What's your unpopular movie opinion?

No, keep going, this is great stuff! Makes me want to see Munich, revisit A.I. and Spring Breakers, which I admit didn't sit well with me but left an impression strong enough to know that I'd see it again to reassess.

i think it's more about Iñárritu overrating himself than anyone else. It's prevelant in The Revenant, which he seems to think he's elevated to high art but really remained an action movie that could honestly stand side to side with Liam Neeson's The Grey.

No amount of Tarkovsky's imagery can change the inherent nature of the film.

Yes I agree with you entirely. One can appreciate the Revenant for what it strives to be, a stripped down statement about the resilience of the human condition in the face of uncompromising indifference of nature but was it really the game-changing masterpiece some over-zealous critics made it out to be?

Personally I wouldn't bother sitting through it again even though it's probably the only half-decent film he's made. The difference between Godard and Inarritu is that Godard has made some genuinely good films (like Nouvelle Vague) but he's also made a whole lot of crap. Inarritu's work has been at best mediocre and at worst self-defeating and dare I say largely repulsive.

I would definitely recommend that you watch Spring Breakers again and I can entirely understand why it may have felt downright vulgar at first watch but I think there is genuineness and purpose to everything that was going on, on screen. The director drills into a contested, deeply American topic here — the pursuit of happiness taken to nihilistic extremes — but turns his exploration into such a gonzo that it takes a while to appreciate what he's actually doing. He's created a giant music video about the lust buried within the institutions of modern society.

One day I shall post a long essay on this website explaining why I feel that A.I. is one of most profoundly insightful films I've ever seen, a haunting & evocative statement on sentience, mortality, god & what it truly means to be a human being, that makes an awful lot of other film-makers look timid and negligible by comparison. In my opinion, it belongs among the elite group of sci-fi films, by which I mean 2001, Blade Runner, Stalker and Metropolis.

I was repelled by Spring Breakers, not because I thought the film meant what it was pretending to say (it's ok, it's what everybody wants and so do I), but what the idiots it portrayed in the film would think about it in real life. I was afraid of the effect it would have on the already crap parts of society we have in real life, as depicted in the film. My buddy said he "got it" right away, and we actually had a bit of a silent argument with a lot of tension and I went home really pissed off. We were fine the next day but we both had some words with each other. I think we were both right in some ways. I do plan on seeing it again. I thought the way it was made was brilliant. I remember the credit sequence blowing me away with those chunky and saturated synth patches and the cream colored coral fonts they used. And the lighting at the boat dock at night..jesus!

I will see A.I. again.

Just to continue my previous list (and possibly piss off even more people to whom I assure that this is really not some rant against the norms of film culture), here are a couple of others -

8) Quentin Tarantino always weaves interesting ideas into his films but he executes with a minimal level of sophistication and at times an obnoxious immaturity. Inglorious Bastards is the perfect example.


9) Tarkovsky's Andrei Rublev is, simply put, "the most important film ever made". I'm not sure how unpopular this may be considered (given it is quite an admired film) but to me this is the only film that really addresses and questions the role of the artist in society. The film asks the question - in a time when there is so much war and death, what good is a painter? What can be accomplished by his brush strokes? Tarkovsky being a devout man, equates artistic expression as a way of directly channeling God. To him, the artist's duty is to capture truth about a time and to immortalise it forever (as a painting or a film). One can interpret the film on several levels.


10) The Coen Brothers' A Serious Man is a much better film than Fargo. A chilling story of watching your life fall apart and not knowing if God is behind it or if it's happening because there is no God at all.


11) Ingmar Bergman's The Seventh Seal is a film that's very easy to laugh at because of its pantomime depiction of the "dual with death". It's far from his best work.


12) The Shining is yet another example of a film whose reputation hinges almost entirely on it director's reputation. Heavy doses of symbolism don't make a mediocre horror film any less mediocre.


13) Kenneth Brannagh's Hamlet is not only far superior to Sir Laurence Olivier's best picture oscar winning Hamlet, it's the best on-screen portrayal of Shakespeare's greatest tragedy that I've ever see.


14) Werner Herzog's Grizzly Man is a better documentary than Orson Welles' F for Fake, Chris Marker's Sans Soleil and Abbas Kiarostami's Close up.


