Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

Popular movies that you hate


Recommended Posts

I paid money to go see Avengers, and Avengers: Endgames, and enjoyed them very much.  The biggest selling point for me was Joss Whedon's ear for dialogue.  

I'm in total agreement that zombies as a genre just needs to die.

I have acquaintances who are just nuts about Transformers movies, and even thing the 1985 animated film is some kind of cultural touchstone, but I could never get into the idea of sitting down for what is essentially an extended toy commercial, much less paying the price of admission for the privilege.

 

Now, I'm glad I saw A Clockwork Orange, but it was a tough watch, and I'm not sure I want to to that again.

It's something I've thought about over the years, but is not wanting to watch excessive cruelty really such a bad thing?

Is it being over sensitive, or just a sign that your soul still works?

 

 

 

 

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rjbartrop said:

Now, I'm glad I saw A Clockwork Orange, but it was a tough watch, and I'm not sure I want to to that again.

It's something I've thought about over the years, but is not wanting to watch excessive cruelty really such a bad thing?

Is it being over sensitive, or just a sign that your soul still works?

This reminds me of dialogue in a film I recently watched.

Character says:

There are two things, that if you lose them, you can't get them back. Trust. And your soul.

Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Bronxgirl48 said:

I'm always drawn, though, to the unpopular stuff.  And that usually means a genre film in the horror/sci-fi/mystery category.   ROBOT MONSTER is a favorite.   

I know I wasn't the only one who helped Kickstart the restoration of the original "lost" 3D Robot Monster print for Blu3D disk:   B)

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Ferris Bueller's Day Off made me loathe Matthew Broderick and want someone to slap the smugness out of him. This cannot be a good thing to desire.

Harold and Maude: Sorry, I know a lot of people love this one. I had never seen this film until last night, and though I'm glad Ruth Gordon had this starring role and the cinematography was beautiful in a way apparently unavailable to current cinematographers, I despised the filmmakers for loading the scales so much against the non-"hip" people, and the story, dialogue, and attitudes were so ridiculously dated that by comparison a Nehru jacket would look new.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, King Rat said:

Ferris Bueller's Day Off made me loathe Matthew Broderick and want someone to slap the smugness out of him. This cannot be a good thing to desire.

Harold and Maude: Sorry, I know a lot of people love this one. I had never seen this film until last night, and though I'm glad Ruth Gordon had this starring role and the cinematography was beautiful in a way apparently unavailable to current cinematographers, I despised the filmmakers for loading the scales so much against the non-"hip" people, and the story, dialogue, and attitudes were so ridiculously dated that by comparison a Nehru jacket would look new.

Sounds like we both took the plunge at the same time.  Harold and Maude was one of those films I'd avoided for years, because it didn't sound like something I'd enjoy, and was right.  I was okay with the dated style,  but I'm supposed to be sympathetic to the plight of this spoiled man child who had everything practically thrown at him?  If anything, my sympathies were with the people around him who had to put up with Harold's baloney.

Quadrophenia was another one where I couldn't muster up any sympathy for the protagonist, even though I'm a huge fan of The Who's music.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, overeasy said:

TikiSoo.  I disagree on Blandings.  Perhaps it's the fact that I own an older house and can relate to the ongoing issues.  Certainly not Myrna's best, but the "paint color" scene is a classic!

Well I'm a professional restorer & know all too well what a time & money pit an old house is too since I do all the work myself.

I actually LOVE that scene and actually start my restoration proposals/presentations/articles with it and always get a laugh. It works remarkably well in text, although maybe because I can hear her voice in my head when reading it.

No argument, Myrna Loy is beloved and a very talented, natural actress. I just don't care for Nora Charles, the charactor. I think she's haughty, smug & full of herself.  Irene Dunn strikes me that way sometimes too, like in MY FAVORITE WIFE. 

As for HAROLD & MAUDE, it's one of my top ten faves, but as many of you have pointed out, I first saw it as a young adult. I remember looking at my friends saying "ew, they really slept together?" found the movie shocking, then poignant. It is kind of heavy handed and at times silly, but I love the story. Through the years watching it, I discovered how brilliant & funny Vivian Pickles as the Mother is. It's like once you know the story, your focus shifts to other performances.

As we left the theater my friends said,  "Maude is what you're going to be like as an old lady" which I could not fathom. And they were 100% right. 

  • Like 1
  • Haha 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I make this point too often but comedies are very much of their own time. It's a rare one that crosses generations in it's appeal. Blandings was once a novel plot idea, but it's tired now. Still it has its moments. I always like the bit about the lallies or whatever, and Cary did exasperation very well. Douglas is very good, too, always hanging around to see Myrna. ("Why doesn't he get married!?")

