Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

In general, I agree that we shouldn't dislike films just because they are historically inaccurate. But where historical inaccuracy is a symptom of general laziness in research and lack of attention to detail, or done deliberately in order to augment or denigrate a particular person or worse, a race or nationality, then it can be something that detracts from the overall quality and enjoyment of the film.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I think it might depend on what you mean by "dislike." You probably shouldn't say it's a "bad film" based on historical inaccuracy, because that's rather misleading, but you can certainly dislike it as a whole, if you think it's spreading disinformation with no regard for the truth (Titanic comes to mind).

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Braveheart is up there with Forrest Gump when it comes to acclaimed films that are way too easy to hate.

Quills isn't historically accurate but nor does it pretend to be. Braveheart believes it's verbatim, that's why I notioned the issue in the first place.well yea but that's what you get when the Oscars exist

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

... I can't start hating on Braveheart. I was moved by the film when I was younger. I was moved by Forrest Gump too, but, like Iro said, it's just to easy to hate.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I had a similar problem with Apocalypto. For 90% of the film it shows a pretty interesting power struggle between ancient cultures (granted I have no knowledge of them so I can't vouch for its historical accuracy) but the ending was so offensive that it ruined that 90% of entertainment. I almost want to download it and re-edit the film and burn it

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Here are the bad ones in the top 100, which gets pretty ropey towards the end-

#34- Leon
#40- American History X
#27- Amelie
#50- A Clockwork Orange
#62- Requiem for a Dream
#72- The Prestige
#75- Life is Beautiful
#78- Inglourious Basterds
#87- The Green Mile
#98- Sin City

I can only agree with two.

why did you think they're poorly made films?

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

OK, if we're just pissing on bonfires, I'm going back and redoing my list.

I can only think of two that are truly sub-par.

What is this I don't even

Those three I bolded might be three of the best films in the history of ever. You need to watch them again with a more open mind.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

A Clockwork Orange - one of the best films ever, dear God man. :facepalm: :nope:

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Um, yeah. Easily.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Maybe so, but I think it goes without saying that if you want to disagree with someone's choice, you should probably elaborate, or something. I've never understood the point of just contradicting someone. And it's not as if there aren't lots of cinephiles who are less than enamored with Kubrick. He's a pretty polarizing director. We can facepalm all day over Epic Movie or something, but the Kubrick thing is far from atypical.

This is all just a long-winded way of saying: hey, be nice to people with other opinions, and if you want to dismantle them, why not do it with insight and specificity?

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Opinions are like ******** I guess, everyones got one.

I gave the movie a VERY solid 8 on IMDB, thoroughly enjoyed it and it would feature on my list of top 200, so don't begin to tell me why the movie is good, I know.

I just reserve the phrase 'one of the best films ever' for a more exclusive list, maybe my top 30.

Of course your entitled to your opinion.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Like Star Trek for instance.

Not today.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

That's kind of my point: everyone has an opinion, so why just swap them, or make fun of someone else's? We could do that all day, but there'd be no point.

I've had people on here pan films that I adore, and I'll usually brush it off with a joke, but if I want to contradict them, I'll generally explain why I love it and find out why they didn't. That's always interesting to read, if nothing else, and is a pretty respectful way to register one's disagreement.

Exactly, and well spotted.

Though that film is on my list purely because of the quality of the editing, I'm an editor myself so I find myself picking up on good editing even if its acknowledging the subtleties that make the picture pristine, understated, subdued and indistinct as the invisible art should be. Something that should not be underestimated.

Of course I'm always happy to defend my my selection when someone brings it up.

I know, I know.

It's laziness, not a lack of respect on my part. Apologies.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Nah, it's cool, sorry if I seem like a grumpy old man. It's just something which comes up a lot these days and has been on my mind a lot lately.

That said, I hope the two of you do end up going in-depth about it, because A Clockwork Orange is a film I don't entirely feel I "get," but sorta-kinda sense must have a bit more to it than I'm seeing. I'll have to search to see if people have gone into detail on it before (I can't recall offhand).

