Hat tip to Jeff Meyerson for this question.
Boy, there are so many, it's hard to know what to pick.
But I am going to go with Revolutionary Road, last year and Brian DePalma's Black Dahlia of several years ago. It's always especially hard when you're a big fan of the books.
What about you?
68 comments:
I just saw SHERLOCK HOLMES. It wasn't a bad film but I sure expected more.
(Btw that's a great pic of Megan)
The Big Sleep (1978) - the Robert Mitchum version, was the biggest downer for me - especially after his great version of Farewell, My Lovely. Moving the story to the present (and England!) was ridiculous.
Spiderman III--1 and 2 were a lot of fun, III was just a lot of noise and gave me a headache.
Lost In Translation--I like Bill Murray, got caught up in the buzz for the movie, and thought it was going to be something special. Instead my wife and I just sat in the theater shocked by the utter shallowness and suckiness of this movie. We did leave after an hour instead of torturing ourselves any further, so maybe it for better, but that 1st hour was painful.
I have to say David, I saw it this week and was disappointed to. Just too many action sequences and I hated all that secret society crap and black magic crap. Give me a solid case to solve.
And I agree with that too, Evan. It was a disappointment.
I thought we were the only ones that didn't see the charm of Lost in Translation. It should have been called "They Might Be Zombies."
Spiderman 3 was awful. I think everyone had lost their enthusiasm by then.
I agree with Evan about the Mitchum version of The Big Sleep. And then there was Star Wars Episode I -- the Phantom Menace.
Game Over. Bill wins. I just pray that no child in the future starts with episode one-as he/she is likely to do.
I forgot to mention 'No Country for Old Men'. I LOVE the Coen Brothers. Big Lebowski, Barton Fink, The Man Who Wasn't There,O Brother, Blood Simple are some of my favorite movies. I even liked The Lady Killers. Halfway through No Country I was just waiting for the damn thing to end. Probably my most disappointing movie experience.
There are many, which is why I try to avoid movies with a lot of hype. I guess the most recent is Changeling, which I just reviewed on my blog last night. I agree with you on The Black Dahlia. I heard that Revolutionary Road was a real downer, which is too bad because I liked the premise and the time period. Another ponderous one set in the 50s is Far From Heaven.
Yeah, it was pretty damned grim. Artful and true to the novel (my husband says) but awfully grim. I don't like Hudsucker Proxy either. But on the whole, yes, including A SERIOUS MAN.
Well, the book Revolutionary Road is a downer too. But you get inside his head-the movie can't do that so he seems unfathomable.
I really, really, REALLY didn't like E.T. And I realize I'm in the minority on this.
At the time I liked it well enough. But later, when I saw it out of the stream of hype, it seemed fairly ridiculous. And I suspect, as computer work gets better and better, it will seem more primitive than Wizard Of Oz does. I wonder how many movies will fail to charm because of too primitive computer work rather than none at all.
It wasn't the grimness that bothered me (I like grim!), but how fake and unnatural it seemed. I never felt the killer was anything other than a cartoonish caricature, never felt threatened by him, and all the moaning by Tommy Lee Jones about all the violence in the world today was a bore. First half was okay, second half I was bored out of my mind and couldn't wait for it to end.
Actually, the most disappointing movie was one I didn't even see. I was hoping that Pandorum would be a big hit so that the team working working on it would be hot enough to guarantee Outsourced would be made. Sigh.
The Star Wars prequels. Words fail me in describing the sheer amount of stinkiness.
It never came my way, Dave. Sell the rights again?
Lost In Translation is one of the most successful openly racist films in recent times, I think. Good soundtrack, though.
supposedly they're going out for a director and they're still expecting to make it. it probably would've been more of a sure thing if Pandorum had been a blockbuster.
I would love to see a movie based on SMALL CRIMES some day.
Godfather III. I will watch I and II whenever they come on, but never III.
I want to like it, but it does stink. Too bad.
