Movies You Wish Were Never Ever Made

[hippy fascist]

For all who hate my views, bear in mind that I completely left out the action genre, comedies that aren't sexed up, dramas, and the majority of comic-based films. Why?...because I happen to love those kinds of films.

I just don't think that films should be used to push a view that favors pornography, blood & gore, bathroom & sex jokes, swearing against God, or sex between those who aren't married. It's unnecessary, and 90% of all Hollywood films could lose those elements and still retain a decent story. The other 10% should've never been greenlit to begin with.

This post perfectly encapsulates everything that's wrong with american society due to the chokehold that christianity holds over it

If your views on God are so solid, why exactly does a negative portrayal of god offend you so much? It's just a joke, puut down the pen and paper and stop writing letters to TV studios about programs you have never watched and you might realise this

If god created the human form in all it's glory why is the sight of it so offensive to you?

Short of inventing a time machine and traveling back to medieval england I don't think you're ever going to be happy in this life

 

[hammy]

And they are just entitled to the same expressing of their views of his views.

Yes, they are entitled to express their opinions about the movies. I've already said that. But they can do that without attacking him, yet again, as you have just done.

 

[Gilpesh]

Yes, they are entitled to express their opinions about the movies. I've already said that. But they can do that without attacking him, yet again, as you have just done.

Um. They have to say on topic of movies? But Moviefan can go off on Jesus every two seconds? And the United States being destroyed by ungodly heathens with no morals with their sex jokes and their premarital sex?


Also... I guess it is just because one of my favorite movies is Demons that my say in movies and what should be in them is void.

 

[A Dark Knight]

Speed 2 - It was the worst.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

95% of people disagree with you. See how easy it is to just throw out numbers out there?

I doubt the actual number is that high, Jack, but as for my "rated R vs. family film" statement, that's a simple fact. Last year, "Pirates 2" made over a billion dollars in worldwide box office alone, while "Silent Hill" and "Date Movie" pulled in less than a fifth of that combined...

Pirates 2 - $1,065,659,812, with a $225 million budget
Silent Hill - $97,607,453, with a $50 million budget
Date Movie - $84,795,656, with a $20 million budget

My point is that if sex comedies and gross-out films were really so "good" for people, they'd do far better business. Yet, family fare beats them both, year after year. Numbers like these prove beyond doubt that the majority of audiences want content suitable for all ages, not sex jokes and blood-filled buckets.

 

[shapeshifter]

I respectfully disagree. True maturity is choosing lifetime commitment over "shacking up". I believe that premarital sex is generally one of many factors in the current moral decline of the United States. Sex was created by God, to bond one man and one woman together for life in a holy, loving, committed marriage. It was not created for promiscuity, homosexuality, or spousal / child abuse.

We have a lot to disagree about. However since we are both intent on being mature about it, I say we agree to disagree.
As long as neither one of us tries to impose their philosophy upon the other I see no reason for this to get nasty.
I'm of the mind that there are a lot of people out there that are not mature enough to handle sex, period. It is something that has to be taken with a certain amount of respect and sobriety. However I do not believe that it was created by god, as you put it, or for the reason you stated.
As far as homosexuality, while I myself am not gay, I do feel that they have every right to do what they wish in the privacy of their own homes, and don't condemn them or suggest that they are degenerates that are adding to the moral decline of the US.

 

[Infinity9999x]

I don't condone extreme censorship, but I do feel that sometimes it is necessary. Art should be used to encourage people in morally-postive ways...not tear them down spiritually, or desensitize them.

The problem here is where do you draw the line at what's morally right? Let's say you want to censor movies that show abortion. Okay, but then let's say they make a movie about a woman who is raped, and the movie deals with how horrible rape is and how this woman copes with what happens to her. That is a very positive message I think, because it teaches people how much an act can hurt someone.

Now let's say this movie has a scene where the woman aborts the child that is a product of her rape. Do we censor the entire movie because of that one scene? And how morally right or wrong is the woman in that case? Can we blame her? I certainly couldn't, seeing as how I have never, and can never, be in her situation.

