Everybody Loved Them; I Cringed

Uh-oh, Clockwork Orange is on my current list of films to rent again, but I do remember gratuitous violence to the point of being silly. British humour?

Believe it or not, I didn't start this thread to take whacks at sacred cows. I started this thread to illustrate what I viewed to be popular movies (critical and commercial successes) that I found to be fundamentally flawed in a dishonest sort of way--in a way that made me cringe. So much for my intentions.

Movies that are boring don't make me cringe. They make me, well, bored. Sometimes even sleepy.

Any time we talk about movies or books or art we can't escape the issue of personal taste. Certainly boring is a matter of taste. I was hoping to avoid the issue by discussing fundamental flaws. But even there I was wrong. So much for my intentions.

BTW, for what it's worth, I think that Citizen Kane was a very good movie, but not a likeable one. I find it necessary to distinguish between my favorites--those that touch me or amuse me or that have some elements I can relate to--and movies I think are good, even if I didn't like them much. For example, I acknowledge that Jane Austen was a good writer. But I don't like her work much. It's not to my taste, but, despite this fact, I know good writing when I see it.

Roberta, I get your point. I will mention that there is one movie that boggles me as per the 'dishonestly flawed' list. My Dog Skip....I felt completely manipulated, but the film was somehow acted so honestly it was very real. I was bawling at the end, and was left very confused about what had just happened to me.

eoe- Yeah, it was foul and lowlife..........but in such an elegant way. Although I felt uncomfortable watching the movie, especially the rape scene, but the music in the background gave it the feel of dance.

As far as the aversive therapy part of the movie, I have always found films that have psychological themes fascinating. I can certainly understand your reaction, though.

Depends how you want to judge a film. Two I love to pick on are 2001 - Space Odyssey and Dr. Zhivago. Lavish, well filmed, stemming from brilliant concepts - yet vapid for the most part, unless you want a picturebook to look at. I prefer a b grade western over such fare as that.

Phoenix, I'm also an admirer of A Clockwork Orange for the reasons you state. I have to add that I can watch just about anything in a movie. It's the news I have trouble with.

Hmmm ... well the new one still heavily relies on special effects so perhaps that was a wise choice. But still, its different!

Like you, I liked the first one and hated the second one. Originality turned into pomposity, freshness into woodenness. Too much concept crammed into the story made for unpalatably slow, almost teacher-like monologues and "cryptic" dialogues that still hardly clarified what it was all about. Made you want to go: "dont tell me what it's about, show me - and if you do gotta explain, at least do it well instead of trying to just appear 'wise and mysterious' ..."

But part III, at least its second half, does away with the self-important explanatory bits and just goes into action, what these movies in the end are best in, anyway. Of course, they've really gone from the original quirky innovation into something more like hyperbolic overdrive, and the Jesus-metaphors tend to get a bit much. But it is gripping and at least in the second half I stopped giggling at what was intended seriously and was convinced to suspend my disbelief ...

Egh, Rohmer. Now there's a critically acclaimed director I can't stomach. I saw "Les Rendez-vous de Paris" and one of those Contes - cant remember whether it was the Winter, Spring, Summer or Autumn one. He epitomises the cliches about French movies to me: all interminable pseudo-deep relationship chit-chat of vain Parisian thirty- and fourty-somethings.



Didnt see Microcosmos but I have no problem with "watching grass grow" - some of the very best movies I've seen (by Tarr/Feher, Bartas, Puipa, Sokurov) hardly had any dialogue. Its where films get overly explanatory and pompous (like the Matrix II) or obsessed by the purportedly "deep" questions of the protagonists' comfortable superficial little vain lives (Rohmer) that I lose interest. ;-)



Hmmm ... I saw Drowning by Numbers first, liked it - not in any deep way, just appreciated the cleverness and originality of it. Much later I saw The Pillow Book and loved it - visually astounding enough to get impressed by, without form ever actually overtaking the allure of the story itself. Then after that I saw The Baby of Macon, and didnt like it much at all.