15) Princess Mononoke proves why Miyazaki, although a great filmmaker is not a great thinker. His views are unmistakably biased. Once again he asserts, without any justification, that nature is inherently peaceful, man is violent and cruel and industrialisation is unnatural. But unlike his earlier films, Mononoke is also both preachy and self-important in how it suggests these ideas. Rather than subtly demonstrating, he throws it all in your face.


16) Edward Yang's A Brighter Summer Day is a better film than Martin Scorsese's
Goodfellas.


17) Christopher Nolan's Inception is often praised for being a risky and brainy blockbuster but the truth is, it's nowhere near as audacious and ambitious as his The Dark Knight, which is a genuinely powerful depiction of the war on terror and how sometimes in order to preserve democratic values, you must betray them. Hack movies like Babel get fawned over for insipid themes like "not communicating is bad", the Dark Knight deals with dark thematic issues most movies never touch, like Invasion of civil liberties to fight terrorism, deceiving the masses for their own good, love not saving anyone and the impossibility of living upto heroic expectations. Nothing in Inception compares. His much lauded Interstellar falls even shorter.


18) Eric Von Stroheim's Greed is better than every other silent film (including acclaimed masterpieces such as City Lights, The General, Sunrise: A Song of 2 Humans & The Passion of Joan of Arc) by a landslide imo.


19) Woody Allen's Deconstructing Harry is a better film than Manhattan.


20) Terrence Malick's The New World is his best film, the sum total of his life as a filmmaker. And just to spice things up even more, I shall make the bold claim right now that in 50 years time, Terrence Malick will be regarded a superior filmmaker to Stanley Kubrick.


Please feel free to disagree. I'd love to see if anyone shares the same boat as me.

To put it simply, it's about a boy growing up. The "gimmick" is that the film was shot a bit at a time over the course of 12 years so the characters effectively age in real-time as the film progresses. Of course, this meant that a backlash set in where people claimed that the only reason anyone liked it was because they were overly impressed by its ambitious 12-year production and were willing to disregard any shortcomings it had in terms of performances or writing or whatever. It doesn't bother me personally since I'm a fan of Linklater's lackadaisical filmmaking approach, though I don't think I'd consider it especially great. May be due for a re-watch, though.

Besides, I just think it's funny that Cynema will decry it as "overrated melodrama" and then try to defend American Beauty, but scanning their other unpopular opinions makes me think that I'm going to disagree with them on a lot of things. Hell, I could definitely talk up how Birdman and The Revenant are hollow films that also depend on technical gimmickry in lieu of anything resembling substance or that The Departed is Scorsese's worst film.

__________________
Iro's Top 100 Movies v3.0

I thought Animal House was dull and not very funny. I'm not sure how unpopular this opinion is present day since many films have surpassed Animal House in terms of writing and basic entertainment value, but I've always thought AH was just OK, and that's it. I know John Belushi is considered a legend, but he only really had a small handful of films before he choked himself out with drugs. SNL days must be the reason, I have no real idea, even though I kind of lived through that era more or less. I think Neighbors is his best work. He plays a straight man to Aykroyd's unpredictable and zany guy, and it works great. I think that film was over looked for being a nice little comedy with some decent atmosphere.

I also consider Bottle Rocket to be Wes Anderson's 2nd best film behind The Royal Tenenbaums. I appreciate it for it's strong emotional themes. The friendship, the betrayal, Mr. Henry, though a bad man, manages to remind us that Dignan is a man alone, and needs his friends now more than ever, if only as a way to keep them out of the house so he can rob it. I did not miss Anderson's heavily stylized sets and camera work. It was up to par enough to enjoy the story and the innocent sense of humor. It also had a nice little love story. I thought Moonrise Kingdom was actually a bit creepy and not very entertaining. I know it tries to go for the whole french new wave film vibe mixed with Anderson's usual sensibilities concerning meticulous sets, segues and crash zooms, but it just didn't do much for me, even after seeing it twice. Strange how that movie is his highest rated, critically.

I feel the same even though I cannot deny that Tarantino is a very talented filmmaker and has absolutely changed the shape of American cinema as well as usher in a new awareness for films that might have been otherwise buried. I feel that Jackie Brown is his best effort as far as maturity goes, even if only for Robert Forster and Pam Grier's potential romantic subplot.