Dave Zeltserman named my first choice with Spiderman III. So, I guess I'll have to say X-MEN: THE LAST STAND. The sheer amount of damage hack Bret Ratner did to that once promising franchise was enormous. Unfortunately, both raked in a ton of money, and my teen son adores them--but I still refuse to see them again.
Didn't see that one so I can't comment.
"Camelot" back in the late 1960s. The costumes were three hundred years off, the dialogue was asinine, the story absurd, and the acting mechanical. Mush ado about nothing. Burton & Taylor's "Cleopatra" runs a close second. The Hugh Hefner financed version of "Macbeth" was beyond the pale, and "Caligula" was a failure even as porn.
I remember seeing Cleopatra when it came out and even as a young teen it seemed ludicrous. But I was never much a fan of costume dramas.
Okay, I'm prepared to be exiled to some cave in Afghanistan, but I walked out halfway through SLUMDOG MILLIONAIRE. I know, I know, it's great and oh, those poor Indian kids... weren't they great? And wasn't it all just...great?
Well, actually, no. The whole thing (or at least the first half I saw before walking out) was nothing more than one disgusting scene of child abuse after another, shot in one of the most repulsive cities on earth.
I'm ready to board the exile train now.
Panic Room and A History Of Violence. I'm a huge fan of both directros but the aforementioned films seemed to represent a backward step
I know what you mean, Mike. Those scenes of blinding children were wretched and coupled with later ones seemed incongruous.
Panic Room-not for me. Too claustrophobic.Funny how Foster is drawn to films like that.
Bill got mine too. It made me swear off George Lucas movies forever.
Another: AMERICAN BEAUTY, the worst Best Picture Oscar winner EVER!
Jeff M.
I'm with Patti on HUDSUCKER, which I hated so much I quit after half an hour. Given my previous devotion to the Coens this was saying something.
But I didn't feel that way about NO COUNTRY.
Granted, it's no BIG LEBOWSKI but what is?
Jeff M.
Godfather III was pretty bad too.
Just saw Mika Brzezinski say she walked out of AVATAR after 20 minutes.
Jeff M.
I don't know how you could walk out on it if you have any appreciation of a technical wonder. If story is your only concern, I guess it's possible. Or if you saw the political agenda in the movie as disturbing. I've walked out on two movies--no, three--but that's a topic for another day.
Ditto on American Beauty. What we were thinking? They never even rerun it.
THE AVENGERS movie from 1998 with Uma Thurman and Ralph Fiennes. Sean Connery's presence couldn't save this stinker. I had such fond memories of the TV show from the Sixties. Most of the sparse audience walked out before this disaster was over, but I hung in there until the bitter end. What a mistake!
Bad as the "Star Wars" prequels were, they aren't even the most disappointing SF movies. That "honor" goes to David Lynch's complete botch of "Dune". The fact that Lynch was completely wrong for this material provides a partial excuse, but still.....
At least one good thing came out of this mess. As part of the deal that got Lynch to direct "Dune", the producer agreed to finance "Blue Velvet".
Oh, I see AMERICAN BEAUTY runs from time to time, and it's not quite as bad as CRASH, but very nearly so (nor any worse than TITANIC, but no better). I'm impressed by the sequels to bad films people hate (hell, none of the STAR WARS or SPIDERMAN films were particularly good as far as I was concerned, among the ones I've seen...THE EMPIRE STRIKES BACK, with what survived of Leigh Brackett's attempt to elevate the enterprise, the least dire of the four I've seen in that sequence). And while I hoped against hope for THE BLACK DAHLIA, I was rather braced for a De Palma film from an Ellroy novel to be as bad as it was. And LOST IN TRANSLATION is indeed dire and at least borderline racist till the very last scene, which doesn't redeem it. I rather liked PANIC ROOM as far as it went (better than some of Foster's other recent films) and liked A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE a lot...not as gooily strange as most Cronenberg films, but also the first to treat sexuality in reasonably healthy terms (the two aren't unrelated, perhaps).
