Most Polarizing (In Opinion) Films

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by ShellOilJunior

500 Days of Summer (I think it's terrible)

Shell, I agree with you.

[rocketeer53]

District 9, I hated it. Everyone else i know loved it, so I got the most crap for that one. And most recently Prometheus.

[JavaJulien]

Originally Posted by rocketeer53

District 9, I hated it. Everyone else i know loved it, so I got the most crap for that one.

Same. It amazes m how much crapped on Avatar was when this movie got a free pass from most criticism.

Forrest Gump is the most polarizing movie I know of.

[olivehead]

Originally Posted by psychomugs

The Social Network and 2001 are definitely on there. TSN is something I can (and have) watched repeatedly, but almost everyone I ask about it say that they disliked it. 2001 and Kubrick in general, but then again most of the people I talk to are in a collegiate setting.

I can't say I "love" 2001, but I do like it and appreciate it for the landmark film that it is. Also, I happen to like the story and style, and even though not much appears to be going on, I still find the 2 hours fascinating. The only thing that I really just have to fast forward through, and the thing that dates the film, is the stargate sequence. But those were different times...

[Abdrewes]

Life is Beautiful

[TheHighRoller]

Well, Sucker Punch is a perfect example. I was obsessed when I saw it opening day at midnight (in IMAX, no less). And looking back at it, I think there's a lot more there than what people see in the first two viewings. It's not all about girls in revealing outfits killing everything they see. There's more to it that many people fail to grasp because they're too busy focusing on things they feel the need to complain about. I feel like this is one of those rare films that people hated when it was released, yet will be re-evaluated in the future and come up to be really great. I know a few people have been doing that. Especially when looking at it's overall visual and sound aesthetic (almost like in the case of 2001: A Space Odyssey).

The Tree of Life is also another great one. When it comes to Malick, you can't really expect a fast and easily engaging picture. Those of us who have actually seen more than one of his films know that there's a deep message behind them that takes time to figure out. People come in expecting to see some sort of Life of Pi or some other overrated p.o.c. like it, and leave disappointed because it's not necessarily the blockbuster+Academy material they hoped it would be.

[TheHighRoller]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I've got to disagree Squid, Fincher's expertise is what elevates it. Sorkin's screenplay is good, no doubt about it, but thats not whats great about it. It's among the most finely directed films of the last couple years. On a visual level the film is nothing other than sophisticated, meticulous and exact.

On the topic of Fincher (whose late films are especially of note), a shining example of visual communication is the last act of Dragon Tattoo where Lisbeth Salander freezes Hans-Eric Wennerstrom's bank accounts. Under the direction of anyone else, it would have been a clunky set of expository syntagma. Instead Fincher's keen visual sense Draws us into the proceedings.

I don't mean to say dialogue is worthless, but rather without the cinematography to convey those ideas it is: whether it be simple set ups like Louis Malle's My Dinner With Andre or the jaw dropping Tracking shot of Goodfellas; there's a marriage that must be forged between all the elements.

This many times over.

I don't even know how to add to that.

[Danchez]

Originally Posted by TheHighRoller

Well, Sucker Punch is a perfect example. I was obsessed when I saw it opening day at midnight (in IMAX, no less). And looking back at it, I think there's a lot more there than what people see in the first two viewings. It's not all about girls in revealing outfits killing everything they see. There's more to it that many people fail to grasp because they're too busy focusing on things they feel the need to complain about. I feel like this is one of those rare films that people hated when it was released, yet will be re-evaluated in the future and come up to be really great. I know a few people have been doing that. Especially when looking at it's overall visual and sound aesthetic (almost like in the case of 2001: A Space Odyssey).

The Tree of Life is also another great one. When it comes to Malick, you can't really expect a fast and easily engaging picture. Those of us who have actually seen more than one of his films know that there's a deep message behind them that takes time to figure out. People come in expecting to see some sort of Life of Pi or some other overrated p.o.c. like it, and leave disappointed because it's not necessarily the blockbuster+Academy material they hoped it would be.

Strongly agree with almost everything you said. (Life of Pi was my favorite movie of the year.)

Still,

[prkprkprk]

Seeking a Friend for the End of the World
Cloud Atlas
Prometheus
The Hobbit: An Unexpected Journey

All of these are recent movies that obtained a polarizing reception from critics and audiences alike, with the same amount of people who liked and disliked them. I happened to love all of them.

[blonde_devil]

maybe Close Encounters of the Third Kind? I kept hearing as a kid about what a fantastic movie it was but I found it to be rather dumb. too many shots that were there for no reason other than to have a cool effects shot and some pretty big gaps in logic that makes you scratch your head. For that matter, ET as well. never liked it as a kid, saw it again in my 20's and still didn't like it. neither of the really worked in my opinion yet I know people think they are great movies.

[TheHighRoller]

Originally Posted by Danchez

Strongly agree with almost everything you said. (Life of Pi was my favorite movie of the year.)

Still,

What made it "almost"?


I think the best picture of 2012 was Beasts of the Southern Wild, with Silver Linings Playbook and Django Unchained close behind. And I think Django is one of the most original screenplays I have seen and it had the most substance than any other film I could think of that has been released in the last two years. The whole universe in it was very real.

