The Gunslinger45's top 12 Biggest Film Disappointments
→ in Movie Reviews
Reply to Topic
I'm not a fan of superheroes so I never bothered with Suicide Squad. I've yet to attempt a Fellini.
__________________
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Sometimes negative threads generate more discussion.
Fair enough. But after finally seeing Fight Club after the twist, it just killed the movie for me.
Now the acting I had no issues with. Well for the most part. The casting was very good, but holy CRAP was the writing bad. And this is David Ayer, I KNOW he writes good stuff. The man wrote Training Day! But the movie felt like it was on fast forward! The pace was break neck when it needed to slow down at times and establish this group as a collective unit and not just a pack of criminals shoved into a bad situation. I needed more character motivations, I DESPERATELY needed more back story on villains, I needed more back story on some of the team members, and I needed less tattoos on the Joker.
And why the hell is Amanda Waller so damn skinny in this movie? I blame the Nu 52 for this BS. In the Nu 52 reboot of the DC universe they made Amanda Waller; a smart, cunning, and ruthless FAT black woman into a skinny hot busty black woman. What the hell? We can’t have a government intelligence be a big girl? Look I ain’t a fragile crying SJW snowflake crying on Tumblr, but what was wrong with Amanda Waller being fat? Why change the character? The character was a damn good one. Why did we need to slim down Amanda Waller? Was it the artists thinking that to appeal to 13 year old boys they can’t have a fat character? Or would it because the character would be a unique figure be drawn and not just flat out traced. I don’t know but DC lost my business with that crappy reboot. Viola Davis is a great actor but she is just too damn skinny to be Waller. What the hell people?! Now I could go on about the Nu 52 and why it sucked, and how they messed up Jaime Reyes as the Blue Beetle, and why the hell Barbra Gordon can walk when The Killing Joke is still cannon, but that would take way too long.
The movie needed an extra 30 to 45 minutes to flesh out the story. And I can’t say that this was a new issue. Man of Steel was crammed with way too much story and not a lot of time, but that movie was around 2 hours and 30 minutes or so. This movie was closer to two hours. If they added an extra 30 minutes and added a few more scenes I think it would have really improved on the movie. But they didn’t and the movie just plain suffers for it. A+ in marketing, but a C- in execution of the movie.
__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0
I really just want you all angry and confused the whole time.
X
Favorite Movies
Sometimes negative threads generate more discussion.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
You don't need to tell me.
Understandable. I managed to see it without knowing the twist and of course thought it was Top 10 worthy for a long time after that, but nowadays I think I'm over it.
I may not think that "the guy wrote Training Day" is the superlative that you make it out to be, but it's worth noting thate WB only gave Ayer six weeks to write the entire movie - and then there was the fact that the end result is clearly reshot and cut to hell and back without too much of Ayer's input. Really doesn't jibe with DC presenting themselves as "filmmaker-driven'.
wat
It seems more like they could have kept it to 2 hours but used the time more efficiently. The first 40 minutes or so get burned on introducing the characters (some of them multiple times - Deadshot gets at least three separate scenes that could serve as his introduction) and the part where they finally get around to doing some action is still a mess for various reasons.
Understandable. I managed to see it without knowing the twist and of course thought it was Top 10 worthy for a long time after that, but nowadays I think I'm over it.
I may not think that "the guy wrote Training Day" is the superlative that you make it out to be, but it's worth noting thate WB only gave Ayer six weeks to write the entire movie - and then there was the fact that the end result is clearly reshot and cut to hell and back without too much of Ayer's input. Really doesn't jibe with DC presenting themselves as "filmmaker-driven'.
wat
It seems more like they could have kept it to 2 hours but used the time more efficiently. The first 40 minutes or so get burned on introducing the characters (some of them multiple times - Deadshot gets at least three separate scenes that could serve as his introduction) and the part where they finally get around to doing some action is still a mess for various reasons.
As for the Amanda Waller stuff here is a visual explaining what happened, and my nerd rage outburst.
X
Favorite Movies
Considering Iroquois once did a "Worst Movies" countdown, I don't think he's particularly averse to the idea of a negative thread.
Yeah the WB messed up there. This movie was a glorified rough draft in the writing department.
As for the Amanda Waller stuff here is a visual explaining what happened, and my nerd rage outburst.
As for the Amanda Waller stuff here is a visual explaining what happened, and my nerd rage outburst.
X
Favorite Movies
Yeah, but that list is seven years old now and I consider it a semi-trolling mess these days where revisiting a bunch of the entries revealed that they weren't that bad. Negativity may inspire discussion, but then the question becomes whether or not the discussion is worthwhile. It's why I've started to distance myself from certain negative concepts like "overrated" movies or "so-bad-it's-good" movies in recent years.
