Movies considered "classics" that aren't that great

[gap5ewl]

There are a lot of movies out there that critics and people consider to be the greatest and classics. However, there a quiete a few of these movies that you have to admit, aren't exactly all they are made out to be (and I mostly consider the older classic movies to be the ones). Why am I saying this? Because they can get incredibally BORING and the acting in some of the older movies just feels forced and not natural. Here are some movies that I think fit in this category:

The Manchurian Candidate (original): I watched the remake and thaught it was amazing. It got good reviews but most critics said the original was better and considered to be one of the greatest thrillers ever made. But while watching the original I noticed how incredibally boring it can get. it got so bad that I couldnt watch the whole movie because I just couldnt get into it since some scenes just kept going on an on...Yeah I was very dissapointed and I think the remake is a lot better.

Dr. Stranglelove: This is conisdered to be the greatest comedy ever made. Although it does have some funny scenes and has a lot of political meaning, it gets pretty boring especially in the beginning. The ending was pretty good but the most part the scenes in the movie went for too long and really get boring.

Casablanca: Now I do like this movie but Im using this to form another example: Acting. The movie doesnt get boring and has a strong plot but I noticed in a lot of the older films that the acting just isn't entirely believable. There is never pauses and it just seems they are forcing the lines out and talk really fast (like they quickly say them so they dont forget them).

King Kong (original). This movie is just a cheesy popcorn movie really (for todays standards at least). I mean it had no depth and and was just mindless. The new version I think is a lot better because it shows the depth of kong and makes you sympathetic towards him.

I think the reason these movies are considered classics is because:

1) there werent any other movies like it before

2) it fit in well with the culture of the time (especially manchurian and stranglelove)

So what do you think? Do you have any movies you also think are not as great as they are made out to be?

 

[Poetic Chaos]

2001: A Space Odyssey

No sense makin', light show havin' peace of crap of cinema.

 

[Bat Attack]

2001: A Space Odyssey

What he said.

 

[L0ngsh0t]

Obviously we are going to think a action epic made in the 20's is going to be cheesy now, but back then that was bigger than Jurassic Park

 

[Movies205]

2001: A Space Odyssey

No sense makin', light show havin' peace of crap of cinema.

Perhaps you just did not understand it, or let me guess, just because you did not understand it that means "no sense makin'" I can concede the point however it's a very slow film, however is that not our fault in our MTV Generation we can't appriciate things that are slow?

 

[matrix_ghost]

Return Of The King

 

[Cyrusbales]

Wow, I disagree with what I'm seeing. Dr strangelove is amazing, as is casablanca and King kong. 2001 is wonderful!

I agree about manchurian candidate though. Ones i think are overrated: Taxi Driver(a waste of time). Scarface(the original was good enough, no need to try to beat it and fail). Godfather(it's ok, not really the absolute masterpiece people claim it is!).

Deer hunter is another, it is pretty good, but a masterpiece? Nope, the original cut was like 10 hours, I think that says something about the mentallity behind production, it wasn't a section of life, it was a whole life almost.

I can think of more though, will post them at some point....

 

[cryptic name]

There are a lot of movies out there that critics and people consider to be the greatest and classics. However, there a quiete a few of these movies that you have to admit, aren't exactly all they are made out to be (and I mostly consider the older classic movies to be the ones). Why am I saying this? Because they can get incredibally BORING and the acting in some of the older movies just feels forced and not natural. Here are some movies that I think fit in this category:

The Manchurian Candidate (original): I watched the remake and thaught it was amazing. It got good reviews but most critics said the original was better and considered to be one of the greatest thrillers ever made. But while watching the original I noticed how incredibally boring it can get. it got so bad that I couldnt watch the whole movie because I just couldnt get into it since some scenes just kept going on an on...Yeah I was very dissapointed and I think the remake is a lot better.

Dr. Stranglelove: This is conisdered to be the greatest comedy ever made. Although it does have some funny scenes and has a lot of political meaning, it gets pretty boring especially in the beginning. The ending was pretty good but the most part the scenes in the movie went for too long and really get boring.

Casablanca: Now I do like this movie but Im using this to form another example: Acting. The movie doesnt get boring and has a strong plot but I noticed in a lot of the older films that the acting just isn't entirely believable. There is never pauses and it just seems they are forcing the lines out and talk really fast (like they quickly say them so they dont forget them).

King Kong (original). This movie is just a cheesy popcorn movie really (for todays standards at least). I mean it had no depth and and was just mindless. The new version I think is a lot better because it shows the depth of kong and makes you sympathetic towards him.

