kinda like a less controversial of the movies assholes dig thread. this is about those movies that are supposedly good but you would never know because it's just too "proper" for you to give a shit.
I will start. lets be snobby!
Ron Howard films
Braveheart
I always felt the same about Ron Howard films. They always just felt just good enough to keep you just entertained. Don't do to much to piss off viewers. IMAGINE that dough if we can do just enough!!
This is the way I feel about the Spiderman movies. They just do barely enough to keep you entertained. Most summer blockbuster are the same actually.
My list would start long lines of people waiting to argue with me, but rest assured that just because a film is a 'classic' or 'revolutionary film' or 'seminal indie film' or whatever doesn't make it pass in my book.
I'll give a short list for participatory purposes:
Cameron Crowe films.
American Beauty.
Sex, Lies, and Videotape (but Soderbergh agrees with me on this one).
JFK.
Drugstore Cowboy, Elephant.
And of course I third the Ron Howard vote.
Erin Brokovich
almost any historical epic like Kingdom of Heaven or Troy. it's like they're trying so hard to be authentic while stamping Oscars all over it
oh yeah, and wet hot american summer. I just can't get into that movie. I laugh when friends quote that movie but everytime I watch it I just end up staring at it like terry schivo at everything.
Quote from: peteoh yeah, and wet hot american summer. I just can't get into that movie. I laugh when friends quote that movie but everytime I watch it I just end up staring at it like terry schivo at everything.
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fzulm.net%2Fforums%2Fimages%2Fsmiles%2Frofl.gif&hash=de33237cd548e6f48d0444c9f6ecce477c645263)
I only think I know what this thread is about, but do Rob Reiner films fit?
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fzulm.net%2Fforums%2Fimages%2Fsmiles%2Frofl.gif&hash=de33237cd548e6f48d0444c9f6ecce477c645263)
Is that supposed to be Terry Schiavo?
So you mean movies that get lots of praise but, to you, don't seem that interesting? Am I getting that right?
Since Ron Howard is a given...
Anything by Lasse Hallstrom except for Gilbert Grape.
Anything by Sydney Pollack after Tootsie.
I'll prefer to watch a Ron Howard movie over a Merchant/Ivory one.
Kevin Spacey is one of my worsts. I can't dig him. "Listen here, baby, if you don't like the way I act, you can leave, sugar"
Annete Bening is another one.
Quote from: Stefen Posts DrunkerKevin Spacey is one of my worsts. I can't dig him. "Listen here, baby, if you don't like the way I act, you can leave, sugar"
What exactly don't you like about him?
stefen, i'm dying to know who wrote ur sig.
Quote from: Jay Tee Emstefen, i'm dying to know who wrote ur sig.
Kevin Spacey.
Never got around to watching these, because I didn't like being told they would be "good" for me, liking eating granola cereal or brussel sprouts:
The Hours
Far From Heaven (Sorry, Julianne!)
White Oleander
Just a few there....
Whoa now, Far From Heaven is great, or it was great when put in the perspective of all the Douglas Sirk films.
I'll defend The Hours as well, and not even just for John C. at the dinner table.
Quote from: Stefen Posts Ghetto?Kevin Spacey is one of my worsts. I can't dig him. "Listen here, baby, if you don't like the way I act, you can leave, sugar"
yeah, i agree w/ spacey. this dude kind of sucks....hes made a string terrible shit films ...just like travolta. plus he plays the same character in each film..just about
lastly, JFK?!?!?!?!?!......ban that guy..please
If Oliver Stone is overrated, JFK is the most overrated. No actually it's overrated either way.
I never saw My Big Fat Greek Wedding. It's probably good. Oh Well..
Quote from: Slick ShoesI never saw My Big Fat Greek Wedding. It's probably good. Oh Well..
90 minute sitcom.
that's 79 minutes too long.
Quote from: petethat's 79 90 minutes too long.
Has disliking Citizen Kane become cool? I know a bunch of people that want to go into film and don't like it but don't have much of a reason why. This isn't to say if you're going into film, you need to love films like Casablanca and Seven Samurai, but it seems like people are rejecting these classics because it makes them seem unique to cast aside great films because they think they are on a different level.
