Anyone have a movie that they cannot stand?

Independance Day. It was good, even funny, until they had Will Smith's character beat up an alien in the desert. That was so corny that it ruined the movie for me.

Others include:

Top Gun-I guess you have to be a child of the 80s to like this one.

The Outsiders

Austin Powers movies

almost all "chick flicks"(Dirty Dancing, Boys On The Side, Ghost, Fried Green Tomatoes, stuff like that...)! The shipwreck in Titanic was cool, though.

 

I love that movie! Nothing like the 70s as *I* remember it, but in a weird way, it reminded me of the 70s...

 

Top Gun - Can only sit thru' first 20 minutes and then walk away.
Air Force One
Die Hard trilogy
Salo don't ask!!

 

I have to ask... sorry!

I have heard about this movie but have never seen it. I am not easily offended (really I don't think any thing could) but is this really as bad as I have heard and read?

 

It's bad. I actually sat through the whole criterion laserdisc, however there is one section that really tested the limits of my "open-mindedness". The whole film is amazing in that it could actually get made. It is hard to describe in a "wholesome" place. If you really want to know about it Rob, send me an email.

 

BLADE RUNNER did get positive reviews for its visual brilliance back in the spring of '82. But, as noted, E.T. came along a few weeks later and every other film in circulation was quickly forgotten. Over the years it has probably made a profit due to home video sales.

Going against the common wisdom, I must confess to preferring the original cut, with voiceover, as presented back in '82. Although imposed upon the film by the producers, the voiceover adds a noirish tone to an already noirish movie. It tends to give the Deckard character more humanity, a worldweary nature that belies the hidden fact he is very likely a replicant.

Another missed theme is one that is central to Dick's work: what constitutes identity; that is, what is real and what is not. Unfortunately, when transferring his stories to cinema, his more interesting plot undercurrents tend to be lost. On the other hand, like Asimov, he is not the easier writer to read on the printed page, and the complexity both brought to their work has always made adapting their material difficult, to say the least, whereas a guy like Ray Bradbury is relatively easy to adapt.

Love the movie; BLADE RUNNER has some plot holes, but it's so visually striking and Vangelis' score so perfectly evocative, it won me over upon first viewing. I still play my Criterion CAV laser edition on occasion; I have the director's cut DVD, but I skip the opening minutes where the narration is absent, and it's mostly okay. Really a must-see in a theater.

ED

 

Salo: Out of curiosity I bought the DVD and watched it once, then sold it. Sometimes it's better to remain ignorant. While the director could be called brave, it seems more exploitation since the unpleasantness in the film to me feels artificial and forced. Of course, I'm seeing it from the perspective of 20+ years of even more unpleasant films since it was made, so I'm probably significantly more jaded than a viewer at the time it came out. If I still had it I could sell it for a pretty penny on ebay, but I don't traffic in that sort of thing.

Most movies I'll watch once. The ones I really hate I always walk out on, and therefore usually can't remember the title of!

 

A side question is: where did you see the movie when you hated it?

For example, I saw Blade Runner when it first came out, in Seattle on one of the last huge curved Cinerama screens. The visual impact was stunning and memorable; the story seemed almost secondary. Since then I find I can't sit through the movie on video; the movie just doesn't seem made for that medium and I hate trying to watch it.

OTOH, I also saw 2001 on a first-run Cinerama screen (in Springfiled, MA). Again, stunning, and I hate the fact that I'll never again have the same experience of the almost 3D effect in the opening moments when the sun rises over the earth. But, I also enjoy watching the movie on video; the central questions of the story never fail to engage me.

 

This may well be the most perverse-sounding sentence I've ever read on this forum!

As I recall, "Blade Runner" was seen as visually creative but dead otherwise during its initial run. However, you've got your release dates backwards. "Blade Runner" came out 6/25/82, two weeks AFTER "ET". "BR" was DOA at the box office for reasons largely unrelated to "ET" other than the fact the latter cleaned up so heavily.

