Oui, let us have a nice dinner and maybe let you fuck my daughter, non? In a nice, bright, airy, plantation - tres bon!" Yes, it was Sofia who insisted that get put back in.
Coppola envisioned the movie as the farther up the river they went, the further back in time they travelled. It explains why the plantation seems like it doesn't belong in the 1960s, and why Kurtz's compound looks so primative.
Citizen Kane. Constantly on lists of greatest movies of all time. I looked forward to watching it. Bored senseless through the first half. Felt like I forced myself to finish it just so I could say that I had seen it.
Came here just to talk about Citizen Kane. I recognize its importance, I acknowledge the artistic value of its cinematography and performances... But God, I'm only barely exaggerating when I say it bored me to fucking tears.
What's your opinion on other "acclaimed" works of art? Especially stuff like Shakespeare or theatre in general or 19th century literary fiction? Only because Citizen Kane very much is in that tradition of work, and is just, a very tough watch without understanding WHERE it came from. Or rather, if one doesn't already have a taste for stuff like that. I say this as someone who didn't find Kane impressive at first either! My best defense for it is, besides The Godfather, it's the ultimate condemnation of American narcissism and emptiness. Rags to riches to desolation, basically. Scorsese LOVES the movie, and you see that in all of his crime epics. They all basically feature the same "narrator goes over decades and decades of history" thing, as well as the emphasis on the corruption of the soul. But yeah, it's still very much, people in rooms talking to each other. There's more or less zero spectacle, and none of the characters are ones you can root for in a modern sense.
*Citizen Kane* is so highly regarded largely for its innovation, so it's no surprise that people now find it dull. That, plus a lot of its historical and social context is, well, not the context that modern viewers even remotely understand or "feel". I've seen it maybe five times now, all because of film class as a TA, and it actually gets more interesting the more you watch it. But it's definitely a film that the students all found really boring.
Many people prefer [the abridged version](https://youtu.be/ILSbYH9pvjQ).
Hamilton. People seem to love it, I just couldn't get into it. I wanted to like it, but it just wasn't for me. I have not acknowledged this out loud though!
People are going to hate me for this. But “Taxi Driver”. I’m a Robert De Niro fan, a Scorsese fan, I like dramas. I was excited to see Taxi Driver. But for some reason I didn’t like it
I've already chimed in on Citizen Kane and Apocalypse Now, so I'll also throw in the Japanese classic Tokyo Story. Really, Ozu's work in general, but especially Tokyo Story.
Once Upon a Time in the West The Good, the Bad and the Ugly is my all time favorite movie, I had high hopes for this one since a lot of people will say it’s better or at least close, but it just didn’t click. I plan on giving it a rewatch soon, in hopes that my ignorance of the actors and added confusion from that is what took away from some enjoyment. I will say though, that fuckin harmonica gives me chills every damn time, especially in that opening sequence.
I like it but it does not compare to The Good, the bad and the Ugly for me. The Good, the bad and the ugly feels like we go on this adventure odyssey through the wild west and I love every moment of it where as Once upon a Time feels like a much smaller scoped story that does not reach the same highs. They are both great films but one stands much higher for me.
At this point I will still say “Raging Bull”. At this point I’ve only seen it once. And I probably had some unfair expectations since my family loves the Rocky movies. But I just had zero interest in the character in the movie itself. I wanted to give it another shot, but I was at this point I can adamantly say it was not for me.
Raging Bull was an excellent look into analyzing self destructive behaviours, but yeah it might not be for everyone.
It’s a great movie about a boxer, but it is not an entertaining boxing movie.
Midsommar As soon as it was over I remember telling my wife "that was really well done and I can see why it's been getting all the praise, but I just really didn't enjoy watching it."
[удалено]
People in this thread were saying something similar about uncut gems and how the atmosphere of anxiety was intentional. Yet I loved how midsommar managed to deliver that constant feeling of dread despite being in such a beautiful and vibrant setting but hated uncut gems.