I would like to know why James hated ET, a film I didn't love nor like but didn't revile. Boring, surely. But, as with STAR WARS, I wasn't six when I saw it.
Most disappointing for me might've been NIGHT AND THE CITY or V. I. WARSHAWSKI, the latter because it was half a good film. I did come into the aggressively atrocious THE HAUNTING remake cold, all unknowing. SONS AND LOVERS was all a bad laugh.
Actually, the big disappointment for me among the Coen films so far has been O BROTHER WHERE ART THOU? Decent but not great soundtrack (despite the roster assembled), terrible film. (Rather liked the Lynch DUNE as a comic book on film, but boy is George right about THE AVENGERS...not that Uma Thurman could possibly approach Rigg even with a script to help.)
Oh that V.I Washawski thing was horrible, wasn't it? Nobody has ever recaptured the sixties. It always seems a lot more lollipop than it was what with assassinations, Cuban Missile Crisis, Bay of Pigs. Short skirts do not a decade make.
I liked History of Violence well enough--but it did have an odd tone, perhaps due to the original material.
Cronenberg's work Always has an odd tone, even moreso than Lynch's. And Cronenberg can tell a linear story, too.
With a decent script, I think the Paretsky adaptation might've been quite good...Kathleen Turner and Wayne Knight were both fine in it. THE AVENGERS in the Peel seasons, of course, was always surreal, but even the weakest episodes had a much better script than the miscast film.
I think Ollie Stone's 'W' was a missed chance. Stone proved he has a gift for comedy with World Trade Centre - well Cage's hair is always good for a laugh- so 'W ' was a missed chance.
How much more fun it would have been if he'd cast Leslie Nielson as Bush, Steve Coogan as Blair in a Bob & Bing style caper. Hilarity ensues as our heroes hunt for 'Osama Bin Liner' played by Sasha Baron Cohen.
BTW I like Panic Room- it was the best of the Home Alone films, I think.
Only if you don't suffer from claustrophobia and fear of harm to a child.
Didn't see the Thurman Avengers-I am seldom persuaded to see any movie that does not get a consensus of positive reviews. We are all a victim of some impulse and with me its reviews.
I'm going to go with Boogie Nights because I think we're forced to deal with pornography encroaching into our culture everyday and we've never really tried to understand its effects.
And then this lightweight movie comes along petending to be all deep and we lose another chance to maybe have some decent discussions.
I was also disappointed by Pulp Fiction which I found to be little more than a teenage boy fanatasy, but I realize that means I have to get on the train with Mike. Oh well, the snacks are usually good on the train...
Reversing this, I thought Wonder Boys was actually better than the book, by condensing a few things. Same with Affliction.
That instinct didn't steer you wrong in that case. Another major disappointment, even though I already had low expectations of Stephen King work, was the film of THE SHINING. A low point for Kubrick, after his earliest features.
I doubt anyone will be exiled here. PULP FICTION was just RESEVOIR DOGS II, only kuter...though it did seem like a shallower version of Joe Lansdale fiction at the time, and was pleasant for that.
Yes! to Wonder Boys. I was surprised to find a different tone in the book. As a big Russell Banks fan, I'll plead both were very, very good. Wish they'd make Continental Drift.
Boogie Nights-another one that fooled me at the time-Watched it again and huh? What did I see in it?
I liked QTs first three. But since then....I am tempted to rent Inglorious though since the SAG award.
Eyes Wide Shut. I'm a Kubrick Fan but I just hate this Movie.Also Rocky-could not understand why so many people like it. Just an update of Somebody Up There Like Me.Except Paul Newman can act and Stallone can't. And Little Miss Sunshine and Juno-horrible films.
Loved Hudsucker tho-the montage sequence of the failure than success of the hula hoop is priceless.
How did I forget V.I. WARSHAWSKI?
Maybe because it was so awful I blocked it from my mind.
I did like HISTORY OF VIOLENCE, however.