Yeah, that's a good point. Still, it's not like Davis that much of a shift away from that first version of Waller - if we were talking about someone like Naomie Harris or Thandie Newton then it might be a bridge too far, but Davis didn't strike me as being too skinny.
Yeah, that's a good point. Still, it's not like Davis that much of a shift away from that first version of Waller - if we were talking about someone like Naomie Harris or Thandie Newton then it might be a bridge too far, but Davis didn't strike me as being too skinny.
X
Favorite Movies
Yeah, but that list is seven years old now and I consider it a semi-trolling mess these days where revisiting a bunch of the entries revealed that they weren't that bad. Negativity may inspire discussion, but then the question becomes whether or not the discussion is worthwhile. It's why I've started to distance myself from certain negative concepts like "overrated" movies or "so-bad-it's-good" movies in recent years.
Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Also "overrated" doesn't equal "bad" and some of my favorite movies are so bad they're good, so I don't see that as a particularly negative concept. Hell, Showgirls has shown up in my top 100 favorites twice. I love that movie. It's crap, but I love it.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
Negative opinions are just as valid as positive ones. Also "overrated" doesn't equal "bad" and some of my favorite movies are so bad they're good, so I don't see that as a particularly negative concept. Hell, Showgirls has shown up in my top 100 favorites twice. I love that movie. It's crap, but I love it.
X
Favorite Movies
there is something inherently condescending about "so bad it's good", as if you have to act like you're better than something you enjoy no matter the reason. I like Showgirls but I barely register it as so-bad-it's-good.
X
Favorite Movies
X
User Lists
8. Straw Dogs (1971)
Now here is a flick that was a major let down. Now I love me some good old fashioned revenge and vigilante flicks. And this movie is usually thrown in the same mix as the other movies. Maybe a bit unfairly in hindsight and it is not a straight revenge flick. But this is a movie from the 70’s (my favorite decade for films) and from Sam Pekinpah. The man who directed awesome movies like The Wild Bunch and Bring me the Head of Alfredo Garcia. Films of ideals versus the real world, violence and brutality, and plenty of gun battles. Needless to say I like Peckinpah, but oy vey did this suck.
Okay first off I just did not like Dustin Hoffman’s character. The man is a p***y. I know his character is supposed to be weak. He is an American Mathematician run away to England with his English wife. He goes to England to avoid Vietnam the war, but also the wave of social protests against the war. It is not that he is apolitical or apathetic, but more that he just can't take a stand. This is the set up for his arc, But between that and his reaction to a slaughtered cat and other offenses by the workers on his home, his reactions are beyond weak and timid and down right unsympathetic. This is all building up to him finally finding his balls and standing up for what he thinks is right in the final violent climax of the flick. I get the themes and I get the arc of the character. Problem is he is a bad character. I don’t care how good the arc is, if I don’t care about the character I am not going to connect with the flick.
But worst off all was the most controversial scene in the movie. The rape scene. In the movie Dustin’s wife Amy is asleep on a couch when one of the local workers and her ex-boyfriend (Venner) makes a sexual advance. She resists at first; but then seems to consent. It looked like it would start out as rape, but combined with the camera focus, lighting, and tone made it kinda look like consensual sex. But the set up looked liked like rape, and it left me a tad confused and uneasy. Then worker number two (Norman) comes in and violently rapes her. Throwing ambiguity out the window and even has Venner hold Amy down while he assaults her. And what does it do to advance the plot? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Dustin’s character never finds out they raped her, he never gets revenge for it, they barely mention it again aside that Amy breaks down at a church social when the rapists are also in attendance. And when Hoffman finally does find a spine, grabs a shotgun and starts shooting sh!tbags, it is for reasons OTHER than these bastards raped my wife. WHY?!?!?!? What is the point of the rape scene when it leads to NOTHING! Especially since there was so much focus on that one scene. It doesn’t establish them as horrible people, we knew they were bastards before! It does not show rape as something rampant like in say medieval Europe during a war, or a tool of war like in the Congo. It is just there for no real reason. Sure Hoffman catches Norman trying to rape her again, but it is not even Hoffman who kills him, it is Venner! Who then immediately gets whacked by Hoffman! Leaving the rape to be completely pointless! At least I Spit on Your Grave with its gratuitous 25 minute rape scene LED to something with Camille Keaton’s revenge. It was resolved and the scene had a purpose in the flick
I will stick to a much better movie about an anti war pacifist who when confronted by violence and sexual assault of his family leads him to violence. It stars Charles Bronson and it was called Death Wish.
