Movie you liked but most people hated...

[5150 Lego]

Actually it makes perfect sense, I don't see how you can't grasp that. Yes, critics do go majorly overboard, but for the most part, people will pay through the nose to watch a movie with huge explosions and "cool factor" regardless of good plot. Citizen Kane is for example, one of the greatest movies of all time and on of my favourites, but I doubt the majority of people know anything about it. Just because a movie makes a truckload of cash doesn't mean it is good, it merely means it is popular. Critics don't always get it right, Fight Club is a brilliant movie that was panned at its time and guess what? Barely made a cent at the box office. Still, the movie kicks Transformers left and right in just its opening scenes. It is the distinction of a good movie regardless of what you think of it in your opinion, and a movie you like.

A movie myself that is a sort of guilty pleasure is the horrible American version of Godzilla, which while terrible in terms of plot, ripping off of other films and bad humour, I always enjoy if for some crazy reason I can't explain, despite mocking it even while I watch.

To the Brickmobile!

Not true. There is no set definition for what qualifies as a good movie. Largely because depending on the subject said movie is focusing on it will, and should follow a certain criteria. You can't say citizen Kane is a fantastic movie cause it has an excellent plot and story, but then slam a movie like transformers for being crap cause its plot isn't as strong. Two completely different movies, aimed at to completely different audiences. TF main focus is the explosions and "cool factor". That's what every series in the TF series has always been about. Its not a thinking movie. It it had to much depth and followed the criteria of the movies you used as examples, then it would have not only failed at the box office, but as a Transformers movie. That's what people like yourself, as well as critics need to understand. It did what it was supposed to do. Deliver two hours of awesome special effects, great characters (i will admit,more character development was needed), top notch fight scenes, and explosions galore.

Like i said, most movies that critic's seem to pander over, never even make it out of the Sun Dance Film festival. Why? Cause its not something anyone wants to see and major production companies know this. You can't tell me something is good if no one is willing to pay to see it.

Anyways, i don't get why some complain of the plot and story of TF anyways. If my 60yr old mother who has never had any exposure to Tf other than the occasional glimpse of the 80's cartoon can understand whats going on just fine, then i'm sure critics who's job is to review hundereds of movies should be able to do the same. If not, then maybe they need to

[Tyrant]

Well, the problem with your stance is that you act like everything is subjective, when even many of those who share similar beliefs to you will agree that the subjectivity will only stretch so far. Is One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest a better film than Fist Spaceship on Venus? Yes, its not even a matter debating, because while comparing One Flew with a film that is well made, well shot etc would be subjective as you say, that film is so awful on all levels that subjectivity is thrown out the window. There is no arguing because it is a downright awful film. Likewise, less extreme examples are relevant too. Storytelling cannot be measured no, nut you make the easy assumption that this means one cannot have bad plots. There can be bad plots, and there can be good plots, its only when the distinction becomes harder to make between two good films, or two films of wildly different genre and style, that it becomes subjective. I never stated that movies can be measured as fact, nor compiled in a list from bad to good, but it is possible to categorise movies into basic groups of good, bad and great etc based on their collective wholes, since flaws are not subjective, plot holes are not subjective, continuity errors are not subjective, and the presence of metaphors, symbolism, or clever characterisation are not really majorly subjective either. Subjective is often just used so one person can defend a blatantly awful piece, or in rare cases, because it that applies in several parts of film making.

To the Brickmobile!

What I am saying is that art is subjective. Movies are art. Your assertions lead to there having to be a system to measure these things. Otherwise, you can't say one is better than the other. "You" can say that, but it doesn't it make it any more true than me saying it (or saying you're wrong for that matter). For you to be able to say what you are trying to say, there has to be a means to measure. If this were the case, every critic would use such a system and come up with the same answer. I'll go ahead and assume you know that isn't the case. In fact, even if there weren't a system, your comments lead to having to believe critics will come up with the same general ratings and they don't. This is before we take personal goals, studio bribery, psychology, and whatever else motivates critics to write particularly glowing or scathing reviews. In short, they are people who have an opinion that others feel some need to listen to when they could quite easily just be making it up for a variety of reasons. This isn't like measuring the distance between two objcects where there is one and only one answer. This is subjective. I'm not using it to justify terrible movies. I do think some movies are worse than others and I think some are down right awful. The difference is I know my opinion is just that, an opinion. For some reason, this rule doesn't apply to critics and people who try to sound like them. In the grand scheme of things, there is no such thing as a good or bad movie in any measurable way.