I think the reason these movies are considered classics is because:

1) there werent any other movies like it before

2) it fit in well with the culture of the time (especially manchurian and stranglelove)

So what do you think? Do you have any movies you also think are not as great as they are made out to be?

you can't watch older movies with todays standards. you have to watch them in the context in which they were made.

 

[Cyrusbales]

you can't watch older movies with todays standards. you have to watch them in the context in which they were made.

I disagree, a lot of older films are even better now!

 

[Poetic Chaos]

I'll also add No dialog havin' to my rant for 2001.

 

[cryptic name]

I disagree, a lot of older films are even better now!

that's true, but as far as things like acting go. i mean, there was a completely different style of acting in the 20's, 30's, and 40's than now. the way people spoke, cadence and all that, right down to character mannerisms. that style can seem hammy and over the top to us now, but you can't hold it against the film.

 

[Movies205]

Ah, fresh meat for the grinder

There are a lot of movies out there that critics and people consider to be the greatest and classics. However, there a quiete a few of these movies that you have to admit, aren't exactly all they are made out to be (and I mostly consider the older classic movies to be the ones). Why am I saying this? Because they can get incredibally BORING and the acting in some of the older movies just feels forced and not natural. Here are some movies that I think fit in this category:

What you fail to realize is that film, and the world for that matter, did not being the moment you were born. Most critics are fairly older than you are, there's a certain nostalgia and value that go along with these films that you are not privy too. Also what you fail to realize most classics, at least according to the AFI list, also take into account the impact it's had on film, not just as how well it stands today. For example Citizen Kane employed a number of cinematic techiques that are conisidered standard today, that back then were not such as coated lenses. Also another bit you seem not privy to is that acting is an art and like all art it goes through phrases. In the beginning of film it was overly dramatic and was based on facial expressions, most obviously due to the fact that the first films were silent films. After that period in the early part of the talkies, films were very dramatic much resembling it's theater counter-part, as well as films going through a period of showing a more idealized household and situations, as time goes on, and we shift to the now, it becomes more "real"(and I use this term hesitantly since it a very misleading term" and less dramatic. Who knows where acting as an art will go in the next 20-30 years, and what the kids of tommorrow will say of our films. Also another point to bring up is that you grew up with film and that many of the things you take for granted could not be done some time ago. For example, let's take the quick cut, of someone being in one place and then cutting to them being at another place, we're so use to film, that we immediately realize they must have walked from one place to another. But the original film-makers would have to show all this action so people will understand what's happening, people would not have been able to process a film with the amount of cuts they have today, this has been a hundred year process. So please keep this in mind when judging these "older" films. Also keep

The Manchurian Candidate (original): I watched the remake and thaught it was amazing. It got good reviews but most critics said the original was better and considered to be one of the greatest thrillers ever made. But while watching the original I noticed how incredibally boring it can get. it got so bad that I couldnt watch the whole movie because I just couldnt get into it since some scenes just kept going on an on...Yeah I was very dissapointed and I think the remake is a lot better.

Again, you been spoiled by video games and MTV, that your mind can barely sit still to take in the wonderful imagery and tension that John Frankenheimer is setting up. The original Manchurian Canidate is about fear, control, and paranoia, how does one convey those properly outside of making a slow film since these are slow-acting things? Personally I think the brainwashing scenes are perhaps some of hte coolest scenes committed to celluloids, especially with the old ladies

Dr. Stranglelove: This is conisdered to be the greatest comedy ever made. Although it does have some funny scenes and has a lot of political meaning, it gets pretty boring especially in the beginning. The ending was pretty good but the most part the scenes in the movie went for too long and really get boring.

First off you have to enjoy satire to appriciate this film as well as understand the context of the film, if you know nothing of the cold war, then you'll not find this funny, how could you? As for dragging, my god it's such a funny and awesome film, every bit leads to a bigger bit and eventually the end. I'm going chalk this up to your ignorance on the subject.

Casablanca: Now I do like this movie but Im using this to form another example: Acting. The movie doesnt get boring and has a strong plot but I noticed in a lot of the older films that the acting just isn't entirely believable. There is never pauses and it just seems they are forcing the lines out and talk really fast (like they quickly say them so they dont forget them).

Again your ignorance on the subject, go to my first response...

King Kong (original). This movie is just a cheesy popcorn movie really (for todays standards at least). I mean it had no depth and and was just mindless. The new version I think is a lot better because it shows the depth of kong and makes you sympathetic towards him.

The film is hollow as can be however if you can't see the significance of the first hollywood special effects bonaza, then you got bigger problems. Also did it ever occur to you that King Kong isn't shakespeare? People see king Kong to see a big ape, not to sit through 3 hours of pretencious story telling.

