Movies you just didn't "get".

The ole lady's been bringing home some movies from a friend at work. Needless to say this guy's tastes are far different from mine. I don't get this guy at all. I get his movies even less. Some movies that, after all these years, I just don't "get".

1. "Eraserhead" - Sorry try as I might I don't grok this one at all. Mebbe I need to drop a tab or two first.

2. "Bug" - One of the borrrowed ones, absolutely horrid and mystifying. What the hell was/is Billy Friedkin thinking?

3. "The Tennant" - Another borrowed film. WTF? Roman Polansky acting? Hopefully his first and LAST starring role.

4. "Zardoz" - Unnnh yeah, you got some Splainin' to do Sean.

5. "Twin Pealks" et al. - Sigh I must not be gettin' the right drugs.

6. "Sola" - Yipes, only the Italians could produce this thing.

Just off the top of my head.

Da Worfster

Some of the beaten path selections from the Worfster...nice.

For me:

1) Mr Bean Anything - Never funny

2) Wild Hogs - if my mid-life crisis is that lame it means my sleaziest fantasies are behind me.

3) The Fountain - this thing collapsed under the weight of its concept before it had a chance to run.

4) Whore 2. - I mean when I was 12 and the original came out I got "it" enough..but the sequel? WTF?

2001: A Space Odyssey...

"Holy sheep dip! That was in-freaking-credible!"
"What was?"
"The movie! It was awesome, man!"
"What movie?"
"2001: A Spce Odyssey! I love that movie! WOW!"
"Really good, eh?"
"Hell yeah, that good! It's a classic!"
"Hm. What's it about?"
"Um...Ah...Well, it's..."
"I see what you mean. Classic, huh?"
"Yeah!

The Saw series, the Hostel series, anything of that genre.

I haven't seen any of those movies so maybe I'm missing something really great. But, somehow, I doubt it. Why anyone would want to watch someone else be tortured either physically or psycologically is beyond me. I totally don't get it. Furthermore, call me closed-minded, but I'm not willing to even try.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by ForeverAutumn

The Saw series, the Hostile series, anything of that genre.

I haven't seen any of those movies so maybe I'm missing something really great. But, somehow, I doubt it. Why anyone would want to watch someone else be tortured either physically or psycologically is beyond me. I totally don't get it. Furthermore, call me closed-minded, but I'm not willing to even try.

---

Same here. The only reason I've seen any of the Saw is because I was up one night didn't have anything to do and it was on TV. I thought I'd give it a shot. The first one was interesting I guess, with a nice plot twist. It was infinitely better that I would have imagined.

The Lost Highway, David Lynch...try to get your head around that movie

cheers,
elapsed

Saw...Hostel...No thanks. Not interested. Not even thinking about it. I get enough o' this at work.

David Lynch. As if things aren't twisted enough up there!

I'm surprised no one mentioned Mulholland Drive. It took me a couple of viewings to actually appreciate it. Then I sold it.

Completely agree with the Saw/Hostel critique. These movies probably rank up there with the Faces of Death series. They sell them at Target and I saw a couple of kids buy Saw IV at the register and the clerk just swiped it through. They could not have been 16 years old. I'm no fan of censorship, but no kid should be watching that crap.

Actually Tarrentino is starting to really piss me off, too. Yes I liked Pulp, Dogs, and even Bill, but there's a limit to what I'll spend my money on. He's got a new one coming out where a bunch of British army recruits go into Nazi-occupied Europe to torture Germans soldiers to death and set examples. Apparently they're be collected scalps. It stars Brad Pitt and could have been an interesting story-line if it weren't for Tarrentino's asinine obsession with torture and gratuitous violence. That guy has issues.

Want to see a real movie about torture? Watch Taxi to the Dark Side. That's a movie I would put on the opposite spectrum from movies that lack a point, in contrast to most of the movies we're talking about here. Still not one kids should be watching, though.

Incredible....No, credible! The clerks at that store should be either fired or talked to. God, isn't watching the news mind-numbing enough? No, wait....Maybe the news makes schist like Saw etc. more palatable. Argh!

I watched about 45 minutes of "Synedoche, New York, " and turned it off. Neither my wife nor I could stand it, despite the glowing review The New York Times gave it, nor Roger Ebert's 4-star rating. Dark, morose, confusing and unpleasant. Somehow movies of that genre wind up being called "profound." I thought it was horrible.

I know a lot of people loved this movie, but I got so lost watching "The Matrix"
Also "Vanilla Sky" and I watched about 15 minutes of "Eyes Wide Shut" on Friday night. Maybe it's the Stanley Kubrick thing, because I watched 2001 twice and I'm not sure I got it then.