Now here is a flick that was a major let down. Now I love me some good old fashioned revenge and vigilante flicks. And this movie is usually thrown in the same mix as the other movies. Maybe a bit unfairly in hindsight and it is not a straight revenge flick. But this is a movie from the 70’s (my favorite decade for films) and from Sam Pekinpah. The man who directed awesome movies like The Wild Bunch and Bring me the Head of Alfredo Garcia. Films of ideals versus the real world, violence and brutality, and plenty of gun battles. Needless to say I like Peckinpah, but oy vey did this suck.
Okay first off I just did not like Dustin Hoffman’s character. The man is a p***y. I know his character is supposed to be weak. He is an American Mathematician run away to England with his English wife. He goes to England to avoid Vietnam the war, but also the wave of social protests against the war. It is not that he is apolitical or apathetic, but more that he just can't take a stand. This is the set up for his arc, But between that and his reaction to a slaughtered cat and other offenses by the workers on his home, his reactions are beyond weak and timid and down right unsympathetic. This is all building up to him finally finding his balls and standing up for what he thinks is right in the final violent climax of the flick. I get the themes and I get the arc of the character. Problem is he is a bad character. I don’t care how good the arc is, if I don’t care about the character I am not going to connect with the flick.
But worst off all was the most controversial scene in the movie. The rape scene. In the movie Dustin’s wife Amy is asleep on a couch when one of the local workers and her ex-boyfriend (Venner) makes a sexual advance. She resists at first; but then seems to consent. It looked like it would start out as rape, but combined with the camera focus, lighting, and tone made it kinda look like consensual sex. But the set up looked liked like rape, and it left me a tad confused and uneasy. Then worker number two (Norman) comes in and violently rapes her. Throwing ambiguity out the window and even has Venner hold Amy down while he assaults her. And what does it do to advance the plot? NOTHING! ABSOLUTELY NOTHING! Dustin’s character never finds out they raped her, he never gets revenge for it, they barely mention it again aside that Amy breaks down at a church social when the rapists are also in attendance. And when Hoffman finally does find a spine, grabs a shotgun and starts shooting sh!tbags, it is for reasons OTHER than these bastards raped my wife. WHY?!?!?!? What is the point of the rape scene when it leads to NOTHING! Especially since there was so much focus on that one scene. It doesn’t establish them as horrible people, we knew they were bastards before! It does not show rape as something rampant like in say medieval Europe during a war, or a tool of war like in the Congo. It is just there for no real reason. Sure Hoffman catches Norman trying to rape her again, but it is not even Hoffman who kills him, it is Venner! Who then immediately gets whacked by Hoffman! Leaving the rape to be completely pointless! At least I Spit on Your Grave with its gratuitous 25 minute rape scene LED to something with Camille Keaton’s revenge. It was resolved and the scene had a purpose in the flick
I will stick to a much better movie about an anti war pacifist who when confronted by violence and sexual assault of his family leads him to violence. It stars Charles Bronson and it was called Death Wish.
X
Favorite Movies
This thread is great, because while I am sad that you were dissapointed by my favorite movie and 8 1/2, your explanations are more than enough for me to understand your thought process behind the opinions. Keep it up 
__________________
Letterboxd Profile: https://letterboxd.com/GatsbyG/
Letterboxd Profile: https://letterboxd.com/GatsbyG/
X
User Lists
This thread is great, because while I am sad that you were dissapointed by my favorite movie and 8 1/2, your explanations are more than enough for me to understand your thought process behind the opinions. Keep it up
X
Favorite Movies
The rape scene in I Spit on Your Grave was really 25 minutes? I don't remember that. Not that you're wrong.
What makes the film 8 1/2 so special to you? I am curious.
X
User Lists
The rape scene in I Spit on Your Grave was really 25 minutes? I don't remember that. Not that you're wrong.
X
Favorite Movies
Well, I think it is because I can relate to some of the frustrations Fellini had as someone who constantly trying to be creative. I've always been tried to be original with my ideas. Ironically, a document of his struggles shows one of the most original styles and iconic images in cinema history. It's also because Dude With a Problem movies just tend to resonate strongly with me.
X
Favorite Movies
Btw GS, I think you'd like La Dolce VIta (it plays out like a classy noir instead of a whack Italian director's lamenting).
X
User Lists
Btw GS, I think you'd like La Dolce VIta (it plays out like a classy noir instead of a whack Italian director's lamenting).
Wasn't a fan either. I have also seen La Strada and Amarcord
X
Favorite Movies
That is about what it came out to when I timed it.
Also, you timed a rape scene?