Still, I wouldnt put Baby of Macon on this thread, either - its like someone here said, there's a difference between movies that you disliked and movies that you thought were bad. Well, I disliked The Baby of Macon because it was too painful to see, for me - it was too igly and I didnt grasp the point of why it needed to be so - but that doesnt in itself say whether it was a bad movie or not, just that it wasnt for me.

Anyway, to the question - films that were critically acclaimed but that just made me wince ... here's one.

- Kieslowski's "Red" - from the "Red", "White", "Blue" triptych. Oh, and his and Tykwer's "Heaven".

I mean, lookit, I liked Kieslowski. I first saw his "Blind Chance" (from '87) on TV and was so impressed. I remember an inventive and suspenseful story set-up, some unsettling moral dilemmas elaborated in unpredictable ways, and all that convincingly set in the grim reality of communist Poland. Then I saw "A Short Film about Love", liked it: well done, again the deeply unsettling, but ambiguously posed moral dilemmas, the authentic and convincing setting in Polish social reality.

Then Kieslowski produced his famous "Dekalog", got renowned and rich and settled into comfortable Parisian work-exile. And his films started getting ever more pretentious and self-satisfied.

"La Double Vie de Veronique", I must admit, still got me in the end - I actually remember sitting there all teary-eyed. But I also remember feeling so cheated about that as soon as I left the cinema. All the new age-ish hot air about synchronicity. The overblown melodrama.

It seems Kieslowski then succumbed ever more to the vain charms of pretentious triviality ... ever more pretty, young girls in his movie, who would, of course, stare into space in seemingly profound thought they would then poutingly whisper something mysterious about ... I think "Red" was meant all metaphysical, but it just made me laugh. Then there was "Heaven", which he did with Tom Tykwer, should have been a brilliant colaboration ("Lola Rennt" was utterly cool), but again ... <shakes head>. It started out really good, the opening shot from above paraphrasing the labyrinth of the story, the camera zooming in onto its opening scene ... clever. From there it went downhill tho, especially the second half - they totally overreached, spoiling a good little story with all kinds of pretensions that weren't worked out well and then led them to end with some megalamoniac, but wholly unbelievable end scene ...

I just saw Lost in Translation and thought it a boring movie in which nothing happened. Of course, in the 1960s, we said life has no plots but this was a stupid movie.

I found the newsreel type scenes of Tokyo both uninteresting and unattractive. So much for Sofia's vaunted eye.

I could not understand why a woman who was in such a state of ennui over her busy husband would latch onto a monosyllabic loser like the character played by Bill Murray. It is probably a blessing that I fell asleep during the film.

On the other hand, I highly recommend Bubba Ho Tep which is sweet but sleazy fun.

This thread is fun.
A few personal opinions.

Citizen Kane: great storytelling, an interesting character (you are not supposed to actually like him, BTW), a good look into journalism. Rosebud, of course, is what every middle aged to old person often misses: innocence and freedom.

Carrey, Arnold, Stallone movies: Carrey: I loved "The Truman Show"; "Man on the Moon" is interesting; laughed with "Dumb and Dumber" (there's nothing wrong with being silly). "The Cable Guy" is one of the worst films ever. Arnold: "Terminator" (the first one) and "Total Recall" are great films and Sci-Fi classics, IMO. I have also enjoyed such "jewels" as "Kindergarten Cop", "True Lies" and even "Junior".
Stallone: he was once in "Convoy", an OK Peckinpah vehicle.
Wayne: couldn't act, but some of the stories are good.

Greenaway: I have only seen "The Belly of an Architect", and I haven't got the guts to stomach any other of his films.

Kieslowski: loved one of his first films, "Amator" (The Director?), but he went downhill in my taste afterwards: "Blue" is so damn pretentious!

Costner: I don't understand why he is so villified in the US. He's corny and politically correct. I personally don't mind that, if there is something more inside. This means I liked both "Dances with Wolves" and -very much- "The Field of Dreams", both taken with a grain of salt.

