Movie that you hated, now enjoy?

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

What's wrong with a happy ending?

I'm a happy ending guy. I hate when a movie ends on a down note - it sets the mood for the rest of the day.

[TheZoof]

I feel a 'mist' discussion coming... lol


I just realized that I wasn't the biggest fan of 'Batman Begins' when I first watched it. I didn't hate it or anything but it didn't blow me away. I would now rate it slightly higher than 'TDK'.


Caroline... I saw it at a friend's house... meh... boring. I didn't understand the appeal. I got it as a gift from another friend... 'curses'... ended up watching it a few months later and really loved it. It is one of my favourite animation blu-rays.

[leey]

District 9

The plot unraveled just too easily to me once Wickus inhaled the toxin; I knew how it was going to end :/. But on subsequent viewings I've liked the approach on discrimination towards the aliens etc

[ManWithNoUsername]

Hard to think of. I guess the most recent is Inception. I saw it a bunch of times trying so hard to like it, and really didnt like it much at all for a long time, but its grown on me a little. I still dont love it, but I like it more than I did.

Probably not an extreme example since I still dont think the movie is that great but I grew to kind of like it so it counts I guess. Cant really think of anything that I once completely hated then grew to love it.

[ManWithNoUsername]

Originally Posted by mayday72

Casino Royale initially bored the hell out of me. I now LOVE that movie. The one I keep trying to like is Blade Runner. I've sat through it 4 different times now and still can't stand it . . . lol

Hehe with you on Blade Runner. I know it was incredibly influential at the time and Scott made that movie like Star Wars never even existed, and it looks very cool, I just find the movie to be a complete borefest. Im not sure Ill ever grow to like something that slow.

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by Mahatma

I interpreted the ending as a lovestory:Who knows how much time one has together.Rachel was special,so he didn't know how long her lifespan was.But I can see your point of the environment.I just thought they'd moved alittle further out west.And BTW:What's wrong with a happy ending?

Nothing's wrong with a happy ending if it fits the type of story one is telling. The happy ending in Blade Runner is tacked on at the last moment and it reeks of studio executives' flop sweat. You know what I mean; Romeo and Juliet wouldn't work as a story -- and would be entirely pointless -- if the ending wasn't tragic. It also negates the poignancy of Deckard's choice -- that he chooses to escape with Rachel even though he doesn't know how much time they might have together (so he'd better make the most of it). In the theatrical cut Deckard doesn't have to make any tough choices, or live with their consequences, because they've all been expediently eradicated by a cowardly script. It might as well end with unicorns and bluebirds serving Deckard and Rachel breakfast in bed.

Blade Runner still has a love story no matter which version you watch (since the romance aspect was in the script from the beginning, no matter which ending you see). In the director's cut, however, we are left to imagine what will befall them. I prefer the more ambiguous ending, as it seems more believable (and aimed more at adults who know how bittersweet romantic affairs can be).

Regarding "further out west" in Blade Runner: If paradise exists just further west (of Los Angeles? Wouldn't that be Santa Monica?) why would anyone stay in rundown L.A. to begin with, and more importantly why would they need to "escape to the Off World colonies"? Sebastian is still on Earth due to his medical condition, and it's portrayed in the film as if it's a bad thing -- that only society's rejects still live on our planet. The movie also seems to hint that something is wrong with the Earth's environment, so I don't buy that there is suddenly this beautiful, lush area on Earth that no other character in the movie has ever thought to live there. It might make more sense if it's the "Off World" colony, and maybe it is, but we are not given any information on that. If it was, how could Rachel -- a known fugitive -- been allowed to move there?

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I'm a happy ending guy. I hate when a movie ends on a down note - it sets the mood for the rest of the day.

Would you rather see the movie end on a happy note even if such an ending would be illogical to the plot that preceded it? Or obviously pablum dished out to appease the lowest common denominator? Do you ever find happy endings to be cliched or predictable? Why are tragic, ironic or ambiguous endings considered a "down note"? Many of them are powerful and affecting, and can illuminate the human condition far more effectively than can a light-hearted movie with a typical happy ending.

[Grand Bob]

Originally Posted by J. J. Hunsecker

Would you rather see the movie end on a happy note even if such an ending would be illogical to the plot that preceded it? Or obviously pablum dished out to appease the lowest common denominator? Do you ever find happy endings to be cliched or predictable? Why are tragic, ironic or ambiguous endings considered a "down note"? Many of them are powerful and affecting, and can illuminate the human condition far more effectively than can a light-hearted movie with a typical happy ending.

I have enjoyed many movies that don't have happy endings - and still do, but I prefer those with happy endings. As for "the human condition", I believe Montaigne summarized it well in his Essays:

"Alas poor man! You have enough necessary ills without increasing them by your invention, and you are miserable enough by nature without being so by art. You have real and essential deformities enough without forging imaginary ones."