As for flaws, plot holes, etc which you seem to think are a matter of fact, I am fairly certain they too are subjective. Just because the reviewer, or viewer, doesn't understand something doesn't make it a hole. On the flip side, there are movies where plot holes are par for the course and in some cases are intentional. The same goes for symbolism. The fact you think that isn't subjective is rather odd because all you have to do is look into literature or listen to certain directors to know that symbolism can be subjective. The Coens, for instance, have stated that any hidden meaning in their movies is entirely accidental and up to the audience to make up/decipher at their will. The Matrix movies are another prime example. How much is symbolism with substance and how much is simply flash in the pan that ultimately means nothing. It's like naming a character Loki and then giving him no attributes of the trickster god. There will be some people that will yell and scream that you intended symbolism of some sort no matter how many times you say you just thought the name was cool.

Comparing movies (which you have to do to say one is good and one is bad) is like comparing food or music. Someone can give you their opinion of which is better all you want (both of these have critics too, imagine that) but until you try it you won't know which is better. In the case of food, one may be better for you, but that won't make you like it more (unless that's what you're looking for, obviously).

5150Lego is right. These movies wouldn't make tons of money if there wasn't something good about them. What critics and wannabe critics don't get is that there are opinions other than theirs and that theirs rarely (if ever) matter. Quite honestly I get the superiority vibe from most critics (and I get it big time from the wanna be's) and I personally can't stand people like that. Especially in the case of critics when more than a few are nothing but failed writers and filmmakers.

tl:dr critics' opinions are worth no more to me (and apparently most of the movie going public, which says something) than a random person I ask on the street.

[The Alchemyst]

I always thought SW I was good.

But then again I was really little and watched it once, without much idea of the story.

Only the really really cool Podracers. :D

I personally though TF2 was shit. It was too long, what I thought would be the "climax" turned out to be half the movie, and for an action movie at the Imax, I was about to sleep. The story was incoherent, with nearly no explanation for certain parts of the movie [Why did he come back to life? Just because some legendary Transformers tell him to? -.-]. Megan Fox's character was just fan service, doing absolutely nothing in the plot itself. In a movie-watching aspect, it wasn't captivating to me, it was just all in your face with boobs and explosions.

And the only reason to watch it? The CGI.

Tyrant, I think you're missing the point that it's all opinion, even though you seem to state it. There are "good movies and bad movies", it's just that the idea of it changes from one person to another. Leave it be.

EDIT: Same for Art such as MOCs. There are clearly "better MOCs", to some people.

The problem with "Highest Grossing" is inflation, But the Top 10 Highest-Grossing Opening Days? All sequels. Every single last one. I do think that hype, and the fact that "the last one was good" plays into the early viewing and money gain of movies.

[-TA-]

Edited August 20, 2009 by The Alchemyst

[5150 Lego]

Tyrant, I think you're missing the point that it's all opinion, even though you seem to state it. There are "good movies and bad movies", it's just that the idea of it changes from one person to another. Leave it be.

Sounds like he understand this just fine. Its others that seem to want to state their opinions as "facts" when they have nothing factual to base this on.

[The Alchemyst]

That's what I get for not reading the entire topic. >.>

Scratch the misunderstanding, but I still think "Good and Bad Movies" Exist.

[-TA-]

[Tyrant]

That's what I get for not reading the entire topic. >.>

Scratch the misunderstanding, but I still think "Good and Bad Movies" Exist.

[-TA-]

I agree on the basis that it is understood that you are saying "some movies are good and bad to me". There are movies I think are bad, in case I didn't make that clear. I just don't assume my opinion is any more valid than anyone else's and I accept that my criteria are only valid to me. If someone else "wants" to listen, that's fine. The idea that others "should" listen, however, isn't fine with me. It reeks of elitist mentality and I can't stand that, especially when we are talking about movies which are by and large meant to entertain not change your life or the world. It just seems petty to me to try to appear better than others in a field that ultimately doesn't matter.

[5150 Lego]

That's what I get for not reading the entire topic. >.>

Scratch the misunderstanding, but I still think "Good and Bad Movies" Exist.

[-TA-]

Oh, i agree with that statment 100%. Even if "Good and bad movies" are subjective to the person watching them. But while i believe like Tyrant that there is no set defenition of a good or bad movie, i do believe that movies should focus on there criteria at hand or the theme that said movie falls under (action, love, suspense, horror etc.)