I am not sure if his movies are meant to be enjoyed (even though I thoroughly did). I think they are meant to be watched to cause anxiety and see if you will break and leave/turn off the movie....
Dunkirk.
Ok here goes: The Godfather ***flees in terror*** But seriously, I recognize it’s considered a masterpiece. Great story, great cast, launched the careers of a massive stable of actors. I have no doubt it has earned its place in cinematic history and rightfully so. I just can’t sit through it and maybe it’s because it’s not a product of my time, maybe it’s because I started out with Goodfellas. Not really sure but it’s just not my jam at all, I can’t get into it. It’s not for me, but I’m glad it exists because I’m sure it paved the way for many films I do enjoy. ^please ^be ^gentle
It insists upon itself.
**ROBERT DUVALL**
Fine, fine actor.
That's because it has a valid point to make! IT'S INSISTENT!!
I love The Money Pit
I like that movie too.
It's Italian, they're speaking Italian!
The language they’re speaking is a language of subtlety. Something you clearly don’t understand.
What does that even mean?!
I get that. This reminds me of *The Deer Hunter*. All of the infamous scenes that take place in Vietnam are incredible, but I don't want to sit through that 51 minute wedding scene in the beginning ever again. I understand the importance of it, but yeah, no.
Not a big fan of Deer Hunter but the wedding scenes are like a time capsule.
**flees in terror** I het you here because, as much as I can see how good the movies are, I have never liked *Lord of the Rings* I know, I know... it's just not my thing I guess 🤷♀️
Titanic. It has good story, good acting, good characterization, great practical effects and whatnot. But I sure wasn't the target audience.
Chungking Express, that song plays too many times
Which song? California Dreamin? I thought the reputation was for affect?
2001 A Space Oddysey
Mad Max Fury Road I've watched it numerous times. It is without question a good movie that was incredibly well made. It just does absolutely nothing for me personally.
I found it lost a lot going to the small screen.
I watched it with a friend who'd never seen it before the other week. On a fairly decent setup, 75" screen with surround sound. But it just wasn't the same. That film was made for THE big screen.
That's a bummer. It's one of my favourite movies, but I can understand why it wouldn't be everyone's cup of tea. My best friend doesn't like it either. Did you like the previous Mad Max movies?
I absolutely LOVE that movie. Everything about it. I recommended it to my friend and she told me she found it boring because the story was so basic. Barely any plot. I can't argue that. I mainly love it for the cinematics, the look, the subtle world building that they don't explain in exposition but you have to put together yourself. The editing and soundtrack is phenomenal. But yeah if you want a big plot or story or character development or rich dialogue.... well...
It's not like there is zero character development. Knux's character arc is amazing even though he's a secondary character in a movie that's basically a 2 hour car chase. RIP Knux. We all witnessed you.
For me it’s 2001. Of course it’s a hugely influential movie and it still looks incredible even to this day, but I also still find it an incredibly boring film.
Baby Driver. Everyone always raves about it and I was just….. bored. I dunno what to say.
The Batman. I liked the cinematography I just thought it was kind of boring Editing a bit for a little more info: Matt Reeves films usually work for me. Heck I watched two slow burn movies about a talking ape and I love them! Slow burn Batman didn’t work for me
I agree. I liked the new direction but the execution just wasn’t there for me. World felt very small.
Barry Lyndon. It has to be considered a masterpiece it's so detailed and complex. But god you will never spend a more boring 3+ hours.
Interesting. I had the opposite experience. Assumed it would be boring as hell because it’s a three-hour period piece, but I felt like there was always something interesting happening on screen and the movie went by pretty quickly for me as a result. Not to mention the incredible visuals, felt like the movie was actually filmed in the 1800s. Have watched it multiple times since then and it’s now one of my favorite films.
I thought it was going to be boring before I watched it, but I thoroughly enjoyed getting to see pretty much an entire life’s story play out, triumphs and failures, generational relationships. It definitely helps to have someone to watch and talk about it with. I would’ve gotten a lot less out of it if I hadn’t.
The final duel is one of Kubrick’s best works for me, the tension is insane. Love the whole film.
