Seriously and sincerely, you should take some film courses at a local college. In addition to them being an absolute joy, they may actually surprise you. Almost every professor I had while earning my degrees(even the dottering one who continually confused Janet and Vivien Leigh) would tell you that, while you can deconstruct IKIRU or OPEN CITY to the Nth degree or argy-bargy over the mise-en-scene in CUL-DE-SAC and have some cerebral fun doing it(and it is!), you can be just as satisfied being blown out of your seat at a spectacle for which the only requirement is to be a simple audience member. They're two halves of the same coin. My definition of a film buff involves very little snobbery. Surely you must have, over those early Sneak Preview years(I'm guesstimating your age), noticed that Gene often felt fondness for films that may not have been AFI listers. Even Roger Ebert has shown a decided soft-spot for sincerity over sophistication in many instances. I followed those guys on to their other shows, Jeffery Lyons and Michael Medved(ugh!) just didn't do it for me. Considering our vastly different takes on film appreciation, I think it's pretty...I don't know...weird...that you and I are most likely the only people in this forum (and perhaps that either of us know at all) who have actually seen MIND WALK.

Well, "Who cares if it's bad, because it looks cool and your inner child would dig it?"is probably the most cynical way to put it, but yeah...sure. Why not? I guess as jaded as I thought this often grossly ignorant culture had made me, I'm really not as far around the bend as others. I still enjoy a good spectacle. (Which is fortunate in light of the upcoming election season!)

As for effects...TITANIC had every possible advantage in budget and special effects technology, and boy did it look incredible, yet A NIGHT TO REMEMBER trounces it in a number of key aspects; questionable boat models and all. Despite dated and black-comically garish(think Hammer Films with an Ealing twist) gore effects, Vincent Price's THEATER OF BLOOD still casts an inescapable shadow over the what-are-supposed-to-be 'horror films' churned out monthly now. Great effects? Sure. Any soul? Pffft.

I can buy your boredom with the remake of KONG(though not with swooning over Brody). Jackson's film was just too long. He spent much too much time celebrating his affection for the original for most folks to patiently appreciate. While it was interesting to see, only cinema cultists would have lamented the spider pit concept missing again this time around....nevermind the bronto chase. And, more interesting to me, aesthetically, the end of the second act was much more moving and heartrending than the climax at the Empire State Building. GREATEST STORY EVER TOLD suffers similarly, as raising Lazarus from the dead is a tough act for anyone to follow.

ps STAR WARS was not a 'word-of-mouth' film for anyone I knew as kid.

__________________
random youtube observation #83:
Nana Mouskouri without glasses is like peanut butter without jelly, like yin without yang, spic without span...

You got me on the money issue. There's no doubt about that. It sucks.

Well, that was my point. I can imagine he was fairly grateful. Was every movie you were taken to as a child a completely satisfying experience for your escorts?

With that many voices, a consensus is probably pretty rare. What about this...take your son to a matinee and let your wife and daughters stay home and watch DIRTY DANCING or FATHER OF THE BRIDE or rent some Hugh Grant 'comedy'. Consider it bonding. He'll look back fondly on your 'sacrifices' later when he's wiping the pureed peas from your chin in the nursing home.

__________________
random youtube observation #83:
Nana Mouskouri without glasses is like peanut butter without jelly, like yin without yang, spic without span...

The critics have. Or are you one of those people who doesn't realize that they actually watch all of 'em?

Oh, Soylentgreen, I've seen some turkeys. (Though not yet the one you've named yourself after.) And in another thread, I made the point that, in the end, you actually have to watch the movies you analyze. I've also confessed some fondnesses myself to movies that other people assure me they loathe. (Not as many as my boyfriend, a diehard fan of Waterworld, The Postman, and every Chevy Chase movie ever made; he never believes me when I tell him that most other people think his favourites are horrible. Come to think of it, it's his fault that I've seen what I consider the worst movie out of the untold thousands I've seen.) It's just that I'm not much on eye candy. In the long run, it's not my favourite. You'll notice--if you have, as I suspect, been reading my journal--that I just don't watch many action movies. Not my thing.

Actually, I saw Mindwalk because my best friend insisted. And, you know, it's got Sam Waterston. (Yeah, I know. I have really weird tastes in actors.) It's a fascinating movie, though it's not really a story as such. However, the fact that it raised as many interesting thoughts as I did made it, if you'll notice, similar in my view to the third Pirates movie. I'm awfully weird about movies in general, I guess. (And I'm 31.)

