Your favorite vilified movie
- Thread starter gorfias
- Start date
Recommended Videos
I actually really liked the Green Lantern movie. Going on the internet the next day made me realize anew that I don't really have many standards in common with a lot of people.
'Eraser', with Arnold Schwarzenegger. Totally stupid movie, but tons of fun, and watching James Caan be a bad guy is always fun. I think the movie also deserves some recognition for basically popularizing Railguns, especially the whole 'smoke coil' effect that's become their staple in video games.
The Punisher movie with Thomas Jane. Ok sure it was full of plot holes and some really dumb stuff, but overall it was just a really entertaining and fun movie to watch. It was also entertaining to see a Punisher who was able to do a little bit more than just shoot people in the face.
Already mentioned but I loved Event Horizon. Yes the gore was a little extreme and sort of killed some of the atmosphere, but the plot was solid and it was just a damn fine movie.
Hot Rod. This movie got thrashed by critics, but I count it as one of my favorite comedies of all times. The scenes and lines in this movie are so damn memorable, my friends and I still quote them constantly.
The Punisher movie with Thomas Jane. Ok sure it was full of plot holes and some really dumb stuff, but overall it was just a really entertaining and fun movie to watch. It was also entertaining to see a Punisher who was able to do a little bit more than just shoot people in the face.
Already mentioned but I loved Event Horizon. Yes the gore was a little extreme and sort of killed some of the atmosphere, but the plot was solid and it was just a damn fine movie.
Hot Rod. This movie got thrashed by critics, but I count it as one of my favorite comedies of all times. The scenes and lines in this movie are so damn memorable, my friends and I still quote them constantly.
Favorite movie vilified by critics? There can be...only one. Highlander! I read a review that called is a weird hodgepodge of swords and sorcery that defies categorization with a silly story about immortals. Exactly!
And while this one isn't necessarily a "favorite", I really enjoyed Man of Steel. There. I said it. I didn't go in expecting the Second Coming of Christopher Reeve, liked Mr. Cavil's performance and appreciated the approach of a man trying to discover his purpose.
The only problem I had was Michael Shannon as Zod. And that's only because every time I saw him, this immediately came to mind:
And while this one isn't necessarily a "favorite", I really enjoyed Man of Steel. There. I said it. I didn't go in expecting the Second Coming of Christopher Reeve, liked Mr. Cavil's performance and appreciated the approach of a man trying to discover his purpose.
The only problem I had was Michael Shannon as Zod. And that's only because every time I saw him, this immediately came to mind:
Pirates of the Carribean: At Worlds End
It felt to me like a fitting send off for all the characters, Jack Sparrow was among the funniest he's been (I think so, anyway) and the action was large and epic. I didn't mind the extreme length as it gave time for all the characters to develop and just be natural. I hear people say that it's too dark for a family film but it's rated PG-13 folks. Don't tell me were going to have another Temple of doom where outraged parents spawn the creation of the PG-R rated movie! The supernatural stuff is intrinsic to the Pirates franchise ever since the first movie in 2003.
I haven't seen the fourth one but my brother who shares about the same opinion of AWE as me saw it and said it wasn't worth it.
It felt to me like a fitting send off for all the characters, Jack Sparrow was among the funniest he's been (I think so, anyway) and the action was large and epic. I didn't mind the extreme length as it gave time for all the characters to develop and just be natural. I hear people say that it's too dark for a family film but it's rated PG-13 folks. Don't tell me were going to have another Temple of doom where outraged parents spawn the creation of the PG-R rated movie! The supernatural stuff is intrinsic to the Pirates franchise ever since the first movie in 2003.
I haven't seen the fourth one but my brother who shares about the same opinion of AWE as me saw it and said it wasn't worth it.
Batman and Robin. People hated it because it was so stupid. I loved it because it was so stupid. I like Arnold Schwarzenegger as Dr. Freeze and all of his cheesy one liners. People claim that it was so ridiculous that they couldn't take it seriously. I didn't take it seriously and I still loved it. I don't think that the movie was good by any stretch of the imagination, but the fact that Arnold is one of the reasons why so many people hated the movie seemed a bit silly to me.
Man of Steel is one of my favourite movies, although I wouldn't consider it vilified; it's more of a polarizing movie.Zen Bard said:
I have no idea which is my favourite, but I'll mention Tank Girl anyway since I was surprised it was hated by many.
The people who put story first or whatever damn it hard, but as someone who puts general execution and just enjoys fun scenes first, it's a lot of fun. Silly here and there, and something weird pops up nearing the 3rd act, but it generally gets it right with fun characters, fun dialogue, great animated bits, interesting music, and it knows how to go dark as well.