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether any comedy or plot idea is "tired" depends on who's watching.  As with Blandings, my younger daughter, who's never seen it until a couple or so years ago, and had gone through the whole having a house built ordeal with her ex a decade earlier, said she found it "familiarly    amusing".    After all, some are capable of watching "classic" movies of an advanced age with consideration of WHEN it was made, and not compare anything about them with what the current culture is at the moment.   

And funny is funny regardless of when it comes from.     One example....    In the Laurel and Hardy short MEN O' WAR('29)  there's a situation where the boys, both sailors and wanting to treat two girls they meet to sodas, find they only have 15 cents.  Thinking the sodas are 5 cents a piece, Ollie cooks up the idea of ordering only three and having him and Stan split one of them.  But when the sodas come, Ollie indicates to Stan to dink his half first.  But When Ollie discovers Stan drank the whole thing and confronts him about it, Stan in his high-pitched whimper tells Ollie, "I couldn't HELP it.  My half was on the BOTTOM!"  :lol:

Now, THAT'S funny.  In 1929 AND 2021!  ;) 

Sepiatone

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

In regards to HAROLD AND MAUDE (1971) don't forget there was some pre-release cutting done.  → I reckon 'We The Viewers' will never know if it would've been a better movie -OR- would we be left with a different feeling had those late cuts not been made.  I recall Bud Cort mentioning he was displeased with some of those cuts; one of which was why his character 'Harold' had slept with 'Maude'.  (Note there's 2 editors credited, btw). 

In one regard it was fairly obvious there were late cuts made to the film.  When I first saw HAROLD AND MAUDE many moons ago I wondered why Cyril Cusack was credited on the opening credit sequence.  He's in the movie for what, 5 seconds?  His part as 'Glaucus' bit the dust!   Even a dopey teenager such as I was when I first saw "H & S" could figure his part was chop/ped for some reason!  I expect all that late-in-the-game excised footage is long-gone.  

(Much like the 1977 movie OH, GOD! where you see Donald Pleasence's name on the opening credits and he's barely in the movie.  Apparently his part as the questioning priest was deemed to 'not work' so his part bit the dust . . . but I reckon he still got a prominent credit due to his contract). 

  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, King Rat said:

Ferris Bueller's Day Off made me loathe Matthew Broderick and want someone to slap the smugness out of him.

That gave him a career, but didn't typecast him. He's pretty much played introverted bumblers ever since.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

In spite of any "cuts"(which the general public didn't know about until many years later) I liked H&M pretty much.  But, as usual, I went into it without any expectations, so I had no expectations it failed to live up to.  :rolleyes:  I found the Maude character's personal philosophy a good one for a person of her character's age, and the quick flash of the sight of the serial number on her wrist certainly explained a lot of where that philosophy came from.   And perhaps that cut that Dan asserts would have explained why  Harold had slept with Maude was maybe cut because  the reason was obvious without it.   B)  And perhaps Cusak was mentioned in the credits, despite his short appearance was due to his status in the acting community....? 

Sepiatone

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Sepiatone said:

And funny is funny regardless of when it comes from.     One example....    In the Laurel and Hardy short MEN O' WAR('29)  there's a situation where the boys, both sailors and wanting to treat two girls they meet to sodas, find they only have 15 cents.  Thinking the sodas are 5 cents a piece, Ollie cooks up the idea of ordering only three and having him and Stan split one of them.  But when the sodas come, Ollie indicates to Stan to dink his half first.  But When Ollie discovers Stan drank the whole thing and confronts him about it, Stan in his high-pitched whimper tells Ollie, "I couldn't HELP it.  My half was on the BOTTOM!"  :lol:

Stan Laurel was ahead of his time in creating "minimalist" humor, a mind-blowing concept in the early talkie days of upgrading silent-movie slapstick--Like his innocently but torturously annoying Ollie with Kneesie-Earsie-Nosie for two minutes of screentime in The Devil's Brother.

images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQP13Rj7LZUOvfU-YaLN4R

(My favorite is still in the short where Stan gets locked in the bedroom closet just before Ollie goes to bed, and every time he knocks, Ollie gets up to see who's at the bedroom door.  Finally, Ollie figures it out, opens the closet, and asks Stan, "If you knew I was there, why didn't you just shout for me to let you out?"   And Stan innocently replies, "Well, it was so DARK, I didn't think you'd HEAR me!")

  • Haha 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, King Rat said:

Ferris Bueller's Day Off made me loathe Matthew Broderick and want someone to slap the smugness out of him. This cannot be a good thing to desire.

Google "Why Ferris Bueller is a Textbook-Psychiatry Sociopath" from any number of Internet and YouTube fans, and you will never un-see the movie the same way again.    😮

Me, I already hated John Hughes for being a smug, untalented hack, so I never warmed to Ferris's incarnation of Hughes' 40-yo. teen-hipster fantasies in the first place, but it's nice to see a consensus growing.  

