The reverse of that post I’ve made a week ago…
Rules: pick one movie or series and explain why you actually enjoyed it despite the criticism.
For me: The JJ Abrams Star Trek movies, by far the best ST stuff ever made, I couldn’t take seriously the original universe with the dated effects and stiff acting, same goes for NG… These movies did ST actually great looking and much more believable, not just the effects.
Super Mario Bros. with Bob Hoskins and John Leguizamo. I don’t care how bad it is. It’s in the campy so-bad it’s good pool of movies and nothing anyone says can change my mind. The fact that they were drunk off their asses just makes it even funnier in my opinion.
Wild Wild West has a 16% on Rotten Tomatoes but I genuinely enjoy that film. League of Extraordinary Gentlemen also at 16% and also a movie I enjoyed
Fun fact. Will Smith passed up playing Neo in the Matrix for WWW. I think we got the better deal but it’s fun to picture it.
No way ! WWW is a treasured childhood memory of mine, this rotten tomato guy can suck ass
League of Extraordinary Gentlemen aka How audiences unjustly bullied Sean Connery out of acting.
I can see someone liking League if they’d never read the comic.
Not sure if it was HATED, but Hook if we’re going by reviews. I can’t imagine any kid seeing that movie and not loving it though.
For me, it’s the movie Waterworld. I cannot get enough of that movie. So many people hated it. 🤣
Haters: it’s just Mad Max on water
Me: that’s awesome
I like Waterworld, and I like The Postman.
Postman was great! The book is worth a read, too.
The joke in my friend group was that Waterworld was Dances with Wolves on water. The Postman was Waterworld on land. Dances with Wolves was the Postman with Native Americans. Toss in whichever parallel you feel works best to not actually say the movie you’re putting on.
DRY LAND!!!
I dont understand the hate other than cosner was the guy to hate in that era.
I’ve never understood Costner hate. He’s a good actor who stars in a lot of good movies.
Solid Film. Quirky characters. Everyone seems to be having fun.
It inspired me to buy a kayak a few years back to have my Autistic Fish Man Summer.
If paper is the most valuable substance in the entire world, then why are they continuously smoking cigarettes that are rolled in paper? That would be like eating a chunk of gold every hour.
Have you ever smoked? When you’re addicted you’d trade in a chunk of gold for a cigarette if necessary.
I once walked 10 miles to get cigarettes, so yeah, I guess I get that.
In my headcanon it’s some kind of smokable kelp wrapped in different kelp.
Pretty sure when I went to WB world or whatever as a kid they had one of those 15min live shows of it. Jestskis and a few explosions. Surly it can’t be thst unpopular.
It’s a fine movie, but people really don’t like being reminded of climate change or other environment issues. Same thing with Avatar. If you cast an environmentalist as a villain though, people seem to like it.
That was the first that came to mind, but I didn’t know it was very hated, just thought it bombed at the box office opening weekend because it was in competition with another movie that was way more popular.
I thought Waterworld was fine.
Waterworld and Robin Hood Prince of Thieves.
Waterworld is ocean Fallout and RHPoT is fucking meme central. Plus RH is my childhood nostalgia movie, I’ve probably watched it over a couple hundred times just on VHS.
Johnny Mnemonic. Keanu cannot act for shit in it, the story isn’t exactly gripping, hell the action in it is somewhere in the shitter. Oh, and Henry Rollins is a nerdy doctor. All if it adds up to a campy trip of slop that triggers my guilty pleasure.
For me: The JJ Abrams Star Trek movies, by far the best ST stuff ever made, I couldn’t take seriously the original universe with the dated effects and stiff acting, same goes for NG… These movies did ST actually great looking and much more believable, not just the effects.
Just kidding… but not really.
Yeah, to each their own, but if you think this, you don’t understand why people like Star Trek.
Maybe I do understand why people like Star Trek, but I just don’t like that myself?
Dude if in universe they talk about hyper advanced races or warlords without mercy or AI and all the have is actors in shitty make up or awful “martial arts” and sword fighting, then the new movies are better by default. It’s about immersion
I say this purely tongue in cheek.
Enjoy your polished turd. But don’t look directly at it. It will blind you with lens flare.
Funny thing, I didn’t even really notice the lense flares until people started complaining about it… I guess when you live with something like that all the time (thanks, astigmatism), seeing it on screen just doesn’t have the same effect on you
Wow, I don’t think I’ve ever seen someone with this confusing of an opinion. And I’ve met Trump supporters that love Star Trek.
