Movies that everybody seems to hate

[AKORIS]

As I read so many of these posts and threads I notice that certain films are brought up again and again and again with particular venom!
I would be interested in people's opinions on what really makes these movies so bad to them-- I picked 4 titles-- 2 hits, 1 moderate financial success, and 1 flop--

STAR TREK-- saw it, liked it very much

SPIDERMAN 3-- I love the series and while this one was my least favorite I thought it was still very good

X-MEN 3 -- I like the entire series equally

THE UNBORN-- I've seen a ton of horror flicks-- this one was perfectly entertaining to me-- nothing great but not "the worst film of the year" as so many have said

please don't say things like "it sucked" or "it was stupid". How about some real, specific reasons for all the hate....

[MrFattBill]

Miss March - The story was terrible and the acting was worse.

Bill

[tblubie]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

As I read so many of these posts and threads I notice that certain films are brought up again and again and again with particular venom!
I would be interested in people's opinions on what really makes these movies so bad to them-- I picked 4 titles-- 2 hits, 1 moderate financial success, and 1 flop--

STAR TREK-- saw it, liked it very much

SPIDERMAN 3-- I love the series and while this one was my least favorite I thought it was still very good

X-MEN 3 -- I like the entire series equally

THE UNBORN-- I've seen a ton of horror flicks-- this one was perfectly entertaining to me-- nothing great but not "the worst film of the year" as so many have said

please don't say things like "it sucked" or "it was stupid". How about some real, specific reasons for all the hate....

Star Trek was one of the best-reviewed films of 2009. The fact that a few geeks on the internet didn't like it doesn't really matter.

[Rblu-Dblu]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

SPIDERMAN 3-- I love the series and while this one was my least favorite I thought it was still very good

Because it was a convoluted mess. The characters felt forced and it changed everything we knew about the first 2 movies. In Spiderman 1 I was perfectly fine knowing Joe Schmoe killed uncle Ben, then they come back in 3 and tell me it was really Sandman. What a mess.

[mywhitenoise]

I thought Star Trek was universally praised? Enough to be in the high 90's on rottentomatoes.com

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by tblubie

Star Trek was one of the best-reviewed films of 2009. The fact that a few geeks on the internet didn't like it doesn't really matter.

maybe so, but it sure appears to have a big backlash-- again-- what's wrong with it?

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by mywhitenoise

I thought Star Trek was universally praised? Enough to be in the high 90's on rottentomatoes.com

it was obviously a very well received film and everybody I've talked to loved it-- but again a lot of people hate it here on this site...

[tblubie]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

maybe so, but it sure appears to have a big backlash-- again-- what's wrong with it?

Again - nothing is wrong with it, and it was universally praised by critics. Geeks will find a reason to complain about anything. It does not belong in your op, plain and simple.

[iam1bearcat]

I also enjoyed Star Trek. One of my favorites from 2009, but as far as Spider-Man 3 goes... oh boy... here's why I hate it and while I will one day buy it on blu, I will probably watch once (if possible) and then place it on the shelf next to its brothers and sisters and forget all about that atrocious mess.

Reasons I hate Spider-Man 3 (no order):

1. Emo Peter Parker. The hair, the all black clothes. It's cheesy, it's unforgivingly terrible to see and it's over used and is a craptastic way to get a message across about this "dark" Peter Parker.

2. The lack of Venom. I know Raimi didn't want Venom in the film, but seriously they fudged EVERYTHING up with the character. From the introduction of the "character" (completely different from the cartoon / comic beginnings which was excellent) to the lack of a good actor portraying Venom to the PG-13-ness of the character.

3. The length. I know all Spider-Man films are long, but my go SM3 was beyond long because of the total suckage factor. Alot of useless scenes, alot of useless dialogue, alot of boring / slow moments that weren't needed.

4. MJ's character. I can't remember off hand exactly why I rolled my eyes so much at her (only saw it on opening night years ago) but her character seemed to do things that normal people wouldn't. Seemed very flaws. An Dunst isn't good as MJ to begin with.