Same goes for The Lost World, Super Mario Brothers, Dead Mans Chest, The Village, and some others.
The people who put story first or whatever damn it hard, but as someone who puts general execution and just enjoys fun scenes first, it's a lot of fun. Silly here and there, and something weird pops up nearing the 3rd act, but it generally gets it right with fun characters, fun dialogue, great animated bits, interesting music, and it knows how to go dark as well.
Same goes for The Lost World, Super Mario Brothers, Dead Mans Chest, The Village, and some others.
I have trouble coming up with my own examples, so I'll just use a couple of other folks' examples as a starting point.
There were elements I could have done without, but that didn't make it a bad movie.
Similarly....
This actually had the retroactive effect of making me dislike the other prequels even more, though a rant like that is probably too long and too off-topic for this thread.
I actually felt that way about Batman Forever. The movie wasn't quite as panned, and wasn't quite as comic-book-y, but had a similar response from people. Also, I think Kilmer was better as Batman than anyone else prior to the Nolan reboot (though I'm undecided on Bale's later performances, I liked him as a learning Batman in Begins).thaluikhain said:
There were elements I could have done without, but that didn't make it a bad movie.
Similarly....
I liked Episode 3. Like, legitimately liked it. Not "it's watchable," or "it's not horrible," but "I enjoyed it. Well, mostly. There was more good than bad, I think."crimsonspear4D said:
This actually had the retroactive effect of making me dislike the other prequels even more, though a rant like that is probably too long and too off-topic for this thread.
I never even think of this as a reviled movie by critics, because it retroactively became a cult hit and whatnot. But I enjoyed it. I also enjoyed Highlander 2: The Final Dimension[footnote]That other movie never happened![/footnote]. Even a lot of other Highlander fans didn't like that movie. A shame they left the series with a dud like Endgame[footnote]Neither did Highlander: The Road Warrior![/footnote].Zen Bard said:
- Mar 31, 2010
- 7,170
- 143
- 68
- Country
-
- Gender
-
Yeah, I liked the third Pirates too, they should have ended the series there. I watched the fourth on Netflix and basically... some stuff happened. That's about as much as I can say, there just wasn't the spark that made the original trilogy great, it was essentially just Jack Sparrow running around with some cliche badass female pirate searching for *insert macguffin here*SilverLion said:
OT: Stars Wars: the Phantom Menace. As in, really enjoy watching it. Not sure how I like this movie so much compared to the average commenter online, perhaps it helped that I was smack in the middle of the intended demographic age (about 7 or 8) when I first saw the movie so it left a good impression that has remained over the years. Qui Gon is cool, young Anakin is adorable, the battle droids are funny... even Jar Jar Binks gets a chuckle out of me, and knowing the rage he inspires only makes it better
Also glad to see the Escapist is back online... for now >.>
I'll toss in another like for Spidey 3. Yeah, it had lots of questionable choices, but the end result was a competently made movie that told a story with a beginning, middle, and end, and where everyone had motivations that made some sort of sense. That puts it above pretty much all the "bad" superhero movies (including the Spidey reboots).
I never would have guessed that people thought League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was a disaster. Yeah, it's over the top, silly, and filled with corny one-liners, but that's exactly the point. In the end its still a fun adventure with lots of character.
Oh, and apparently the 1994 Jungle Book, which I loved as a kid but have never heard anyone else mention, is considered bad. Haven't seen it in awhile but I remember it being pretty good, even if it wasn't anything like the book or cartoon.
I never would have guessed that people thought League of Extraordinary Gentlemen was a disaster. Yeah, it's over the top, silly, and filled with corny one-liners, but that's exactly the point. In the end its still a fun adventure with lots of character.
Oh, and apparently the 1994 Jungle Book, which I loved as a kid but have never heard anyone else mention, is considered bad. Haven't seen it in awhile but I remember it being pretty good, even if it wasn't anything like the book or cartoon.
It depends on when you saw it, I guess. I actually saw it in the theaters when it first came out. At the time, pretty much every reviewer slammed it. But yeah...movies like this that are ahead of their time thankfully go on to become cult classics.Something Amyss said:
As for the sequels...I don't know what you're talking about...
I didn't think it was possible to dislike Paint Your Wagon until I happened across Roger Ebert's review of it. He rips it apart six ways from Sunday, in his inimitable style, and goes out of his way to make sure the reader understands that he's not just being a curmudgeon about it - he outright loathes the movie, and genuinely feels that it has no redeeming qualities whatsoever.