Though I have to say at times there's very little understated about the motion graphics in this movie (Not CG/SFX). The finest example of post production grading and lighting in particular I've seen to date.

http://img695.imageshack.us/img695/8...otfilwrbaz.png
Note: the effect is a hard to capture with a single frame.

What can I say, I'm a sucker for the stellar and divine aesthetic of a celestial sci-fi flick, it causes my heart beat to raise and in a sentimental and evocative way brings me back to my childhood. Sci-Fi is my love, I appreciate the cotton wool wrapped classics as much as the next person, but Star Trek is a thoughtful and deserved addition to my particular top 10. I'm not going to apologise for that. Even if it makes me look less educated than Star Wars, 2001, Blade Runner etc.

This probably contains SPOILERS about A Clockwork Orange, so read at your own risk if you haven't watched it.

Well, A Clockwork Orange sucks the viewer in with a weird, otherworldly atmosphere by using high-contrast photography and a Beethoven soundtrack. It isn't science fiction. It's closer to some kind of alternate universe. Almost immediately it pummels you with sex and ultraviolence in an attempt to either turn you on or turn you off (or perhaps more significantly, both at the same time). The subject matter is rather repulsive but the cinematics are spectacular. We follow Alex and his "little droogies" around while they "shag and fag" and vicariously see things which seem beyond the pale, but Beethoven is just oh so beautiful.

Then, the flick turns a bit more serious and substantial when Alex ends up in prison and is enticed to undergo some kind of miracle therapy. I know many people who love the first part of the film but say that the next section (the point of the film) is "boring". They wanted more in-out and ultra violence. Well, we do get to that and that's the film's coup. The authorities basically use A Clockwork Orange itself as the miracle cure for Alex to become a "normal member of society". Alex is forced to watch a facsimile of A Clockwork Orange to get repulsed by rape and violence, and since Beethoven is on the soundtrack, it deeply disturbs and affects him. The whole thing is really just a political scam though with Alex as the guinea pig in the middle of a political war. However, even the "peace and freedom" types want their revenge on Alex so the whole movie comes full circle.


Now, I realize that what I'm saying here is nothing new or enlightening. It's always been there right in the film. But as time goes by, and I get more and more students who started watching ultra-violent films and pornos when they were five-years-old, and they mostly have a kid or two by the time they're 15 and they belong to gangs and want to do things like Alex does in the first part of the movie, A Clockwork Orange takes on a kind of prescience which makes it seem better now than when it was first released. But I've always been deeply disturbed because I loved the film the first time.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Yeah, I think A Clockwork Orange is one of the few Kubrick films I truly love. I think mostly its due in large part because I agree with its core message, or at least the core message that I get from the movie.

It doesn't matter what you do to someone, how much you torture them, brainwash them, whatever. People don't change unless they want to. Alex didn't change and neither does most everybody else that goes through all sorts of various forms of "therapy" and whatever other forms of brainwashing you may try to implement in your life to change your daily outlook.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I couldn't agree more with the last two posts. I suppose the odd thing about this is that I actually love A clockwork orange. It just doesn't feature on my top say.....30 films to deserve the tag, "one of the best films ever made". So I have no quarrel or argument with anything you've posted, I'll never dispute a film I love.

Here's a bit more about why I consider the ones I listed as bad (not just overrated) films-

#34- Leon- a paper-thin and suspect film;
#40- American History X- separated from being a bog-standard made-for-schools message film only by the central character, which is a skilled enough performance but leans far too far towards glorifying fascism;
#27- Amelie- a sickly, manipulative film, a damn shame from someone who once made Delicatessen;
#50- A Clockwork Orange- Kubrick was sometimes embarassingly awful when he tried to shock (Eyes Wide Shut was even worse), and despite one or two decent ideas this lacks any real sense of outrage at all, like an old member of the establishment imagining what youthful rebellion should look like. It’s a ridiculously silly film and impossible to take seriously. The main character is offputtingly repulsive and the Englishness it portrays (on both 'sides') is gross and horribly dated;
#62- Requiem for a Dream- extremely disappointing to see the fantastically imaginative Pi followed up by an imagination-free, one-note shock movie that any of thousands of directors could made when presented with a card with three words on it- ‘addiction’ ‘extreme’ and ‘cool’.;
#72- The Prestige- this tedious gimmick movie would have sunk without trace if it didn’t have Nolan’s name on it;
#75- Life is Beautiful- don’t like the Holocaust being used as a backdrop to Roberto Benigni’s grotesque Robin Williams light comedy. This is false, exploitative and offensive;
#78- Inglourious Basterds- hours upon hours of Tarantino having characters sit around and drone on and on to prove he’s badly lost his touch with dialogue. Boring;
#87- The Green Mile- If I was going with overrated films, Shawshank Redemption would be in, but that film is just about on the pretty good side; its similar but significantly crappier followup had no chance of avoiding the list;
#98- Sin City- awful in its interchangeable 1-d characterisation and in a story apparently written by a 12 year old not doing his work in a maths class. Does look quite good, but not good enough to forget the shoddiness of every other aspect.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

