I just hate to admit it, but....

Chit-chat, current events

Moderators: Sue Sue Applegate, movieman1957, moira finnie, Lzcutter

User avatar
Posts: 1603
Joined: April 17th, 2007, 10:57 am
Location: Seattle, Washington

I just hate to admit it, but....

Post by cinemalover »

I think many of us have seen films that are considered great, either in the classic sense or just greatly entertaining and popular, but don't get the connection. It may be a "guilty dis-pleasure" burning inside you that you've never shared, or you may not care about insulting the film gods and have shouted to the wind what dreck you think some classic truly is. I have never "gotten" Gone With the Wind. Yes, it's nice to look at, and the scope of the epic story is impressive, but, so what. Gable's classic line from the film really sums up my feelings, "Frankly, my dear...."

So while I'm waiting for the blasphemous lightening to strike me down, what "classic" films do you find to be a complete waste of celluloid?

The only bad movie is no movie at all.
User avatar
Posts: 534
Joined: September 3rd, 2007, 12:57 am
Location: Toronto, Canada

Post by Bogie »

Casablanca (i've said this numerous times)

Most of Orson Welles' movies. (I haven't given Citizen Kane a fair shot tho but some of his other stuff? ZZZZZZ)

Arsenic and Old Lace

Mrs. Miniver (trust me i've seen this movie a dozen time and it still bores me to tears)

Post by feaito »

Last Tango in Paris.
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Post by MikeBSG »

Federico Fellini and I just don't get along. "8 1/2" and "La Strada" bore me to tears, but, oddly, I really enjoy Woody Allen's revisions of them: "Stardust memories" and "Sweet and Lowdown."

Early George Cukor tends to leave me cold. I thought "Camille" had no place to go after the magnificent scene with Garbo, Henry Daniell and the piano, and the movie took its sweet time getting there. "the Philadelphia Story" always runs out of gas for me too. Oddly, I really enjoy Cukor's work after 1950: "Les Girls," "It Should Happen to You," "Pat and Mike" and "A Star is Born."

Speaking of running out of gas, "All About Eve" stopped dead for me when the car runs out of gas. I love "Letter to Three Wives" and "There Was a Crooked Man," but "All About Eve" fails to enthrall me.
Posts: 52
Joined: June 5th, 2007, 2:13 pm
Location: Dallas, Texas

Post by bradtexasranger »

I'd have to say African Queen, given the two stars, is a major disappointment. I would say the same thing about Rooster Cogburn, but I don't believe it's held in that high esteem.
User avatar
Posts: 380
Joined: July 15th, 2007, 3:45 pm
Location: San Jose, CA

Post by Jezebel38 »

Star Wars
Posts: 508
Joined: October 14th, 2007, 5:58 pm

'great' films?

Post by melwalton »

I thought 'Gentlemen's Agreement' very boring. It got the oscar or, at least, a nomination. Other disappointments: 'The Boy Friend' I expected a good one with songs from the 20s I walked out halfway through it. 'Deadline at Dawn (not sure of title) movie about ww2 nothing to it. About 'Casablanca', I didn't dislike it, thought it pretty good but could never understand why so many people thought it was the best thing since chocolate. Maybe because both Bogart and Bergman were near the top of the popularity polls at the time,
User avatar
Posts: 4220
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 5:20 pm
Location: Chicago SW suburbs

Post by mrsl »

Citizen Kane - Two hours of disconnected film strips
2001 a Space Odyssey - Two and a half hours of disconnected film strips
An American in Paris - Showcase for a show off
American Beauty - Total garbage of no use or value.

I have others, but these were all award winners. :cry:


* * * * * * * * What is past is prologue. * * * * * * * *


Post by jdb1 »

I'd put Casablanca at the top of that list. Small scenes of great acting do not a movie make. The movie looks exactly like what it is purported to be: made up as they went along.

I also dislike musicals with supposedly "operatic" sopranos of thin, reedy and uncompelling voice. Anything with Kathryn Grayson or Jane Powell keeps me far away.

I still can't get anything from Star Wars. George Lucas watched hours and hours of outer space-type movies and serials, and he still couldn't make anything of it.

Spielberg movies are OK, but I don't think they deserve the frantic adulation given to them.
Posts: 1777
Joined: April 25th, 2007, 5:43 pm

Post by MikeBSG »

It probably shows how little I think of "Star Wars" that it never even occurred to me to mention how underwhelming I think it is.

I saw "Gone With the Wind" once, and that was enough.