I don't know if that makes sense. But it definitely deserved the Best Original Screenplay award, along with Waltz's win (who I think stole the whole film).

[ElliesDad]

Originally Posted by TheHighRoller

What made it "almost"?


I think the best picture of 2012 was Beasts of the Southern Wild, with Silver Linings Playbook and Django Unchained close behind. And I think Django is one of the most original screenplays I have seen and it had the most substance than any other film I could think of that has been released in the last two years. The whole universe in it was very real.

I don't know if that makes sense. But it definitely deserved the Best Original Screenplay award, along with Waltz's win (who I think stole the whole film).

Waltz steals every picture he is in (Inglorious Basterds?). Watching him, particularly in the earlier sequences in "Django", is an absolutely mesmorising experience. It's possible, with Waltz to be both utterly immersed in the character and the viewing experience while at the same time being fully aware of the wonderful depth and intelligence he brings to the performance.

Anyone else pumped at the prospect of seeing him play Mikhail Gorbechev in "Reykjavik"

[Show spoiler](despite the fact that Michael Douglas will be playing Ronald Reagan~ really? what's next, Meryl Streep playing Margaret Thatcher??)

?

"Forrest Gump" absolutely~ a heart-warming triumph, or a paeon to 'stupid'. Not sure if "500 Days of Summer" would make the list though. Pleasant and innocuous enough but shouldn't a film have a bit more gravitas before being considered polarizing?

[Abdrewes]

Originally Posted by ElliesDad

Waltz steals every picture he is in (Inglorious Basterds?). Watching him, particularly in the earlier sequences in "Django", is an absolutely mesmorising experience. It's possible, with Waltz to be both utterly immersed in the character and the viewing experience while at the same time being fully aware of the wonderful depth and intelligence he brings to the performance.

Anyone else pumped at the prospect of seeing him play Mikhail Gorbechev in "Reykjavik"

[Show spoiler](despite the fact that Michael Douglas will be playing Ronald Reagan~ really? what's next, Meryl Streep playing Margaret Thatcher??)

?

"Forrest Gump" absolutely~ a heart-warming triumph, or a paeon to 'stupid'. Not sure if "500 Days of Summer" would make the list though. Pleasant and innocuous enough but shouldn't a film have a bit more gravitas before being considered polarizing?

I don't know man, my brother has seen 500 Fays of summer scores of times. Also it appeared on countless top ten lists.

Just join us at the Zoey Deschanel Haters Club. Beware: if you miss a meeting we'll lock you in a closet and force you to listen to She & Him and The Elf soundtrack.

[Angel Eyes]

Without a doubt the correct answer is Star Wars just read the threads: UOT vs SE, SE vs 3D, Lucas vs Kershner vs Marquand vs UOT vs PT vs Han vs Greedo vs Shooting First vs Shooting at the same time vs vs vs vs vs vs vs vs, and the beat goes on, and the beat goes on. Haters to the left vs haters to the right.

[Ironhorse75]

Originally Posted by Abdrewes

I don't know man, my brother has seen 500 Fays of summer scores of times. Also it appeared on countless top ten lists.

Just join us at the Zoey Deschanel Haters Club. Beware: if you miss a meeting we'll lock you in a closet and force you to listen to She & Him and The Elf soundtrack.

Out of curiosity, why do you own the movie? Regrettable blind buy?

[Zen_Amako]

[A Sith Lord?]

Dark Knight Rises.

It was either one of the best superhero movies ever, or it was a movie full of plotholes that didn't make any sense.

I chose the former, and spent weeks defending it of the plotholes to the haters after release.

[guile]

Some REALLY good examples here.

Blair Witch (I liked it and thought about it for days after seeing it, but don't need to ever see it again)

Death Proof and Tarantino- I LOVE Tarantino!!! But Death Proof imo was just bad.

No Country for Old Men.....LOVED IT!

My choice for a polarizing title? Hmmmm......while I wouldn't say the film Titanic falls into this category.....I wish it did! I HATE the movie!

Somebody said Schindlers List??? WTF???

What....no Eraserhead???

I might also add Stardust. Personally, I liked the film a lot but MANY people thought it was a steaming pile of poo.

Oh, and I LOVED Drive!! I thought it was riveting and one of the best I saw that year!

[octagon]

Originally Posted by ElliesDad

Not sure if "500 Days of Summer" would make the list though. Pleasant and innocuous enough but shouldn't a film have a bit more gravitas before being considered polarizing?

Interesting question. I don't think the poles in polarizing necessarily have to be love and hate. Love and ambivelance could work too.

I would consider the Stooges and their equally brilliant descendents Beavis and Butthead to be pretty polarizing. Neither seem to generate much middle ground - people either love them or just don't see the point. You don't really see a lot of people say 'well, yeah, they're kinda funny, I guess'.

That said, even on that basis I wouldn't say 500 Days of Summer is really all that polarizing because there does seem to be a 'yeah, it was okay, I guess' middle ground. Love and hate might be loudest reactions (what else is new) but like is pretty well represented too.

[guile]

Originally Posted by rocketeer53

District 9, I hated it. Everyone else i know loved it, so I got the most crap for that one. And most recently Prometheus.

+1 on District 9....REALLY liked that one too