| Author |
 Topic  |
|
Chris C 
"Four words, never backwards."
|
 Posted - 07/04/2007 : 19:32:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by damalc
without thinking about it much, "The Matrix" has to top my overrated list.
I love The Matrix, but Reloaded and Revolution could be better than they are. |
 |
|
|
Chris C
"Four words, never backwards."
|
Posted - 07/04/2007 : 19:34:03
|
quote:
Originally posted by Randall
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
My personal shitty movie list includes the following:
Being There
What a range we have here on fwfr. For more than a year after I joined this group, I posted as avatars nothing but pix from this film to bolster my own four-word description. Something happened and I lost the power to upload graphics, but I still keep the four most important words from one of my very favorite movies as my personal description. So sorry you don't dig it. IMO, your loss.
Diffr'nt folks etc.
That's what makes this world a better place. |
|
|
|
Airbolt 
"teil mann, teil maschine"
|
Posted - 07/07/2007 : 01:11:01
|
My own pick would have to be "Reversal of Fortune"
I really dont like this film - a bloodless robotic Irons plays Mr Guilty and gets a tricky lawyer to get him off the hook. All filmed in a flat and meaningless palette . With people who i couldnt give two craps if they lived or died. A vapid film about the vapid rich .
Morally Bankrupt.
|
|
|
|
silly 
"That rabbit's DYNAMITE."
|
Posted - 07/09/2007 : 16:46:33
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
The Song Remains the Same: Love the music, hate the pretentious twaddle on the screen. Sorry Led Zep, this leaves me cold. I�ve fallen asleep during this, twice. There isn�t going to be a third time.
Ya know, I've never watched this movie sober. It was a midnite movie staple when I was a kid, along with Black and Blue (Black Sabbath/Blue Oyster Cult, love the Godzilla song) and the original Halloween.
I've never actually met anyone else who's seen it. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/10/2007 : 00:30:57
|
quote:
Originally posted by silly
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
The Song Remains the Same: Love the music, hate the pretentious twaddle on the screen. Sorry Led Zep, this leaves me cold. I�ve fallen asleep during this, twice. There isn�t going to be a third time.
Ya know, I've never watched this movie sober. It was a midnite movie staple when I was a kid, along with Black and Blue (Black Sabbath/Blue Oyster Cult, love the Godzilla song) and the original Halloween.
I've never actually met anyone else who's seen it.
Seen it a few times. Was a total Zep-aholic 20 years ago. Excellent band.  But, I tend to agree with Chris that movies such as this should have music, music, music and not much of anything else. I.e., skip the pointless conversations and padding. |
|
|
|
Chris C
"Four words, never backwards."
|
Posted - 07/24/2007 : 22:38:50
|
| Mrs C has asked me to add 2001 - A Space Odyssey to the list of crap movies. Her exact words were "pointless tedious pretentious drivel". Anyone care to agree/disagree? |
|
|
|
randall 
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 07/24/2007 : 23:10:15
|
quote:
Originally posted by Chris C
Mrs C has asked me to add 2001 - A Space Odyssey to the list of crap movies. Her exact words were "pointless tedious pretentious drivel". Anyone care to agree/disagree?
Instead of arguing, let's go back to Duke Ellington, and let's send it to your wife: "Lady, if you don't know by now, you never will." |
Edited by - randall on 07/24/2007 23:13:59 |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper. 
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/24/2007 : 23:14:58
|
I could have done without the monkeys at the start of the film. They were pretty ridiculous.
|
|
|
|
randall
"I like to watch."
|
Posted - 07/24/2007 : 23:22:30
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
I could have done without the monkeys at the start of the film. They were pretty ridiculous.
Forty years hence, sure they are. But Kubrick's simians still looked better than the apes on Chuck Heston's planet, released in the same year. |
|
|
|
Whippersnapper.
"A fourword thinking guy."
|
Posted - 07/25/2007 : 00:28:00
|
Well, I first saw it maybe 39 years ago and to me they looked pretty ridiculous then.
The difference between them and The Planet of the Apes apes is the former were supposed to look real, whereas the latter are in a fictional evolved universe so we don't expect realism.
I'm not saying it could have been done much better in 2001 , but better it had not been done at all than create unintentional mirth or just plain embarrassment at the start of the film. A voice-over narrative even would have been better.
That's my tuppence worth anyway.
|
|
|
|
GHcool
"Forever a curious character."
|
Posted - 07/25/2007 : 03:15:58
|
quote:
Originally posted by Whippersnapper
Well, I first saw it maybe 39 years ago and to me they looked pretty ridiculous then.
The difference between them and The Planet of the Apes apes is the former were supposed to look real, whereas the latter are in a fictional evolved universe so we don't expect realism.
I'm not saying it could have been done much better in 2001 , but better it had not been done at all than create unintentional mirth or just plain embarrassment at the start of the film. A voice-over narrative even would have been better.
That's my tuppence worth anyway.