  • Like 2
  • Confused 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
22 hours ago, King Rat said:

Ferris Bueller's Day Off made me loathe Matthew Broderick and want someone to slap the smugness out of him. This cannot be a good thing to desire.

 

Ferris Bueller appears to be a favourite  Unfavourite   ( couldn't resist trying to be oxymoronic there )  movie here on this thread.   I just want to say,  I absolutely understand that:   Ferris,  in the person of Matthew Broderick,  could definitely strike people as annoying, full of himself,  and smug.  Yes, I can see that.

However,  I'm  going to defend this movie ,  just a bit,  if only because ain't nobody else speaking up for it,  seems it's universally despised here.

I actually think Ferris Bueller's Day Off  is fun.  It's kind of a teen fantasy,  to just give yourself an illicit day off school ,  to get your friend and your girlfriend   (  or boyfriend,  as the case may be )  and take off for a day of freedom and mayhem.  I love the "Twist and Shout" scene,  for instance.  Now,  this is by no means  on my list of favourite movies of all time,  not even close.  But I enjoy it whenever I've seen it  ( I think,  only twice,  once when it first came out,  and once some years later.)  I don't have a problem with  it.

John Hughes really did have the pulse of '80s teens,  and I think his films reflect that.  Again,  not a huge fan,  but on the other hand,  I find them kind of enjoyable when I come across them.

Edit:  I wrote the above before I saw Eric's post,  denigrating John Hughes as an "untalented hack".  I really think that's unfair, also,  not a "consensus",  there are many John Hughes fans out there.   But I almost never agree w ith Eric,  so there ya go.

  • Like 3
  • Thanks 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

@SEPIATONE:   Here's a tidbit of info in regards to pre-release 'cuts' and on-screen credits; maybe you'll find it interesting + it was a popular movie at the time.

We have the psycho-sexual thriller SEA OF LOVE (1989).  If you've seen the theatrical version you know Lorraine Bracco is not featured in the film even thought she filmed at least 2 scenes and so she does not get an on-screen credit in the theatrical version as her part was cut out in its entirety.  Not even 5 seconds remained like Cyril Cusack in "Harold and Maude".

For an inexplicable reason, in the year 2000 . . . Universal released "Sea of Love" on VHS for the 3rd time under a heading that says 'UNIVERSAL THRILLERS'  and this version of the movie featured Lorraine Bracco's name in the opening credits and her part was put back into the movie (along with an extra scene with William Hickey as 'Frank Sr.' and another scene involving Al Pacino's mid-life crisis where he gets paranoid on the street observing a potential suspect).  

This particular VHS-issue puzzles me.  Did someone working at Universal issue the 'pre-release version' complete with Lorraine Bracco's credit and part restored on purpose?  Or was it just an odd mistake the company made?  I'm not privy to the inner workings of movie studios "Homevideo" divisions, but I find this kind of stuff fascinating.   

1990:  SEA OF LOVE released on tape by 'MCA Home Video'. 

1995:  SEA OF LOVE re-released on tape by 'MCA/Universal Home Video'.

2000:  SEA OF LOVE released again on VHS under the 'Universal Thrillers' heading with the pre-release version on the videocassette instead of the theatrical version.  Except there is nothing on the video box or cassette label to indicate this is a different version of the movie but, sure enough, when I plunked this 2000-issue tape into my VCR it's not the theatrical version contained therein. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, EricJ said:

Google "Why Ferris Bueller is a Textbook-Psychiatry Sociopath" from any number of Internet and YouTube fans, and you will never un-see the movie the same way again.    😮

Me, I already hated John Hughes for being a smug, untalented hack, so I never warmed to Ferris's incarnation of Hughes' 40-yo. teen-hipster fantasies in the first place, but it's nice to see a consensus growing.  

Not to defend Ferris, but hen you think about it, most movie character behaviour comes off as pretty crazy when judged by real world standards.    In a lot of cases, part of their appeal is things people fantasize about doing if they weren't held back by those very necessary social conventions.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 10/2/2021 at 4:15 PM, rjbartrop said:

I paid money to go see Avengers, and Avengers: Endgames, and enjoyed them very much.  The biggest selling point for me was Joss Whedon's ear for dialogue. 

