You must log in or register to comment.
Avatar. Highest grossing movie in the world. Blue shit.
Best critique I ever heard about Avatar: “Eh, Fern Gully did it better.”
I call it Space Pocahontas.
I mean it’s just Dances with Wolves in spaces.
Or Pocahontas
The movie was forgettable and not that special. Going to the IMAX with my uncle and three cousins and watching our first ever (and only ever) 3d movie together and squealing the whole 3 hour car ride home about how much fun we had as a family is one of my best memories.
I think this is what people forget about Avatar. It was never supposed to be the best writing or the best story. It was purely just to show off incredible ground breaking CGI technology. Seeing it in IMAX was a damn near religious experience, but watching on a TV at home just doesn’t do it justice.
dabu di dabu dai
Avatar was the best screensaver ever made.
Bluntly manipulative melodramatic tripe that ejects me completely from the movie, just as with Titanic. James Cameron decided to keep churning out the modern cgi version of a top hat-wearing villain cackling and twirling his mustache as he leaves the damsel tied to the train tracks, and it is kind of dismaying that he got so thoroughly rewarded for it.
It was an okay (but derivative) movie, but an amazing tech showcase for 3D. That’s why it was the highest grossing.
Anything that comes from Marvel. Overrated CGI tripe.
Since you phrased it ambiguously, Spider-Man: Into the Spider-Verse is amazing.
I’d argue that those are Sony movies, not Marvel.
Back when Marvel was financially struggling, they started selling off rights to various characters. Sony bought Spider-Man (and a handful of other characters), and that’s where the Tobey Maguire movies came from. It’s also why the X-men will likely never be a part of the MCU, because Sony owns the movie rights to (most of) the mutants.
The Spiderverse movies are basically Sony riding the wake of the Tom Holland hype. To be clear, they’re phenomenal movies. But they’re only tangentially related to Marvel.
Oh I agree, I was just being pedantic because OP said “Marvel”.
the spider verse movies are basically Sony riding the wake of the Tom Holland hype
But they also have some of the most incredible visuals I’ve ever seen in an animated movie. I still maintain that the second one could be watched entirely on mute, and you could still understand the story.
The only Marvel movies I like and they are not even made by Marvel.
Since I’m already being pedantic, technically produced by Marvel Entertainment.
Even something like Iron Man 1 and 2?
I don’t like Iron Man 3 but 1 and 2 are quite enjoyable to me.I liked the original tobey maguire spidermans, but that was 20 years ago when they came out (and I was a teenager). I like them now for the nostalgia, not so much for the movie it is. And after those nothing really spoke to me. I went to see quite a bit of newer movies because my gf and friends do like them, so occasionally I give in and tag along for the company (I distinctly remember age of ultron and infinity war pt I for how bad it was, but the memory of some others I’ve seen faded the minute we got in the car home)
For me these movies all feel the same and formulaic. The stories are predictable, the characters flat and the edit is just too much focused on extreme visuals, spectacle for the sake of spectacle. I find many storylines very forgettable, to the point I even forgot that I’ve seen some movies before. In the edit, they are trying very, very hard to evoke emotions from the audience using tricks and tropes; but in the end it’s all a hollow shell, a cash grab without authenticity. At least, it feels that way for me. I understand many people love these movies, they’re just not my thing.
And that’s totally valid.
Thank you for elaborating :)
Hey, tripe doesn’t deserve that
Not even Xmen animated series?
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.
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
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.
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.
I’m reminded of this video:
any of the new MCU movies post-endgame. they were so generic, and it was clear some of the movies ran out of money on cgi or animation.
Guardians 3 was still good, I see it as the post credits scene of the MCU
The rest is boring to awful
introducing new content helps, rather than just promoting the next characther movie or show.
Even Shang-Chi?
The way I feel about the MCU is like an old relationship where there’s not much love left and you can’t seem to break it off. Some days you have vain hopes, other days you hate yourself for being too coward to leave.
That’s where the comparison ends, because in a relationship you can talk things over together and try to work things out.
Any superhero movie since 2008.
into the Spider-Verse has redifined what studios are willing to do in animated movies.
I guess it was a pretty broad stroke and there is some collateral damage. I might look into this one.