Quote from: WalrusHas disliking Citizen Kane become cool?
I'd like to hope not. These people that you know are fucking stupid. Not in the sense that they don't like the movie, but what you're saying implies that they don't respect it. I'd like to draw a parallel by saying that's like saying, "I like Phillip Glass, but fuck man, I fucking hate Beethoven! That dude was a fucking shitty composer!"
To go into filmmaking and not at least respect, if not love your predecessors, the people who defined film before those kids were even living, is pretty dumb IMO.
Fuck, I can't believe that. I'm annoyed.
EDIT: Movies.
I fucking hate Forrest Gump. HATE.
that is if you believe the history of film and music is linear. it's perfectly reasonable to like phillip glass and hate beethovan. same thing with disliking movies "back in the days". why do filmmakers have to like citizen kane? what does liking good movies have anything to do with making good movies? that's a bunch of film school crap right there. plenty of filmmakers love kane and still make shitty movies, can't the opposite happen?
not that I like kids who claim to hate citizen kane just to be cool.
Quote from: petethat is if you believe the history of film and music is linear. it's perfectly reasonable to like phillip glass and hate beethovan. same thing with disliking movies "back in the days". why do filmmakers have to like citizen kane? what does liking good movies have anything to do with making good movies? that's a bunch of film school crap right there. plenty of filmmakers love kane and still make shitty movies, can't the opposite happen?
not that I like kids who claim to hate citizen kane just to be cool.
But you're missing the point. All the power to them if they dislike it. I don't give a fuck. I think it seems like they're too cool to be paying respect where it's due and understanding that film could be different had this film not came out, etc. I think that's kind of bullshit.
I don't think there is anyone who hates citizen kane, at least not anyone that takes film and filmmaking seriously. You may not think it's the greatest film of all time like some suggest but to hate it is a little absurd. Anyone who says they hate it can't really be taken seriously.
I'm not saying hating Citizen Kane is wrong. I love plenty of movies my friends don't, and I can't expect all of our tastes to line up. But it seems they so quickly dismiss Citizen Kane and Casablanca because they're classics, not because they don't like certain aspects about the films.
No, hating citizen kane is wrong. You can't hate something thats good. Even if you think it's overrated, like me, but you can't hate it. Anyone who says "I hate citizen kane" is wrong, just wrong.
I agree, Stefen. Besides, let's say someone did say they hated Citizen Kane, but they had what they considered legitimate, filmic reasons. Even after they explained themselves, how seriously could you take them from that point on? Not very, I suspect.
Quote from: deathnotronicQuote from: petethat is if you believe the history of film and music is linear. it's perfectly reasonable to like phillip glass and hate beethovan. same thing with disliking movies "back in the days". why do filmmakers have to like citizen kane? what does liking good movies have anything to do with making good movies? that's a bunch of film school crap right there. plenty of filmmakers love kane and still make shitty movies, can't the opposite happen?
not that I like kids who claim to hate citizen kane just to be cool.
But you're missing the point. All the power to them if they dislike it. I don't give a fuck. I think it seems like they're too cool to be paying respect where it's due and understanding that film could be different had this film not came out, etc. I think that's kind of bullshit.
i think the problem goes further than disliking films like Kane and Casablanca to "be cool", rather their dislike comes from impatience and and a lack of desire to understand and appreciate the work BEFORE judging.
It's fine to dislike it, but in order to come to a valid conclusion one must fully explore the material, come to appreciate and understand the landscape, THEN form an opinion wheither or not they as a viewer like it.
The problem with many young viewers is their inability to contexualize WHEN a film was made. If one does not understand what film, as a medium and industry, was at the time of film like Kane, they can not fully judge nor discredit.
Its a matter of being lazy and uninformed.
The sad thing that I've found with many young directors (aspiring and professional), they are more concerned with agents/producers/studio execs than they are with the history of the medium they're working in.
