RE: "Classic Films" that are actually utter rubbish.

The Godfather was okay, but nothing amazing. Goodfellas was much better.

The Exorcist wasn't really anything special.

Taxi Driver didn't impress me.

The Abyss (classic? maybe not) was underwhelming.

Rocky may have an inspirational story and a great soundtrack, but it fell short of what I expected.

I think if you grew up in the 1970's or early 80's, these films would seem a lot better, but more recent films just have so much more to them which takes away from these classics.

Prototype wrote:

Prototype for the Tea Party: 1925 Birth of a Nation

As an Independent, I can go eitehr way. But ever time I see a post like this I get pushed further and further to the right. I figure by voting Democrat I am aligning myself with people like you. There is no way I'll join such a despicable group. Sure, there are posts here from the far right, too, but I'd estimate there are AT LEAST 5-10 from the far left radicals for every 1 from the far right radicals. Thanks for helping make my voting decision for me.

depends when you grew up wrote:

The Godfather was okay, but nothing amazing. Goodfellas was much better.

The Exorcist wasn't really anything special.

Taxi Driver didn't impress me.

The Abyss (classic? maybe not) was underwhelming.

Rocky may have an inspirational story and a great soundtrack, but it fell short of what I expected.

I think if you grew up in the 1970's or early 80's, these films would seem a lot better, but more recent films just have so much more to them which takes away from these classics.

Whoa, easy cowboy. What do these recent films have more than some these classics you mentioned? I would like to know.

And Goodfellas better than Godfather? Sure its got more action and isn't as slow, but the Godfather is so much better on so many levels.

I just had a quick look at the AFI's top 100 American films list. I would say West Side Story and the Sound of Music stick out like sore thumbs. Of course, I have a searing hatred that is hotter than a thousand suns in regard to musicals.

I also noticed that steaming pile of a movie called Platoon is number 83. WTF? It wasn't even believable acting as a WAR movie, let alone anywhere the top 100.

Breakfast at Tiffanys

Hepburn was irritating and annoying, not all endearing.

newsleak wrote:

Yanqui wrote:

Casablanca has just about the most perfect script of any movie ever made. Let's not be silly.

Agreed. Great script. Great movie.

Though many could disagree--and not many consider it a classic movie--"Pulp Fiction" has a wonderful script. A very worthy Oscar winner. (I just re-saw it on YouTube and appreciated it even more than when I saw it on its first run.)

A movie that I personally find puzzling is "Shawshank Redemption." Many consider it a true classic. I think it was a good movie--not "utter rubbish"--but by no means an all-time great.

Similarly, though--being of Scottish extraction--I thoroughly enjoyed much of "Train Spotting" (especially this:

), I never understood the esteem in which it was held, a few years back. That vogue has faded; I suspect the regard for "Shawshank" will, too.

I could be wrong, too. There's no disputing tastes.

Citizen Kane, I've never actually met anyone IRL who didn't think that movie sucked

tyed wrote:

[quote]newsleak wrote:

[quote]Yanqui wrote:

A movie that I personally find puzzling is "Shawshank Redemption." Many consider it a true classic. I think it was a good movie--not "utter rubbish"--but by no means an all-time great.

I could be wrong, too. There's no disputing tastes.

I don't like Freud much, but was I the only one that thought about him during the jailbreak sequence in Shawshank Redemption?

And good point about there being no disputing taste.

Is Apocalypse Now a classic (1979)? If so that gets my vote. One great scene with Robert Duvall in the midst of hours (seemingly) of tedious crap with several more hours (seemingly) of Brando mumbling about something or other at the end.

Another vote for Rebel Without a Cause, which some people seem to regard highly. That "features" some of the worst acting ever committed to film. It's like if your local high school's drama club remade an episode of Beverly Hills 90210.

Did someone mention "The Abyss?" I've never met anyone who even thought it was good.

I'm not a big fan of musicals, but "West Side Story" and "The Sound of Music," which were mentioned here, are far better than "My Fair Lady," which is old and stiff and stilted, and "Gigi," which is just plain tedious.

The movie that comes to mind when overrated is mentioned is "The Deerhunter." Five or six years ago, when I first got Netflix, I decided to watch all the best picture winners and "The Deerhunter" was by far the hardest to watch (due to extreme boringness).

I got the feeling they took the Godfather and tried to make it even more "artsy" (make it longer and at a glacial pace) and added a couple of shock scenes.

