Truck Month Textbook Trade In Amazon Fashion Learn more nav_sap_cbcc_7_fly_beacon $5 Albums Tile Wearable Technology Fire TV with 4k Ultra HD Grocery Mother's Day Gifts Shop now Amazon Gift Card Offer ctstrph2 ctstrph2 ctstrph2  Amazon Echo  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Echo Dot  Amazon Tap  Amazon Echo Fire, Only $39.99 Kindle Paperwhite AutoRip in CDs & Vinyl Shop Now SnS
Customer Discussions > Movie forum

Post an unpopular statement about a classic movie

Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 1000 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Feb 9, 2010 8:12:15 PM PST
DJ Deathwish says:
The theme here is simple, many movies are highly regarded by many people so post your honest opinions about so called classics and prepare to make people's heads explode.


I hate Blade Runner. I had never seen this movie until last year and everyone said I needed to see it, so I figured, what the hell? I could barely get through it. I was so incredibly bored watching it that sitting through it was painful. Flame away but this is just my honest opinion. And I hate Chinatown for the same reason.

Posted on Feb 9, 2010 9:31:20 PM PST
It's not the film, it's what was changed. A Star is Born and Lost Horizon with still photo scenes that weren't really needed. Cannery Row is liked by most on amazon, but narration was substituted for what could have been the best scenes.

Posted on Feb 9, 2010 9:37:19 PM PST
someguy says:
the first time i saw 'blade runner' i was pretty underwhelmed by it, but it grew on me later. danged if i know why. i sorta get what other people don't like about it even though it's become a favorite film of mine. i am way too agreeable for this kind of thread, i guess.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 9, 2010 9:54:27 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Feb 10, 2010 8:48:46 PM PST
Interesting subject. Before answering, would you mind if I ask how old you are? I'm not going to insult you for age, but I was an avid movie watcher in high school. I went through the AFI's top 100 list and saw as many of those films as I could. But now, as a father and college graduate, there are a lot of experiences that I have gone through since high school that make some movies connect with me that I don't think I would have like if I had seen them years ago.

The first time I watched Blade Runner I was on my computer surfing the web. So I was only half paying attention to the movie, and when it was over I just felt, "eh." But I can tell when a movie has merit, so I watched it again about a year later and loved it - the characters, the pacing, the whole atmosphere that Ridley Scott captured was amazing. Another example of a re-watch was with Brazil. The first time I saw it was the re-cut version the production studio had done which is now referred to as Love Conquers All. I didn't like the movie, but I felt there was something I missed. So a couple years later I checked out the directors cut and fell in love with it. I guess what I'm getting at is maybe give Blade Runner another shot in a year or so. One movie that fails to gain like-ability for me is Mulholland Drive. I've seen it two or three times now and, though everyone I know loves it, I just don't care for it. It's a unique idea and extremely bizarre but I don't see myself ever liking it.

My unpopular statement is that I hate Gone With the Wind. I thought Clark Gable was great and he was about the only redemption the film had. I know there were 3 director changes and a lot of fighting over budget with the studio, but it's a dud in my book.

Posted on Feb 9, 2010 10:11:01 PM PST
David Kahoun says:
Hated Ghostbusters the first time I saw it. HATED IT! Couldn't wait for the movie to end. Didn't think it was funny at all. I don't know if it was too many people in the theater ( I hate a crowded movie theater) or what the problem was. Anyway, a few months later, it showed up as a "sneak preview" on HBO. That was when HBO went off the air late at night. There was nothing else on that night so I watched it again. Liked it a lot better the second time.
Didn't like Blade Runner either. Never have gone back and watched that one again.
Love Gone With the Wind though.
This is a very interesting subject. Hopefully will get a lot of responses.

Posted on Feb 9, 2010 10:22:53 PM PST
PlanetHell says:
I honestly don't how much people liked Dangerous Liasons, but that movie stunk. It was so boring, and had a stupid plot that made no sense. This is also the movie who tells us that Michelle Pheifer and Glenn Close are the hottest people in france, and Uma Thurman, well, isn't. Somebody was smoking crack with how this movie was set up. None of it was even remotely believable.

Posted on Feb 9, 2010 11:19:56 PM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Apr 29, 2010 6:36:54 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 9, 2010 11:30:43 PM PST
DJ Deathwish says:
Spencer, I'm 29.

Posted on Feb 9, 2010 11:50:35 PM PST
Tom S. says:
What a terrific idea for a discussion group! I'm not a kid, I'm in my 50s, and I agree wholeheartedly about Blade Runner. Saw it in a theater when it first came out, hated it. Saw the Director's Cut rerelease, hated it. Was forced to watch the DVD at a party years later, still hated it. Three strikes and it's out! I disagree about Ghostbusters, Gone With the Wind, and Dangerous Liaisons--I love all three of them. Hitchcock+Kubrick+Kurosawa+Lean=GODS ON EARTH. Favorite film of all time? It's a tie: Vertigo and North By Northwest.