Also, let's say you think it's morally wrong to show any nudity in a movie, but then half of Europe thinks it's perfectly fine to show nudity in a movie. Who is right?

Or the other extreme, you think it's perfectly fine to allow women to show their faces in movies, yet thousands of people in other cultures think it's offensive if women display their face in public, let alone to millions of people in a film.

The biggest problem is, who is right? You would obviously think you're right, and you would have your reasons as to why you think you're right. But then there are hundreds of other people who think their right, and they all have individual reasons to why they think they're right.

This is why you can't try to censor things. Where does it end? Where's the line between censorship to protect and censorship to control? What it all comes down to is this: everyone has different opinions, and we can't censor those opinions even if we disagree with them, because everyone has a right to let their opinion be heard, we can only choose to ignore that opinion.

 

[hammy]

Um. They have to say on topic of movies? But Moviefan can go off on Jesus every two seconds?

It's about personally attacking someone. If you can't see that, I can't explain it any more simply.

 

[shapeshifter]

Censorship is dangerous. Once it is placed upon one thing who is to stop it from spreading? "Oh they can stop you from putting nudity in movies, great now I can get nude magazines banned, or maybe I can get people to stop painting nudes, and taking nude photos. I know I can do what they did in the Vatican, have all of the genitalia knocked off from hundreds of priceless roman statues because penises are wrong."

 

[Mr. Socko]

Honestly, none.

There are many movies I don't like; Uwe Boll movies, Kevin Smith movies, gory slasher movies- 95% of horror movies, horrible lame comedies(Date Movie, Epic Movie), but in the end, I just don't watch them so it doesn't bother me at all. Hollywood can make whatever films they want, if it is horrible, I'll just skip it.

And moviefan I'd appreciate it if you don't bring your condemnationable views on homosexuality into this thread as you like to do everywhere else, so do us a favor and stop while you're ahead.

 

[Gilpesh]

It's about personally attacking someone. If you can't see that, I can't explain it any more simply.

Sorry. I get it now. I should say Christians are a blight to humanity because talking in generalities is acceptable. Do remember, you are defending a guy who just said all homosexual people are what making this country 'go to bad place'.

 

[Moviefan2k4]

The problem here is where do you draw the line at what's morally right? Let's say you want to censor movies that show abortion. Okay, but then let's say they make a movie about a woman who is raped, and the movie deals with how horrible rape is and how this woman copes with what happens to her. That is a very positive message I think, because it teaches people how much an act can hurt someone.

Now let's say this movie has a scene where the woman aborts the child that is a product of her rape. Do we censor the entire movie because of that one scene? And how morally right or wrong is the woman in that case? Can we blame her? I certainly couldn't, seeing as how I have never, and can never, be in her situation.

Also, let's say you think it's morally wrong to show any nudity in a movie, but then half of Europe thinks it's perfectly fine to show nudity in a movie. Who is right?

Or the other extreme, you think it's perfectly fine to allow women to show their faces in movies, yet thousands of people in other cultures think it's offensive if women display their face in public, let alone to millions of people in a film.

The biggest problem is, who is right? You would obviously think you're right, and you would have your reasons as to why you think you're right. But then there are hundreds of other people who think their right, and they all have individual reasons to why they think they're right.

This is why you can't try to censor things. Where does it end? Where's the line between censorship to protect and censorship to control? What it all comes down to is this: everyone has different opinions, and we can't censor those opinions even if we disagree with them, because everyone has a right to let their opinion be heard, we can only choose to ignore that opinion.

It ends, morally speaking, with what God has to say on the matter. He sets the only permanent standards, period. The divisions you speak of ("who is right?", etc.) are the collective result of one thing: mankind seeking to separate itself from God. Those who trust in Him know where the boundaries truly lie, but so many people willingly cross them every day, and that's the big problem. Right and wrong were intentionally designed as eternal absolutes, but mankind has been trying to redefine it ever since, to something they'd rather hear or think.