/\.. you my dear friend, don't know what "bad" is... No Offense!!

In what way is this 'suspect'? Because the characters with whom we are supposed to identify do bad things? That would make a lot of films 'suspect'. If not that, then can you elaborate on why you call it 'suspect'?

I'm no fan of A Clockwork Orange (actually, I think Eyes Wide Shut was considerably better), but bear in mind that none of the 'ideas' in the story are really Kubrick's, it is adapted from a novel by Anthony Burgess, so it would be unfair to really blame or praise Kubrick for what is taken directly from the book. I do agree that it appears horribly dated, though, in some of its attempts to look futuristic.

I think The Prestige is a little overrated, perhaps, not a legitimately bad movie, but I don't think Nolan's name had all that much currency at the time it was released. Or do you mean it has been looked more kindly on since then because of his subsequent films?

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I'll echo those questions. I'm glad we're getting some reasons, but...most of them just beg more questions. Simply calling something "boring" isn't really any more specific than saying you just don't like it.

And I don't know what film you were watching if you thought American History X glorifies fascism. It does the exact opposite. I'm not quite as high on it as most people my age, and there are criticisms of it I wouldn't disagree with, but that's just the flat-out opposite of what the film is actually saying.

Also, throwing around words like "overrated" and "disappointing" suggests that you didn't read the thread's first post.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Some of the IMDb ratings...how 500 Days of Summer got 8 out of 10 is beyond me.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I'd give it 8 out of 10. But films like that need a year or two to get more ratings, at which time most of them figure to drop off.

But really, is it hard to see why this would happen? The results are heavily weighted towards younger moviegoers, because they're the most likely to be voting on websites to begin with. If anything, it's amazing that so many classics are near the top, given the selection bias inherent in this sort of thing. There's no use being outraged or amazed by it; everyone is going to feel that looking at any list, and it's not supposed to be anything more or less than the voting results of a certain group of people. I don't think anyone pretends it's supposed to be some kind of AFI substitute.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I'd give 500 Day 7/10... I think it was a good film...

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I still think Kubricks best work was the Moon landing hoax.

Really? I thought that was a bit overrated too.

Originally Posted by Thursday Next (Post 668519)

In what way is this 'suspect'? Because the characters with whom we are supposed to identify do bad things? That would make a lot of films 'suspect'. If not that, then can you elaborate on why you call it 'suspect'?

I found the portrayal of the Portman character and the relationship with Reno’s questionable. You're right about the moral issues with lots of films; I consider Leon not to be a good film because I find it shallow, modish and forgettable.

Originally Posted by Thursday Next (Post 668519)

I'm no fan of A Clockwork Orange (actually, I think Eyes Wide Shut was considerably better), but bear in mind that none of the 'ideas' in the story are really Kubrick's, it is adapted from a novel by Anthony Burgess, so it would be unfair to really blame or praise Kubrick for what is taken directly from the book. I do agree that it appears horribly dated, though, in some of its attempts to look futuristic.

Fair enough.

Originally Posted by Thursday Next (Post 668519)

I think The Prestige is a little overrated, perhaps, not a legitimately bad movie, but I don't think Nolan's name had all that much currency at the time it was released. Or do you mean it has been looked more kindly on since then because of his subsequent films?