Its truly beautiful. The writing is a little wonky but the second one is written much better. I would recommend waiting for the third one to release if you want to watch thay one though because it is very much a part of a non complete whole at the moment.
Probably getting some hate for saying this, but…. The Dune movies are some of the worst big budget movies I’ve seen. They look nice and the cinematography is awesome but that movie feels so damn empty.
Yeah, I’d rather watch the Lynch version anytime, the new ones are like 6 hours of bland, boring choices and wooden performances.
lol, true. At least Lynch‘s version is a entertaining fever dream.
Yeah the only reason it could be considered “bad” is because they ran out of money and the entire 2nd half is just a montage of shots to end the movie because the producers took over.
“Wooden performances” is the only way to describe the acting in Lynch’s. That movie is a confuding mess and painful to watch if you don’t know the story. A movie can’t simply assume you’ve read the book to understand it. People can only truly prefer Lynch to Villeneuve ironically. You can’t honestly think it’s better film.
I thought watching the new ones was like watching paint dry. At least Lynch’s version had some personality.
Not all personalities are likeable.
I’m not sure why you’re trying to argue this stuff. This is a thread about movies you can’t be convinced are good. I’m not trying to convince you, I’m stating that I liked the David Lynch Dune considerably more than the new ones. Feel free to take that or leave it, art’s not really objective, dude.
Even the three part TV movies from around 2000 are better.
I thought that version was generally well received?
I will say, the first one is the most to-the-letter book adaptations i have ever seen.
I’ve only watched the first one. Visually it was great, but the scenes over shadowed the plot to such a degree that, even having read the source, it was still hard to follow.
I would not call it a bad movie, but I’d file it with Avatar and the fountain as being more about the experience than the story.
lol, yes. The first avatar was mostly goosebumps to this day but avatar 2 was „wow, that looks nice. When does the plot start?“
Regarding the fountain, I always wanted to see that movie because it looks interesting. But I heard a few times now that it’s not really good.
ive told my friend that its a brutalist screensaver, and he got so mad.
lmao, what a perfect insult.
I watched the first one in the theater and thought it was dry but okay. I tried rewarding it when the second one was coming out and I turned it off like 1/3 of the way through. I watched the second one but it couldn’t hold my attention at all.
I agree with the Dune movies and in particular I think I don’t like Denis Villeneuve; He takes a cute sci fi short story like “stories of your life” and turns it into a very self important dull thing. Then he takes a Novel about flying through space with drugs and doing guerriilla warfare while riding sand worms and it all feels so somber and rigid. Man has no fun in him.
Damn this one hard for me. I absolutely hated the casting and screenplay. But it really redefined how i see the universe in my head when i read the books.
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
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.
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.
Have you seen zoolander? I pretty much agree with you but zoolander is great. Didn’t even like anchorman
I haven’t seen Zoolander. Ben Stiller is also in that, right?
Ben Stiller wrote, directed, and starred in it. He’s good when he’s not doing mid-tier family movies (although I remember him being great in Heavyweights). Similarly, Tropic Thunder is a brilliant movie that he wrote, directed, and starred in.
IMO he’s really good when he’s allowed creative control, which he wasn’t for any of the Night at the Museum movies.
Correct, double whammy
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.
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.
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.
Did you think The Martian was similarly problematic?
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…
Avatar. Good Lord what bad acting and visual dynamics will do for a movie.
Titanic
Titanic is better if you interpret it differently:
Jack never existed. He was a coping mechanism for Rose to get away from crippling depression and self harm.
The whole movie can be interpreted that way, and it makes it much more interesting. There is no direct evidence for Jack’s existence, and everything we hear about him interacting with others is from interviews with Old Rose.
In fact, some parts of the film make more sense when watching this way. Rose’s near-miraculous ax hit to free Jack from handcuffs? Never happened. Not getting caught in cargo storage despite having a very involved tail who apparently just gave up? Never happened – or at least, the part where Jack and Rose have sex in the car never happened.