Least favorite film of all time? Forrest Gump, which is, hands down, the most embarrassing film ever to win the Best Picture Oscar. Ever. Period. Absolutely insulting to intelligent people on every level. Ignorance is bliss?! I don't think so!!! Mentally retarded adults are adorable?! Not!!! The so-called "uplifting message" of that film is soooo creepy and distasteful, I can't even begin to tell you. I actually judge new friends and acquaintances by this simple test: "What did you think of Forrest Gump?" If they hated it as much as I did, they can be my friends. Now, of course, a bunch of you will jump on me for that. But that's why this thread is so cool. I can't wait to see what other classic, award-winning films make this list. Now the truth can finally be told!!! (Well, our personal opinions, anyway....)

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 10, 2010 12:22:23 AM PST
What many consider to be the greatest movie of all time -- Citizen Kane.

Technically excellent it may be, but I just can't make myself care about any of the characters.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 1:58:22 AM PST
My best friend adores Blade Runner, so I just HAD to see it, too. That was seventeen years ago, and I still don't think I've fully shaken the wave of boredom that washed over me that night. Just thinking about it makes me want to drive over to my friend's house and punch him. I was going to say I liked Chinatown until I realized I was confusing it with Year Of The Dragon.

Cast Away: Essentially, it's two-and-a-half hours of Tom Hanks talking to a volleyball--a big-budget expansion of what could have been a thirty second bit on an episode of Gilligan's Island. I kept waiting for the Skipper to happen by and smack Hanks with his hat. I PRAYED for it or ANYTHING ELSE to happen.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 6:44:49 AM PST
Apathostic says:
Star Wars. Bad writing, bad direction, derivative from beginning to end. Great to look at in parts, especially considering the technology available in the late 70s. But generally only one step above Howard the Duck, and a mammoth snore-fest. Three stars created by the movie, two of whom sank without a ripple, the third unable to play anything other than a bored Han Solo in every other movie he has ever done.

The series was only redeemed in a small way by Empire Strikes Back, but I tried watching that recently and fell asleep . . . like I did in all the recent Star Wars films.

Also anything by Stanley Kubrick is way overrated. Painful to watch. Tried watching Strangelove the other night, and thought it was an overblown piece of tripe. Far too much Peter Sellers (another overrated actor), used as three different, extremely hammy characters for no real benefit. Ludicrous premise and boring film.

And I agree with Spencer Hopkins. Gone with the Wind blows. And for one reason: who wants to watch a movie where the main character is such an unmitigated bitch, who learns nothing, doesn't grow through the movie, and is surrounded by a bunch of wimps. Vivien Leigh played herself apparently, and was married to Laurence Olivier . . . and from what I can gather, they deserved each other.

Oh, and everything Harry Potter sucks too. I would tell you why, but that would mean explaining why the term "muggles" is actually an indictment of the arrogant, class-riddled, patronising, condescending nature of English children's literature.

And I am sick of adults drooling over these films and books. They are for kids. They are simplistic, contrived, and without any real depth. If you want decent fantasy novels, read the Harry Dresden books by Jim Butcher.

This has been wonderfully cathartic. Thank you.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 7:07:29 AM PST
Callan, that is exactly one of the big reasons I hate Gone with the Wind. I saw it years ago and couldn't quite remember my disdain for it, but you brought it up - her character is awful and why would we care anything about her?

I'd be interested to find out what movies you do like though, because Dr. Strangelove is my #2 favorite movie (behind Crouching Tiger Hidden Dragon and ahead of The Royal Tenenbaums), though I see how it's not for everyone.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 7:15:52 AM PST
I certainly did not like the film TITANIC. The special effects were excellent, but the central love story was cliche after cliche with paper thin characters. I would have liked a movie about the Titanic (and there have been several) but not a movie about Jack and Rose.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 10, 2010 8:43:25 AM PST
David Kahoun says:
Yeah, Cast Away. Hated that movie when I first saw it. Still don't care for it. But for some reason whenever I happen to catch it on TV, flipping channels, I'll still sit and watch it. I think it is good in some scenes, but as a whole movie it is so boring.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 8:58:13 AM PST
I watched Atonement last night and found it to be quite boring.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 10, 2010 10:28:18 AM PST
Tom you're a cool dude, I agree completely but you need to add Raoul Walsh, Sam Fuller and Sam Peckinpah to your GODS ON EARTH

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 10:30:18 AM PST
Spencer, ironically the first movie that came to mind was BRAZIL. I've been it's-a-masterpieced to death about this film for almost 30 years now. I find it the equivalent of being in a jump castle with a bunch of children with ADHD.