I agree on the basis that it is understood that you are saying "some movies are good and bad to me". There are movies I think are bad, in case I didn't make that clear. I just don't assume my opinion is any more valid than anyone else's and I accept that my criteria are only valid to me. If someone else "wants" to listen, that's fine. The idea that others "should" listen, however, isn't fine with me. It reeks of elitist mentality and I can't stand that, especially when we are talking about movies which are by and large meant to entertain not change your life or the world. It just seems petty to me to try to appear better than others in a field that ultimately doesn't matter.

Pretty much sums up how i feel on the matter. Well said Tyrant.

[Batbrick]

You both (Tyrant and and to a lesser extent 5150Lego) bring good points to the discussion, despite a possible dig from the latter. I think you partly missed the point of what I was saying Tyrant, as I clearly said that I agree movies can't be measured, but for the most part they can still be defined as good, bad or great. For example, if I just made a ball of playdoe and called it art, it would clearly be awful. How awful? There is no measure, but still pretty bad I would imagine.

I concede defeat in subjectivity of plot holes and symbolism though, that is an excellent point.

As for your critic point, good point, but I don't see what that has to do with my argument.

However, 5150Lego, you seem to misunderstand my main point. I really enjoyed Transformers, just as I really enjoy Indiana Jones, which is another movie high on action and low on plot etc. My point was that ROTF unlike its predecessor failed (atleast for me and others) to be what it was trying to be; a fun popcorn movie. It went too long, went too far in some specifics and had pretty poor humour compared to the first. Is this subjective? Yes, to a fair degree, and just to clarify to prevent the analogy happening again; no, I do not believe one can accurately measure its faults. Doesn't mean it doesn't have any nor that because a truckload of people saw it that it was good; marketing, hype and Megan Fox play large roles in that. You label me as being too much like a movie critic, but movie critics are all different and Transformers got mostly good reviews, while ROTF didn't. Doesn't mean they are all right, doesn't mean they are all "high and mighty" either. I'm merely expressing an opinion that is just as valid as yours.

I'm a big fan of subjectivity, but it only goes so far before it becomes a defense for something bad. Plenty of movies fail the criteria they aim for (eg. action movie entertaining, mystery movie not being damn obvious).

To the Brickmobile!

[Forresto]

Why is there several people who are choosing ROTS for being hated. If I remember correctly it had some mixed reviews and some grumbling from OT fans but mostly great reviews and postive reactions.

[The Who]

Everything in Indy moives was made around historical myths and what things we've recoved today. There are rumors and some proof that the Ark, Shankara stones, The Holy Grail , and Crystal skuls exist. I've seen some pictures of a shankra stone, what someone belives to be the Holy grail , and crystal skulls. There is also a rumor that the Ark is in a building where only 1 man can see it. The moives took these historical items and added things around them like temples, other myths, and tons more. I believe they are possible to happen. I can go on about the pyramids and other temples that with todays technology would be difficult.

So you watch the History channel too, huh?

Then they could throw in a few meteors and walla we are all happy.

Um, no. No offense, but your plot sucks. That's why there are experts like George and Steven who actually know what they are doing, and how to please the audience. And because that would make you happy does not mean that anybody else is happy.

Says Mr. Probaly.

Well Indiana Jones tells Mutt to stand against the wall, he does it and steps on a thing that makes meteors hit the earth. Simple.

Why is there several people who are choosing ROTS for being hated.

Because everybody is entitled to their own oipnion.

Personally, I loved The Phantom Menace, but as of so far I have yet to hear of anybody else that likes it.

[Oky]

I'm not sure why people find ROTS bad, thats my favourite star wars film!

Mine too. I think you are right, it's more Ep.I & II (or the PT in general) that people hate, but not so much Ep.III.

Because everybody is entitled to their own oipnion.

Good answer. Seriously, guys, drop the "OMG, how could you possibly hate/love that movie so much?!" comments. That will just lead into a hate fest.

Personally, I loved The Phantom Menace, but as of so far I have yet to hear of anybody else that likes it.

I (and JimButcher) loved TPM too. Jar Jar doesn't bother me at all, the podrace is one of the coolest things I have ever seen, and Darth Maul (Ray Park, aka. Snake Eyes) is simply badass!

@ Batbrick, Tyrant, and 5150 Lego: As interesting your discussion may be, it is a bit off topic, so please continue it somewhere else.

[Tyrant]

You both (Tyrant and and to a lesser extent 5150Lego) bring good points to the discussion, despite a possible dig from the latter. I think you partly missed the point of what I was saying Tyrant, as I clearly said that I agree movies can't be measured, but for the most part they can still be defined as good, bad or great. For example, if I just made a ball of playdoe and called it art, it would clearly be awful. How awful? There is no measure, but still pretty bad I would imagine.