The Lynch movie that gave me a massive migraine was ERASERHEAD. Ugh.
Yes to WONDER BOYS but I liked the book too.
Obviously Steve O. and I have diametrically opposed viewpoints if he loved Hudsucker and hated LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE and JUNO.
Whoops, sorry, that last comment was me.
Jeff M.
Me, too. Loved Juno and Little Miss Sunshine, but not so much my husband. He likes his movies more sour. God, Eraserhead. I have no idea what that was about.
I found Juno's main character to be too hip to be true. Just seemed phony to me. Little Miss Sunshine had too many fake sitcom moments. I scene where they all get up on stage with the little girl at the end was just cringe worthy.Didn't believe that would ever happen.Both were well acted but just too contrived for me. I do like Hudsucker but it's far from being my favorite Coen Brothers film. And whoever said that American Beauty was the worst movie to ever win the Oscar must not have seen The Greatest Show On Earth.
Or CRASH, Steve. Really.
And I agree with you about LITTLE MISS SUNSHINE. Didn't believe it for a second, though I'll give anything with Alan Arkin a chance (no matter how many fizzles he's been in, and they have been many).
Haven't seen all of ERASERHEAD yet, but, Patti, trust me, you probably won't like the early Cronenbergs the same way, maybe not even something as late as EXISTENZ. Even if EASTERN PROMISES was slight.
Some days, it really does seem that I'm the only person who doesn't hate or love (believe it or not) V. I. WARSHAWSKI.
(Meant to write, you might like EASTERN PROMISES better than those earlier goopy films, even though it was slight and in some ways Cronenberg holding back.)(I'll suggest that VIDEODROME is even squickier than ERASERHEAD, as such things ooze.)
I did see that and it's a close call. I am sure there are other poor choices too. I didn't mind Juno being quick-witted. What I liked most was that the hip husband turned out to be a stinker and his neurotic wife turned out to be the right mother. It turned my expectations on their ears. I don't mind a cute movies now or then. Eastern Promises was good-don't think I saw Existenz.
Back up this comment thread a ways, Todd asked why I didn't like E.T. and said that he found it boring. So did I, and also thought it was 'way too cutesy. The other reason I don't like it (and this is no fault of the film) is that Livia and I were physically attacked in the theater by some guys who took offense at the fact we reported them smoking in a no-smoking section. No real harm done, but I still get mad when I think about it all these years later. Even before that happened, though, we were disappointed in the movie.
That can ruin a movie. I forgot what we were seeing when my husband asked the people behind us to stop talking. The guy claimed he had paid his money and had a right to do what he wanted. The argument went back and forth until the movie was spoiled for everyone around us. Ever since, we just move. Anyone who talks is not likely to stop. Now smoking is a whole other thing. I don't remember ever being in a movie where you could smoke. Except perhaps in France.
Wow -- I really don't fit in with this crowd at all. I love HUDSUCKER because I'm a real sucker for screwball comedies and thought it a brilliant evocation of that era. Hate all Spielberg schmaltz. Doubley hate Cameron. Love early Cronenberg. Used to throw on ERASERHEAD on Sunday mornings at the video store on Sunset and Vine -- at least until the manager got there and made us take if off. Most disappointing -- well, WATCHMEN? But I knew it was going to be crap, so I can't say I was disappointed. I was hoping Gilliam would pull the IMAGINARIUM out despite its checkered history, so I guess that counts.
I love screwballs too but it seemed off to me--didn't ring true--just like THE LADYKILLERS.
Not that they can't do comedy-can't think of the title of the one with Cage and Hunter. That I liked.
Brazil was brilliant but I guess this one doesn't work. Maybe the loss of Ledger threw it off.
Ha, Kate...you just haven't noted how little agreement there is here except that Lotsa people hate GODFATHER 3 (I haven't sat through it). I like, with reservations, earliest Cronenberg, but think that VIDEODROME is better than the earliest films (beyond questions of budget and, obviously, experience), and EXISTENZ marginally better than VIDEODROME...but that A HISTORY OF VIOLENCE is his best so far, which is heresy to many fans, who see it as him cashing in. I think their sensors need retuning, myself.