It was also a sci-fi heavy summer, with "ET", "BR", "The Thing", "Star Trek II", "Tron" and probably some others I've forgotten. "BR" was a dark and challenging flick - it's no surprise it bombed but found an audience later. The same thing happened for "The Thing"...

 

200 Motels - as if you can't say ***** enough.

 

I love lists like these, not only for the ones I agree with, but for my favorite movies being panned mercilessly. Good stuff. The most irritated I've been with movies has been SHOWGIRLS, which really should have been viewable for the eye candy aspect, but I just couldn't get through it. Perhaps if I'd been able to play another soundtrack, it would've been nicer. For whatever reason, I went in to see ALIENS in the theater in a foul mood, and that movie bugs the piss out of me to this day. Who knows, when it comes to matters of opinion.

 

What is this Salo movie? Somebody PM me if it is too adult to discuss here.

I barely made it through Blade Runner once. It was so damn SLOW. If they cut 30 minutes from it it would still seem like a 5 hour movie. What pissed me off about Showgirls was how ugly the girl looked. She was always so hot on Saved By The Bell.

 

for more info....

http://film.guardian.co.uk/features/featurepages/0,4120,371838,00.html

 

YUP !!!
There is worse I guess but this is generally considered to be a art-house type film,but it is just pure rubbish.

 

But since you asked, a friend took me to see Russian Ark the other night, and -- call me a dunce, but I have never been so bored in all my life. [/B][/QUOTE]

No kidding, I'm a history professor and I had a hard time sitting through this one. Gorgeous cinematography but man could it use substance or even a point. I do not understand all of the critical acclaim.

 

Alien 2 could've been great but they had to put a cute kid in it (a la Spielberg).

Ruined it for me....

but not quite in the "can't stand it category"! That is reserved for all the Arnie and Jean Claude movies.

 

The Dream Team, a 1989 flick starring Peter Boyle, Michael Keaton, Christopher Lloyd and Stephen Furst. A group of mental patients are taken on a field trip to a baseball game, and wind up getting lost and turned loose in NYC. One of the first films my wife and I went to when we were dating. Looked like a fun film, good cast, and a decent premise, but the film turned out to be rather depressing in the end. I thought it was just me, but even my wife had the same reaction to it. To this day, we still joke about being subjected to it.

 

Well, let's put it another way...it sure looked like a funnier film than it eventually turned out to be.

 

Some of the movies I've had the displeasure of sitting through:

Airport '77
Terms of Excrement, er Endearment
True Lies
Boomerang
How the Grinch Stole Christmas with Jim Carrey as a green-faced Richard Nixon

There are certain movies I won't watch on principle, because of my distaste for gratuitous violence. When I do accidentally catch one of these, they usually live down to my expectations.

And I'll agree with Ed on The Sound of Music. Some catchy songs, but god, it is painful to watch. The only part I always look for is when the von Trapps are running through the field after they escaped the Nazis, and you see the shadow of a helicopter overhead that, you soon figure out, ISN'T SUPPOSED TO BE THERE! My first thought was that they were being chased by some Nazi thugs and some shots were going to be fired. That would have been interesting. Then I realized that, when nothing happened, the helicopter shadow was a blooper.

 

Don't forget one of the grossest movies ever made, Eraserhead. BLEECHH!

 

Chiming in:

My all time most hated is "The Mario Brothers Movie". I hated it when I took my kids to see it in the theater, and learned to loathe it when they constantly wanted to watch the video back in the late 80's/early 90's.

Another series of movies I don't care for, and not due to repetitive watching as noted above, are the James Bond movies. It doesn't matter who is playing the lead role. There is something about the "manner" of the character that impresses me as unrealistic. It appears to me to be a (rather boring) cartoon. Cartoon-like movies (like Batman, X-Men..... et al) are fine when they understand they are cartoons. When they try to take themselves seriously, they are boring. My favorite Bond movies are "Casino Royale" and "On Her Majesties Secret Service". No wonder that one was a parody, and the other represented the limited appearance of an actor in the Bond role.

 

Just watched BAD TASTE the other day on dvd. Man , that's a way over the top disgusting movie but it is funny at times.

JohnG