Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212 
Likes: 1,596
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 6, 2020 8:31:38 GMT
...or admire to some point.
Like Raiders of the Lost Ark for me... Yeah, watching Nazis getting kicked in the balls by a charismatic lead is a fun way to spend two hours...but the second best movie of all time Empire magazine?! (voted around 2008)
|
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Jul 6, 2020 8:49:18 GMT
Moonlight
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 6, 2020 9:22:44 GMT
Do The Right Thing (1989) and Goodfellas (1990) - 2 Great movies that don't resolve themselves well and always make me feel ripped off at the end ..... especially Do The Right Thing with it's queasy compromised ending that rips off a Scorsese type explosion of violence but isn't cathartic or meaningful - no one acts like Sal acts at the end or Mookie either actually.....the quotes at the end are irresolute not profound or contemplative to me......Lee never learned how to end a movie and "quotes" and "still pictures" at the end are exhibit A - it's not a school term paper/essay.
Goodfellas is a movie where no character changes grows or deepens or darkens - zero - you know exactly what you knew at the start. It's a blast .........but in the stature it's held.......that's not enough for me. It's a highlight reel movie and it's also ruined by a couple moments of too cute for its own good wtf-ery (Bracco jumping in on narration, Liotta coming down off the stand and breaking the 4th wall etc).
These are each Best of the Decade contenders everywhere .....that's too high imo and neither make my 10 best of decade.......not even in just English language .........neither is my best of its year even.
|
|
|
|
Post by Miles Morales on Jul 6, 2020 9:23:03 GMT
Carol is my go-to answer for this. For me, it fell well short compared to insane acclaim it got but it's still a very good film.
|
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jul 6, 2020 9:58:09 GMT
Lots of them! I don't think there's anything unique or weird in liking the film and finding it to be overrated at the same time. "Moonlight" is a pretty excellent film that happens to be ridiculously overrated, "Roma" is a good movie the praise for which is similarly overblown. I think "Black Panther" is a perfectly decent superhero flick but the insane raves it received are laugh-out-loud silly. "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" among the classics came to mind first. Lots of them!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
Likes:
|
Post by Deleted on Jul 6, 2020 10:16:04 GMT
Tons, yeah. The Godfather comes to mind. Great movie, but for me nowhere near a Top 10 of all time as it's often placed.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,596
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 6, 2020 10:44:15 GMT
Do The Right Thing (1989) and Goodfellas (1990) - 2 Great movies that don't resolve themselves well and always make me feel ripped off at the end ..... especially Do The Right Thing with it's queasy compromised ending that rips off a Scorsese type explosion of violence but isn't cathartic or meaningful - no one acts like Sal acts at the end or Mookie either actually.....the quotes at the end are irresolute not profound or contemplative to me......Lee never learned how to end a movie and "quotes" and "still pictures" at the end are exhibit A - it's not a school term paper/essay. Goodfellas is a movie where no character changes grows or deepens or darkens - zero - you know exactly what you knew at the start. It's a blast .........but in the stature it's held.......that's not enough for me. It's a highlight reel movie and it's also ruined by a couple moments of too cute for its own good wtf-ery (Bracco jumping in on narration, Liotta coming down off the stand and breaking the 4th wall etc). These are each Best of the Decade contenders everywhere .....that's too high imo and neither make my 10 best of decade.......not even in just English language .........neither is my best of its year even. Isn't the point of Goodfellas some sort of growth though? - Henry (and the viewers, since we've become technically 'one' with him) learns he can't trust this lifestyle forever. |
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,596
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 6, 2020 10:50:56 GMT
Lots of them! I don't think there's anything unique or weird in liking the film and finding it to be overrated at the same time. "Moonlight" is a pretty excellent film that happens to be ridiculously overrated, "Roma" is a good movie the praise for which is similarly overblown. I think "Black Panther" is a perfectly decent superhero flick but the insane raves it received are laugh-out-loud silly. "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" among the classics came to mind first. Lots of them! I almost want to add Boyhood to this recent trend of celebrated coming-of-age dramas as well - remember it was treated like something sent from Heaven when it was out. 100% ratings everywhere and where was it when all the best-of-2010s lists came out a year ago?... but I'm still unsure about where I stand on that film exactly. As for classics, I'd name Singing in the Rain. |
