Film Score Monthly
FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM   
Search Terms: 
Search Within:   search tips 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 10:36 AM   
 By:   Sean Nethery   (Member)

I don't think it's a question of "having the stones" or "not getting it" or whatever. The premise of this thread was to talk about "classic" (I also loathe this word, by the way) films that "you just can't bring yourself to like." I don't get why anyone thinks that someone should provide some other film for comparison - what are you lot asking for, someone to prove their cred by naming some films you can agree on?

I started out just wanting to be snarky, but I'm honestly confused why it matters. Critics, smart people, heck, all people can disagree about the merits of just about anything that some people think is the very bees knees. So effing what?

Oh, and by the way William, I've got no problem with someone not liking Silence of the Lambs because Hannibal Lecter is creepy - that's as good a reason not to like a film as any. (Which in my view is a genuine "classic" if we have to use that word, though sadly also with pernicious influence in pop culture, but enough on that subject for one day).

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 12:27 PM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

Again with opinions parading as fact. Not the people who talk about classics that don't work for them, but the people who insist that they are deeply wrong, don't get it, etc. Guess what. EVERY response to a film is legitimate.

I never paraded anything as facts. We're all talking about our individual preferences here. My issue is -- and has always been -- one of attitude. You can dismiss a film because you don't like the plot or characters, but what if these aspects aren't the focus of the film? What if the filmmaker has prioritized other things? Isn't that at least worth a thought before one makes a value judgement?

I've always felt that certain film fans (and especially those that veer exclusively towards Hollywood fare) are too quick to judge a film based only on plot, because plot is so important in these films. There is too little focus on the visual part of the artform (or aural, for that matter), and ideas that are communicated more through that than plot and characters. Thus, I feel many evaluations are misunderstood or -- at the very least -- not approaching the film on its own terms. That's what I wanted to say.

 
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 1:28 PM   
 By:   Solium   (Member)

A film is the sum of all the parts. It may look beautiful or be visually interesting but the story and characters have to live up to the same standards. Otherwise your evaluating a work of art. There are exceptions of course like "Fantasia" or "2001 a Space Odyssey" which were clearly meant to tell it's story almost entirely with visuals and music.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 5:32 PM   
 By:   Thor   (Member)

A film is the sum of all the parts. It may look beautiful or be visually interesting but the story and characters have to live up to the same standards. Otherwise your evaluating a work of art.

I would hope so. Film IS a work of art. It can do so much more than create characters and tell stories!

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 7:16 PM   
 By:   Sampo   (Member)



Name three "classic" movies that just don't do it for you.

Night of the Living Dead

It's slow, preachy, and I never really liked any of the characters. I respect the film & what it was trying to say, but things about it could have been different.

A Hard Days Night

The Beatles goofing off for 90 minutes. I like Help better.

Life is Beautiful

A comedy with that subject matter is just a bad idea.

 
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 7:42 PM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

The original NIGHT OF THE LIVING DEAD!!!!

I'd forgotten all about that so-called "classic."

Yeah, most definitely.

I remember when I first saw it and had heard or read for years how it was the most terrifying film of all time....

So I watch it.....

Zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz

EAT ME!

 
 Posted:   Jul 9, 2016 - 11:23 PM   
 By:   WILLIAMDMCCRUM   (Member)



I started out just wanting to be snarky, but I'm honestly confused why it matters. Critics, smart people, heck, all people can disagree about the merits of just about anything that some people think is the very bees knees. So effing what?

Oh, and by the way William, I've got no problem with someone not liking Silence of the Lambs because Hannibal Lecter is creepy - that's as good a reason not to like a film as any. (Which in my view is a genuine "classic" if we have to use that word, though sadly also with pernicious influence in pop culture, but enough on that subject for one day).



You're saying it's 'legitimate' to dislike a film, as though legitimacy meant something in this context.

Films we 'enjoy' because of our various complexes and experiences etc. can't be judged (unless we're into serial killers or some madness) but there are criteria re what is 'good' in terms of universal meaning, ethics, message, artistry, craftsmanship, construction, evocativeness, place in history, originality, etc.. Yes, there are those who are basically snobs who love lists of 'critics' 20 best', and who always peep over their shoulders at how they may be being perceived, but great films are great for a reason. When you cross the line from 'I like' to 'this is no good' without defining why, you lose out.

 
 Posted:   Jul 13, 2016 - 9:06 AM   
 By:   Sean Nethery   (Member)

Of course it is legitimate in this context - the context being classics you can't bring yourself to like. The problems some are having in this thread is whether or not this is a legitimate subject for a thread. Negative human responses to a "great" work is a perfectly legitimate topic, just not one that is typically going to generate a lot of keen critical assessment. (My comments excepted, of course. wink)

For me, it's the idea that someone has a duty to admire or value or venerate (or whatever the hell the right word would be) any given "classic" that is illegitimate. And for the simplest and most universal of reasons - because it means telling someone to think like someone else, which no one has the right to do. At least not where I live.