5. Saying Sandman killed Uncle Ben to.... simply prove a point?... or to make Peter hate hi so there was an issue between these characters...? Either way it was useless.

There are more, but I'm too lazy to remember the horror of the film anymore but bottom line is everyone has different taste. I mean, I just watched Zombieland (LOVED IT) and to see it has a rating of 73 on Metacritic? That blows my mind.

[42041]

given a large enough sample of people, you'll find a few vocal haters for literally anything. i'm sure there's people who mutter about how overrated The Godfather is. not worth debating, really.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by iam1bearcat

I also enjoyed Star Trek. One of my favorites from 2009, but as far as Spider-Man 3 goes... oh boy... here's why I hate it and while I will one day buy it on blu, I will probably watch once (if possible) and then place it on the shelf next to its brothers and sisters and forget all about that atrocious mess.

Reasons I hate Spider-Man 3 (no order):

1. Emo Peter Parker. The hair, the all black clothes. It's cheesy, it's unforgivingly terrible to see and it's over used and is a craptastic way to get a message across about this "dark" Peter Parker.

2. The lack of Venom. I know Raimi didn't want Venom in the film, but seriously they fudged EVERYTHING up with the character. From the introduction of the "character" (completely different from the cartoon / comic beginnings which was excellent) to the lack of a good actor portraying Venom to the PG-13-ness of the character.

3. The length. I know all Spider-Man films are long, but my go SM3 was beyond long because of the total suckage factor. Alot of useless scenes, alot of useless dialogue, alot of boring / slow moments that weren't needed.

4. MJ's character. I can't remember off hand exactly why I rolled my eyes so much at her (only saw it on opening night years ago) but her character seemed to do things that normal people wouldn't. Seemed very flaws. An Dunst isn't good as MJ to begin with.

There are more, but I'm too lazy to remember the horror of the film anymore but bottom line is everyone has different taste. I mean, I just watched Zombieland (LOVED IT) and to see it has a rating of 73 on Metacritic? That blows my mind.

thank you-- those are the comments I'm looking for!

[Hi-Def Steve]

That's odd, the impression I get from Star Trek is that most people like or love it. Spiderman 3 I think is from too many story lines and that Peter turned into a dancing emo.

[Chaotic]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

THE UNBORN-- I've seen a ton of horror flicks-- this one was perfectly entertaining to me-- nothing great but not "the worst film of the year" as so many have said

I really like this one. I love the last 15 minutes

[Vendetta-akk]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

maybe so, but it sure appears to have a big backlash-- again-- what's wrong with it?

So trekies and/or trekers do not like the fact that is basically creates a new parallel reality for Kirk, Spock, and Co. because they feel that it somehow devalues the original reality/timeline.

This is a simple a very vocal minority of people however, the large majority of people, including film critics, felt that this was a very well made film. So your premise that this was a film that "everybody seems to hate" was very flawed.

[neo_reloaded]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

As I read so many of these posts and threads I notice that certain films are brought up again and again and again with particular venom!
I would be interested in people's opinions on what really makes these movies so bad to them-- I picked 4 titles-- 2 hits, 1 moderate financial success, and 1 flop--

STAR TREK-- saw it, liked it very much

SPIDERMAN 3-- I love the series and while this one was my least favorite I thought it was still very good

X-MEN 3 -- I like the entire series equally

THE UNBORN-- I've seen a ton of horror flicks-- this one was perfectly entertaining to me-- nothing great but not "the worst film of the year" as so many have said

please don't say things like "it sucked" or "it was stupid". How about some real, specific reasons for all the hate....

These are just my opinions - I don't go around hating on movies, and I understand that others may like them. But since you asked...

Star Trek - This one most people liked I thought? I thought it was fun, but not particularly thought-provoking.

Spider-man 3 - Took an interesting series and plunged it into the ground. 3 villains meant there wasn't time to develop any of them particularly well. Venom was a fan-favorite, but Raimi didn't want him in the picture and Sony forced him in - so we got a lame version of him that no one really liked. And the emo-spiderman scenes just felt so tonally wrong. A whole lot of stuff happened in the movie, but it was tought to care about any of it.