They can raddle off box office numbers and tell you who the VP of Production is at Universal, however they've never heard of Perston Sturgess nor have any desire to see his films.
I think the idea and image of a "film director" has gotten so over-exposed that people are much more concerned about the persona that comes with directing, than they are with the actual work.[/img]
QuoteThe problem with many young viewers is their inability to contexualize WHEN a film was made. If one does not understand what film, as a medium and industry, was at the time of film like Kane, they can not fully judge nor discredit.
Good point, but don't you think that very same thing may contribute to someone younger not giving an old film a chance? A reason that older movies are not seen may be due to them being old, and in this day and age we all seem to have been raised on films that rely more on visuals as oppose to storytelling. Back then I feel it was the opposite to an extent. Visual effects back in the day were pretty much non existant so everything relied on story telling. Even a film like American Beauty which doesn't have many if any visual effects will get overrated by someone younger when putting it up against citizen kane just cause they can relate better to newer films?
Quote from: Stefen Posts Ghetto?QuoteThe problem with many young viewers is their inability to contexualize WHEN a film was made. If one does not understand what film, as a medium and industry, was at the time of film like Kane, they can not fully judge nor discredit.
Good point, but don't you think that very same thing may contribute to someone younger not giving an old film a chance? A reason that older movies are not seen may be due to them being old, and in this day and age we all seem to have been raised on films that rely more on visuals as oppose to storytelling. Back then I feel it was the opposite to an extent. Visual effects back in the day were pretty much non existant so everything relied on story telling. Even a film like American Beauty which doesn't have many if any visual effects will get overrated by someone younger when putting it up against citizen kane just cause they can relate better to newer films?
I definately agree.
I believe much of their reluctance to watch older movies comes from this bizarre mental landscape that is based off of assumption, i.e." black&white films are boring..."
However if one actually sits down with a film like Casablanca and drops their preconcieved notions, the story is so bold and universal that one has to succumb to it.
Or a film like It's A Wonderful Life - one might have this preconcieved idea of it: "Oh I know that one, it's that stupid movie about the guy running down the street screaming that's always on during Christmas..." However, if you sat the most jaded teenager in front of that film, he'd be smiling and reaching for the Kleenex - if not, I'd question his humanity...
I think many young people form opinions without having fully viewed the films. Sometimes only having seen the first 10 minutes and turning it off out of frustration and boredom that their patience has vanished.
Younger generations don't have much patience - they want to be insantly grattified, however if one is patient enough to watch such a graceful story unfold, I don't think one would have any other choice but to be swept away.
When I was younger I'd screen films for friends that tested this exact theory. A perfect example is 2001 - if I hadn't been there to keep them in their seats, they would have shut it off after the first hour - maybe sooner. However, by the end, they were blown away and continue to consider it as a favorite.
I think the main problem is lack of dicipline and patience. Which, in essence, discredits any opinion they have. If one doesn't "watch" a film they're not entitled to an opinion.
How about we blame it on MTV?
So we can definitely say - If you don't like Citizen Kane it says more about you than it says anything about Citizen Kane.
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkI agree, Stefen. Besides, let's say someone did say they hated Citizen Kane, but they had what they considered legitimate, filmic reasons. Even after they explained themselves, how seriously could you take them from that point on? Not very, I suspect.
That's a bit dramatic but yes, we apparently agree. I wouldn't stop taking them seriously, I'd just take them from a different perspetive.
For example, I don't like big impersonal films. You have to take that into consideration when I say I don't love Lawrence of Arabia, North by Northwest, etc. If someone says to me, "I don't like Citizen Kane" I can think of them as someone clearly not interested film history, and I won't be surprised when they tell me their favorite film is Fight Club or whatever. But perhaps I can have a perfectly reasonable conversation with them about Hal Hartley.
Different strokes, you know.
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkQuote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkI agree, Stefen. Besides, let's say someone did say they hated Citizen Kane, but they had what they considered legitimate, filmic reasons. Even after they explained themselves, how seriously could you take them from that point on? Not very, I suspect.
Actually assuming they they gave good reasons I still might be able to take them seriously, it depends on what they look like though.