|
|
|
Post by JangoB on Jul 6, 2020 10:56:29 GMT
Lots of them! I don't think there's anything unique or weird in liking the film and finding it to be overrated at the same time. "Moonlight" is a pretty excellent film that happens to be ridiculously overrated, "Roma" is a good movie the praise for which is similarly overblown. I think "Black Panther" is a perfectly decent superhero flick but the insane raves it received are laugh-out-loud silly. "Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid" among the classics came to mind first. Lots of them! I almost want to add Boyhood to this recent trend of celebrated coming-of-age dramas as well - remember it was treated like something sent from Heaven when it was out. 100% ratings everywhere and where was it when all the best-of-2010s lists came out a year ago?... but I'm still unsure about where I stand on that film exactly. As for classics, I'd name Singing in the Rain.I definitely remember it being quite a big deal that it "Boyhood" received a 100 Metacritic score! I mean, I kinda love the movie but still think it's ridiculous (and not even particularly correct). |
|
|
|
Post by Johnny_Hellzapoppin on Jul 6, 2020 11:01:50 GMT
Ultimately there are loads of these, but to throw out a few that always stand out to me from the 2000s
Brokeback Mountain
No Country for Old Men
There Will Be Blood
The 2007 duo in particular are both damn good films, but I don't think they are outright great films. Brokeback Mountain on the other hand is merely decent.
|
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 6, 2020 11:19:16 GMT
Do The Right Thing (1989) and Goodfellas (1990) - 2 Great movies that don't resolve themselves well and always make me feel ripped off at the end ..... especially Do The Right Thing with it's queasy compromised ending that rips off a Scorsese type explosion of violence but isn't cathartic or meaningful - no one acts like Sal acts at the end or Mookie either actually.....the quotes at the end are irresolute not profound or contemplative to me......Lee never learned how to end a movie and "quotes" and "still pictures" at the end are exhibit A - it's not a school term paper/essay. Goodfellas is a movie where no character changes grows or deepens or darkens - zero - you know exactly what you knew at the start. It's a blast .........but in the stature it's held.......that's not enough for me. It's a highlight reel movie and it's also ruined by a couple moments of too cute for its own good wtf-ery (Bracco jumping in on narration, Liotta coming down off the stand and breaking the 4th wall etc). These are each Best of the Decade contenders everywhere .....that's too high imo and neither make my 10 best of decade.......not even in just English language .........neither is my best of its year even. Isn't the point of Goodfellas some sort of growth though? - Henry (and the viewers, since we've become technically 'one' with him) learns he can't trust this lifestyle forever. I guess you could see it that way but I really don't, Henry just kind of learns he shouldn't have gotten caught. If he's learned that obvious a lesson that everyone in the audience already knew 2 and 1/2 hours earlier when "Rags to Riches" played, well he is just too stupid a central character to justify a 2 1/2 hour film. What scene shows you Henry regretting anything he's done (?)........it's pretty much scumbags killing scumbags (or innocents) for its whole runtime. I'm not being a moralist either, I'm just saying as drama it's lacking .......there is not an actual dramatic "point" to Goodfellas imo - except as a procedural - "how the Mob "really" works". |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 6, 2020 13:15:59 GMT
Isn't the point of Goodfellas some sort of growth though? - Henry (and the viewers, since we've become technically 'one' with him) learns he can't trust this lifestyle forever. I guess you could see it that way but I really don't, Henry just kind of learns he shouldn't have gotten caught. If he's learned that obvious a lesson that everyone in the audience already knew 2 and 1/2 hours earlier when "Rags to Riches" played, well he is just too stupid a central character to justify a 2 1/2 hour film. What scene shows you Henry regretting anything he's done (?)........it's pretty much scumbags killing scumbags (or innocents) for its whole runtime. I'm not being a moralist either, I'm just saying as drama it's lacking .......there is not an actual dramatic "point" to Goodfellas imo - except as a procedural - "how the Mob "really" works". I feel like you're judging the film on the merits of what you're bringing to the table, rather than what the filmmaker is. The entire point of Goodfellas is to show not just why someone would be enamored with the lifestyle, but why someone would willingly go along with it for so long. That's why the Karen narrative shift is as important as it is. Yes, we are so often told from the cradle that crime doesn't pay, but in point of fact it does pay, and can indeed pay handsomely . . . but it also comes at a cost. And the thing is, it's not a moralist tale, nor is it really intended to be. Henry was never as cold-blooded as Jimmy or Tommy, but he still loved the life because it gave him authority, it made him more than an average "schnook," and to go back to that anonymity was as bad as death to him. The only thing he regretted was getting caught. |