I concede defeat in subjectivity of plot holes and symbolism though, that is an excellent point.

As for your critic point, good point, but I don't see what that has to do with my argument.

However, 5150Lego, you seem to misunderstand my main point. I really enjoyed Transformers, just as I really enjoy Indiana Jones, which is another movie high on action and low on plot etc. My point was that ROTF unlike its predecessor failed (atleast for me and others) to be what it was trying to be; a fun popcorn movie. It went too long, went too far in some specifics and had pretty poor humour compared to the first. Is this subjective? Yes, to a fair degree, and just to clarify to prevent the analogy happening again; no, I do not believe one can accurately measure its faults. Doesn't mean it doesn't have any nor that because a truckload of people saw it that it was good; marketing, hype and Megan Fox play large roles in that. You label me as being too much like a movie critic, but movie critics are all different and Transformers got mostly good reviews, while ROTF didn't. Doesn't mean they are all right, doesn't mean they are all "high and mighty" either. I'm merely expressing an opinion that is just as valid as yours.

I'm a big fan of subjectivity, but it only goes so far before it becomes a defense for something bad. Plenty of movies fail the criteria they aim for (eg. action movie entertaining, mystery movie not being damn obvious).

To the Brickmobile!

Batbrick I apologise if I came off as attacking you or anything of the sort. I have engaged in debates on imdb.com of a similar nature and they all started out about the same way. Your mentioning of Citizen Cane in the manner you did sent up warning flags in my mind that this was going to go the same way so I sought to head off all the usual arguments I encounter before they could even get started (which is why I brought up critics and spoke of them as I did). So, it's nothing personal and upon reflection you weren't coming across that way. I can see what you are saying about subjectivity only going so far. To an extent I can almost agree but I believe it is still up to the individual to decide such things. I am willing to agree to disagree.

@ Batbrick, Tyrant, and 5150 Lego: As interesting your discussion may be, it is a bit off topic, so please continue it somewhere else.

You're probably right.

Back on topic, I will watch about any zombie movie that comes out. If anyone else here follows horror movies, they have a pretty good idea how many terrible movies I have probably watched as a result. The standouts that I ended up buying are Return of the Living Dead and Zombie 2. I will watch about any 80s horror movie at least once. Unfortunately the local video store sold off all their VHS tapes about 4 years ago and they haven't updated the older movies to DVD so I usually buy them off Amazon (one of these days I will seriously look into netflix). I've come across some real gems like Suspiria and Lifeforce thanks to Amazon.

[AgentRick]

I felt that "The Adventures of Pluto Nash" was an enjoyable cinematographic experience that does not deserve the hate that it receives.

To get that out of the way, I actually liked Cloverfield, even if it was panned for it's shaky camera and silly acting.

[simonjedi]

I (and JimButcher) loved TPM too. Jar Jar doesn't bother me at all, the podrace is one of the coolest things I have ever seen, and Darth Maul (Ray Park, aka. Snake Eyes) is simply badass!

I Like most of TPM its just a few things that I don't like about. I'd admit its my least watched of the movies though.

I like a lot of turn your brain off and enjoy the film movies like shoot em up and DOA.

[Batbrick]

Batbrick I apologise if I came off as attacking you or anything of the sort. I have engaged in debates on imdb.com of a similar nature and they all started out about the same way. Your mentioning of Citizen Cane in the manner you did sent up warning flags in my mind that this was going to go the same way so I sought to head off all the usual arguments I encounter before they could even get started (which is why I brought up critics and spoke of them as I did). So, it's nothing personal and upon reflection you weren't coming across that way. I can see what you are saying about subjectivity only going so far. To an extent I can almost agree but I believe it is still up to the individual to decide such things. I am willing to agree to disagree.

Thanks mate, glad to agree to disagree. I certainly respect your opinion and you've swayed more on a few things, so I also apologise if I came across as elitist. I don't mean to

Another so-bad-it's-good movie for me is the remake of The Wicker Man. From Cage's awful acting, him punching out women in a bear suit and generally being hilarious, I can't not enjoy its awfulness.

To the Brickmobile!

[The Who]

I (and JimButcher) loved TPM too. Jar Jar doesn't bother me at all, the podrace is one of the coolest things I have ever seen, and Darth Maul (Ray Park, aka. Snake Eyes) is simply badass!