FWIW, I am the Raving Lunatic in the dialog (as if you didn't know it). Loved the movie; do I "get" it? Well....Vanilla Sky just hurt my head.

The Sheltering Sky. I suppose you have to read the book.

1. There Will Be Blood. Didn't get it. Rich guy. Kid goes deaf. Life goes to ****. Movie ends?

2. No Country for Old Men. People die. Guy flips coin to make hard choices. Kills at end. Sheriff retires. The end?

3. History of Violence. Man stops robbery. Is he really just a small town father? Movie turns dark. Writers crib dialoug from crappy Mafia play. Son is a mental midget, with even worse lines. Rough sex. Terrible "special" effects. Are we done yet?

Those are my 3 worst movies that I didn't get.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Groundbeef

3. History of Violence. Man stops robbery. Is he really just a small town father? Movie turns dark. Writers crib dialoug from crappy Mafia play. Son is a mental midget, with even worse lines. Rough sex. Terrible "special" effects. Are we done yet?

Those are my 3 worst movies that I didn't get.

---

The first 2 I enjoyed as they were very human and well performed, if not exactly mind-blowing or original. I do think they were overrated but they were ok.

History of Violence was just a poorly written, boring story with a forced plot twist....zzzzzzzz.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by nightflier

That guy has issues.

---

That's a definite understatement

Have not seen History of Violence. Shame reading these comments: I like David Cronenberg's films as a rule. Then again, they are a mite daffy!

Anybody remember 1984? You know, the one with the soundtrack by Eurythmics? Left me in a foul mood for a couple of days....

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Groundbeef

1. There Will Be Blood. Didn't get it. Rich guy. Kid goes deaf. Life goes to ****. Movie ends?

2. No Country for Old Men. People die. Guy flips coin to make hard choices. Kills at end. Sheriff retires. The end?

3. History of Violence. ...

Those are my 3 worst movies that I didn't get.

---

Haven't seen H of V.

Of the other two, I preferred There Will Be Blood; it's about is power-hungry, vindictive, control freak with barely hidden violent streak. Love's his son? Not more than his compulsion to dominate.

But whereas 'Daniel Planview' is a sociopath, 'Anton Chigurh' in No Country for Old Men is simply a psychopathic killer, nothing complicated about that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Feanor

But whereas 'Daniel Planview' is a sociopath, 'Anton Chigurh' in No Country for Old Men is simply a psychopathic killer, nothing complicated about that.

---

I got the crazy killer part. But the whole drug gang/sherriff thing. And the "retirement" at the end. It was very disjointed, and didn't work out for me. I don't mind a movie with a message, but this was just stupid.

On the topic of violence, I watched Smoking Aces not too long ago with some friends and about 10 minutes into it we all got sick to our stomachs. We had to turn it off. There's a couple of scenes in there that are not necessarily gory, but so suggestively violent that they have that effect. Kind of weird. ...And this had nothing to do with Ben Afleck being in it, either.

Talk about insult to injury!

Anybody remember True Romance? There's a certain bathroom-fixture-related scene in that movie that I try to forget.

Agree completely about Saw and almost any David Lynch movie. I don't get the torture genre in general, and David Lynch needs to stop taking acid.

Fargo - it was OK, but I never got why it was supposed to be a great movie.

Napolean Dynamite - another one people heaped hyperbole on, and I could barely get through it

X Files: I Want To Believe - what was the point?

Twilight - teen vampire romance? and what was with that ghastly green hue they filtered this movie with? and the setting is in Forks, WA? not even a vampire is gruesom enough nor moribund enought to live in Forks, WA - the place is a rain forrest. The state of Washington has enough problems without having teenagers think that looking pasty white and near dead is cool or sexy (not that they didn't already look like that either). Stupid movie about a really dumb romance novel by a hackish author.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Worf101

2. "Bug" - One of the borrrowed ones, absolutely horrid and mystifying. What the hell was/is Billy Friedkin thinking?

---

A really bizzar take on the Leaving Las Vegas thing I guess. I'll give Ashley Judd credit for not shying away from playing less than glamorous roles, but she needs to learn to say no from time to time. Bug coulda been better, but they seemed to write the script as they went along. But still, you gotta love Ashley being full-on nekkid in the final scene.

But I'll see your Bug and raise ya another Judd flick, Eye Of The Beholder. Niether the storyline nor the characters made any sense - the whole thing meanders and then just ends.

I just put Saw IV & Saw V in my cue. I'm renting them for the DTS-HD audio. I am. Honest. :yesnod:

Donnie Darko.........WTF? :out:

Nacho Libre.......... Does anyone think Jack Black is actually funny?