Well, The Prestige came after (a good) cult hit in Memento and (a bad) mainstream smash/fanboy delight in Batman Begins; Nolan’s name had a lot of cachet in certain circles (incidentally the same circles who dominate IMDB), already. To be fair, The Prestige is the one movie on the list I almost took out. It may just make the grade as average.

Originally Posted by Yoda

Simply calling something "boring" isn't really any more specific than saying you just don't like it.

Hmm, ok. I find a movie that consists almost entirely of vast expanses of bad dialogue- dialogue that has no snap, that isn't funny, that isn't realistic, that isn't memorable (and incidentally, didn't sound like it had been edited) hard to sit through. It's hard to comment much on the film beyond the bad dialogue because the film consists almost entirely of the bad dialogue. And bad dialogue is... boring.

Originally Posted by Yoda

And I don't know what film you were watching if you thought American History X glorifies fascism. It does the exact opposite. I'm not quite as high on it as most people my age, and there are criticisms of it I wouldn't disagree with, but that's just the flat-out opposite of what the film is actually saying.

Oh I don’t doubt that American History X tried to oppose Nazism, I just think it’s so clumsy that it botches its attempt and leans too far towards the opposite of what it intended. What one moment of the movie, far more than any other, has entered the popular culture, so much that it has a popular wrestling move named after it? Is any of Norton’s conversion enlightening, real, genuinely moving? Does the new Norton have the same force and conviction of his earlier, evil ways? Some people may get the right message out of the film, but quite a few don't.

Originally Posted by Yoda

Also, throwing around words like "overrated" and "disappointing" suggests that you didn't read the thread's first post.

But I only used the word “overrated” to point out that I was not including films just because I consider them “overrated” (someone had implied that I was). ‘Disappointing’, though, you’re right, I shouldn’t have mentioned that.

(I wouldn't have thought Requiem for a Dream was any better no matter who was directing it, though. There's a definite trend towards bad films by good directors in my list- I like the majority of Kubrick stuff a lot, for example, and I think that's because these are abd movies that without a name on them would not have been remembered well.)

My first reaction to these comments was revulsion. My love for almost all the films on the list had me turned off from the get go. Having had the time to sit back and read through the lot of them, though, I realized his individual critiques were mostly accurate. I think Stevo's largest failing is a skewed view of relative quality. While his commentary is, by and large, truthful it is also one sided and malicious.

Pointing out specific faults of films doesn't make them less worthy of praise. It is the relationship and ratio of positives to negatives which makes a film what it is and Stevo seems to think that placing one con on the table wipes a film of all merit elsewhere. I would hate to see him write a review Vertigo or Hidden Fortress, let alone Star Wars. That would just be painful to read.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Vertigo is high up in my top 100 and I like both Hidden Fortress and its American remake.

I totally agree that films can be flawed but still great. I love a lot of films that are touched by genius but also beset by flaws. Indeed, some of the very best films of all have so much daring and ambition that they couldn't help but have some missteps, and to me as a whole that category is more interesting than exceptionally-crafted 'safer' films. (Hell, Werner Herzog is my favorite director.)

Thing is, not one of the movies I listed is touched by genius; even the ones by good directors are autopilot works or misfires compared to their best. The ones I listed are movies that have average to pretty good elements on the credit side of the ledger and major flaws on the debit. Brilliance can outweigh flaws, but I don't see true brilliance in any of these films. In this group, the (quite) good does not outweigh the (very) bad.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Overrating of superhero craps makes me want to puke.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

There are a few films very high up which I consider very overrated (most notably The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly and Fight Club) but the highest film on there which I think is genuinely bad would be Memento. This is coming from a fairly big Christopher Nolan fan, but it's totally incoherent, deliberately maddening, and also sloppy and cheap-looking when compared to a film like The Dark Knight or Inception (though I realize those two were made on a much higher budget).

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

The two closest would probably be Full Metal Jacket and American History X. They're poor, but not quite bad.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Starting at the top and working my way down, I noticed that most of their top 250 is primarily made up of people's personal favourites and movies that everyone jumps on the bandwagon with... rather than 'genuinely reviewed' and 'good' films.

