What Major Misconceptions Did You Have About Creative Works?

No, I have that movie on DVD and I’m pretty sure I remember a scene where they’re gathered near the main airlock in the big attack on the monster and one of them fires a bazooka. You can see the round actually RICOHETING off the thing. It’s mind-boggling.

Yep. That’s the only way to watch it properly, with no advance warning :slight_smile:

I used to think The Sopranos must be some kind of cringe-worthy sitcom about a mob family with a wacky mom abd neurotic gangster son. A comedy.

In elementary school, my teacher led me to believe the fat guy who played Otis in SUPERMAN: THE MOVIE was the handsomest man on the planet. I asked my mom about this, and she agreed. I concluded that I’d never understand women.

Years later, I found out there’s also a Warren Beatty.

I did catch it on reruns, like I said, didnt’ watch it for years. As for my age, it’s AROUND 35 … how FAR around 35, I’m not saying! :smiley:

I’ve mentioned this before, but when I first saw the TV ads for The Terminator, it looked like another standard low-budget thriller. I figured it would have people in rubber masks driving around LA, shooting each other.

Until I saw an ad that featured the pre-credits sequence. Then I had to go see it.
Similarly, a couple of years later, Robocop looked like a one-joke movie about a cop who’s a cyborg. Big deal – there had already been TV series about a robot cop buddy, and this just looked like it was upping the ante. Yawn.
both films turned out to be well-informed in SF, filled with subtle 9and not so subtle) dark humor and judicious use of special effects, including stop-motion (as good as you could get in those essentially pre-CGI days). I was twice pleasantly surprised.

All through the summer of 1976, I was subjected to trailers for a movie that looked like a laughable, low-budget piece of crap. In the spring of '77, I was amazed when the trailers returned; I’d assumed the movie had been released and died. Same trailers, still looked like a piece of crap.

Then my friend Larry said that for his birthday, he wanted four or five of us to go see that movie. I tried to talk him out of it, to no avail. He said he was sure it was a piece of crap, but he wanted to see it anyway. It was his birthday — what could we do?

So, two days after it opened, we went to see Star Wars.

I think the government in ***Fahrenheit 451 ***is a lot like the government in Brave New World. Both governments figure they’ve FINALLY found the secret to keeping everyone placid and happy (with drugs or with television), which is actually no mean feat. It’s GOOD that everyone is happy, isn’t it? Why come along and ruin that with ideas that could make people unhappy?

In this world, BURNING books is mainly for show, since hardly anybody even WANTS to read them anyway. TV is fun, while books can be complicated and make your head hurt!

When I first saw the Trailer for Star Wars in January of 1977 (I had gone to see Network), it looked awful. They had chosen bad scenes, for some reason it seemed cloudy on the planet. The space scenes didn’t convey the sense of rush and excitement – it looked like spaceships-matted-into-a-star-field, as we’d seen before. They used brooding, doom-like music, not the John Williams score we’ve come to know and love, and they used a dorky typeface for the logo – sans serif lettering in blue, not the crisp yellow piping on a black background that they’ve used for every title.

Then, of course, we went on opening day, and everything was different.

Yes. It’s a GOOD life. Just ask Anthony.

Dad dragged me to a movie in 81’ that from what he described seemed like it was going to be a National Geographic special about archeologists looking for a biblical artifact.

This was mine too. My mother dragged me kicking and screaming because I had no interest in seeing a movie about Noah’s Ark.


Oh my God! Somebody else remembers Holmes and Yo-Yo?

Both Fight Club and The Truman Show took me completely by surprise. The latter is now one of my favorite all time movies.

Pretty much the same here. Ca. 1995-6, a classmate in grad school said to me, “The Simpsons is one of the few shows I’ve ever seen that really rewards you for paying attention.” Apparently, that was all I needed to hear.

I was a teen when*** Saturday Night Fever ***came out, and I refused to see it because I thought it was just a piece of junk aimed at teenyboppers who wanted to see dreamy John Travolta disco dancing.

I didn’t see it until I was an adult, and only then did I realize it was a very good, very gritty movie that didn’t glamorize Travolta OR the disco scene.

This mostly happened to me with books I was forced to read for school. I already knew enough about movies that I rarely saw one without knowing anything about them, even back in the late 70’s / early 80’s.

That being said, I vividly recall reading A Tale Of Two Cities in grade school and being annoyed that I had to, expecting some stupid history lesson. I was dead wrong, and I attribute that positive experience to why I enjoy reading so much.

Similarly, I thought Holmes was an absolute drug fiend, and that his drug of choice was morphine. Newp. (He did smoke like a chimney, though. :eek:)

This was how I felt about South Park for a long while, until I happened to randomly catch the “Chicken [del]Fuck[/del]…Lover” episode. Ayn Rand jokes?! I’ve never followed it closely, but it definitely moved from my “utter crap” to “cool by me” column.

I had somehow gotten the idea that Norman Mailer’s *The Naked and the Dead *was a book about a zoologist doing fieldwork to study monkeys in the Philippines. You know, sort of like a Jane Goodall thing, but with a Southeast Asian monkey population.

It’s really a novel about WWII, based on the author’s time in the army in the Philippines. At least I had the location right. But I swear, I was like 5/6 through the book and still vaguely wondering when the part about going to study monkeys in the wild was going to start.