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 6, 2020 13:34:47 GMT
I feel like you're judging the film on the merits of what you're bringing to the table, rather than what the filmmaker is. The entire point of Goodfellas is to show not just why someone would be enamored with the lifestyle, but why someone would willingly go along with it for so long. That's why the Karen narrative shift is as important as it is. Yes, we are so often told from the cradle that crime doesn't pay, but in point of fact it does pay, and can indeed pay handsomely . . . but it also comes at a cost. And the thing is, it's not a moralist tale, nor is it really intended to be. Henry was never as cold-blooded as Jimmy or Tommy, but he still loved the life because it gave him authority, it made him more than an average "schnook," and to go back to that anonymity was as bad as death to him. The only thing he regretted was getting caught. OMG stephen,  this is eye-opening stuff. You're absolutely right. Henry was not a murderous bastard, but he was good at making friends, even if it's with the wrong guys. I also think Henry persisted with the gangster life partially because it made him seem cool attracting a woman. I dunno about every girl, but most women certainly don't like losers even though they may not be necessarily partial to the gangster life but back then it was also kind of the norm too. I also think towards the end there was a need for him to finally break free, but he had too long a criminal history already that the police just chewed him up easily. I don't think he was as involved with the gangster life when he was finally caught, he was mostly on drugs by that point. I don't mean to belittle your criticism pacinoyes - it doesn't bother me at all, but I'm just naturally curious.... how do you see Goodfellas as scumbags killing each other, but then view Pulp Fiction/Tarantino under a different light? Just wondering your thinking on that. Unless you believe Pulp Fiction is like an intentional kind of gangster comic verse, so it's more anything goes? |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 6, 2020 13:46:16 GMT
OMG stephen, this is eye-opening stuff. You're absolutely right. Henry was not a murderous bastard, but he was good at making friends, even if it's with the wrong guys. I also think Henry persisted with the gangster life partially because it made him seem cool attracting a woman. I dunno about every girl, but most women certainly don't like losers even though they may not be necessarily partial to the gangster life but back then it was kind of the norm too. I also think towards the end there was a need for him to finally break free, but he had too long a criminal history already that the police just chewed him up easily. I don't think he was as involved with the gangster life when he was finally caught, he was mostly on drugs by that point. I don't mean to belittle your criticism pacinoyes - it doesn't bother me at all, but I'm just naturally curious.... how do you see Goodfellas as scumbags killing each other, but then view Pulp Fiction/Tarantino under a different light? Just wondering your thinking on that. Unless you believe Pulp Fiction is like an intentional kind of gangster comic verse, so it's more anything goes? Yeah, Scorsese makes it a point to show that the only time that Henry partakes in violence, it's either because he's provoked to doing it (beating the shit out of Karen's assailant in the driveway) or he's a bystander who's roped into covering it up (the Billy Batts attack). He is also shown to have at least a bit of humanity in him, as shown in the first five minutes when he's helping that gunshot victim with the towels even while Tuddy balks at him. Henry's a criminal, but by and large he's not a directly violent one. That automatically puts him on a different tier than Jimmy, whose cruelty and greed extend to whacking his entire crew just because he didn't want to pay them their fair share of the Lufthansa heist, and Tommy, who would kill anyone for breathing loudly in his presence, and even Paulie, whose menace is far more subdued by still, no one makes a move without his say-so. Does this mean Henry is a saint? Not at all. But when compared to the other people in the film, he's obviously the most relatable because we see how he got into the life, what appealed to him, and why he stayed. This is a kid who had a shitty home life, who wasn't great shakes at school, and who saw his honest working-joe father having to slave away in misery to support them. And then he saw a lifestyle that meant he didn't have to work himself to death (well, in terms of backbreaking labor) while being able to make enough money to bankroll a comfortable life, and the people welcomed Henry as he was with open arms and cultivated what was already there, rather than beating the shit out of him for truancy. It's absolutely clear why a kid like Henry would join a crew, and why he'd stick around as long as he did. Because as long as he abided by the rules of the lifestyle, there was no reason he'd ever have to worry, because it's clear prison wasn't an issue for him. It's only when he got lured in with the drug game that things started to fall apart. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 6, 2020 13:56:08 GMT
I guess you could see it that way but I really don't, Henry just kind of learns he shouldn't have gotten caught. If he's learned that obvious a lesson that everyone in the audience already knew 2 and 1/2 hours earlier when "Rags to Riches" played, well he is just too stupid a central character to justify a 2 1/2 hour film. What scene shows you Henry regretting anything he's done (?)........it's pretty much scumbags killing scumbags (or innocents) for its whole runtime. I'm not being a moralist either, I'm just saying as drama it's lacking .......there is not an actual dramatic "point" to Goodfellas imo - except as a procedural - "how the Mob "really" works". The entire point of Goodfellas is to show not just why someone would be enamored with the lifestyle, but why someone would willingly go along with it for so long. And the thing is, it's not a moralist tale, nor is it really intended to be. It's just not that interesting POV to hang a whole film on dramatically imo (Karen's marginal slant to the story are even less interesting to me tbh) if that's the "entire point" - I'm saying it's not enough. I don't think you can say "it's not a moralist tale, not is it really intended to be" when he's working in a genre that is inherently, dramatically a moralist genre (murder, theft, adultery, deception etc.). Now relative to the thread I do like the film a good bit and it would be in my top 10 films of 1990 (and I rate it high too ~8.5) - heck if it didn't win best of decade and show up as highly as it does on all time lists and within Scorsese's filmography - you probably wouldn't hear me carping too much on these things. |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 6, 2020 14:06:10 GMT
It's just not that interesting POV to hang a whole film on dramatically imo (Karen's marginal slant to the story are even less interesting to me tbh) if that's the "entire point" - I'm saying it's not enough. I don't think you can say "it's not a moralist tale, not is it really intended to be" when he's working in a genre that is inherently, dramatically a moralist genre (murder, theft, adultery, deception etc.). Now relative to the thread I do like the film a good bit and it would be in my top 10 films of 1990 (and I rate it high too ~8.5) - heck if it didn't win best of decade and show up as highly as it does on all time lists and within Scorsese's filmography - you probably wouldn't hear me carping too much on these things. That's fine if you don't find it an interesting POV to hang onto, as it's tough to really love a film if you don't like the approach. It's one of my major issues with both Casino and The Irishman, for example, in that I find both protagonists to be thoroughly inert, unlikable and boring in comparison to the world around them (though my issues on both films extend far beyond Rothstein/Sheeran). But while Goodfellas is in a genre that is, inherently, a moralist one, it doesn't hang on the prototypical trappings that made it such a popular genre in the '30s and '40s, where the Hays Code determined that they had to be moral to a fault. Goodfellas doesn't redeem Henry Hill. It makes no bones that, at the end of the story, he's being punished for not renouncing the lifestyle, because even though he walks away from the game with his life, it's not a life worth living to him. EDIT: I also want to add that the reason I love Goodfellas so much and why I consider it one of Scorsese's two masterpieces is because I feel it's one of the few times where he found a protagonist worth watching. |
|
|
|
Post by pacinoyes on Jul 6, 2020 14:08:00 GMT
Well in this way, I don't think the films are similar at all ......Pulp Fiction has a clear moral purpose AND dramatically its characters change. In fact, one character walks away from that life and one doesn't and he dies (Travolta). It takes Biblical scripture and discusses it, thinks about it contemplates it. It shows two characters in complete opposite moral positions - Roth and Jackson.......you have nothing like that in Goodfellas. In fact, you could never have predicted the change in characters in PF at all (?) - in Goodfellas no one changes, it just stops. That alone puts PF morally on a whole different level in this way........now this isn't a class about theology/ethics and Goodfellas has other things in its arsenal for the quality of the film......but not in this way........ |