The new movies are more credible and feel more real for a sci fi movie, is that hard to understand?
You… You are aware just how much tech and effects have progressed in the last sixty years… Right? What they were doing was groundbreaking for the time, pretty much every time.
It was not great even for it’s time. It was passable and I’m also talking about the movie version of those old series with Kirk and Picard. Star wars came like what… A couple of years after? And looked much better, the next gen movies came after the old trilogy and still couldn’t look better…
The final results are what matter. With sci-fi, the special effects are a primordial part. Also I’m not just talking about effects. Old material was acted like a radio play or theatre… Not a fan. That slowly changed with next generation but still wasn’t enough.
JJ Abrams movies are “ST if it was actually on our world”. And the actors are EXCELLENT, even the haters admit all of them did excellent evocations of the old actors, some of them actually felt like the same actor but younger, which wasn’t necessary since that could alienate the viewer but whatever, it worked.
I don’t have any strong feelings about Star Trek. But I know enough to treat it as a piece of philosophy. It was never about the most advanced visual effects possible (although some of the effects and makeup are quite impressive imo). Star Trek was an investigation into what it means to be human, and the morality behind that. If there was cool tech stuff, that was bonus.
It’s hard to compare the two (original series vs. JJ Abrams), being across such vast differences in time (relative to the progress of technology and style in filmmaking) but its impossible if you’re just going to outright denounce all the qualities the original had for its time.
Star wars came like what… A couple of years after? And looked much better
Star Trek (1966-1969)
Star Wars (1977)
You do the math.
It was not great even for it’s time. It was passable… With sci-fi, the special effects are a primordial part.
What are you comparing it to? The progress in filmmaking during that time was ridiculous. The steadicam hadn’t even been invented yet so shots were much more static. For the time, people were blown away by the sets and effects.
Also I’m not just talking about effects. Old material was acted like a radio play or theatre… Not a fan.
All the acting and direction in every show and movie at that time was stilted and stiff and yes, very akin to a play. That was the time of Adam West Batman. You don’t have to be a fan. But your statements about it not being good for its time are… Ignorant? At best.
JJ Abrams movies are “ST if it was actually on our world”.
You’re delusional is you think “actually in our world” is measured by the visual effects technology and the progress of film/TV acting and direction of the time. Connection with the real world is quite literally what set Star Trek apart and made it change the course of sci fi film and television. It took real world politics and social issues and made them part of a sci fi story.
But if epic CGI space battles and intrusive lens flare from non-existent lights is your definition of reality, there’s not much else we can say.
actually, it’s about imagination
No is not. These aren’t books, it’s an audio visual media. Seeing Kirk in a bad looking cardboard looking set pretending to be another planet with soap opera acting won’t sell the idea
This is a bit right? You’re doing a bit? …right?
What are you talking about?
I’m with you. Both that I enjoyed the movie and don’t understand the point this guy trying to make.
Yeah, those crappy TV shows had brainwashed him
Ngl, I’m with you, holy crap they seem absolutely miserable.
@Platypus@lemmings.world I say this with all the love for a stranger I can have in my heart:
The original super Mario bros movie from the 90s. If I come across it I always get the urge to watch it. Its so weird and interesting, love it. Noone in my family will watch it though they hate it :(
Your family are weird then, that movie is cinematic gold.
They say its too weird :(
Got bust out the ol reliable “no u”
This is mine too. If you haven’t, look up the drama on set! The crew wore shirts stating they hate the directors, the actors were drunk, Haskins broke his leg and was in a cast most of the time (rumored to have been run over on set by another drunk actor, lol).
It’s insane and crazy that we got a movie so fun (seriously, it’s just so fun even if it doesn’t adhere to the source material).
I didnt know about any of that, thanks for the tip!
Way better than the recent animated movie IMO
Also the new movie basically ripped the exact premise from the OG
I’m not even going to call it a guilty pleasure, but Josie and the Pussycats was a movie that I genuinely adored long before people started to appreciate it for the satire that it is.
As a CIS male I got endlessly mocked, but I stuck to my guns.
Matrix 2 & 3. I don’t see, or watch, them as separate movies. Rather, together with Matrix 1, they form one big masterpiece for me. But I can see that it doesn’t really fit the 100 minutes format audiences came to expect, and breaking it in three parts did not do it any good. Plus, I guess I’m just a fan of long movies as I’ve also sat through the original, restored “Until the End of the World,” which runs for about 5 hours.