I consider the Dawn of Man extended sequence to be among the most interesting, haunting, spiritual, intellectual, and poetic sequences to ever be put on film. I don't find any fault with the primate costumes and make up as they were as good as was possible in 1968 and was a hell of a lot better than 99% of primate makeup in science fiction films made before or since then. I also admire the acting! Whether or not the makeup is convincing, the acting certainly is. The actors made them look like they were instinctual beasts and when they figure out how to use tools, we understand through their expressions and body language the kind of primitive thought process they are going through; and all without a single line of dialogue. These are difficult and nuanced performances that are not often appreciated and are overshadowed by the HAL 9000 conflict later in the film.
The Dawn of Man extended sequence lasts for roughly the first 40 minutes the film, which is roughly 2 hrs and 30 min long. It is a very long sequence and has very little to do with the HAL 9000 conflict. A teacher I had in high school shows 2001 to his film appreciation class every semester, and every year he noticed that the film, and especially the Dawn of Man sequence, was putting his class of 10th-12th grade students to sleep. He said he too felt that Kubrick overindulged on the sequence, but felt it was a necessary part of the film. He decided to experiment and edited about 20 minutes out of the Dawn of Man sequence and see what happened. He told me he edited it tastefully and none of the "meaning" was missing. When I heard about this, I thought it was sacrilege, but he showed me his edited sequence side by side with Kubrick's original sequence and I had to admit that my teacher's edited version played better and managed to keep everything Kubrick's might have intended. My teacher explained that he mainly did this by several cutting 40-45 second long shots of unpopulated prarie landscapes down so that it was on screen for about 5-6 seconds. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/25/2007 : 04:09:21
|
quote:
Originally posted by GHcool
I consider the Dawn of Man extended sequence to be among the most interesting, haunting, spiritual, intellectual, and poetic sequences to ever be put on film. I don't find any fault with the primate costumes and make up as they were as good as was possible in 1968 and was a hell of a lot better than 99% of primate makeup in science fiction films made before or since then. I also admire the acting! Whether or not the makeup is convincing, the acting certainly is. The actors made them look like they were instinctual beasts and when they figure out how to use tools, we understand through their expressions and body language the kind of primitive thought process they are going through; and all without a single line of dialogue. These are difficult and nuanced performances that are not often appreciated and are overshadowed by the HAL 9000 conflict later in the film.
Yep I agree with all of that. That sequence is also unique, I don't know of anything like it in any other movie.quote:
The Dawn of Man extended sequence lasts for roughly the first 40 minutes the film, which is roughly 2 hrs and 30 min long. It is a very long sequence and has very little to do with the HAL 9000 conflict. A teacher I had in high school shows 2001 to his film appreciation class every semester, and every year he noticed that the film, and especially the Dawn of Man sequence, was putting his class of 10th-12th grade students to sleep. He said he too felt that Kubrick overindulged on the sequence, but felt it was a necessary part of the film. He decided to experiment and edited about 20 minutes out of the Dawn of Man sequence and see what happened. He told me he edited it tastefully and none of the "meaning" was missing. When I heard about this, I thought it was sacrilege, but he showed me his edited sequence side by side with Kubrick's original sequence and I had to admit that my teacher's edited version played better and managed to keep everything Kubrick's might have intended. My teacher explained that he mainly did this by several cutting 40-45 second long shots of unpopulated prarie landscapes down so that it was on screen for about 5-6 seconds.
Hmmm... Perhaps he didn't cut any of the 'essential' bits of it, but how about the effect on someone who'd never seen it before? Would it be as effective? Carlos Santana always talked about the "power of holding a note", i.e., if a note sounds good, then why not keep the note going instead of rushing into the next note and getting the musical piece over and done with as fast as possible. So if those prairie scenes look good (and I seem to recall they do) then I think I'd prefer to leave them in the movie. The whole sequence tends to instill a relaxed state, even though I know that significant things are happening.
It's possible that today's high-school students who've grown up on Playstations and high-speed CGI action scenes in their movies don't have the patience that people had 40 years ago, and expect to be fed the 'essential' material at a much higher rate, hence get bored when not much appears to be happening. In fact, if 2001 was made today, I rather doubt that the Dawn of Man scene would be 40 minutes long, it would probably be cut the way your teacher cut it.
2001 is not a movie for every occasion. I couldn't imagine wanting to watch it at school in the daytime. For me it's a lights-off, glass-of-port-in-hand, feet-up, the-whole-evening-ahead-of-me and go-to-bed-thinking-about-it kind of movie.  |
|
|
|
thefoxboy
"Four your eyes only."
|
Posted - 07/25/2007 : 04:29:40
|
| The gorilla suit on Gilligan's Island was better. |
|
|
|
MisterBadIdea 
"PLZ GET MILK, KTHXBYE"
|
Posted - 07/25/2007 : 05:27:24
|
| Yeah, I'm gonna have to give my full support to the monkey sequences in 2001 too. I understand that there was a sizable percentage of viewers who thought those were real monkeys. |
|
|
|
Sean
"Necrosphenisciform anthropophagist."
|
Posted - 07/25/2007 : 05:52:11
|
quote:
Originally posted by MisterBadIdea
Yeah, I'm gonna have to give my full support to the monkey sequences in 2001 too. I understand that there was a sizable percentage of viewers who thought those were real monkeys.
I first saw that movie at about age 10 (and was blown away by it). I remember wondering how they got the monkeys to do what they did.  |
|
|
|
Topic |
|
WORST FILMS EVER
