My sister’s mind literally couldn’t accept what she was seeing – she saw “Breakfast at Tiffany’s” several times before she realized that the landlord was meant to be Asian. She said, “I thought he just talked funny because he had such bad teeth.” The yellowface wasn’t too noticeable on our television, which is practically a black and white (it started off as a color TV but is now very old).
Or the casting of Keanu Reeves in anything.
I gotta disagree with the Tucker-bashing in The Fifth Element. That movie wasn’t meant to be serious sci-fi like Contact or 2001, but rather a semi-whimsical space opera.
Chris Tucker’s character was background; admittedly loud and brash, but a bit of the scenery to show the audience what that particular future was supposed to be like.
I rather liked its Heavy Metalesque artwork, goofy special effects and fantastical plot line; I really would have like to hear that diva sing a lot longer than we did. IMO, a nice change of pace from across the ocean.
Luc Besson is one of my favorite directors, and has been since The Professional. I keep my eye out for Jean Reno, and feel he was just about the only saving grace in Godzilla.
And Jean Reno’s voice-over in Ronin isn’t necessarily for dim-bulbs; my step-dad, a veteran Homicide Detective and as sharp an individual as I’ve ever met, didn’t get Ronin, even after the voice over.
He is just too used to fairly cut-and-dried actions/motives analysis to get into the kind of side-ways logic international intrigue/mercenaries involves (or as it was implied in Ronin).
For me, being a veteran, I object to movies that portray the military as a bunch of mindless automatons; or worse, as mindless sycophants. And considering Hollywierd, that’s just about every movie.
The movies that I feel accurately portray servicemembers are Saving Private Ryan, Independence Day, Courage Under Fire, Rules of Engagement, Platoon, The Memphis Belle, A Bridge Too Far, Patton, Three Kings, Dogs of War, Wild Geese,…you get the picture.
Those movies show us as, well, human, with all of the flaws and virtues that implies.
ExTank
The Matrix, first for the idiocy of the whole premise: Humans are being kept in an enormous series of vats, living in their minds in a computer-created world. Why? Because their brains act as a power supply for the machines running things (because the sun is blotted out). Yes, of course. The millivolts that occur accross neuron cell membranes is a much more efficient energy source than, say geothermal or tidal sources, or y’know, windmills.
Second, when Keanu “wakes up” to the higher reality than the one he has been living, he pops out of his pod like a veal calf out of a crate, but with absolutely no muscle atrophy or other ill effects.
Finally, not a single character in the whole movie even suggested the obvious: that this new layer of reality was itself also an illusion. It was the ususal conspiracy-psychology appeal of “we know THE TRUTH that is denied to everyone else.”
The special effects were okay, though.
I have to disagree with this one, too, sort of:
There’s something in what you say, but I have had too many conversations with people who extrapolated things from a movie and insisted that they were absolutely right when all they were doing was reading into it and becoming fascinated by their own cleverness. There was a movie called Smoke I went to several years ago with some friends, and three of the central characters had injuries; one was missing an eye, one had a broken arm, and I forget the third one. One of my friends insisted it was highly significant that the injuries were all on the left side - the “sinister” side. This supposed symbolism was hanging out there alone, mind you, and had no support from the rest of the movie that I could see or he could point to. And of course there were only those three injuries altogether. I pointed out that if a director hands an actor a sling and says “here, put this on”, and the actor is right handed, as most people are, it’s far more likely than not that the sling will end up on the left arm. At any rate, I thought, and still think, that this was just nonsense.
The same for Deckard in Blade Runner. You CAN conclude he was a replicant if you want to, but I’ve read the book and I own the movie and there is no such implication that is not just as readily explained as referring to the girl. It is NOT clear that the director had this mind, and it is NOT true that people who don’t read this conclusion into the movie, or who question those who do, are brain dead zombies who just can’t see it because it isn’t spelled out.
I posted this in another thread, but it belongs here.
Of course, that wasn’t really an “otherwise okay” movie, so maybe it doesn’t count.
The ending of psycho.
How the psychologist explains Norman’s behavior and the reasons for his killings and everything. That just ruined it. The scene where he’s in the cell is alright, just the explanation.
I really hated the end of American Beauty, especially the last line’’“If you don’t know what I’m talking about, you will someday.” It just seemed too cute. Hell, I think the movie would have been a lot better if the ending was just images, not the voice-over at all.