 

[shapeshifter]

I wish Patient J was never made
I wish Pearl Harbor was made by someone who had a clue
I wish the Crow had never been made because Brandon Lee might still be alive.

 

[Gilpesh]

but mankind has been trying to redefine it ever since, to something they'd rather hear or think.

Hey Pot, stop calling me black.

Sincerely,

The Kettle

 

[shapeshifter]

It ends, morally speaking, with what God has to say on the matter. He sets the only permanent standards, period. The divisions you speak of ("who is right?", etc.) are the collective result of one thing: mankind seeking to separate itself from God. Those who trust in Him know where the boundaries truly lie, but so many people willingly cross them every day, and that's the big problem. Right and wrong were intentionally designed as eternal absolutes, but mankind has been trying to redefine it ever since, to something they'd rather hear or think.

How do you know that you are right?

 

[Infinity9999x]

It ends, morally speaking, with what God has to say on the matter. He sets the only permanent standards, period. The divisions you speak of ("who is right?", etc.) are the collective result of one thing: mankind seeking to separate itself from God. Those who trust in Him know where the boundaries truly lie, but so many people willingly cross them every day, and that's the big problem. Right and wrong were intentionally designed as eternal absolutes, but mankind has been trying to redefine it ever since, to something they'd rather hear or think.

Ahh, but what exactly does god have to say? I assume you take your beliefs on God from the bible, but everyone interprets the bible differently.

For instance, some people think Jesus is the only way to heaven. However (and I forget which exact passage this is, I'll have to look it up again) in the bible Jesus says "if you do unto others as you do onto me, you will be accepted into my father's kingdom."

I take that to mean, that even if you don't personally believe Jesus is Christ, that if you lead a good life, and do things Jesus would want you to do, that you will arrive in heaven after you die.

Now, you may say I'm wrong, but you have no way to back that up, because just like you, I'm interpreting the bible. You may interpret it differently, but that makes no difference that your opinion is only based on interpretation, and nothing more.

There are few absolutes in this world, fooling yourself into thinking there are is only a way to set your mind at ease, and it makes the world simpler. At least that is my outlook on life.

 

[hippie_hunter]

The trailers for them were enough for me to decide against it. The film industry would be much better, in my opinion, if graphic violence, gore, sex, demonic subjects, and anti-Christian elements were completely removed.

Wow....the entire film industry would collapse if you got your way. Sorry dude, but people like the graphic violence, gore, sex, and demonic subjects

 

[shapeshifter]

Well, my actual list would be way too long, so I'll answer this one in general terms.

Films I Wish Were Never Made...

1) The entire "slasher" genre (i.e., films which commonly use more than one of the following: graphic, bloody death scenes, stories involving positive portrayals of demonic or occultic subjects, depictions of sex between unmarried people, explicit or otherwise, and overt language including abuses of God's name and profane sexual references). Examples would include the "Halloween", "Friday the 13th", "Nightmare on Elm Street", "Saw", "Scream", and "I Know What You Did Last Summer" franchises.

2) The entire porn industry...'nuff said.

3) The "sex comedy" genre (i.e., films which predominantly rely on sexual or bathroom humor, as well as extreme swearing, in order to drive the story). Examples would include the "American Pie" franchise, "Superbad", and "Knocked Up".

4) Any film which paints a portrayal of the Judeo-Christian God Almighty (or a fictionalized version of Him) as weak, crude, intolerant, hateteful, uninvolved, or otherwise negative. Such films often (but not always) present a positive or inviting view of demonic activity or the occult. Examples would include "Spawn", "Constantine", and "Ghost Rider", among many others.

Spawn and Ghost Rider don't even mention god, and Constantine if anything made god look forgiving, wise and strong. Did you ever watch these movies? or are you just biased against anything that is not "The Nativity Story" and "The Passion of the Christ"?

 

[cozzie]

E T

 

[Moviefan2k4]

Spawn and Ghost Rider don't even mention god, and Constantine if anything made god look forgiving, wise and strong. Did you ever watch these movies? or are you just biased against anything that is not "The Nativity Story" and "The Passion of the Christ"?