Cannes Snooze Festival wrote:

Is Apocalypse Now a classic (1979)? If so that gets my vote. One great scene with Robert Duvall in the midst of hours (seemingly) of tedious crap with several more hours (seemingly) of Brando mumbling about something or other at the end.

It sounds like you watched the Redux version, which added what seems like an enormous amount of irrelevant crap. The low point is when they're eating dinner in some French plantation forever, nothing happens, there's an argument (in French, with no subtitles) and then Martin Sheen smokes opium and has sex with some woman.

Try the original. It's a masterpiece and if you still think it's crap then you are just wrong about movies.

Vertigo. That movie is a steaming pile of sh*t.

depends when you grew up wrote:

I think if you grew up in the 1970's or early 80's, these films would seem a lot better, but more recent films just have so much more to them which takes away from these classics.

Well now, that is the crux of the problem. Human achievement is a progression of ideas and techniques that build upon or respond positively or negatively to what came before. It's not that meaningful to look at the work of somebody contemporary and say, "Everything that came before had so much less." Part of the enjoyment of older work is appreciating what would have been groundbreaking and innovative at the time, the risks the director was taking that now are part of the canon. That may take time, experience and maturity, but it in turn helps you appreciate what is really groundbreaking and innovative in today's work.

I read a quote once, I think by Bill Laswell, talking in the 90's about a friend of his who was a brilliant metal guitarist of the Yngwie Malmsteen variety. He said that if his friend had been alive in the 60's he would have been considered the greatest guitarist of all time. If he'd been in the 70's he would have been a rock legend. If he'd been in the 80's he would have had a successful career as a guitarist in a major-label band. In the 90's he worked in a bakery in NYC and gave guitar lessons to high schoolers. Point being, it wouldn't be very meaningful to say, "Guitarists in the 60's and 70's sucked technically compared to people today." Of course they did, the people who came after them studied all their techniques and then expanded upon them. Does that make the older musicians' work less valuable or enjoyable? Of course not. It's no different in film.

Verdicts on some movies do evolve "Scarface" with Al Pacino was considered terrible when it came out. Now, it's, well, at least it's popular.

ahem.... Rocky

purely awful from start to finish. even the credits sucked

I'm surprised to see so many picks that I agree with, althoug I hesitate to call these films "utter rubbish." I just don't consider them to be the great films that some people do.

I generally agree with the selections of films by Lucas and Spielberg, and I find most Kubrick films to be fairly soulless, with rather cartoonish characters. Fellini is a mixed bag for me; I didn't like "8 1/2," but I think that "La Dolce Vita" is a very substantial film.

I generally agree with the mention of films that won Academy Awards for Best Picture (or "Picture of the Year," or whatever they call it now). Not necessarily bad films, but sanitized and simplified for mass appeal.

"The Graduate" is an interesting choice. It was my favorite film when I was in my twenties. I think that it loses its hold on many people as they get older, and see Ben as a run-of-the-mill confused and pampered young man instead of a great antihero. Perhaps it's a yound adult's analogue to the adolescent's "Catcher in the Rye." I agree that Mrs. Robinson is the most interesting character, although I can't say that I find her to be especially sympathetic.

"American Beauty" is similar to "The Graduate," I think, although it straddles "The Graduate" by focusing on adolescent and mid-life angst. All in all, though, I still like both films, and Kevin Spacey has some lines in "American Beauty" that really stick with me.

I don't consider "Casablanca" to be a great love story, but I think that it has a remarkably good script. Just think of the great lines in that film. It's like the "Hamlet" of movies.

"Citizen Kane" is not one of my favorite films, but I recognize its greatness. And I believe that "The Birth of a Nation" is a truly great film as well, whatever one thinks of its social views or revisionism. In some respects, those two films tower over others of their respective eras.

I must have really shitty taste, because some of my favorite movies include Full Metal Jacket, Reservoir Dogs, A Clockwork Orange, and Apocalypse Now. WTF. I thought I liked strong movies with some of the greatest actors of their generation. Now I have found out that they all suck. I will be jumping off a bridge shortly.

Some Oscar winners are Best Picture are now acknowledged to be terrible. "Around The World in 80 Days" might have seemed exciting in 1956, but most critics now agree it's just a tedious parade of boring brief appearances by a slew of celebrities