I can't stand anything by Spielberg (old lead-hands), and I'm sorry to read there was mild thuggery (I hope it was at most mild) for Livia and yourself, James, at that theater. Yeah, I just move these days, too...though the smoke would be enervating to say the least.
Haven't seen the new Gilliam, but given the brilliance of individual moments of MUNCHHAUSEN, that one could easily make my list, too...but I generally enjoyed it, unlike, say, WARSHAWSKI, where the shoddiness undermines it, or a recent cable viewing of a film called ONE WAY, which is remarkably clumsy in its handling of important matters in a slightly skewed way that non-amateurs might even have made into an excellent film (of course, nearly every Oliver Stone film is also a rotten film about an important subject).
But Gilliam hasn't done a satisfying film that I've seen since TWELVE MONKEYS (and not too many truly finished ones, I gather), and Brad Pitt does his best to ruin that one (happily in a minor role...it's a sad commentary when Bruce Willis is monument to technique and subtlety in comparison). And RAISING ARIZONA, and BARTON FINK, and FARGO all strike me as good comic films...I need to see HUDSUCKER.
Patti, we had to get refunds twice (two different theaters) because of talkers in THE DARK KNIGHT (which, when we finally did see it, we didn't like). The first was a woman who brought her 3 year old kid, who was allowed to talk and ask questions throughout. She took extreme exception (though not a physical attack, James) when we questioned (politely) her intelligence at bringing her young child to such a violent movie.
Jeff M.
Patti, the one you meant was RAISING ARIZONA, which was great until the Coens usual problem - lack of an ending.
I loved John Goodman too - "We released ourselves on our own recognizance."
Jeff M.
I don't remember the ending. Did they return the child?
Once talking was really bothering me especially. When I turned around to say something I realized one of the two was blind. That sort of shut me up although it's still not really fair to other patrons,
They do return the child, but they leave it ambiguous as to whether they break up or not.
Jeff M.
ANother oft-quoted line: "Son, you have a panty on your head."
Daybreakers. Really wasn't worthy of an R. Could have probably gotten by with a PG-13 with a little CGI editing.
It's gotten some good reviews and some bad. Cross it off then.
Black Dahlia: The ending was right out of Scooby Doo. Longest screening of my life.
Indiana Jones and the pointless fourth adventure. During the last third, I kept checking my watch.
8mm: Might be the worst film I have ever seen. Stupid and clumsy. The ending was as cliched as they get. Killer lives with mother, next to a graveyard. Hero goes to house, at night and in the middle of a storm. Shock of shocks, they end up fighting in a the graveyard in the rain, thunder and lightning. El Puko!
Batman and Robin: I did not care for Joel Schumaker prior to this (see 8mm) but this film made me beg for him to be banned from Hollywood. The man is clueless. I can't think of a single good thing about this movie.
Dr. T and his women/Pret-a-porter: I lover Robert Altman but these two films tested that love.
Freedomland: Good book that got lost on the way to the screen. I felt that the director simply lacked the chops to make the movie it should have been.
Regarding Hudsucker Proxy: Not a good film, but it has it's moments...mainly Bill Cobb and Jennifer Jason Leigh. Style but little substance. I would rip on Lady Killers if not for the Donut Money/Dragon Lady scene...priceless. Second only to Wheezy Joe (Intolerable Cruelty) for making me completely lose my sh...stuff in a theater.
Dr. T. The tape broke in the middle of it but we decided that was a piece of luck and never watched the rest. I think Richard Gere and I parted company after that one. Yes, those were Altmans worst two although The Gingerbread Man (Kenneth B.) comes close-was that the title?
Altman's cut of The Gingerbread Man is ok, but the studio cut is a mess.
Post a Comment