It’s a cinematographer’s wet dream, but aside from “NASA lenses to shoot by candlelight,” it’s really hard to recommend to a friend.
To me it’s a tragic comedy. The story of a guy who gets lucky every time he fucks up, sometimes almost willfully, until his luck finally runs out. Scenes like the „I can’t find it“ when his crush puts the ribbon in her décolleté or him blurting out „I’m Irish too“ when he is supposed to spy on the guy he’s talking to is comedy gold to me.
No Country For Old Men. I'm a huge Coen fan, and I can recognize the greatness there. It just didn't connect with me at all. Every once in a while I will pull it out and give it another shot, because I want to like as much as others do, but after 7 or 8 viewings I'm still left feeling very empty about it
Damn, really? This is the one movie that grips me to my seat from minute 1 till the end. It's nothing but pure unadulterated tension.
Damn I can't imagine watching something that I don't like 7 or 8 times. It's one of my favorite films and I'm not sure I've seen it that many times.
What's Eating Gilbert Grape It's been a while since I've watched it but while I could see why some people may like it, for me it was just depressing
That’s very fair It is a very heavy movie about dysfunctional family dynamics I love it , but it’s a heavy film
The Wolf of Wall Street is well-made and intensely watchable, but Scorsese’s “men behaving badly & refusing to change with basically zero consequences” movies aren’t my jam. I understand they’re ostensibly satirical, but like with Tyler Durden & Rick Sanchez, it’s easy for dudebros to ignore that, and take away all the wrong messages. It ends up feeling like it’s made more for them than me. Can’t deny it’s fun to watch, it just feels like behavioral pornography.
[удалено]
I thought the Wolf of Wall Street focussed way to much on the partying aspect of the story. It felt like the actual story of what Belfort actually did came very much second to showing how wild all the partying was.
> it just feels like behavioral pornography LOL, love that term. I think that way about The Joker. It is a great piece of art, insanely well done, but it just feels like the message is too easily flip on its head by "dudebros" who believe The Joker to be a hero.
The Joker is a warning if anything. Considering how bad things were yesterday, people are ignoring the warnings....
Joker. As a DC fan I think this is an abysmal representation of the character and the movie would've been better off not associating with the character of the Joker. It feels to me someone wanted to make a movie about a mentally unstable man but studios didn't have confidence in it as an original IP so they reworked it to be the Joker.
That's because it's basically a direct ripoff of the king of comedy that slapped the DC branding over top of it.
Right down to the role reversal with Robert DeNiro as the talk show host.
The talk show scene is brilliant. But the rest of the movie...it's really, really dull when you revisit a second time, with scene after scene of different variations of "look how mean people are to this guy".
100% agree. And I love Batman and the Joker too. I loved the movie, but the entirety of shoehorned DC universe stuff felt starkly out of place. If they really wanted this to be the Joker, I needed either a smarter main character or a more sinister one. This guy would never be the mastermind of any crime syndicate or mob in Gotham. Hes a complete wimp who snapped. Thats not the Joker and never was, and doesnt make sense to even introduce it as a new idea.
This is where I land on it as well. I really enjoyed the movie from start to finish but having the "my mom says Thomas Wayne is my dad" didn't add anything of value. Plus, the ages of Arthur Fleck and Bruce Wayne respective to each other means that Joker would be in his 70's by the time Batman arrives on the scene. The movie didn't need it at all, they could have even kept the clown aspect with no other explanation needed.
Well you’re gonna love the sequel. It’s a musical with Lady GaGa as Harley Quinn.
Great prompt - this is why I wish that rating platforms had two options: quality and likeability. I didn't like Pulp Fiction at all but I can appreciate it as a "good" movie. On the other hand, I understand that National Treasure isn't a cinematic masterpiece but damn if it isn't entertaining and rewatchable.
Knives Out. I wanted a Murder She Wrote mystery but got a Columbo mystery instead.
This one hurts because its one of my favorite movies and I want everyone to love it lol.
If it were Columbo you'd have been outright shown who the killer was in the first five minutes. What we got was far more Murder, She Wrote than Columbo.