|
|
|
Post by mhynson27 on Jul 6, 2020 14:25:14 GMT
It's just not that interesting POV to hang a whole film on dramatically imo (Karen's marginal slant to the story are even less interesting to me tbh) if that's the "entire point" - I'm saying it's not enough. I don't think you can say "it's not a moralist tale, not is it really intended to be" when he's working in a genre that is inherently, dramatically a moralist genre (murder, theft, adultery, deception etc.). Now relative to the thread I do like the film a good bit and it would be in my top 10 films of 1990 (and I rate it high too ~8.5) - heck if it didn't win best of decade and show up as highly as it does on all time lists and within Scorsese's filmography - you probably wouldn't hear me carping too much on these things. That's fine if you don't find it an interesting POV to hang onto, as it's tough to really love a film if you don't like the approach. It's one of my major issues with both Casino and The Irishman, for example, in that I find both protagonists to be thoroughly inert, unlikable and boring in comparison to the world around them (though my issues on both films extend far beyond Rothstein/Sheeran). But while Goodfellas is in a genre that is, inherently, a moralist one, it doesn't hang on the prototypical trappings that made it such a popular genre in the '30s and '40s, where the Hays Code determined that they had to be moral to a fault. Goodfellas doesn't redeem Henry Hill. It makes no bones that, at the end of the story, he's being punished for not renouncing the lifestyle, because even though he walks away from the game with his life, it's not a life worth living to him. EDIT: I also want to add that the reason I love Goodfellas so much and why I consider it one of Scorsese's two masterpieces is because I feel it's one of the few times where he found a protagonist worth watching.Is the other one Wolf? |
|
|
|
Post by stephen on Jul 6, 2020 14:26:27 GMT
That's fine if you don't find it an interesting POV to hang onto, as it's tough to really love a film if you don't like the approach. It's one of my major issues with both Casino and The Irishman, for example, in that I find both protagonists to be thoroughly inert, unlikable and boring in comparison to the world around them (though my issues on both films extend far beyond Rothstein/Sheeran). But while Goodfellas is in a genre that is, inherently, a moralist one, it doesn't hang on the prototypical trappings that made it such a popular genre in the '30s and '40s, where the Hays Code determined that they had to be moral to a fault. Goodfellas doesn't redeem Henry Hill. It makes no bones that, at the end of the story, he's being punished for not renouncing the lifestyle, because even though he walks away from the game with his life, it's not a life worth living to him. EDIT: I also want to add that the reason I love Goodfellas so much and why I consider it one of Scorsese's two masterpieces is because I feel it's one of the few times where he found a protagonist worth watching.Is the other one Wolf? Absolutely. |
|
|
|
Post by Pittsnogle_Goggins on Jul 7, 2020 2:41:45 GMT
The Shawshank Redemption
Forrest Gump
The Dark Knight
|
|
|
|
Post by jakesully on Jul 11, 2020 23:47:27 GMT
American Beauty
(Mainly for Kevin Spacey's great performance. Seriously, he was so funny in it)
|
|
|
|
Post by Tommen_Saperstein on Jul 12, 2020 1:06:22 GMT
anything by Nolan is overrated but I still really like The Dark Knight and Inception.
|
|
|
|
Post by urbanpatrician on Jul 12, 2020 1:51:51 GMT
Malick movies except The Thin Red Line. The New World, Badlands, Tree of Life are all interesting films that all feel on the positive side .... but none great except The Thin Red Line.
Lynch movies... mostly Mulholland Dr. and Blue Velvet. entertaining dastardly stuff. dude is so fun, but overrated in terms of how often he's talked about. Just a case of needing some new subjects to talk about every once in a while.
Nolan movies... but Interstellar is pretty awesome.
The Shawshank Redemption
Kubrick movies apart from Dr. Strangelove and Barry Lyndon.
North By Northwest and Psycho and Strangers on a Train. Especially Strangers on a Train..... it's entertaining but kinda pedestrian.
Sergio Leone movies. Blown away by OUTITW as a teenager. SO *beep* entertaining. One of 20 most entertaining films. Still... he's overrated by his fans who tend to be really zealous.
Jurassic Park and Jaws. Feels like Jaws, Jurassic Park, and Schindler's List are the 3 that's most people's favorites here. None of them make my Spielberg Top 7.
|
|
Nikan
Based
Posts: 3,212
Likes: 1,596
|
Post by Nikan on Jul 12, 2020 8:40:55 GMT
Feels like Jaws, Jurassic Park, and Schindler's List are the 3 that's most people's favorites here. None of them make my Spielberg Top 7. As long as my pick doesn't make it we're OK  |
|
BlackCaesar21
New Member
You're barking up the wrong acorn!
Posts: 148
Likes: 105
|
Post by BlackCaesar21 on Jul 12, 2020 16:37:24 GMT
The Dark Knight
|
|