I did some quick Googling, and there is indeed surprisingly little love for Paint Your Wagon.
Still, I love this magnificent movie. I greatly admire the lavish and ambitious production - the rise and fall of a boom town during the California gold rush, sheds and shanties popping up around a diminutive but gold-bearing creek as a rich and colorful society evolves practically overnight. The setting is so far into the unknown, uncharted territories of the Old West that civilization is viewed as some unseen novelty no more relevant to daily affairs than the tales of Sceherazade, and the rules are made up as needed.
There's a fun, engaging and genuinely poignant main plot concerning the only woman in town being married to two men - which makes sense to the populace because the two men in question are partners sharing one claim, and the only law available for any purpose (mining, marriage, you name it) is the mining law which dictates that what belongs to one partner belongs to them both.
To me, however, the main attraction is the set itself. There is no photographic trickery - the production company actually built the complete, full-scale town in the middle of the woods, and later destroyed it in a magnificent spectacle that must be seen to be believed. No expense was spared - unless you count the legions of extras who make up the bulk of the town's population. The vast majority of these were hippies recruited from nearby San Fransisco, who required no costumes or make-up because they already looked as much like 19th century prospectors as was considered humanly possible! (The movie was made in 1969.)
Oh, and did I mention -
Also, if there's one thing I really can't believe, it's that Lee Marvin's singing gets dissed.
Fun fact: This is the only musical (so far) to star Clint Eastwood!
I did some quick Googling, and there is indeed surprisingly little love for Paint Your Wagon.
Still, I love this magnificent movie. I greatly admire the lavish and ambitious production - the rise and fall of a boom town during the California gold rush, sheds and shanties popping up around a diminutive but gold-bearing creek as a rich and colorful society evolves practically overnight. The setting is so far into the unknown, uncharted territories of the Old West that civilization is viewed as some unseen novelty no more relevant to daily affairs than the tales of Sceherazade, and the rules are made up as needed.
There's a fun, engaging and genuinely poignant main plot concerning the only woman in town being married to two men - which makes sense to the populace because the two men in question are partners sharing one claim, and the only law available for any purpose (mining, marriage, you name it) is the mining law which dictates that what belongs to one partner belongs to them both.
To me, however, the main attraction is the set itself. There is no photographic trickery - the production company actually built the complete, full-scale town in the middle of the woods, and later destroyed it in a magnificent spectacle that must be seen to be believed. No expense was spared - unless you count the legions of extras who make up the bulk of the town's population. The vast majority of these were hippies recruited from nearby San Fransisco, who required no costumes or make-up because they already looked as much like 19th century prospectors as was considered humanly possible! (The movie was made in 1969.)
Oh, and did I mention -
- it's a musical?
Also, if there's one thing I really can't believe, it's that Lee Marvin's singing gets dissed.
I mean, come ON!
Fun fact: This is the only musical (so far) to star Clint Eastwood!
I saw it when it first came to VHS. My mom has a thing for Sean Connery. So I would have been like, seven, I think? I wasn't exactly checking out movie guides. Or the appropriate age for beheadings. But I think my posting history proves I'm as normal as the next person.Zen Bard said:It depends on when you saw it, I guess. I actually saw it in the theaters when it first came out. At the time, pretty much every reviewer slammed it. But yeah...movies like this that are ahead of their time thankfully go on to become cult classics.
As for the sequels...I don't know what you're talking about...
Sequels? There were sequels? Oh, do you mean that reboot that was supposed to have Ryan Reynolds?
Well, Forbidden Zone comes to mind but I'm not sure if that counts since it got a rather huge cult following; but the critics certainly hated it, and it was blamed for being racist, homophobic, sexist, anti-semitic (Despite being made by a Jewish family), and I'm sure nowadays the word transphobic would be thrown against it (My brother certainly said so, and I think he'd know. He still loved the movie.) but I don't think it was legitimately hateful; it was just Danny Elfman and company being goofs and paying homage to the really fucked up cartoons of the early 20s. Though it probably doesn't count with a 6.9 on imdb and a sizable cult following, so let me think....
Ahh, I've got one: Young Einstein. Can't even say it has a cult following, and I've never met a yank that likes Yahoo Serious. I adore Young Einstein though. It made me chuckle and I think Yahoo Serious is fun. At least in this and Reckless Kelly. Mr. Accident was pretty bad though.
Ahh, I've got one: Young Einstein. Can't even say it has a cult following, and I've never met a yank that likes Yahoo Serious. I adore Young Einstein though. It made me chuckle and I think Yahoo Serious is fun. At least in this and Reckless Kelly. Mr. Accident was pretty bad though.