About watching paint dry:
"Microcosmos" is the typical interesting-boring film. The Best of Little Animal Planet. We've seen too much TV (even by zapping) to be enthusiastic about such films.
Rohmer and his moral tales. They're good if you're in the mood. This doesn't mean they are very entertaining. It's like going to a museum and watching and disecting an interesting picture for a large part of your visit.

Nimh -- I've been lending (mailing) videos from my collection to friends in an isolated part of New Mexico. They've been most appreciative.

When I visited them last month, I found that HE loves Rohmer as I do (though I agree Rohmer can be tiresome -- only Autumn and Printemps of the seasons series are worthwhile) while SHE can't stand Rohmer (except Autumn).

She did an exquite take-off of a Rohmer moment -- in exquisite French -- languid question followed by long pause followed by two word answer followed by long pause followed by languid remark followed by long pause followed by sudden outburst followed by long puzzled pause, followed by.... ! It was hysterical and he and I had to agree that Rohmer takes a paint-drying patience AND (more important) a willingness to put up with some of the most self-centered and peevish women characters ever dreamed up by a director...

Kieslowski is another one I collect (love Red, White, feel less passionately about Blue, love Veronique, am saving to buy complete Decalogues).

I walked out of both West Side Story and Dr. Zhivago.

Tastes are odd.

Three I'd love to hear comments on: Scent of Green Papaya, Tampopo, and Legally Blonde.

I agree with hobitbob about titanic...too much touchy feely bullshit...they should have started the movie right where the guy sees the iceburg and had him go "What the hell".....and then BOOM action....cheaper, shorter, more interesting.....

I haven't seen Scent of Green Papaya but I'm assuming it is good since the other two are. It's been a while since I saw Tampopo -- so weirdly quirky, but isn't it wonderful to have a passion, even if it is for noodles? I've seen Legally Blonde with my 20-year old daughter so many times. It's been one of her favorites since it first came out. At first I held my nose and watched it just to be with her, but it is amazingly well-put-together and is very funny (and kind).

Tartarin -- Your description of your friend's mimicking the movie dialog reminded me of when we laughed ourselves silly repeating Gérard Depardieu's dialog: <deep gruff voice> Dantes?... Edmond Dantes? Moi? Non. Non. Edmond? Edmond ... Dantes? Non... Non. I.... I am the Count, the Count of Monte CRISTO.... etc.

LOL Piffka!!

I think Legally Blonde is one of the funniest movies made in this country in decades. It's beautifully done -- script, editing, everything. And kind -- which is what makes it so watchable.

(I can't watch Tampopo -- which I must have seen half a dozen times -- without having a package of Marukan noodle soup nearby, to which I add chopped scallions and cilantro...)

Oh, yeah -- Mr. Cranky, the most respected critic alive.

Light Wizard -- LOL Lighten up, Mr. Wizard! Since when is ANY critic "respected"? They are listened to or you read what they write, and then, if you happen to agree, you quote 'em. Mr. Cranky thrives on being controversial... and funny, I think.

I really liked the Cable Guy. It was very different, I thought Jims charecter was interesting. The basketball and fighting knights scenes were hilarious. why did most people hate this movie? I can think of way too many movies that were much worse.

I only saw about five minutes of it on TV once, Cinder, so I'm far from an expert, but there was a ghastly truth about the cable guy's intrusiveness and I betcha it was too close to reality for many people to want to watch.

Good to see fbaezer is with me on Kieslowski - for a while I was thinking, am I crazy or what is it, on that one!

Tartarin, you gotta try to get some older Kieslowski movies, from the 80s. I mean, it seems our tastes differ in any case, but it would be interesting to see either of those two older movies I mentioned (or probably the one fbaezer mentioned), and then look back at Veronique or Red/White/Blue and see if you see what we meant. Or perhaps the Dekalog will already make a good comparison.

Hilarious take of your friend's on Rohmer, by the way ;-).

I remember seeing part of Tampopo on TV and liking it. Long time ago tho.