When I binged all 3 movies I realised that 2 and 3 should be watched together as a single film, it makes it so much better
I get quite annoyed when people talk trash about 2 and 3. If it’s not for you then that’s fine but saying they’re not good really gets under my skin.
I mean, 2 and 3 are also largely a deconstruction of 1. The Matrix is an incredibly well made movie with really stupid themes. 2 and 3 do an excellent job highlighting why stuff like “Neo is the Chosen One” is fundamentally bad storytelling, but there were a lot of audiences who loved The Matrix fully and completely. I can understand why those people were disappointed when 2 and 3 weren’t just more senseless violence in black trenchcoats, but ultimately the series wasn’t made for them.
IIRC, 2 and 3 were meant to be one film, but it got split due to studio meddling. I wonder if there is a mega-cut adapting the whole trilogy into a single runtime.
Matrix 2 and 3 were films that always got a bad rep, but were alright if you sat down and watched them.
Matrix 4 is… best left forgotten, and I say that as someone who likes Indy 4
Yea I’m with you on this. They expand on an otherwise superb unit in a rather intricate way, bringing in so much lore and characters, complexifying the stakes, that I can see how they can be perceived as diluting a very pure work of art, and losing the beautiful esoterism of the first. But it’s two of those films you need to watch several times to wrap your head around and appreciate rightfully. Just like The Big Lebowski, in a different way
SOLO - I know everyone hated on this film, but we get a space western mixed with a heist movie. Woody Harrelson and Donald Glover are icing on the cake. Plus we get a robot uprising. 5 bags of popcorn and throw in a couple of those Darth Vader cups.
I did not enjoy the sequels, but Solo? Yeah, that is a solid fun time. I even have a Solo T-shirt that I still wear on occasion.
I don’t think this is really a hot take. I know quite a few star wars fans and most of them (including me) love Solo, even those who can’t stand any of the other new movies.
For some reason I was thinking you were talking about that Mario Van Peebles movie
Yea I enjoyed Solo, good popcorn flick
It’s easily the best Star Wars movie in the last 30 years. Its only major faults are some bits of bad cinematography and a bit of cringey fan service.
That’s Rogue One.
I did like Solo, but can’t but feel it would have been better had the main character not been Han Solo, because nobody was really going to live up to Harrison Ford in the originals.
Its easily Roque One, Theres just no competition movie wise. In general its Andor, that show was just peak Star Wars
Nah, Rogue One is as bad as the other sequels. The main character is about as interesting as a wet dish rag. Several of the side characters are annoying. Zombie Tarkin. There’s no story arc or characters that are worth caring about and the entire plot is just a thin excuse to have cringey fan service and CG action scenes.
Star Wars Ep 1 gets more hate than it deserves. It’s not a masterpiece by any means, but it’s enjoyable.
The Postman. Compared to other post apocalyptic cheese fests it feels like a more nuanced display of societal breakdown and the re-emergence of the barter economy.
Tank Girl, it got shit reviews when it came out, but has grown a cult following since then, https://www.rottentomatoes.com/m/tank_girl
I am also partial to Dude Where’s My Car
I don’t hate Tank Girl for what it is but for what it could have been. Like that was the greatest casting imaginable for Tank Girl in any era of film and the soundtrack was magical at the time. It had so much potential but got lost due to budget and film industry input
I think the set and costumes are on point for a satirical punk comedy.
I made the mistake of watching dude wheres my car again recently. I enjoyed it as a kid, but the way that trans charcter was done really upset me. I entirely forgot she existed in the movie, but a cis actress who was dubbed with a cis man voice was used to trick the main charcters into making out and then played as gross out humor. Her whole storyline was just flat out upsetting stereotypes.
The tattoo scene is still a total gem, but the rest of it aged so poorly.
The 90s in general were pretty bad for portrayal of trans and lgb+ characters. Remember Ace Ventura, first one?
I agree, though, close minded people ruin everything.
Pet detective was my favorite movie growing up, now I try to forget it exists. Most movies haven’t aged well in terms of casual bigotry of all flavors. Yet they still hold value, some more than others. It’s just important to remember they were products of their time. Which makes them good measuring sticks for how audiences have changed. Sometimes the real joke is what I used to find funny as a kid.
Tbh, some of these scenes were pretty mind boggling to me even as a kid. Never understood what people have against different bodies.
both awesome movies. don’t trust “experts”, siskel and ebert rated Tommy Boy the worst comedy they’d ever seen. fuck them lol
Zoltan!