I agree. Jar Jar actually causes such neutral feelings with me, I even use him as an avatar. (Sorry to state the obvious )

The Podrace is amazing, and I was very dissapointed at the few sets TLG made for Ep.I recently. I was hoping for another Podrace set, to place beside my old one to compare.

And having met Ray, I must say that he is a pretty cool guy.

[JimBee]

I (and JimButcher) loved TPM too. Jar Jar doesn't bother me at all, the podrace is one of the coolest things I have ever seen, and Darth Maul (Ray Park, aka. Snake Eyes) is simply badass!

Shh, don't let KimT hear of this!

Yeah, I enjoyed all three PT movies, and I don't understand why some hate them. Dislike parts, yes, like some of the cheesy script, but not hate the PT. Jar Jar doesn't bother me, but I can see where he'd get on someone's nerves. Thanks to Liam Neeson as Qui-Gon, that whole movie was awesome to me (oh, and the cool fight and podrace scenes ).

[Svelte]

Don't beat me, but I secretly enjoy the Avengers remake with Uma 'Wooden Plank' Thurman and Ralph 'Just cash the cheque' Fiennes.

Like The Wicker Man, it also has people dressed as giant bears. Perhaps there's a trend there....

[Sir Wellington]

I loved the movie, "Marie Antoinette", sadly the media thought it was terrible and a big show of Sofia Copollas favorite pop songs. :(

[Captain REX]

I agree. Jar Jar actually causes such neutral feelings with me, I even use him as an avatar. (Sorry to state the obvious )

The Podrace is amazing, and I was very dissapointed at the few sets TLG made for Ep.I recently. I was hoping for another Podrace set, to place beside my old one to compare.

And having met Ray, I must say that he is a pretty cool guy.

And i too love TPM because it had the first awesome lightsaber duel, not that the ones in the original trilogy arent, its just they did more complex fighting styles this time round. And you've met Ray Park? The only Star Wars person i've met was artist Chris Trevas at Celebration Europe.

[saberwing]

I liked the kingdom of the crystal skull too. (Apart from the fact that it included aliens.)

Another movie which I thougth was great, is die hard 4.

I can't seem to understand why some people hate that movie so much.

[The Who]

And you've met Ray Park?

Yes, at the Star Wars Weekends in Disney in Orlando Florida, 2006.

[darkrebellion]

Here is my list of movies I love but most people hate :

Watchmen: In my opinion the best 2009 movie so far. I just love it so much . The acting was great in my opinion especially the performances of Roscharch and Nite Owl. The plot was incredibly well done, the special effects were great and the music perfect.

The Lost World: I still can´t understnad why so many people hate the JP sequel. The plot wasn´t the best one either the acting but the whole movie is one of the best blockbusters I have ever seen.

Indiana Jones: KOTCS: In my opinion definitely not better than the first ones but still an awesome installment of the Indy franchise. I don´t know why so many people hate the fact the movie included aliens but I think it was mainly for ignorance because just a few actually knew about the Crystral Skulls before the movie premiered. In the legend of the Crystal Skulls one of the best theories where that ALIENS build them so I perfectly understand why they include them. I also think the hate for this movie comes from the hate people have against George Lucas. I don´t really understand what he does wrong apart from not making the PT AS GREAT AS THE OT .

Star Wars Prequels: Even if I don´t think they are exactly what I call a "Great movie" I really enjoyed them. Sure they have some "flaws" but they were really interesting and took a new generation to the best movie saga in history. The story of TPM and AOTC was a bit hole filled but ROTS was really good. A concisious plot with some average performances and an awesome way to end the saga.

[Emperor Claudius Rome]

Am I the only person on EB that liked "The Love Guru"? Come on, it was funny!

[JimBee]

Watchmen: In my opinion the best 2009 movie so far. I just love it so much . The acting was great in my opinion especially the performances of Roscharch and Nite Owl. The plot was incredibly well done, the special effects were great and the music perfect.

The Lost World: I still can´t understnad why so many people hate the JP sequel. The plot wasn´t the best one either the acting but the whole movie is one of the best blockbusters I have ever seen.

Who doesn't like Watchmen? It got good enough ratings, right? I haven't seen it myself yet, so I can't say for sure, but I don't know many people who didn't like that movie.

I personally hated JPIII. It didn't have the same vibe of excitement that the first two did, the acting was bad, and the same plot theme was getting old at that point (go back to an island with dinosaurs and escape). Then again, this topic is for movies that you liked, so I'll shut up now.