Again though, starting at the top and working my way down, number 60, A Clockwork Orange is probably the first one I came to that I genuinely thought shouldn't be in there.
Not a 'bad' film, just like I said above, more of a 'bandwagon favourite' and, simply, just not worth the praise it gets.

(Am now preparing for a backlash of abuse from bandwaggoners)

I read the whole list and from the films I ve seen anyway, I honestly couldn't pick a "bad" film. Of course there are films that I would rate lower but none that I could in all fairness call bad.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Actually number 1 Shawshank I only gave it 2 stars

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I don't think there is legitimately a bad flick on the top 250, but there are plenty I don't personally like.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Probably Warrior is the lowest rated for me, though the film was massively tainted by a ridiculous ad campaign

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Nothing to do with how bad, but I'm quite surprised to see the animation Mary & Max on that list. Seems like an odd choice and not that well known from what I've seen. Just out of all the animations out there, Mary & Max?

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Shawshank Redemption and Inception first came to mind.They are good but mediocre movies.How can Shawshank outrank Godfather,Pulp Fiction and other flawless masterpieces??Inception for me is a typical action movie.Well,yeah,it has this dreams thing but it isn't better because of that.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

^Yeah, Shawshank is good, but I have no idea why everybody ranks it SO highly. Greatest Movie of All Time? Hell no.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

^ The shawshank redemption is a brilliant movie even though i agree it is not 'the best' it is however a top class movie and i really enjoyed it watching it for the first time.
On topic - To be honest 'A clockwork orange' wasnt as good as i thought it would be but still good nevertheless although i do not like the fact that its a higher rank then some other way better movies.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Shawshank is very inspirational so maybe it influenced some people and that's why it is so high. :/
For me,it is one of those movies when you watch it for the first time and you think "that was a great movie".And it stays on your mind the next day,the next week,maybe even the next month.But,after a year,you absolutely forget it and when you are reminded about it,there's only a blunt memory of this movie. :/

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

The Avengers is a pretty god movie, but being at 31???

Leon is probably the first movie on the list I'd call "bad", but that's my POV. I think it's a bit of overrated crap, but a lot of people seem to like it a lot (for some reason).

Then there's The Shining. I've posted about it many times around these parts, but I'll state my thoughts again. It's not just Kubrick's weakest film (who I'm usually a fan of), it's one of the most disappointing films I've ever seen. It nearly put me to sleep a couple of times, the "iconic" scenes had no impact on me, and the supporting cast couldn't act their way out of a haunted hotel. Nicholson was solid (of course) and it does get better near the end... But then it ends.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Fight Club
Inception
Once Upon a time in the West
The Usual Suspects
Forrest Gump
Leon
American History X
American Beauty

Absolutely loathe these movies.

I can understand the others (I don't agree, but I can understand), but Once Upon a Time in the West and Leon?!? :eek:

I don't know if there really are any "bad" films on the list, but it is certainly ranked goofier than hell. Shawshank should not be number one. Not by a long shot! There's tons of films that are too low; The Apartment, Raiders of the Lost Ark, 2001, Unforgiven, Die Hard, Up, Blade Runner, The Big Lebowski, No Country for Old Men, There Will be Blood, Groundhog Day, 8 1/2, and The Exorcist should all get a bump up, IMO.

Actually, I take back what I said about bad films. Sin City and Donnie Darko are on that list...

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Just a quick look through the list again and saw a few more I'd consider:

43. I wasn't that impressed with Spirited Away, and I don't think it's the 43rd greatest film ever made, but it isn't a bad film, I suppose, so its safe.

44. Again, The Avengers wasn't all that.

48. The Shining. Three posts above.

74. Gladiator. I'm not a Ridley Scott fan at all, and this was a pretty poor film. Joaquin Phoenix was great, but everything else was hollow, and I don't really like it at all.

188. The Bourne Ultimatum. I liked it, but I wouldn't go as far too say it was a great film. But, again, not a legitimately bad film.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Gladiator: Not a bad movie at all. I actually like this movie. But it doesn't deserve to be in the top 250. RusselL Crowe's performance is the reason that movie is so popular.

Batman Begins: Again not a bad film at all. I also like this movie. But top 250? No way.

