Critically Acclaimed Movies You Don't Want to See

[commasense]

I’d like to encourage a few posters here to reconsider:

Tentacle: You’re absolutely right about the second two Matrix films. Appalling dreck, both of them. But the first is different, because even though it is loaded with violence and special effects, at heart it is about the character Neo discovering who he is. That raises it well above average shoot-em-up, big explosion films.

Wumpus: I saw Remains of the Day long before reading the book, which I only got around to earlier this year. It’s strange you should raise this objection because I found the film to be just about the most faithful version of a novel that I’ve ever seen. Virtually every important scene from the book is in the film, it’s beautifully acted, and the tone is completely faithful to the source. So give it a shot. I don’t think you’ll be disappointed.

Nightwatch: I think you’re missing out by avoiding GWTW and The Wizard of Oz, but okay. But my jaw dropped when you listed Casablanca. You must get over that prejudice for older films and see it. It is simply everything a movie is supposed to be. (Am I right, Ilsa?)

For everyone who isn’t interested in seeing GWTW, I saw it as a child, and for decades felt the same way: too long and melodramatic. But I saw it again when it was re-released to theaters ten years ago or so, and was completely blown away by what a great story it is. The character of Scarlett is rich and complex, and provides a compelling and human thread through the epic story.

But it probably doesn’t translate very well to the small screen. If you’re going to watch it at home, I’d suggest trying to make it as theatrical as possible: dim the lights, cut out as many distractions as you can, take a break at the intermission, etc. There really is a reason it’s on so many top ten lists.

Although I wouldn’t argue at length with anyone who didn’t care to see Forrest Gump, The Rocky Horror Picture Show, or even Titanic (all of which I enjoyed), the films on the AFI list are all well worth your time, even if you are usually not interested in that type of film. Try something different once in a while. You may like it.

[DMark]

The Hours.

I know, it is supposed to be great and all, but the idea of watching a film about three suicidal Lesbians, well…maybe someday when my remote is broken and I am too weak from the flu to get out of bed to change the channel. But until then…

[DWMarch]

@Wumpus

I’ve never seen Black Hawk Down, partly because I figured it would really make more sense to read the book (see above) and partly because of my abiding hatred of schlockmeister producer Jerry Bruckheimer. But I’ve already fallen off the Bruckheimer wagon by seeing Pirates of the Carribean, so I guess I might as well go rent it now…

Good call on this one. The book and movie are nothing alike. The book is a very well-detailed and honest account of The Day of the Rangers. The movie is a typical Jerry Bruckheimer film, with 'splosions and shit. The movie left out a lot of critical details, like the fact that if the helicopters hadn’t been making continuous strafing runs, the Rangers would have been slaughtered (In the movie, the attack helicopters make one run and that’s it). Characters were missing (all the Delta guys in the book became Uber-Delta “Hoot” in the movie), details were changed and the film wasn’t even shot in Somalia.

BHD (the book) is a true account of the story. BHD (the movie) is just a story.

[Evil_Death]

@OtakuLoki

Hmm… maybe because the NAACP, as well as most movie historians, describe the movie as a paen of praise for the KKK protecting whites from the evils of rule by blacks?

Yeah, and it’s not like the NAACP have an agenda to push or anything, is it?
:rolleyes:

There is exactly one scene in the entire 190-minute running time of BoaN that shows the KKK protecting whites from blacks. One. Any critic who draws the conclusion that it’s what the whole film is about from that doesn’t deserve his job, and any NAACP member who draws it should be forced to sit at the back in what we shall refer to as Fucktard Heaven.

Regarding the “accusation” that it’s a groundbreaking piece of technical filming and that makes it worth watching, this is also the argument that puts the utter dullfest that is Citizen Kane at the top of so many movie polls. The difference is, Birth of a Nation is actually worth watching. I didn’t float off on a cloud when I saw it as part of my Film Studies courses at university, but I didn’t resent the time either. Kane, on the other hand, I wish to God I’d never had to suffer through and the course lecturer even apologised beforehand for making us watch it. A great technical showpiece; a fucking terrible movie.

On the subject of fucking terrible movies…

[Forrest Gump] Forrest Gump is like a pile of shit … it’s a load of stuff reprocessed into waste product with everything good sucked out, and it stinks.[/Forrest Gump]

[Ephemera]

I joined Netflix a couple weeks ago and have been going through 6-9 movies a week, all of which have been movies I’ve needed or been meaning to see for years now so far. When the AFI Top 100 list was linked earlier in this thread, I opened it to see how many of the movies I needed to add to my queue (I’ve probably only seen about ten of them already at most) and out of the 100 listed, wound up selecting five. The rest just didn’t appeal to me.

So, in summation, most of them. I’ve got quite a few Coen Brothers and Steve Buscemi flicks on there though.

[RikWriter]

@DWMarch

Good call on this one. The book and movie are nothing alike. The book is a very well-detailed and honest account of The Day of the Rangers. The movie is a typical Jerry Bruckheimer film, with 'splosions and shit. The movie left out a lot of critical details, like the fact that if the helicopters hadn’t been making continuous strafing runs, the Rangers would have been slaughtered (In the movie, the attack helicopters make one run and that’s it). Characters were missing (all the Delta guys in the book became Uber-Delta “Hoot” in the movie), details were changed and the film wasn’t even shot in Somalia.

BHD (the book) is a true account of the story. BHD (the movie) is just a story.

Totally wrong. The movie is excellent and does as good a job as possible in portraying the confused and high-speed events of the day in a narrative manner. It’s definitely one of the best war movies I’ve ever seen.

[Marley23]

@Fish

The RHPS “virgins” are, I hear, subject to a variety of public humiliations out of good-natured mockery.

Pfft. That’s only if they find out you’re a virgin. If you just keep your mouth shut or don’t volunteer when they ask for virgins you’re fine. (Like I’m brave enough to really humiliate myself. :rolleyes:) And actually they don’t always make a big deal of it or do anything embarrassing.

The Passion, and critically-acclaimed horror movies are always must-miss for me.

A Beautiful Mind. I don’t like Russell Crowe and from the first time I saw an ad it seemed like such blantant Oscar-bait. Ditto Master and Commander, but not quite as much.