I can't say I think The Shining is a mediocre movie. I've always been hypnotized, for better or worse, by Kubrick's deliberate and meditative style for that film, usually milking shots for all they're worth while the music score works itself into my head. I see what you're saying about symbolism, and the same could be said for Eyes Wide Shut, too, I suppose. But The Shining is a great film and not the kind of film you really get anymore, because even if you did get it today, you'd only have it because of The Shining.

Oh right. I had no idea. Did this get a cinematic release in Aus? I only knew about it because a Dutch friend mentioned it.

Sorry Snake, but not a lot of people agree with you on Iñárritu besides a select few. In fact, that's your informed opinion that his films are "based on technical gimmickry." Not fact. Because Iñárritu pours his blood, sweat, and tears into every film he makes. That's not his intention to push the 'technical' boundaries of filmmaking, It was the case a tad bit with 'The Revenant.' But that's about it. That's just YOUR perception if his technical style of filmmaking outways any substance. (For me, I can go on and on and on; on how AGI's Entire Filmography is absolute brilliance.)

Also, the definition of 'Melodrama;'
a sensational dramatic piece with exaggerated characters and exciting events intended to appeal to the emotions.

Now, you COULD make the argument that 'American Beauty' is melodramatic. I however believe It's grounded in reality a bit more and touches on too many social themes (brilliantly I may add) to be considered 'melodramatic.' Even though there's a little bit of it stuck in there. A perfect example of overrated melodrama (in my opinion) would be the aforementioned 'Forest Gump.' Hate that movie.

I do respect your opinion and your constructive criticism, love to read it.
And I'm curious, what are your thoughts on 'Moonlight' and 'La La Land?'

It did - I managed to see it in cinemas, at least.

If we're going to distinguish between "informed opinion" and "fact", then that won't do Iñárritu too many favours either. Allow my informed opinion to reflect that I reckon that Birdman and Boyhood are both dependent on their "gimmicks" to distinguish them. If Birdman needs the long takes to accentuate its story about the virtues of theatrical performance, then Boyhood needs the passage of time to emphasise how its characters age into and out of the various conflicts they encounter over the years. I don't know how much worth "blood, sweat, and tears" really matters, especially if we're going to talk about facts - it took Cuarón about seven years to make Gravity and (like you said) that still ended up being an insubstantial spectacle more than anything else. I'd say the same is true of The Revenant and how it emphasises the ambition and endurance of cast and crew alike over its extremely stock-standard revenge narrative or even its greater pretenses to artistic merit (and I do question its attempts at profundity). I might have to bring seanc into this because he was the one who was trying to convince me that Iñárritu intended to push himself and the boundaries with each of his films (as seen in this thread). I'm not so sure I'm convinced of that pushing-the-boundaries considering how 21 Grams and Babel felt like diminishing returns on the whole intertwining-anthology premise of Amores perros (which I'd still consider his best film, or at least my favourite) and that The Revenant felt like it repeated certain aspects of Birdman despite the shift in genre and execution.

I'd make the case that American Beauty is less "grounded in reality" than Boyhood -.Boyhood is still very slice-of-life and lacks certain classically "movie" conventions like an original background score or fantasy sequences. As for the social themes, well, who says that melodrama has to forgo thematic nuance along with any attempts at subtlety? Both American Beauty and Boyhood are limited by their comparatively insulated settings and casts anyway, so they can only touch on so many social themes as a result (and that's without getting all dismissive and saying "look at these sad white people and their first-world problems"), but I wouldn't say that Boyhood totally lacks for said themes either.

I'll grant you Forrest Gump, though. Even now, I struggle to think about what that movie was even about underneath its crowd-pleasing (if bittersweet) tale of a simple man doing the best he can. May be due for a re-watch just for that.

I like Moonlight quite a bit - I was even going to post that it's the "most deserving Best Picture winner since No Country" in here as one of my unpopular opinions. La La Land...well, I'll grant that it's technically solid but the story really didn't do much for me so I'm pretty meh about it.

I get why you'd think it's overrated or gimmicky (although I don't agree), but how come you think it's Melodrama? It seems like the exact opposite to me.

Edit: ignore, I posted this before I read on with the thread haha

i said once that oblivion is a good scifi film, but many disagreed...i personally like joseph kosinki movies

You know that GIF could be interpreted as a sign of agreement, right?

That's more like it.