 
 Posted:   Jul 13, 2016 - 10:42 AM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

Maybe a thread where fifty so-called certified (I guess by the Academy or the AFI or some other douchebag outfit) "classics" are listed, then we give opinions as to how much we either like or don't like them. But then, really.....

There's better things to do.

 
 Posted:   Jul 14, 2016 - 1:18 PM   
 By:   WILLIAMDMCCRUM   (Member)


For me, it's the idea that someone has a duty to admire or value or venerate (or whatever the hell the right word would be) any given "classic" that is illegitimate. And for the simplest and most universal of reasons - because it means telling someone to think like someone else, which no one has the right to do. At least not where I live.


There are different aspects to people.

The part that says 'I like' is subjective. The deeper part has a 'duty' to be fair. The duty is not to follow some conformist canon, but to be fair. That might mean trying to be as objective as one can. If millions say a film is universally good, you would hope that was a result of that film's inherent merits, exposed to everyone's FAIRNESS.

But even with the subjective part, there's a personal responsibility to examine our own preferences to see whence they originate.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 14, 2016 - 1:50 PM   
 By:   Rameau   (Member)

I think why you like or dislike something (films, clothes, people, music) is pretty well unknowable, it's in that part of your brain that you just can't get to. It seems there's two kinds of unliked classic movies. 1/Nothing wrong with the film at all, you can see why it's a classic, but it just doesn't do it for you. 2/You don't think it's very good, you see many faults & just don't know why it's considered a classic.

A more fun thread would be: 3 bad movies that for some reason you just love.

 
 Posted:   Jul 14, 2016 - 2:54 PM   
 By:   RR   (Member)

Oh, I've got dozens of those!

 
 Posted:   Jul 14, 2016 - 3:11 PM   
 By:   other tallguy   (Member)

Conan. I'm sorry, I'm so sorry. I should love this movie and I just don't. I've tried. But I like it better than Legend.
Annie Hall. Never mind my grudge about Best Picture.
Taxi Driver. Have I ever liked a Scorsese film? (Ok, I liked Color of Money.) See also Goodfellas.

Honorable mention: Vertigo. This is an edge case. I like the movie. But I don't love it 1/10 as much as North by Northwest.

 
 Posted:   Jul 14, 2016 - 3:33 PM   
 By:   Metryq   (Member)

A more fun thread would be: 3 bad movies that for some reason you just love.

Oh, I can think of lots of films that I "like more than I should" because I like the score. I, ROBOT with Will Smith is one example. The story is more like Roger MacBride Allen's novel CALIBAN (set in Asimov's "robots" universe) than like the Asimov anthology I, ROBOT. Anyway, the script had logical flaws that rubbed my fur the wrong way. So while it was not a "bad" film—Beltrami's haunting score kept me seated—the flaws compromise the drama for me.

The anime feature THE SECRET WORLD OF ARRIETTY was boring, but I loved Cécile Corbel's music.

Disney's THE BLACK HOLE was unquestionably a bomb, but I loved John Barry's score.

 
 
 Posted:   Jul 18, 2016 - 9:21 AM   
 By:   joec   (Member)

EASY RIDER is definitely one!

 
 Posted:   Jul 18, 2016 - 2:56 PM   
 By:   FredGarvin   (Member)

EASY RIDER is definitely one!

Yeah, completely overrated. But credit is certainly due to the influence it had on indie film-making at the time.

 
 Posted:   Jul 18, 2016 - 3:37 PM   
 By:   Sean Nethery   (Member)

Honorable mention: Vertigo. This is an edge case. I like the movie. But I don't love it 1/10 as much as North by Northwest.

Mr. OT, I'm not going to start a "how can you not love this" thing, but I do have a question - have you seen Vertigo in the theater?

I saw it in the theater twice, in the 80's and 90's. And though I too enjoy N by NW more, I think of Vertigo as Hitch's best late movie, and maybe his best ever. And I think it's because I've seen it in the theater, where my attention was fully and completely on the film, and I was carried away by it in a way I don't think I could have been on first watch at home.

 
 Posted:   Jul 18, 2016 - 4:04 PM   
 By:   RoryR   (Member)

EASY RIDER is definitely one!

Yeah, completely overrated. But credit is certainly due to the influence it had on indie film-making at the time.


Not to mention quite dated. Tried watching some of it the last time TCM showed it, and in HD, but I couldn't stay with it. Even smoking a little weed myself at the time didn't help.

 
You must log in or register to post.
  Go to page:    
© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved.
Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.