Okay I can buy that.
I would like to join the “Dirty Dancing Haters Club”.
In a world where a spaceship can travel faster than light and be centuries of distance away from home, you think that air purification is going to be the same level as earth 1970?
Sheesh, I’ve heard some strange reasons for not liking a movie. That one is up there.
The reality seems to be you don’t like smoking in movies. Which is almost as bizarre a reason for not liking movies now. It was a thing.
That’s right. A cigarette, like a human, converts oxygen into carbon dioxide. Humans do this much more efficiently than cigarettes.
The real problem is all the smoke products. It seems likely that the crew of the Nostromo actually like the smoky atmosphere, because they are rough, working types; the common clay of the New Frontier. You know, morons.
Smoking as a dramatic item has long been a narrative tool. Smoky rooms. Dangerous criminals. Draw a breath, say something dramatic. I guess, assuming all the ill effects are long gone, and indeed, even if not, bored and floating in space for months to years, I’d take up smoking to help with my drinking.
The eradication of smoking from our history seems to provide extreme reactions when people see it as normal, like it used to be. Smoking was pretty much compulsory in war time, with death a second away, it was a stimulant and part of the war effort on the allied side. You got cigarettes issued to you.
Does seems a weak excuse to not like a movie. Personally, I found Alien boring mostly, with some bits at least suspenseful. Hate it? There’s far worse movies.
But for operational reasons (i.e. stealth), military nuclear-powered submarines frequently don’t surface for months. A military submarine on patrol would not surface (or even snorkel) to ventilate unless it were an emergency.
Instead, they utilize air purification equipment, just like the fictional spacecraft in the Alien movie presumably does.
It’s over there, in the corner. With Baby.
I didn’t watch Bicentennial Man when it came out because the promos made it look like a comedy. I was hoping for something closer to the original story.
Cold Creek Manor. There is not one redeeming thing to that movie because there is not one original thought in that movie.
A few years after it came out a then-co-worker showed up one day ranting about this terrible movie they’d rented - Cold Creek Manor. I asked her if she got the impression from the trailer - my sister and I had - that there was a supernatural element to the film (there wasn’t). She said yes, and that was a reason they’d rented it.
They remembered, and in spades. Maybe not your preferred brand of humor, or maybe you didn’t like the politics of if and that made it unfunny to you, but they sure as heck didn’t forget.
How was that weird? The girl called them. Doesn’t make the movie great overall, but their arrival certainly made sense in the story context.
Field of Lost Shoes. Lost cause propaganda on par with Gods and Generals, but without the production values or the acting.
Hmm - three that have not been mentioned.
Carry On England - yes, a Carry On movie. Almost the last, made long after they had run out of steam and the franchise had ceased to be relevant. Embarrassing and unfunny and just sad, because at least the early Carry Ons were fun.
Escape to Victory - a bemusing story about how, in some way, a WWII prisoner of war camp football (soccer) team is the key to an audacious escape. Starring many notable footballers with no acting ability (including Bobby Moore and Pele!) and Michael Caine. Oh, and Sylvester Stallone as the goalkeeper. In case it is unknown in the US (and it certainly deserves to be): Escape to Victory - Wikipedia
Psycho - I have no idea how this pedestrian and absurd slasher movie has a reputation as a classic. And while we’re at it, you can throw in that piece of nonsense that goes mumblemumblemumble KNIFE! mumblemumble KNIFE! as well.
j
At Play in the Fields of the Lord. If you’ve ever seen it you know why you wish you hadn’t.
You think a movie with the tag line, “In space, no one can hear you scream” wasn’t billed as a horror film?
Because it was the first one?
Arbitrary gate-keeping has been a cornerstone of sci-fi nerdom for decades.
Well, I suppose if Hitchcock hadn’t invented the genre someone else would have done. Being first doesn’t make me like the film (or the genre) any more.
j
I’m not so sure it is a slasher movie; and expecting it to be one and judging it by that standard may be why you have such a low opinion of it.
Treppenwitz and I disagree on Psycho because it’s one of my two all-time favorites. There was really nothing like it before, but I’m not out to convince anyone out of their opinion. If a poster doesn’t like it, that’s fine.
My contribution to the thread has to be The Wizard of Gore. Technically speaking, it’s a horribly made movie, with flat, harsh lighting, incompetent acting, a nonsensical plot, and stomach-turning effects that, while obviously horrendously fake, make one nauseated.
I once thought that Herschel Gordon Lewis was the worst director ever, having not only seen TWoG, but Two Thousand Maniacs and The Gore Gore Girls, but I once read an essay (no link) that compared Lewis to Ed Wood, saying Wood intended to make an actual movie, while Lewis’ intention was to simply make money. In other words, while Wood was an awful director, he at least cared about what he was doing. Lewis didn’t. The conclusion that Wood was by far a worse director than Lewis.