There is a nude drawing of Rose which she says was done by Jack; however, it is actually signed “JD”, so technically could have been any commissioned artist with those initials. In fact, Cal could even have set it up himself – again, you only ever get Old Rose’s version of events. Though we see Rose given the Heart of the Ocean diamond while on board Titanic (and she is wearing it in the drawing), there is once again no reason that must be the case, and since the drawing isn’t dated, it could even predate her voyage. The letter she claimed she wrote to Cal about said drawing is not found with it, despite the two documents apparently being stored together.
And, note that a “Jackdaw” is a type of bird with various connections in lore – one of which being that Jackdaws appear as a precursor to death or an omen of death. Rose claims she met Jack Dawson when he saved her from a suicide attempt.
I am not convinced
Titanic would’ve been a better movie if they’d cast someone other than DiCaprio. But it probably wouldn’t have been as big of a hit.
The Godfather. The characters are empty and hard to attach to, the sound is terrible, there’s so much filler in the editting it becomes a chore as I watch yet another seemingly pointlessly extended shot or micro-scenes—Why?! What was the point?!—And yet I’m meant to feel something when this character I hardly know since about 10 mins ago gets killed?
If a film had an inflated ego…
Thank you, absolutely. So slow and boring.
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.
I have a hundred of top 10 movies, and I don’t understand the hate for the new Dune movies. The actors are good, the movies stick to the script, the picture is pretty and the music is nice too. I was also pleasantly surprised that you could transpose all this world to a movie because it’s kinda difficult. You can’t please everyone though.
i think its that theres no investment in the characters unless youve read the books.
i didnt care about any of the characters in the movie. it feels though that if i had read the books, i might have.
just a hunch; from someone else who only mildly liked the movies and has not read the source material.
It’s fair. I have read the books quite a few times in my childhood and the movies were almost like I have been thinking of the whole time.
That goes for the main characters and the background characters imo. The second movie did a lot better in regard to showing off the different cultures but the first one just felt so…empty. People just did things and had things done to them, and I didn’t understand why I was supposed to care about any of them.
Pretty accurate. Most of the first movie is basically the prologue to the main story.
The first movie is extremely loyal to the book; I have yet to see the second movie, but I would be surprised if it wasn’t much the same.
Funny thing: theres a surprising number of Dune references in The Grim Adventures of Billy and Mandy.
Not the person you’re replying to, but for my own POV:
I think the new Dune movies are the best they could be and I’m glad I was able to catch them in theaters, but they’ve also convinced me that Dune just isn’t a franchise I’ll ever be interested in. I’m not sure if I’d bother with the third movie, and any spin-offs are also fully out of the question for me.
Uncut Gems
A stressful two hours of screaming and bad decisions
That’s the point… We’re watching the spiral of a gambling addict. Its pure anxiety, and it’s done so well.
I get that but you are not convincing me that this is good
I guess its personal preference, it’s like eating food with a lot of spice. Some people enjoy the stress it brings.
Highly agree. The stress and anxiety is there for a reason. I actually hated it the whole time I was watching, but it was very much worth it. That being said, I don’t think I’d watch it again.
It’s good at what they were trying to do. It’s not enjoyable.
First answer I’ve taken offense to. IMO one of the best films I’ve ever seen, and hands down the best thing Sandler has ever done.
Lucas directed Star Wars. Any. He’s an awful director in almost every aspect. Some of the worst acting from extremely talented people I’ve ever seen because he doesn’t know how to direct them.
Take the same cast, story, massage the script, and have ANYONE else direct, and it’d be great. I just can’t with Lucas.
I think George Lucas would agree with you.
While he directed the first film, Empire and Jedi had other directors. When it came to the prequel series Lucas really tried to get someone else to direct, but everyone turned him down as the project was “too daunting”.
Lucas is best as the idea guy.
Take the same cast, story, massage the script, and have ANYONE else direct, and it’d be great.>
Not true, they did this already with Ep7.
My hot take gets hotter…as flawed and problematic as they are, I think they 7-9 are better. The bar is THAT low in my mind for 1-6.
7-9 don’t even have a cohesive story. They literally did not have a plan going in and 9 spent a lot of time reconning what happened in 8 because the directors disagreed with each other. I feel like you’re just trying to be contrarion with this statement.
This whole thread is contrarion to popular belief. I didn’t say 7-9 were awesome, I said they passed the very low bar that 1-6 are for me. It’s like, just my opinion, man.
