It seems that you're using an outdated browser. Some things may not work as they should (or don't work at all).
We suggest you upgrade newer and better browser like: Chrome, Firefox, Internet Explorer or Opera

×
avatar
AdamR: The Cable Guy

I think it was ahead of its time. Maybe people weren't ready to see a dark, twisted, creepy Jim Carrey.
It is one of my favorite movies of all time.
I saw that movie with a few friends and that's the way they felt. It felt wrong for them but I loved it.
I'm going to say House of Flying Daggers. The critics didn't like the movie much, probably because it isn't as good as Hero but it's still a great movie for Zhang Yimou's Wuxia movies and has probably one of the best climaxes in a martial arts movie, you expect the dancing that comes with the wuxia sub genre but you get a brutal fight instead and I found that really powerful.
avatar
roninnogitsune: I'm going to say House of Flying Daggers. The critics didn't like the movie much, probably because it isn't as good as Hero but it's still a great movie for Zhang Yimou's Wuxia movies and has probably one of the best climaxes in a martial arts movie, you expect the dancing that comes with the wuxia sub genre but you get a brutal fight instead and I found that really powerful.
I actually prefer it to Hero. Hero's deeper, maybe, but I find House more entertaining, and I've seen it several more times.
"Alien 3". I know its been spoken of before in this thread but that assembly cut is one of my favorite films, & the documentary that comes with it is also pretty good. Also great for being able to use as an example of the kind of weirdness that can plague a film during production. Allot of people say it wasn't faithful to the original but I think the third film drives that point from the first film of the Alien being the perfect survivor, Ash knew she'd never escape.

Also I'd like to mention "2010: The Year We Make Contact". Really enjoyed that film, watched it after reading Clarke's novels, but I've heard allot of gripe about it. Not hard to understand considering that it follows 2001. Its a good sequel though.
avatar
TStael: I think that the great storytelling and the plausible "worn and used" universe of the original series, and the charm of very well played characters was supplanted by special effects and commercial interest in the follow up movies.
I'll have to disagree. the "great storytelling and the plausible "worn and used" universe" is also present in the prequels.

avatar
TStael: And the characters were just so weak, compared.
I will disagree as well. However, this shows what someone once said that people spend more time comparing them to the originals, instead of discussing the movies themselves.
avatar
TStael: I think that the great storytelling and the plausible "worn and used" universe of the original series, and the charm of very well played characters was supplanted by special effects and commercial interest in the follow up movies.
avatar
Alexrd: I'll have to disagree. the "great storytelling and the plausible "worn and used" universe" is also present in the prequels.

avatar
TStael: And the characters were just so weak, compared.
avatar
Alexrd: I will disagree as well. However, this shows what someone once said that people spend more time comparing them to the originals, instead of discussing the movies themselves.
I appreciate this is most certainly in the eye of the beholder, but... I did find the MAD Magazine cover of the young Obi-Wan beheading JarJar fairly charming. ;-)

Where (in terms of scenes) was this universe worn, used and plausible then, if I might ask? Anywhere the droid army was shown, the writing on the wall in capital letters was "computer animation." As opposed to human storm troopers in the first. And air chases: so very smooth, as opposed to blue screen and miniatures.

The same issue was with Lord Of the Rings: the two latter parts were just so computer animated that they were no longer really able to carry through the make-believe - but first was great. There was something very scary about those great big black horses with blood dripping down their hooves, and those nails driven into them from the wrong side. But not so in later films.

I should have liked to like the sequel films - but could not. Maybe Disney will salvage the franchise, let's see.

Edit: snipping.
Post edited November 27, 2012 by TStael
avatar
Export: Citizen Kane. I'm serious. You use it as an example of a great film, or the best film, and it's instantly shot down and mocked as if you'd just suggested Pearl Harbor. It's kind of like saying Final Fantasy VII is one of the best games; probably more of a reaction to the frequency and predictability with which people cite it as a benchmark, but it's still annoying.
avatar
BadDecissions: Well, do you think it's the best film? Certainly nobody would deny that the cinematography was amazing and groundbreaking.
Actually, you'd be surprised how many people deny just that. Citizen Kane certainly isn't the greatest film ever made, it's something like 70 years old now, but it does routinely get mocked as unwatchable art house stuff. Which it isn't, it's probably one of the least boring films I've seen in recent years.
I'll add a few more films since this thread is still alive. However all of them are little known American indie films that "nobody" watches, but I thought were unfairly maligned and/or critically dismissed:

The Hawk Is Dying. 2005 film. Character study on monomania and existential regret, as seen through the eyes of George Gattling, a rumpled and obsessive Paul Giamatti obsessed with falconry, except that he kills all the hawks he tries to train.

Claire Dolan. Lodge Kerrigan's 1998 follow-up to his breakout Sundance indie flick Clean, Shaven. He became a critical darling with his debut's searing portrayal of schizophrenia through the eyes of one man trying to re-unite with his daughter; his second film deals with a New York call girl (Katrin Cartlidge, icily brililant) trying to navigate an emotionally barren and taxing existence with a hostile and controlling pimp on her back (Colm Meaney, who most know as Chief O'Brien of Star Trek fame). Lodge Kerrigan didn't get the same accolades this time 'round, though populist critic-of-the-masses Roger Ebert gave this art-film four stars.

Sorry, Haters, 2006 psychological drama about a severely emotionally damaged woman who works as a low-level executive at an MTV-esque entertainment channel, who hijacks a Syrian cabbie one night in a twisted psychological game of manipulation. Really stunning character study in repressed rage, envy, and the curdled milk of the American Dream, but told through the perspective of a native and a hard-working immigrant. By far Robin Wright's best role of her career (most know her as "Princess Buttercup"). Guess critics found this movie too corrosive, however.

On a lessor note, I'll add The Black Dahlia to the list. It's not an independent film, but a big-budget Brian De Palma noir period film. It's was critically panned, and rightfully so. It's comically misguided in its hard-boiled script, casting choices, hammy direction, and methodology of building tension. However, it's so colossally un-self-aware of how over-the-top it is (all the drama is played "straight") that it's destined to fall into a "so bad it's good" category in the midnight movie vein. I don't think I've laughed harder at a non-comedy film.