I think the reason these movies are considered classics is because:

1) there werent any other movies like it before

2) it fit in well with the culture of the time (especially manchurian and stranglelove)

So what do you think? Do you have any movies you also think are not as great as they are made out to be?

I think your just an ignorant little kid who knows nothing about film However, if you are just 14 or 15 years old then that's fine before highschool or mayber earlier I don't remember I use to hate anything made before the 80s for those exact same reasons. Eventually and hopefully, you'll grow up and realize why these films are good. However that doesn't mean you have to like them, on the contrary everyone has there opinion. I personally agree King Kong (1933) has a terrible story and is ridiculously hollow but that's the point. I also can't get into Taxi Driver, however I Can see why it's considered a great film. There comes a time when I wish people would realize just because you don't like something doesn't mean it's bad, it's just not your cup of tea.

 

[Cyrusbales]

that's true, but as far as things like acting go. i mean, there was a completely different style of acting in the 20's, 30's, and 40's than now. the way people spoke, cadence and all that, right down to character mannerisms. that style can seem hammy and over the top to us now, but you can't hold it against the film.

depends though, if we're talking about really old films, expressionist acting is amazing, it's a lot more stylised than acting thesedays. Style of film noir acting never really seems cheesey, it's a style! Yeah things like damnbusters are a little hammy now, but the great old films just get better for me!

 

[Movies205]

depends though, if we're talking about really old films, expressionist acting is amazing, it's a lot more stylised than acting thesedays. Style of film noir acting never really seems cheesey, it's a style! Yeah things like damnbusters are a little hammy now, but the great old films just get better for me!

Expressionism rules... DR. CALIGARI OWNS YOUR SOUL!!! Creepiest **** I've seen, if you can look past the cardboard cutout backgroundst:

 

[Cyrusbales]

Expressionism rules... DR. CALIGARI OWNS YOUR SOUL!!! Creepiest **** I've seen, if you can look past the cardboard cutout backgroundst:

Don't diss the set design! That's the whole point! All to do with the fake faces people put on and such like, can't fault it!

 

[Movies205]

Don't diss the set design! That's the whole point! All to do with the fake faces people put on and such like, can't fault it!

You can, but I won't... Since once you get use to it, it's cool... If things go to plan, Cyrus I'll be chilling in England for a semester to study film and literature.

 

[L.A.]

Im probably going to get flamed for saying this but Taxi Driver, Oldboy and Fight Club.

 

[Cyrusbales]

You can, but I won't... Since once you get use to it, it's cool... If things go to plan, Cyrus I'll be chilling in England for a semester to study film and literature.

cool, wherabouts? Maybe you can do some work exp like stuff with my company? Had someone doing that already recently.....



And no, I will not flame you you for Taxi Driver or Fight Club L.A. Taxi driver is quite poor, Fight Club is decent, but not a masterpiece.

 

[Fledermaus]

Gone With the Wind

 

[Movies205]

cool, wherabouts? Maybe you can do some work exp like stuff with my company? Had someone doing that already recently.....



And no, I will not flame you you for Taxi Driver or Fight Club L.A. Taxi driver is quite poor, Fight Club is decent, but not a masterpiece.

If all goes to plan because I'm applying for the study abroad program, Lancashire, Edge Hill University... I'll probably be taking the script writing and vid. prod course, with some literature classes to boot. They tell me that schools in England are hard so if that's the case I'll probably be uber busy, but I could definately use some real experience

 

[Movies205]

Gone With the Wind

Oh no you didn't! Clark Gable is the absolutely ****in man... besides the rape scene

 

[Cyrusbales]

If all goes to plan because I'm applying for the study abroad program, Lancashire, Edge Hill University... I'll probably be taking the script writing and vid. prod course, with some literature classes to boot. They tell me that schools in England are hard so if that's the case I'll probably be uber busy, but I could definately use some real experience

Well find me on MSN messenger or something, then when you get there or something I could guide you through and maybe give you some hands on stuff?

 

[Movies205]

Yeah sure, off I go to go rent a movie...

 

[cryptic name]

cool, wherabouts? Maybe you can do some work exp like stuff with my company? Had someone doing that already recently.....



And no, I will not flame you you for Taxi Driver or Fight Club L.A. Taxi driver is quite poor, Fight Club is decent, but not a masterpiece.

what do you find poor about taxi driver?

 

[Cyrusbales]

what do you find poor about taxi driver?

it has some nice bits in it, but generally it's badly paced. Long films can be slow yet well paced(2001), but taxi driver was not. I found the whole narrative very unconvincing, and found myself not caring for any of the characters or the outcome. It lacked any emotion, or something to engage, very bland. The whole thing seemed very bitty, without any purpose or direction. Just going through the motions that didn't flow.