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Sometimes we go to movies as a family and other times it's just me and my son. I've seen all the Batman movies with him and did not include my girls or my wife. The Spiderman movies were a family outing. I just refuse to see every new cool looking movie that comes out. It can get very expensive if you do that. A few months ago, we purchased a new 58 inch plasma tv, so I think when 10,000 BC comes out on dvd, everyone in the family will still get to see it on a relatively big screen setting. This was one of the reasons that I purchased the new tv and surround sound system in the first place.

Tease! What is it?

I'd have to think about what I'd pick for the worst movie I've ever seen. The first thing that comes to mind is Pink Floyd's The Wall, but I think that's more a case of it failing miserably to live up to expectations than being objectively bad...

__________________
SeanF

"Ask to understand, but don't challenge unless you have the knowledge."--NEOWatcher

The contents of this post are ©2008 by SeanF and may not be copied or retransmitted in any form without the express written consent of SeanF

It's interesting. Here we have a board where most posters are fanatical about hard evidence (as they should be)...and yet have no problem trashing a movie they have never seen. Just seems odd to me.

I, for one, certainly enjoy all the hard science of Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, and Battlestar Galactica.

Oh, I quite liked The Wall, though I'll admit it's been years since I've seen it and my opinion may have changed.

No, so far as I am concerned, the worst movie I've ever seen (MSTies don't count) is The Medallion, starring Jackie Chan. Now, it was probably made worse by the fact that I saw it in the theatre, meaning that I went all the way across town on the bus to see it. (About an hour each way.) Also, it's not a genre I like in the first place, and Graham knew that even as he was all but begging me to come with him. I like Chow Yun Fat, and I like Jet Li as often as not, but I don't like Jackie Chan. And I don't like pure kung fu movies. (I have issues stemming from my days on the Evergreen school paper; our sports editor was also the head of the kung fu club/team.) So I did not go into this movie with high expectations, but it still completely failed to live up to them. I had to go sit in the bathroom for five minutes because I just couldn't take it anymore. And as we walked out of the theatre after one of the only times I didn't stay for the credits, Graham said, "Wow. That was worse than I was expecting."

Eragon was a pretty close second, though.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

Those Daring Young Men in Their Jaunty Jalopies. This is the only movie I have ever walked out.

My roommate and I were on a double date. We went to this movie; it was supposed to be a cross between Those Magnificent Men in Their Flying Machines and The Great Race, both of which are very good. This one isn't.

Part way through, my roommate excused himself to go to the men's room. Shortly after, his date excused herself to go to the snack bar.

My date and I sat and watched and waited for them to return. After 15-20 minutes, we decided that the movie was awful and we weren't waiting for them to come back, we were leaving.

As we started back up the aisle, there they were, sitting a few rows back, grinning broadly. They, too, had decided the movie stunk and were waiting to see how much more we'd take before leaving.

__________________
Never attribute to malice what can be adequately explained by ignorance or stupidity.
Isaac Asimov

It's personal with turkeys. It always is and, of course, should be. I actually don't believe there is a film that didn't have some aspect or instance, no matter how miniscule, that didn't reward in some capacity. As for turkeys grade, I can guarantee I've seen(and probably own) flicks that would make your hair stand on end. Hows about GUYANA:CULT OF THE DAMNED(or CRIME OF THE CENTURY, depending on just which grindhouse you saw it in)? A sleazy, exploitation spectacle based on, surprise, Jim Jones and his People's Temple. Boasting a cast of "oh, they're still alive?" names like Gene Barry, Joseph Cotten and Yvonne De Carlo(a personal crush), the film probably has no redeeming merit other than being the sole proof that only the son of the director of SURVIVE!(the Chilean Andes rugby disaster) could indeed find another sad tragedy to cash in on in such a sincere manner. And until the incredibly well done Powers Boothe tv-mini gets it's long awaited release on dvd, there's no other competition.

As a history freak, even stinkers have a home in my collection(see REVOLUTION, FLYBOYS, even PEARL HARBOR-the trick with this one is watch TORA, TORA, TORA right up until the morning of the attack then throw in the Bay film, then right after stick in TORA again!). They are, after all just another social perspective. Demented and sad, but social.