At the risk of revealing myself as the only comic book movie geek on this board, I think Josh Wheedon was only involved with the original Avengers? By Endgame, I'm pretty sure control of the franchise had passed on to ... the Russo brothers, I want to say.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Psycho is my least favorite of the major films Hitchcock made. Never loved the horror genre and just wasn't thrilled with the story or acting.  "2001: A Space Odyssey" is also a drag. The lack of dialogue really hurts that one, even though it does have great cinematography and visuals. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, EricJ said:

Me, I already hated John Hughes for being a smug, untalented hack

The guy died really unfortunately young, you know. Just sayin'. I thought Planes, Trains and Automobiles was really brilliant.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, sewhite2000 said:

At the risk of revealing myself as the only comic book movie geek on this board, I think Josh Wheedon was only involved with the original Avengers? By Endgame, I'm pretty sure control of the franchise had passed on to ... the Russo brothers, I want to say.

16539.jpg?fit=640,480

Seriously, obviously there's at least one other, though science fiction is what I really geek out on.

If you've watched TCM on Saturday mornings, you know comic book movies have been around almost as long as comic books.  I see the current crop of Marvel movies as part of the long tradition of escapist spectacle that Hollywood does so well.   People took their minds off the Depression by watching chorus girls dance on the wing of an airplane,  and today people want to see good vanquish evil in glorious 3-D.   It's Jason fighting stop motion skeletons, only we use fancier tech to do the job.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, misswonderly3 said:

Ferris Bueller appears to be a favourite  Unfavourite   ( couldn't resist trying to be oxymoronic there )  movie here on this thread. 

I never saw it when it first came out, but wanted to. I tried watching it in 2020 and couldn't get interested after the first half hour. I chalked it up to just being too old for the storyline. 

Same for A CHRISTMAS STORY. I just found the charactors mean. The sight of a toddler in a snow suit (or bunny suit?) did not strike me as hilarious.  The kids were really nasty to each other, the parents weren't the nicest either. Just didn't like it. 

But I still say "Fra-gil-lé", thought that one line was cute.

Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, misswonderly3 said:

Ferris Bueller appears to be a favourite  Unfavourite   ( couldn't resist trying to be oxymoronic there )  movie here on this thread.   I just want to say,  I absolutely understand that:   Ferris,  in the person of Matthew Broderick,  could definitely strike people as annoying, full of himself,  and smug.  Yes, I can see that.

However,  I'm  going to defend this movie ,  just a bit,  if only because ain't nobody else speaking up for it,  seems it's universally despised here.

I actually think Ferris Bueller's Day Off  is fun.  It's kind of a teen fantasy,  to just give yourself an illicit day off school ,  to get your friend and your girlfriend   (  or boyfriend,  as the case may be )  and take off for a day of freedom and mayhem.  I love the "Twist and Shout" scene,  for instance.  Now,  this is by no means  on my list of favourite movies of all time,  not even close.  But I enjoy it whenever I've seen it  ( I think,  only twice,  once when it first came out,  and once some years later.)  I don't have a problem with  it.

John Hughes really did have the pulse of '80s teens,  and I think his films reflect that.  Again,  not a huge fan,  but on the other hand,  I find them kind of enjoyable when I come across them.

Edit:  I wrote the above before I saw Eric's post,  denigrating John Hughes as an "untalented hack".  I really think that's unfair, also,  not a "consensus",  there are many John Hughes fans out there.   But I almost never agree w ith Eric,  so there ya go.

I agree MissW. I like Ferris Bueller, I also think it's a fun movie. I also like Home Alone, The Breakfast Club, Sixteen Candles. They are fun films and I enjoy watching all of them. John Hughes was far from an "untalented hack"  a comment from another poster, quite the contrary. He was a very talented filmaker. John Hughes ended his films on a possitive note, maybe that's what's bothering the grumps on the bds.

  • Like 4
  • Thanks 1
Link to post
Share on other sites

I adored Ferris when it was released and saw it probably five times or so.

I enjoy watching it today, perhaps even more, nostalgia being what it is.  Who says a smug lead character can't be entertaining. 

I always thought it would make a good one of those Hollywood to Broadway musical type things.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites

I laughed through Love Story because it was so bad.  The book wasn't great either.

The Man Who Knew Too Much with Doris Day was pretty bad (one of my least favorite Hitchcock's).

As for what the title of this category means, I'm really unsure.  Are we talking about ticket sales or critical response (or just what your friends, etc. like).

Link to post
Share on other sites

I guess it could be either one, Chaya.  Box office hits the critics didn't like /OR/ movies that were critical darlings which didn't do so hot at the ticket window. 

I reckon Hitchcock's '56 remake of THE MAN WHO KNEW TOO MUCH is also one of my least-favorite "popular" movies.  I'll take the '34 B&W low-budget version any day.  What Hitchcock accomplished in 75 minutes in 1934 took 120 minutes in 1956 and the result was far less satisfying. 

QUE SERA SERA . . . WHATEVER WILL BE WILL BE . . . THE FUTURE'S NOT OURS TO . . . PUKE!  BARF!  ILLNESS! 

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
© 2021 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...