Films Loved by the Critics but not by You.

JunkMonkey said:
It was/is quite popular here in Scotland too for some reason which escapes me. I think it's a pile of crap.
Click to expand...

Odd. I would have expected the reverse due to how historically inaccurate it was. Why do you think it is popular there?
 
Michael Colton said:
Odd. I would have expected the reverse due to how historically inaccurate it was. Why do you think it is popular there?
Click to expand...

For all the historical inaccuracies (and they are legion - sometimes funny, sometimes very silly) the very broadest brush stokes of it are correct - plucky beserker Scot defeats nasty imperialist English for a short time, is ultimately betrayed by Scottish nobility and dies a very horrible death, but sticks to his principles.

Sentiment and heart is in the right place for the nationalist crowd (of which I am a partial member, so I quite enjoyed it when I went to see it at the cinema, I have to admit. Not really a film I'd watch again though.)
 
Fair enough. I suppose that is the only way that The Patriot can be explained. That entire genre of martyr-porn (Braveheart, Gladiator, The Patriot, Saving Private Ryan, the list is endless) is distasteful to me, but I can understand the appeal I suppose.
 
Star Wars, though did the critics really like it or just go along with the entire world. I have never understood its appeal. I can understand why nobody likes the others, but since it's for the same reasons, why do they like the first one?

Also the TV series Battlestar Galactica, either the original or the rework. The original was just silly, the rework was edgy, dark, and silly
 
Well, unless it's MEANT to be....Sorta like the old joke about the audience laughing wildly, when the hero dies.
 
JoanDrake said:
Star Wars, though did the critics really like it or just go along with the entire world. I have never understood its appeal. I can understand why nobody likes the others, but since it's for the same reasons, why do they like the first one?

Also the TV series Battlestar Galactica, either the original or the rework. The original was just silly, the rework was edgy, dark, and silly
Click to expand...


I think you had to be there at the time. As a 16 year old kid seeing it for the first time was amazing. All the SF I had seen in my head while reading the likes of Heinlein, Asimov, Smith, Laumer and countless short stories by authors too numerous to mention played out in front of my face. It was like someone has hot wired my imagination and projected it onto a screen. Looking at it now as a 56 year old man it don't half look like a load of old tosh. I kind of like it for the same reasons I like Ray Harryhausen's films and Universal Horror films of the 30s/40s. Fine examples of period drama dressed up with (just beyond) state of the art special effects.

Battlestar G, Mk 1 was crap - even at the time.
Battlestar G Mk 2 was the best thing American TV did about the Iraq War.
 
"Prometheus" .. I hated this film. But it was sucessful, though ... unexplainable for me.
 
Out of curiosity, why did you hate it? The only significant thing I disliked about it was Charlize Theron.
 
Personally,

Wasted potential.

It was hyped as so much more,but at the end of the day it's a heavily edited mess with no direction.
 
Ah, I suppose I thought that was intentional. It was meant to be an atmospheric hype release for bringing back that universe.
 
Recently, I have found two films very disappointing.

Beneath The Skin - I've heard the book it's based on was well received and that some people really like slow panning scenery porn but for me it was slow, illogical and ultimately ended with no real conclusion other than
the main character was dead.

Lucy - Strong start, good setup, lots of action, tension, build-up and... Huh! What? Is that it? So, pretty much like my sex life.

The common denominator is Scarlett Johanson but I don't think she's to blame.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
J-Sun said:
In a completely different way, Citizen Kane. I don't loathe it at all - it's fine, but I guess I'm just not enough of a film buff to see what makes it The Best Film of All Time. I suspect, even if I were, I wouldn't think it was that great. So it more exactly "didn't impress me".
Click to expand...

This one! Never understood the praise it got, other than using deep focus. But a new technological trick does not a classic film make (see Avatar). Orsen Welles was bombastic as ever, but the story isn't that revelatory and as biopics go it doesn't tread much new ground.
 
Verse said:
Lucy - Strong start, good setup, lots of action, tension, build-up and... Huh! What? Is that it? So, pretty much like my sex life.

The common denominator is Scarlett Johanson but I don't think she's to blame.
Click to expand...

You're shagging Scarlett Johanson!?


[Awed silence]


May I touch the hem of your garment?
 
Michael Colton said:
Out of curiosity, why did you hate it? The only significant thing I disliked about it was Charlize Theron.
Click to expand...

Mainly the unlogic plot annoyed me. Furthermore there were some conceptual flaws (in my opinion). Worst is, that I read afterwards, that even the unlogic plot was meant conceptual. Too much concept, too less inspiration.
 
Chariots of Fire . The most memorable aspect of the film was it's musical score .
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Thread starter Similar threads Forum Replies Date
B What do you think Are The Most Overrated Films ? General Film Discussion 35
Harpo Poll: some 1982 films General Film Discussion 24
B Your Favorite Roger Corman Films General Film Discussion 17
B Best Cult Films Ever General Film Discussion 70
B Films Loved by Critics and Hated By You General Film Discussion 47

Similar threads


Back
Top