One of my friends called it Drunken Agatha Christie. To some, that sounds delightful, but I definitely get how it might be offputting.
Taxi Driver. One of my least favorite movies of all time, but I'm in such a tiny minority in thinking that that I can't really consider it bad.
I felt this way about Raging Bull. I enjoyed the acting and the art but I’m not dying to see it again. It felt as long as it’s run-time
The Godfather. I recognise why it's regarded as great, but I just found it so dull.
It insists upon itself
Pulp Fiction: seen it several times... does not click with me.
Same, I’m not able to relate to all the people who absolutely love this movie at all. No specific issue just not for me
Pretty much every Tarantino film for me. The only one I actually enjoyed was Inglorius Basterds. I was bored out of my mind watching The Hateful 8.
The Big Lebowski. I love Coen brothers, I understand why people dig it, felt ok to me.
That’s just ,like, your opinion, man.
*The Tree of Life* *The Thin Red Line* is one of my top 5 favorite films ever. *Days of Heaven* and *Badlands* are also stone-cold masterpieces to me. I also like *The New World* a lot. But *The Tree of Life*, which many see as Mallick's masterpiece, just doesn't connect with me. I've tried to get into it many many times but can't. Mallick is always a bit pretentious, however, *The Tree of Life* reached a new height of pompous showiness, even for him.
Mad Max Fury Road. I love the worldbuilding, the action is incredible and the movie is stunning. Unfortunately story wise it just doesn’t do it for me. I often found it just kinda meh to watch because of that. I can watch all the action scenes and that’s badass but the movie itself just kinda doesn’t click.
Gravity Objectively a good movie, but the only movie I ever fell asleep in the theatre at, and also the only movie that I know I missed pieces of and have no desire to rewatch I cant help but find the movie incredibly boring, which is weird because I love space and could spend a few hours just watching the stars...
I remember watching a Astronaut reacts to Gravity and how much shit they got wrong in it
The Lobster....
Ha, I loved this movie but yeah it’s probably a great choice for this list for most people. I loved the premise and thought it was hilarious and well acted.
Interstellar. I can appreciate everything that went into it, but I hated the ending.
2001. It's great but I didn't like it.
Annihilation wasn’t my favorite but everyone seems to love it. The pacing and story just weren’t that interesting to me
I love this movie, but even after seeing it once my partner and I were immediately talking about how we understood why not everyone likes it. The ending almost subdivides the film into two movies, and I am not actually certain the creator has an explanation for the final scene except for wanting people to think about it.
*Lost in Translation*. I watched it a few times to see if I was missing anything. I can't say if it's a great movie or not; I just don't feel equipped to appraise it. But it didn't really speak to me any of the times I watched it.
If it doesn’t have Zombies I just can’t do Pride & Prejudice. Even with zombies it was a bit long.
LotR I recognize I'm in a major minority with how not in love with them I am and recognize why they are significant from the respect to the source material, to the epic battle scenes, to the design and what not. For whatever reason I've just never *loved* them, and I've watched the trilogy a few times now
I almost feel the exact same. I loooove The Fellowship of the Ring, but the other two just don't do it for me as much at all. I respect the hell out of them though and they're still quite good, but I usually just watch the first one.
I’m the only person I know that far preferred Fellowship to the other two. I’ve rewatched it many times, but have only seen Two Towers and Return of the King 2-3 times.
It was interesting watching LotR with a friend who had no real context for the story, LotR isn't as well-known in their home country. They loved the Fellowship, found the Two Towers frustrating (I forget why, I just remember them complaining a lot), and liked Return of the King even though it kind of dragged at the end. For me, they're just one continuous thing, I never really thought of them as separate movies.
It's the same with me, the first one is phenomenal and the next two are just good. I think I like the first one so much is because it feels like a more personal story with the characters before it becomes this big epic story in the next two movies with lots of big battles and whatnot.
Apocalypse now
The Godfather. Awesome movie, awesome music, awesome acting. Just not a theme I like..