Quote from: Stefen Posts Ghetto?Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkQuote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkI agree, Stefen. Besides, let's say someone did say they hated Citizen Kane, but they had what they considered legitimate, filmic reasons. Even after they explained themselves, how seriously could you take them from that point on? Not very, I suspect.
Actually assuming they they gave good reasons I still might be able to take them seriously, it depends on what they look like though.
If they look like this, I definitely would:
(https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.calsmodels.com%2Fimages%2FXIXAX%2Fiftheymated.jpg&hash=6f5146f4e9d0d0f72a4a5885011eaed7513f67b8)
I get a lot of this in my film school classes, which is one of the reasons i ditched the film theory major. It seems most young viewers become bored with older movies, therefore dubbing them as poorly made films. The average modern day movie doesn't hold a frame on screen for more than 3 seconds, conditioning your attention span accordingly. after years of repeatedly viewing films made in this manner (and TV is no help), getting a younger viewer to sit through an older, more patient film, is an exhausting experience.
Fuck, that was a long post.
regarding Citizen Cane, i've never understood why it's considered the greatest movie of all time. sure it's definitely a great movie, but i think people who say it's "the best" are just basing that on it's tremendous influence towards film and film technique. many people have taken what Orson Wells's started, and improved upon it ten fold..... same deal with The Beatles.
The fuck do you know?
nothing. i know nothing.
Yes, and let's all remember that.
Citizen Kane was an innovation in cinema. You saying we should ignore that because things have improved upon it is like ignoring the radio because now we have the television.
Is that you in your avatar, jtm? I don't trust ya.
Quote from: Jay Tee Emregarding Citizen Cane, i've never understood why it's considered the greatest movie of all time. sure it's definitely a great movie, but i think people who say it's "the best" are just basing that on it's tremendous influence towards film and film technique. many people have taken what Orson Wells's started, and improved upon it ten fold..... same deal with The Beatles.
i also agree that you dont know anything
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkYou saying we should ignore that because things have improved upon it is like ignoring the radio because now we have the television.
No it's not. That comparison is absurd, tried, unfitting, and kind of cute. I wish to subscribe your audacious analogies newsletter.
I personally don't think Citizen Kane has been bettered. I think the deep focus photography is still remarkable, that any movie which has tried to clone the narrative technique has not furthered the process but only come off as derivative, that the story is just as compelling and epic as ever, that the actors in it are terrific and that Orson Welles has a presence which is simply unrivaled, that the boldness of the movie still gets through, that the movie makes love to celluloid, and that there isn't an American film which deserves to be placed above Citizen Kane.
Or hell, it's at least a knock around the block, you know.
Quote from: Losing the Horse:Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkYou saying we should ignore that because things have improved upon it is like ignoring the radio because now we have the television.
No it's not. That comparison is absurd, tried, unfitting, and kind of cute. I wish to subscribe your audacious analogies newsletter.
If you know anything about the history of radio as entertainment, then it's only kind of absurd, not so tried, kinda fitting, and still kind of cute.
You know, analogies off the top of your head can only be so apt. How bout "....is like ignoring the telegraph because we have the telephone." Satisfied?
(i'm going to pretend you've already replied with a 'negative')
Anyhow, I don't really give a shit. For god sakes, are you reading what JTM is saying?
Oh ho ho, I was equally appalled I can assure you. In my last post you can read my heavy handed, flat, tiresome, and long winded defense of Citizen Kane.
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkYes, and let's all remember that.
Citizen Kane was an innovation in cinema. You saying we should ignore that because things have improved upon it is like ignoring the radio because now we have the television.
where in my post did i say we should ignore it's innovation in cinema?... i simply stated why i think it's considered "the greatest movie" of all time.
and for those of you who don't agree with me, please enlighten me as to why it's the best movie ever.
Too late.