From what I've read and heard, "Constantine" made the devil look more powerful than God, by him being able to keep John Constantine on Earth, rather than taken to heaven. Also, Gabriel was seen as in league with the enemy, and the whole notion of "angels stay in heaven, demons in bad place" is contrary to Scripture, which states that both angels and demons walk the earth at times.

"Ghost Rider" mentions God a ton, and also mentions the archangel Michael. The Caretaker tells Johnny "selling your soul for love puts God on your side", when Jesus clearly says in the Bible that "he who is not working for Me is actually working against Me."

As for "Spawn", it uses the same warped theology as "Ghost Rider", in that it shows the power of evil being the only thing capable of defeating it. Also, Spawn mentions God as an offhand remark, prompting Clown to say, "Not the G-word!" Oh, and there's devil worshippers shown in a cemetery.

 

[JackBauer]

I doubt the actual number is that high, Jack, but as for my "rated R vs. family film" statement, that's a simple fact. Last year, "Pirates 2" made over a billion dollars in worldwide box office alone, while "Silent Hill" and "Date Movie" pulled in less than a fifth of that combined...

Pirates 2 - $1,065,659,812, with a $225 million budget
Silent Hill - $97,607,453, with a $50 million budget
Date Movie - $84,795,656, with a $20 million budget

My point is that if sex comedies and gross-out films were really so "good" for people, they'd do far better business. Yet, family fare beats them both, year after year. Numbers like these prove beyond doubt that the majority of audiences want content suitable for all ages, not sex jokes and blood-filled buckets.

yeah, they might make more money, but you have to remember that:

a) the movies you mentioned are terrible movies for tons of reasons other than just being immoral (and btw, how is Jack Sparrow moral, exactly?)

b) even those terrible movies do have an audience that (unfortunately) actually likes them (even if you don't), and who do have the right to watch them. Which is proved by the fact that they actually made quite a profit.

c) Not only family movies also make tons of money. I wouldn't take any kid to watch a borderline-snuff-movie like Passion of the Christ. Didn't stop it from making hundreds of millions of dollars more than it should have (but that's another discussion altogether). And hey, Bourne Ultimatum and 300 are both in the top 10 biggest grossing movies this year, with Knocked Up almost making it too (#11). bad place, if we adjust the all time box office for inflation, the ninth biggest movie of all time would be The Exorcist. See? People DO want to watch all kinds of movies, even if they don't fit into your idea of "morally acceptable".

d) Why oh why only stick with just what the majority wants? If that's not sheep-like mentality I don't know what is.

I could go on, but I think I've made my point.

 

[shapeshifter]

From what I've read and heard, "Constantine" made the devil look more powerful than God, by him being able to keep John Constantine on Earth, rather than taken to heaven. Also, Gabriel was seen as in league with the enemy, and the whole notion of "angels stay in heaven, demons in bad place" is contrary to Scripture, which states that both angels and demons walk the earth at times.

"Ghost Rider" mentions God a ton, and also mentions the archangel Michael. The Caretaker tells Johnny "selling your soul for love puts God on your side", when Jesus clearly says in the Bible that "he who is not working for Me is actually working against Me."

As for "Spawn", it uses the same warped theology as "Ghost Rider", in that it shows the power of evil being the only thing capable of defeating it. Also, Spawn mentions God as an offhand remark, prompting Clown to say, "Not the G-word!" Oh, and there's devil worshippers shown in a cemetery.

you see it your way, and I'll see it mine. I doubt that you would change your views in any case.

 

[jnmx2000]

The problem here is where do you draw the line at what's morally right? Let's say you want to censor movies that show abortion. Okay, but then let's say they make a movie about a woman who is raped, and the movie deals with how horrible rape is and how this woman copes with what happens to her. That is a very positive message I think, because it teaches people how much an act can hurt someone.