I firmly believe Gilliam's very public fight with the studio over creative control created a positive buzz around a film that just doesn't deserve it. This was one of his immediately post-Python films and suffers from his old ethos that there must be seven things going on concurrently in every shot. It's distracting, irritating, and headache-inducing. By the time Gilliam grew out of it (around the time of FISHER KING OR 12 MONKEYS), he apparently willed it to Baz Luhrmann (whose MOULIN ROUGE is likewise unwatchable).

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 11:51:33 AM PST
Oh, and as for the topic at hand, NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD is by no means a masterpiece of horror, and George Romero is by no means a great director.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 12:24:37 PM PST
R. Long says:
"Gone With the Wind" is definitely one for me. I know I'm supposed to look at it from a historical perspective and that I should be able to give the film the benefit of the doubt with its offensive stereotypes because it was made in the '30s and set during the Civil War. I've tried to watch it a couple of times, but I just can't do it. I cheered when Savannah burned, and I'm pretty sure that's not what the filmmakers intended the viewer's reaction to be. Except for Clark Gable and Hattie McDaniel, I actively rooted against every single character.

"Easy Rider," on the other hand, was just self-indulgent crap. The only good things to come out of that hippiefest were Jack Nicholson and Steppenwolf.

In reply to an earlier post on Feb 10, 2010 12:32:58 PM PST
No argument from me - Return of the Jedi does nothing but annoy me. The Ewoks are the nail in its coffin, but I felt something was askew from the opening rescue scene. I suddently felt like I was watching a live-action approximation of a Star Wars cartoon and it just got worse from there. As terrible as the new series was overall, I actually like Episode III better than Return!

The more I read here, the more I realize this isn't that controversial of statement, but here goes anyway: The Dark Knight was overlong, had too many villians, a horrible performance by Christian Bale, and a third act that just drags out the movie. It wasn't terrible... I just think a lot of its weaknesses were overshadowed by Heath Ledger's performance. I preferred Batman Begins.

Completely different genre.... Sleepless in Seattle is idiotic and a perfect example of what's wrong with Romantic Comedy as a genre. There's nothing wrong with Bill Pullman's character other than the fact that he has allergies -- there's shots for that. Yet we're supposed to root for Meg Ryan to break it off with him and go for this guy she doesn't even know because that's what the kid wants? This movie hits us with such a thick wave of sentiment we're supposed to forget all logic and reason.

Finally -- Meet The Parents is a painfully dumb movie. I'll never understand why it's mentioned in the discussions of "greatest comedy". I understand that stupid humor can be funny, but all this movie succeeds in doing is making you cringe for two different reasons -- the painful situations, and the lame attempts at humor. Fawlty Towers at least allowed you to laugh as a release from your pain... this movie was just pain with the occasional pause for a bad joke. Why were we supposed to be rooting for Ben Stiller again?

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 12:45:44 PM PST
Zuriel says:
"Citizen Kane" bored me to tears and I saw it in film class. As someone else stated, I appreciate the technical aspects of the film (the long shot through the skylight was amazing) but the pacing of the actual story almost put me into a coma.

Don't even get me started on "Titanic". I fell asleep on that a half an hour in to the picture. I have also fallen asleep on "Avatar" which I thought was 'Dances with Wolves in Space' and "Aliens" even though I enjoyed "Aliens" once they actually reached the planet. I've noticed that the pacing in several of Cameron's films is extremely slow. Does anybody else concur?

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 12:56:28 PM PST
Joel, ditto on MEET THE PARENTS.

You have no confidence in your script whatsoever when you resort to naming your lead "Gaylord F---er" for a cheap laugh. Subtle as a brick. Painfully stupid from stem to stern. It was one of the first films that tried to forcefeed the notion that Owen Wilson is funny.

It's enough to make you forget that Deniro used to regularly strike gold with Scorcese.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 1:59:20 PM PST
Lawrence of Arabia sucked.

Posted on Feb 10, 2010 3:40:33 PM PST
I've got to go with 2001: A Space Odyssey as the highest rated piece of garbage that I ever forced myself to watch. I love everything about space and Sci-fi and all that but by the end, I was just like, "Wow, that was stupid!"
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 ... 93 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in

Recent discussions in the Movie forum


This discussion

Discussion in:  Movie forum
Participants:  231
Total posts:  2321
Initial post:  Feb 9, 2010
Latest post:  Apr 16, 2015

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 7 customers

Search Customer Discussions