Quote from: Losing the Horse:I personally don't think Citizen Kane has been bettered. I think the deep focus photography is still remarkable, that any movie which has tried to clone the narrative technique has not furthered the process but only come off as derivative, that the story is just as compelling and epic as ever, that the actors in it are terrific and that Orson Welles has a presence which is simply unrivaled, that the boldness of the movie still gets through, that the movie makes love to celluloid, and that there isn't an American film which deserves to be placed above Citizen Kane.
fair enough, but i was speaking to Gamblor who clearly misunderstood the intentions of my post. maybe Citizen Kane is the best movie of all time, but i personally don't think so and was just saying why i think it's considered so.... i do applaud you for at least giving me an explanation as to why you believe it, as opposed to just some smart ass remark not backing up ur opinion. that's far too rare around here.
ya know, i've pretty much come to the conclusion that i'm not much of an Internet guy. i've been a member of this community since the PTA board day's and have a lot of fond memories of this place, but the truth is, i just don't come off as well on a message board as i do in the real world... i'm sure if i met you guys on the outside we would get along famously but this ain't the real world. far from it....so i feel it's time to move on and focus on getting "my dream" of being a filmmaker on it's way without this distraction of other people opinions getting in my way and bringing me down. sure, opinions are healthy, but as i've said before, i find myself, most often, misunderstood either by my own fault or not... this thread is not the reason for it mind you (i feel i should underline that cause i'm sure some of ya will think it is but whatevs ) but it was the catalyst for this decision. i took a year break from here for the same reasons and just started posting again a few months ago, and had hoped i was over it but i'm just noticing the same problem again and again..... this is the only board i've ever posted at and i have learned a lot from reading here and will never regret having found this place..... hell, Atticus Jones's posts alone made it worth visiting. i have no hard feelings against anyone here (well, actually, just a couple people) and just feel it's time to move on.... a big shout out to the following people who stick out in my mind as making this place something special.....
MacGuffin (the greatest thing this site has ever seen, thanks abunch for giving us all the news that's fit to read without asking anything in return. this place revolves around you)
Jeremy Blackman (an all around good guy)
Ghostboy (i bought ur short film and feel bad about never getting around to reviewing it. if there's anyone here who will make it, it's you)
Pubrick (ur insults always put a smile on my face whether they were directed at me or not. u some funny shit)
Atticus Jones (my reason for being here. looking forward to ur next, and so on)
Regular Karate (i always felt a strange connection to ur posts and really related to u in some strange way.)
Picolas (always fair)
Sigur (nicest guy here)
...i'm forgetting some people i know but oh well...
so, anyways, i love you all and hope all of you become whatever it is you desire.
JTM signing off...
I'll be blunt and say I only think it's the greatest movie of all time, because that's the general consensus. I understand what everyone (being historians and Roger Ebert and others) means when they describe why it's the greatest film. I think they're all right. Why should I repeat what's been said millions of times? Call me ignorant, call me lazy, but I think I trust their opinions enough to believe them. They know more than me. It would be like visually defending 2001...
Well...erm, nevermind. See ya.
jay tee em-
take it easy and good luck w/ future enderavors
...we all need to hang out and drink some where....
Quote from: Jay Tee EmCitizen Cane,
Orson Wells's
INVALIDATED
nah just kiddin witcha, my only regret is that ur not Brazoilange.. latt!
Hmm. Strange. That post of his made me realize I don't really add much to xixax. Good thing I'll be leaving for a while, too.
Quote from: Gamblor Posts DrunkGood thing I'll be leaving for a while, too.
Quote from: Pubrickmy only regret is that ur not Brazoilange.
Admit it Gamblor, Stefen retired you. He dominated you so bad he made you hang up the mouse and keyboard. (https://xixax.com/proxy.php?request=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ezboard.com%2Fimages%2Femoticons%2Fpimp.gif&hash=545cde09784b397779767aac8b02c538dddfe74f)
I think that there's a difference between the most innovative film of all time and what people say is the best film of all time. People would say the best film of all time is their favorite movie, the movie they admire most, but the most innovative and inspiring film of all time could be something different. I think it's absurd to say everyone should think Citizen Kane is the best film ever made and always will be. It could very well be the most innovative film ever made, and that could be considered fact, but for everyone to love the film the same is something that just won't happen.