The Bourne Ultimatum: There is a pattern. Good film. Not worthy of a spot in the top 250.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Inglorious Basterds
Beauty & The Beast

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I'd say the majority of films on that list wouldn't make my top 500.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I like the Harry Potter stuff, but I don't think any of them belong on this list.

Meanwhile, my vote still goes to The Shawshank Redemption, which is just OK, but generally manipulative and lame.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Fight Club at 12....meh. Entertaining but 12th best of all-time? No way.
Gran Torino at 117...sympathy vote for Clint, maybe? He was good, as usual but overall the acting was horrid in that movie.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

If I look past Pulp Fiction as a bad movie (which for me is very hard to do), it still makes me stop at Fight Club (I can't look past that)

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Not sure if Inception was "legitimately bad", but I found to be mediocre and not worthy of the top 250

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I wanted to say 12 Angry Men, however, because of your specifications, I can't, because it wasn't a bad movie, it was just inexplicably overrated beyond belief.

This is tough because I really do have problems with the placing of some films, though I don't believe they're necessarily bad. Nolan's films, for example, are WAY overplaced, thanks to fanboys pumping them up into the stratosphere. Inception and The Dark Knight, though good films, are especially so.

But to answer the question, for me, I didn't reach a film that I thought was truly "bad" until #133, Sin City. It pains me to say it, as I'm a huge fan of those books and a huge fan of Robert Rodriguez. But Frank Miller's style doesn't work in live action on the big screen. It's just silly and contrived.

If one could sway me into believing that Sin City deserves a spot for its technical achievements alone (which I think have been dwarfed these days by bigger, better movies anyway), then the next "bad" film to me is #235, Shutter Island. I like Leo DiCaprio and Martin Scorsese, and I generally like movies of this tone and feel. But it was overlong, convoluted, and confused.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Blasphemy.

I've certainly never heard this before, nor regarding any Lumet. How so?

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Movies that shouldn't be on IMDB Top 250: Toy Story & Toy Story 3, Gran Torino, The Apartment, Blade Runner, The Artist, Good Will Hunting, My Neighbor Totoro, How to Train Your Dragon, Grave of the Fireflies.
Later!

:indifferent:


Oh sorry...

I didn't realise internet privileges at the funny farm were restricted.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I would like to know why you think The Apartment, and Grave of the Fireflies shouldn't be on the list.

12 Angry Men mostly works as drama, but the fact that the kid is so guilty cripples the whole movie. Here's a great article by Mike D'Angelo detailing why the idea of finding him not guilty is fundamentally flawed

http://www.avclub.com/articles/did-1...t-wrong,83245/

And as far as the original question, while there are plenty of mediocre movies all throughout the list I'll go with The Green Mile at #69 as the first legitimately awful one. It's bad. Still crazy inexplicable how Shawshank has held onto that top spot for so long

With so much hate for Shawshank I am also perplexed as to how it's still the number one film on imdb. I'm sure there's a growing number of imdb users who would not hesistate to rate the movie down out of spite.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

That's an interesting A.V. Club article, but I'm not sure it proves what the writer says about 12 Angry Men. For one thing, even though it's not argued in the movie because the introduction of the second switchblade is far more dramatic, I thought the kid could have lost his knife before his father was stabbed, and the murderer found that knife somewhere near his home (or even near the front door) and killed his father with his own knife. To me, that's not nearly so far-fetched, especially if the murderer lived in the area and heard the earlier screaming. Anyway, that's just my two dollars (inflation, ya know?)

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

The problem with that is, no matter where the murderer found the knife, he still would have had to have taken it and gone into that particular apartment to kill the father. That's still extremely unlikely. Even if he was from the area and even if he had heard screaming coming from the apartment before - don't know if I buy it. There's the possibility the knife was left in the apartment, though the kid says he lost it on the way to the movie. Anyway, like D'Angelo argues, the truly most damning evidence is the sheer amount of evidence and necessary coincidence

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

191. The Princess Bride. I don't know if this movie was supposed to be a spoof of itself or just an adventure film that didn't take itself seriously, but I don't think it succeeds in any genre or subgenre and just comes off as annoying.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

the whole problem with this list is that it only includes people who actually took the time to go on the website at click on a rating. That demographic just happens to like the Shawshank Redemption. I'm pretty sure if you asked anyone what the best movie of all time is, no one would say Shawshank.