Now let's say this movie has a scene where the woman aborts the child that is a product of her rape. Do we censor the entire movie because of that one scene? And how morally right or wrong is the woman in that case? Can we blame her? I certainly couldn't, seeing as how I have never, and can never, be in her situation.

Also, let's say you think it's morally wrong to show any nudity in a movie, but then half of Europe thinks it's perfectly fine to show nudity in a movie. Who is right?

Or the other extreme, you think it's perfectly fine to allow women to show their faces in movies, yet thousands of people in other cultures think it's offensive if women display their face in public, let alone to millions of people in a film.

The biggest problem is, who is right? You would obviously think you're right, and you would have your reasons as to why you think you're right. But then there are hundreds of other people who think their right, and they all have individual reasons to why they think they're right.

This is why you can't try to censor things. Where does it end? Where's the line between censorship to protect and censorship to control? What it all comes down to is this: everyone has different opinions, and we can't censor those opinions even if we disagree with them, because everyone has a right to let their opinion be heard, we can only choose to ignore that opinion.

This is the best post I have ever read, anywhere. I agree with everything that you said. There can be no real censorship because every culture is different. And with independent filmmaking becoming more and more accessible we're only going to be getting more and more of these kinds of films that people would like to see censored. I myself being an independent have plans to make films that depict the very thinks that moviefan seems to hate against. I have a film I'm going to be working on where the main character starts to entice fights because because he likes the pain that he inflicts onto others and he enjoys the pain that is inflicted on to himself and it leads to his eventual downfall. I have another one about a gay character that lives a secret gay life from his normal life and is afraid to tell anyone because of the backlash he may receive and it would be about the character and his struggle to live in a society that he believes does not want him. I find this horrible and is why I would like to see this movie made, because I believe no one should be hated for who they love nor should they be punished for having sex with who ever they love, married or not. now in moviefans eyes these movies should never be made, which is a shame because I think we need more movies like that, ones that dig deep into the heart of society and what's going on in the world around us. but that's just me, sorry if that upsets anyone.

now to be on topic.

date movie
dragon ball z
remake of escape from NY
lost boys 2
starship troopers 2
1941
final fantasty, the spirits within
alien ressurection
blade 3
batman forever
batman and robin
scary movie 3 and 4
epic movie

these are movies that I think should not have been or will be made period. not that I think they should be made differently, they just shouldn't exist.

 

[hippie_hunter]

I doubt the actual number is that high, Jack, but as for my "rated R vs. family film" statement, that's a simple fact. Last year, "Pirates 2" made over a billion dollars in worldwide box office alone, while "Silent Hill" and "Date Movie" pulled in less than a fifth of that combined...

Pirates 2 - $1,065,659,812, with a $225 million budget
Silent Hill - $97,607,453, with a $50 million budget
Date Movie - $84,795,656, with a $20 million budget

My point is that if sex comedies and gross-out films were really so "good" for people, they'd do far better business. Yet, family fare beats them both, year after year. Numbers like these prove beyond doubt that the majority of audiences want content suitable for all ages, not sex jokes and blood-filled buckets.

There's a difference between Pirates of the Caribbean: Dead Man's Chest and Silent Hill and Date Movie:

Pirates of the Caribbean 2 was an awesome movie. Silent Hill and Date Movie were terrible films. Take a look at non-family films such as the Lord of the Rings Trilogy, Titanic, the Matrix Trilogy, 300, Terminator 2, etc. They were successful because they were good films.

Family films such as the Shrek series, Transformers, Pixar's films, the Chronicles of Narnia, Harry Potter etc. are successfull because they too are good films. The reason why they are more successful is because the audience is everyone, not an older one, not because they are family friendly.

Quality often determines success, not "values." It's why we see family films such as Around the World in 80 Days, Looney Tunes: Back in Action, From Justin to Kelly, Catwoman, and Cutthroat Island bomb. It's why we see more adult films like Judge Dredd, Ballistic: Ecks vs. Sever, and Uwe Boll films bomb too.

 

[shapeshifter]

Movie fan how do you feel about Harry Potter?