When Cate Blanchet got on the boat at the end of The Talented Mr. Ripley, everyone in the theater groaned. (Actually, the worst part of that movie was the preview. Totally misrepresented the movie)
I always hate it in movies when a phone number starts with 555. It ruins it for em everytime.
As a matter of fact, I think this would be the first time for you. For anyone on the board, in fact, except for my wife, katrina.
Let’s see, how likely is she to read the movie-related threads? Hmmm… 
One thing that’s always bothered me about cop movies is the whole “keep him on the line, we need two minutes to trace the call” idea.
As a private citizen, I can get call display hooked up to my phone that shows me the name and number of who’s calling me before I pick up the phone. Am I to believe that the police forces of the world can’t set up a system that will show them the name, number and address of who’s calling?
Ummm, APB, did you go for popcorn during the scene in the Matrix when Neo has several hours of surgery to repair his atrophied muscles?
At one point he comes to, looks down and sees needles sticking out of his body, and Morpheus tells him he’s never used his muscles before so they have to be repaired. Then he falls back asleep and when he wakes up he’s normal, albeit bald.
–John
Okay, I must have forgotten that part. It’s been a while since I saw it.
[/quote]
Allow me to humbly add Forest Gump to that list. I always find it more effective when flashbacks are used as a vehicle for the first two acts, leaving the third act for the future. This worked perfectly in Gump. (And also The Shawshank Redemption, to an extent.) I despised the bookends in both The Green Mile and Saving Private Ryan. Both stories stood fine on their own. Totally pissed me off, that.
friedo, normally I wouldn’t bother replying, but curiousity has gotten the better of me here.
You resurrected a year old thread to respond to a poster that stopped posting three months ago regarding a topic that was a hijack of the thread’s original purpose. Why?
I’ve seen all of these movies. More than once.
The Sixth Sense does not have any narration.
I agree that the narration in the other four were well handled, especially in The Shawshank Redemption (Morgran Freeman has one of my favorite voices to listen to…it’s almost like listening to music) and Fight Club.
Sorry, Ender. I’m not trying to encourge the bump. I was just responding to something from the first page that hadn’t been corrected.
True Grit is a very good movie badly marred by Glen Campbell’s performance. And this is a movie with both Robert Duvall and Dennis Hopper in it in bit parts.
Any non-singer cast in a singing role in a musical, most notably:
Marlon Brando in Guys and Dolls
Buddy Hackett in The Music Man
Jimmy Stewart in Born to Dance
The entire cast of Paint Your Wagon
Wooden, wasn’t it?
No worries. I’m not waking up at night in a cold sweat wondering why this thread is still in existence. I was just curious as to the reasoning. So knock yourself out.
Totally agree with this one.
Also,I still love John Balushi’s bits in Animal House and overall it’s held up pretty well, but the scenes in the bar where the Deltas go to see Otis Day come across as blatantly racist on a recent rescreening:
(“What are you studying?”
“Primitive Cultures”
Cut to Otis singing “oo mau mau”)
and where the big scary black guys steal the wimpy white guys dates. (cringe :rolleyes: )
Raymond Burr in Godzilla–I just love trying to figure out how he is going to be worked into the next scene. It is also a great drinking game. See Burr, take a drink.
The nude walking down the hall scene at the end of “Teachers”. Other than getting a racier rating, I could see no purpose.
(Going to get some disagreement here) The fight scene between Mel Gibson and Gary Busey at the end of Lethal Weapon. Yes it was a good fight scene, but it had nothing to do with the movie and actually took you away from the movie as a whole.
I’ve seen countless movies ruined by the insistence that there be some romance that develops, no matter how improbable, no matter how short the time allowed for it to happen. It’s like “Attractive male lead? There must be some attractive female character who throws herself at him at some point in movie”
Not that this was a fantastic movie in every other way, but I just about shrieked in annoyance when the girl kisses Leo Davidson the astronaut at the end of the recently-released Planet of the Apes. What, you’re just so overcome, you have to tongue-kiss this guy all of a sudden?
Or the way The Last of the Mohicans changes the love stories from the way the book was written. aaaaaaaaaaAAAAAAARgh
Crunchy, have you read William Goldman’s (The Princess Bride most notably) essay on this? He says most of the same things and is very forceful about it.