On SOYLENT GREEN...some rainy afternoon with 97 minutes to spare, you should check it out at least once(yes, I know, you will go into it knowing the 'gag') if for no other reason than for Edward G Robinson's last role. His chemistry with old friend Heston is very sweet and combined with his serious illness makes his performance much more moving than one would expect from a film in this genre. Keep your eyes peeled for a little appearance by soon to be octoliberially satisfied Dick Van Patten.

Film buffery, to me, is about balance. My friend and I get together every week and watch some flicks. Usually we balance a nice classic noir(most recently THIEVES HIGHWAY) with something lite and relaxing(most recently CONCORDE: AIRPORT 79!). An incredible Dassin film with the always excellent Richard Conte followed by the franchise-self-destructing final AIRPORT film with cinema's only pairing of my hero George Kennedy and the Anne Rice-pleasing Alain Delon. Delon even shells out the francs for a hooker for the Blue Knight! Movie GOLD!

I like him already!
(sadly, the last Chase film I enjoyed was FOUL PLAY in it's endless run on HBO in the early 80s)

sidenote: both Harry Harrison(author of 'Make Room, Make Room', which became SOYLENT GREEN) and 'Postman' author David Brin have said that, despite vast differences between their work and the film versions, they both thought each film did honor the spirit of the source and appreciated their earnestness. Brin, even mentioned being envious of a few ideas the screenwriters came up with.

ps You're not alone concerning Waterston.

[SORRY...I'm derailing this thread big time.....please continue with 10,000 BC]

__________________
random youtube observation #83:
Nana Mouskouri without glasses is like peanut butter without jelly, like yin without yang, spic without span...

I meant it didn't sound like anyone posting in this thread had seen it. I realize the critics have seen it. But I hardly ever agree with them. I prefer to hear what "normal" people have to say. And sometimes they're wrong too, I'll freely admit that.

I just said that I enjoyed it. I don't expect it to win the Best Picture Oscar.

As for nitpicking, no one has mentioned the metal swords yet. Oh right, that's because you haven't seen it.

The trick with critics is to know where you'll disagree. Richard Roeper likes much dumber comedies than I do, so if he suggests that I will like a Will Ferrell movie, he is wrong. If he suggests that I won't, it must be very bad indeed. I have friends whose opinions I don't trust. Someone whose opinion I usually trust made me watch Barry Lyndon, which I hated. (It was lovely, but I hated it.) Know your critics, and you know when you can trust them.

Anyway, I've started a general film buffery thread over in BABBling in an effort to avoid taking this too far off track.

__________________
Gillian

"Now everyone was giving her that kind of look UFOlogists get when they suddenly say, 'Hey, if you shade your eyes you can see it is just a flock of geese after all.'"

"You can't erase icing."

"I can't believe it doesn't work! I found it on the internet, man!"

I like Barardinelli's Reel Views

__________________
'The eye can only see what the mind is prepared to accept'

One other thing I forgot to mention. There's actually some astronomy in this movie. Not sure if any of the critics mentioned it.

The constellation Orion plays a small part. And our hero is apparently the first person to figure out how to navigate by the stars.

I can hardly wait for the sequel in which their computers crash because the year number loses a digit.

__________________
Life is like a box of chocolates. All of your choices are bad for you.

Snce the story apparently takes place on an Omnicontinent, they could have a "nearby" civilization with a calendar that predicts the world will end in 12, 012 years.

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
Illuminati's Razor-The most complicatedly evil answer is usually the most correct answer. - Fazor
"Every book is a children's book if the kid can read." - Mitch Hedberg
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

That's not a contradiction. The ads for the movie, and the reports on it from other people who have seen it, are evidence.

The HBO bts documentary told me a great deal about inconsistencies in the film.

Now, in all fairness, it might not be the cinematic turd most of us think it is, given most of us haven't seen it yet.

It might become a cult classic, like '300' (much-maligned for its artistic liberties with history), and earn gazillions in DVD sales and popcorn revenues.

But the science/history geeks, those who know something about ancient history and prehistory certainly have valid arguments agaisnt '10,000 BC'.

I'll wait a few months, till it comes out on PPV.

__________________
Angel of the Abyss
-------------
"I am Ripper...Tearer...Slasher...Gouger. I am the Teeth in the Darkness, the Talons in the Night. Mine is Strength...and Lust...and Power! I AM BEOWULF!"