X-Men 3 - Bryan Singer had really created a great film with X-Men 2, and seemed to be building to a big part 3 - but instead of waiting for him to be able to direct part 3, Fox decided to quickly churn it out with Brett Ratner at the helm. Most of the good qualities of part 1 and 2 were not kept in part 3. The movie at times felt like a revolving door of mutant cameos - sure, we got to see Angel and Beast and Juggernaut, but they were all such insignificant roles. And the big story that Singer had been building to, the Phoenix Saga, was handled in the most ridiculous anticlimactic manner possible.

The Unborn - Nothing about this film seemed entertaining to me. There's no particular thing I can point to it lacking since I didn't go in with any real expectations, but it did nothing unique or surprising or interesting. Generic story about some demon trying to enter the world, with a couple jump scares and a stereotypical exorcism ending. I wouldn't say it's the worst movie I've ever seen, it was just completely forgettable in all ways. The few positive qualities about it have been done so much better in so many other horror films. Also a shame to see Gary Oldman slumming it...

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by Vendetta-akk

So trekies and/or trekers do not like the fact that is basically creates a new parallel reality for Kirk, Spock, and Co. because they feel that it somehow devalues the original reality/timeline.

This is a simple a very vocal minority of people however, the large majority of people, including film critics, felt that this was a very well made film. So your premise that this was a film that "everybody seems to hate" was very flawed.

sounds like I shouldn't have included STAR TREK-- I guess I agree when I read the name of my thread. But again, my thread is based on the comments I read here specifically at blu-ray.com each day. At the very least I thought it would be interesting to hear people's comments.
How about the other ones.... or new ones?

[madmojo]

Well, Spiderman III and X-Men 3 suffered the same problem, really, which was trying to put too much in one story. X-Men 3 seemed like it was simply trying too hard to feel like one of those comic book story archs that take about 6 or 7 issues to tell, and yet it wasn't good enough even for that. The core plot about the vaccine was good, but it wasn't executed right. It ended up all over the place. Halfway through the movie I forgot what all these mutants were fighting each other about. Spiderman 3, heck, I really don't even remember the plot to. It should have either been about Sandman or Venom, not both. Batman Returns did two villains pretty well, but it sidetracked the hero, so it ended up being about the villains. Spidey 3 tried to keep it about the hero, which meant that the two villains were given little to do.

Star Trek most people actually loved. I dunno why it's listed here. I was disappointed by it simply because while they got most of the characters right, (Zachary Quinto's Spock ended up being a parody to me), and the story was fine, I didn't like the mainstreaming of Trek. No, not a Trekker here. I do own the original series and all the movies, including this one, but can't say what happens in all the episodes or gone to a convention, so those of you that like the film, don't lump me in with them. Star Trek was always about society's hopes, expectations, downfalls, and faults at it's core. Sure, not all the movies followed that, but that was it's core idea. The movie has none of that. It's an action film. That's fine. It's also a good movie. It's just not a good Trek film to me.

I never saw The Unborn.

[tblubie]

Originally Posted by AKORIS

sounds like I shouldn't have included STAR TREK

I'm just worried that it's only a matter of time until Elvis shows up in this thread to start another idiotic Star Trek debate.

[AKORIS]

Originally Posted by tblubie

I'm just worried that it's only a matter of time until Elvis shows up in this thread to start another idiotic Star Trek debate.

........that is a legitimate concern!!

[Vendetta-akk]

Originally Posted by tblubie

I'm just worried that it's only a matter of time until Elvis shows up in this thread to start another idiotic Star Trek debate.

Two of the people I work with are like that, which is why I knew exactly what was the point of contention trekies/trekers have with the new movie. I heard about it in length for weeks and weeks afterwards. And the funny they is I think they both probably saw the film 3 times in theaters, and who knows how many times since it has been out on DVD/Blu-ray.