In this thread, Screeme says that “all sorts of good movies get lame titles.”
Hmm. I dunno. Let me run off and gaze upon my DVD collection and see which ones have titles that make me experience the dry heaves a la “Attack of the Clones”.
Nope. Not one.
I suspect it’s partly because if the movie has enough intelligence behind it, the writers that possess enough wit and brainpower to create a great story are capable of selecting a title that doesn’t make people roll their eyes when they hear it for the first time.
At the Internet Movie Database, their list of the Top 250 films all have titles that don’t make me wonder if the person who named it was short a few brain cells. At least, the titles that are in English.
Ditto for the movie names that can be found at Roger Ebert’s The Great Movies website, although I think a movie called Peeping Tom probably is pushing the definition a bit.
Can anyone help me here? Can anyone name for me a great movie that has a truly, no-doubt-about-it, lame title?
Proof of my theory of drama/thriller movie names. There’s a hat full of nouns, and a hat full of adjectives. You pick one from each, concatenate, and voila! A movie title. Kind of the same way the computer game Harpoon II randomly generates mission code names.
How about The Shawshank Redemption? Many have said that the title was most of the reason it didn’t have better box office. And the movie title was even shortened from the Stephen King story titled Rita Hayworth and the Shawshank Redemption. After you see the movie or read the story, of course the title is perfect…
Another title I never really liked was Pulp Fiction. Kind of a boring title for such a twisting and turning movie.
I hate the movies with dramatic one-word titles, usually the main character. There was a rash of them a few years back, many related to gangsters. Bugsy. Hoffa. Etc. Zzzz.
I don’t know, I thought Pulp Fiction was very evocative. You knew it would be sleazy and full of sex and violence. Did it deliver?
I never thought As Good as it Gets really worked even if Nicholson does offer the line midway through the movie.
Also, one of the all-time stupidest titles has got to be To Wong Foo, Thanks for Everything, Julie Newmar. Oh wait, we’re talking about lame titles that go with good movies.
This is a great movie with a lame title. I mean, “Manhunter”?! So it’s about a hunter who’s a man? A cannibal? A foxey heterosexual woman with insatiable desires? Obviously some powerful in Hollywood thinks one-word titles sound dramatic and sell tickets; whether they’re right or not, I don’t know. In any case, I hear Red Dragon was rejected as a name for this book because of course the Americanaudienceswhoarewhollycomposedofunwashedilliterates wouldn’t have understood that it doesn’t have any actual dragons in it. Still, any name other than Manhunter would have been better … uhh … how about “Hannibal”? (Just kidding.) How about “Scary-Ass Harelip Guy” with a couple of exclamation points? Anyway, I recommend it. It is a good source of Brian Cox vs. Anthony Hopkins debates, anyway.
Snatch was also a terrible name for a movie. It was a pretty good movie, a de facto remake of Mr. Ciccone’s first picture, Lock, Stock, and Two Smoking Barrels. I don’t know what they should have called Snatch, but I think they could have squeezed another word or two into the title. Maybe, “More Locks, Stocks, and Barrels in a 1:1:2 Ratio” or something.
I never saw Pitch Black but I had real trouble remembering the name. “What was dat movie? Uhh, Pitch Dark? Perfect Dark? After Dark? Near Dark?” It’s kinda hard to come up with a novel way to describe a lighting condition. Maybe … “You’ll need portable illumination to see in THIS place” … “Barry Lyndon with Space Monsters”?
Uh, the Big Red One is the nickname for the First Infantry Division (this site should help) and is pretty self-explanatory for (1) anyone familiar with military history, or (2) anyone who actually bothered to watch the (admittedly great) movie.
Oh, and if nothing else, the patch with the Big Red One that all the soldiers wore on the shoulders of their uniforms would probably be a giveaway.
No, because another movie with the word “Dragon” in it already bombed at the box office that same year, and the movie makers didn’t want the audiences to connect the two films. See? There’s a logical explanation for everything.
The the Coliseum move multiplex here in Mississauga, there was a handwritten sign outside that on the top half was advertising that new positions were available. On the bottom half it announced the release of the upcoming Guy Ritchie flick.
I thought Quick Change was a nice little comedy, but I always have a terrible time remembering the name. I guess I can sort of see how it fits the plot of the movie, but it doesn’t seem terribly descriptive.
I saw a picture of a sign outside a movie theater featuring a triple play. Unfortunately, the marquee displayed the disturbing announcement:
Erin Brockovich
Screwed
My Dog Skip
I don’t even know if this is a good movie or not. It’s because of the title that I’ve never seen it. Eight Heads in a Duffel Bag.
I also thought that a movie as entertaining as The Opposite of Sex could’ve had a better title.
Uh, Arc, I know the premise of the movie. This thread is about good movies with bad names. The Big Red One is a stupid name for a movie. We’re having fun here, Arc, just having fun.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by ThisYearsGirl * I always thought All About My Mother (Todo Sobre mi Madre) was a stupid title. I like it better in Spanish.
I think it makes sense since the plot of All About Eve echoes all through the story.
Nurse Betty gets my vote for a good movie with a pitiful title. Maybe it worked though, because I was expecting much lighter fare and was caught off-guard.
I don’t know what they should have called Snatch, but I think they could have squeezed another word or two into the title. Maybe, “More Locks, Stocks, and Barrels in a 1:1:2 Ratio” or something.