I hated "Raiders of the Lost Ark." It reminded me of Andrew Sarris' definition of Old Hollywood/New Hollywood. "In the Old Hollywood, stupid people made stupid movies. In the New Hollywood, smart people make stupid movies."
User avatar
Posts: 1603
Joined: April 17th, 2007, 10:57 am
Location: Seattle, Washington

Post by cinemalover »

I will give an emphatic second to 2001. The effects were masterful for the time but I was about 10 when I first saw it and that ending has bothered me to this day!

The only bad movie is no movie at all.
User avatar
Posts: 5513
Joined: April 15th, 2007, 3:50 pm
Location: MD

Post by movieman1957 »

I have an active dislke for "2001." The thing is just so slow. I actually saw it in a theater and the scene where the multi-color streaks go racing by on the screen ( for what seems to be 10 minutes) was almost more than I could bear. Being a true movie fan I stuck it out. However, it is one film I have no interest in seeing (or attempting to see) again.

It may not qualify for the topic but I thought "Brigadoon" may be the strangest movie I've ever seen. I kept thinking the guys that wrote this were on something. Cyd Charisse is lovely, Van Johnson looks lost and the whole thing looks like a weird dream.

"Time flies like an arrow, fruit flies like a banana."

Post by klondike »

Anatomy of a Murder.

I love a good courtroom drama; I really dig movies set in or around the backcountry of Michigan; I greatly enjoy Otto Preminger's work; I'm a huge Eve Arden fan, and although I can be quite critical of some of his work, I have applauded Mr. Stewart in roles everywhere from Washington to Philadelphia to Bedford Falls to many a far country . .
And yet I loathe this movie, and in trying to reverse that reaction, I've made myself sit all the way through it twice.
But I just can't help my gut reaction, or even put my finger on why; it simply stands firm as the absolute blueprint of the "kind" of movie I just can't stand!
Last edited by klondike on October 19th, 2007, 6:05 am, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Sue Sue Applegate
Posts: 3327
Joined: April 14th, 2007, 8:47 pm
Location: Texas

Post by Sue Sue Applegate »

Klondike, I know what you mean. Anatomy of a Murder had Jimmy Stewart, Lee Remick, Ben Gazzara, and EVE ARDEN, for gosh sakes, and it just kept stalling my movie mojo.

I think it was more about Lee Remick's anatomy and what people thought she might have been doing with it, than a dissection of a psychologically compelling murder and the salvation of an innocent man. Anatomy of a Murder, for me, though seems somehow a cinematic precursor to In Cold Blood. Call Northside 777 , however, had much more going for it.
Blog: http://suesueapplegate.wordpress.com/
TCM Message Boards: http://forums.tcm.com/index.php?/topic/ ... ue-sue-ii/
Sue Sue : https://www.facebook.com/groups/611323215621862/
Thelma Ritter: Hollywood's Favorite New Yorker, University Press of Mississippi-2020
Avatar: Ginger Rogers, The Major and The Minor
Posts: 49
Joined: April 26th, 2007, 4:46 pm
Location: Reno, Nevada

Post by Erebus »

I too was not a fan of 2001, for almost forty years now, but when TCM aired it recently I did sit down to slog through it again, only to come away surprised at how much I enjoyed it. But the mystery troubled, which lead to an online search and to this review/analysis: http://www.filmsite.org/twot.html It’s three pages but well worth reading for anybody who wants to get into it.

As for hating to admit, “From Here to Eternity” has never done it for me. I can see what people say about “African Queen”, though the middle section on the river, with the odd chemistry between Bogie and Hepburn, seems to work. I can’t see a flaw in “Casablanca”, unless it’s the hokey twin-engine airplane in flight, but the rest is perfect, like an accident of nature, or at least of Hollywood. Lee’s “Anatomy” definitely works for me: she was the Pfeiffer of her day. Speaking as a Randian libertarian, I used to not respect “The Fountainhead” because I found it crude and cartoonish, but I have come to believe it was intended and designed as a morality play, with the characters cast as stereotypes that could not be mistaken for anything other than what they are, as philosophical types. For me “Gone With the Wind” is spoiled by the success with which Vivien Leigh portrays such a repulsive character, and by how Leslie Howard’s talents are wasted. I prefer to think that people like Scarlett don’t exist. “Bell Book and Candle” is one of my favorite films ever, and I love Kim Novak, except in “Pal Joey”, because loudmouthed, extroverted, wolfish jerks like Sinatra’s character are always impossible to watch under any circumstances.

Other than that I think I agree with everybody in the world, about everything.
Post Reply