+ rep for my NBF. :)

Welcome to the site, SD.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Grave of the Fireflies is boring and is for kids!
The Apartment is a regular film, that's all...there are many movies like this one.

Name some.

I don't know. I'm kind of surprised to see a few of you here so down on Full Metal Jacket.
I do agree that the film was kind of in two parts but, as any one knows that's ever been to boot camp, the first part of the movie was dead on and absolutely riveting and brilliant. I will probably defend it till my dying breath.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Fight Club.

Ok, that you're definitely gonna need to explain.

Here are the films I've seen that I would consider truly bad. That would mean or less. And yes I think the first truly bad movie is the first one. I will bold the truly worse one on there

1. Shawshank Redemption
68. To Kill a Mockingbird
69. The Prestige
120. Heat
134. Ran
137. Sin City
140. No Country for Old Men
195. Slumdog Millionaire
200. La Strada

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I can only agree with La Strada.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

The Matrix at #18 would be the first one for me. The acting is just poor in that movie and I see it as more of a cult favorite for sci-fi geeks than an actually great film. The next one would be 2001: A Space Odyssey at #93. I know that's probably an unpopular opinion and I respect the technical pioneering by Kubrick in that film, but the film has a boring/non-existent plot with little dialogue. Yes it's beautiful, especially for its time period, but I came to watch a movie not a painting.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I don't know about first but I sure do hate Wall-E.

Also, Oldboy is a mess.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

Forrest Gump is the most overrated and I don't really like that much anymore, TSS is overrated but I think it's good.

Full Metal Jacket overrated, decent enough though. Same with Braveheart.

Avatar is massively overrated, although never watched it fully and don't really desire to.

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows Part 2 is pretty bad.

Most of the films on their are too high, but the more I look at it the more I realise I don't really hate many films do I? :P

I take it you're a fan of Fight Club then, I am too and I get quite annoyed when people criticise it. Most of the criticisms of the film are completely stupid, most decide to focus their hate on the ending of course which is actually completely logical and in fitting with the rest of the film.

Recently I found this article written by Jim Emerson, one of my favourite film critics, about Fight Club. For any Fight Club fans, or even haters, I think it is a great read: http://rogerebert.suntimes.com/apps/.../40828001/1023

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

I enjoy Fight Club but I think it's way too high on IMDB top list.It's fun,entertaining and ... well,and that's all.I don't think that it is very well shot.

I enjoyed this film.It was a challenge but I prefer it to 8 1/2.Haven't seen any other Fellini's work.

yeah,I think something like that,too.

if it was up to me,I would put Forrest in the first place and TSS lower. :D

maybe you're not into special effect films?Avatar is spectacular and I'm a fan of HP series.

Actually, 2012 me apparently had a brain aneurysm and thought Thomas was responding to my urging Sinedd to name some similar films to The Apartment with Fight Club, which he clearly wasn't.

I haven't seen it in maybe a year, but I do remember liking it a lot.

Same here. Hated 8 1/2 while only didn't like La Strada.

Oldboy is a masterpiece, though.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

At number 26, The Usual Suspects tries to be complicated for the sole purpose of pulling the rug out from under us at the end. It completely invalidates the entire film, a pointless and annoying film, the first truly bad film on the list

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

****ing Dark Knight Rises

[quote=Powdered Water;652678]@ C&W Really? You think Full Metal Jacket is worse then Eyes Wide Shut?
quote]

Nothing is worse than Eyes Wide Shut. I really enjoy Kubrick, but that movie was awful. Not the direction, not the mise-en-scene, the sound was absolutely perfect, but the plot and the acting were teeth grinding agony.

Re: Name the first legitimately bad film on IMDB's Top 250
 

^ Well, that didn't work out.

Sin City I believe would qualify for that. It had an interesting style, but what a steaming load of **** act/ors/resses.

What don't you like about To Kill a Mockingbird?

Peck was great and all, but I personally thought it was a weak literary adaption. It never came close to showing all the emotion of the book, which even that I think is a bit overrated.