That is why I prefer fantasy, sci-fi, and "lighter" subjects. I feel that I don't need to be reinforced of the fact that, despite our miraculous technological advances over the past several thousand years, men do not get along with other men any better than they did in the stone age; i.e. they have not advanced psychologically. In particular, I will not go to see a movie that delights in physical or emotional cruelty - you will not find me in line to see "Saw XXII" or "Hostel XVI", regardless of the cleverness of the "plot". Life is full enough of real tragedy; for a daily reminder of the human condition on the screen, I need only watch the nightly news.

[P@t_Mtl]

Saw the title of the thread and for the last few days I have been thinking about this. It's a bit strange but it's never happen to me. If I dislike a movie on first viewing I will never really enjoy the movie

[J. J. Hunsecker]

Originally Posted by Grand Bob

I have enjoyed many movies that don't have happy endings - and still do, but I prefer those with happy endings. As for "the human condition", I believe Montaigne summarized it well in his Essays:

"Alas poor man! You have enough necessary ills without increasing them by your invention, and you are miserable enough by nature without being so by art. You have real and essential deformities enough without forging imaginary ones."

That is why I prefer fantasy, sci-fi, and "lighter" subjects. I feel that I don't need to be reinforced of the fact that, despite our miraculous technological advances over the past several thousand years, men do not get along with other men any better than they did in the stone age; i.e. they have not advanced psychologically. In particular, I will not go to see a movie that delights in physical or emotional cruelty - you will not find me in line to see "Saw XXII" or "Hostel XVI", regardless of the cleverness of the "plot". Life is full enough of real tragedy; for a daily reminder of the human condition on the screen, I need only watch the nightly news.

You're equating movies with ironic or tragic endings as somehow being negative. I'm not talking about films that "delight" in cruelty. (I've never seen the Saw or Hostel movies, so I can't say if they indulge in that or not.) I meant movies like gangster pictures, "film noir" thrillers, dramas, satiric comedies, etc. I get more pleasure from watching The Godfather than I do from watching Superman: the Movie. (The ending to Superman is also nonsensical.) That's because the former has a more fascinating lead character in Michael Corleone, where as Superman/Clark Kent -- despite the best efforts of the filmmakers -- is essentially one dimensional. Michael Corleone goes through a change within the movie, Superman does not. The Godfather is also unpredictable, while we all know Superman is going to save the day. I think Cold Turkey is a funnier movie than Bridesmaids. The former spares no one in its satire, while Bridesmaids is essentially a formulaic romantic comedy.

I also prefer movies where characters have to make tough choices, and face the consequences of those choices, rather than having a plot contrivance rescue them. (Which is essentially what happens in the theatrical cut of Blade Runner.) Let me also state I'm also "escaping reality" when I watch these films. After all, the tragedy is not real, and I get to see another side of life from the safety and comfort of a theater or home. People go to movies for an emotional response or connection, and it isn't always to be uplifted. Some people love crying at melodramatic tearjerkers, or being frightened at horror movies.

I'd like to discuss the Montaigne quote you posted, as I feel that taking it out of context may serve your point, but it's not what Montaigne meant by it. However, that would take up too much space right now, and I've already derailed this thread enough.

[Mahatma]

Originally Posted by P@t_Mtl

Saw the title of the thread and for the last few days I have been thinking about this. It's a bit strange but it's never happen to me. If I dislike a movie on first viewing I will never really enjoy the movie

But have you never thought missing out on maybe a masterpiece because it doesn't gel with you for various reasons?See your point,but have several times re-visited a movie/book/album to try to see if I can 'get' it.More often than not,it doesn't happen,but every once in a while...

LotR is one of them,but can never sit through them.Love the cinematography (spot on,if you ask me),but the acting and simplification of the story just ruins it for me Kind of blue album by Miles David is another one.Can sometimes kind of see the greatness,but most of the times it's random notes I can't make heads or tails of it,but am trying.Never learned to listen to jazz,as someone said

@Hunsecker:I see where you're comming from,and agree that a happy ending has to be within the context of the movie-Se7en is a perfect example IMO-but I still dissagree with you that the TE ending in BR is sappy.And my reference of further out west is a philosophical one rather than litterally:didn't mean one of atolls in the pacific But as I said before:Agree to dissagree

Wonder if you can make a discussion of movies you oncee loved,but now disslikes?Maybe save that for a different thread

[spanky87]

Superman Returns. Saw it when it was first released, found it boring and nearly fell asleep.

I bought the Superman Anthology blu-ray last year, and decided to do the Superman/Superman 2/Superman Returns approach and ended up having a completely different reaction. I now think it is under appreciated.

[AndyD]

Green Lantern. Seen it in the cinema and I wasn't impressed.
Bought it on Blu-ray hoping it would be better but it wasn't.

Watched it again on tv this week and I actually enjoyed it. So third times the charm I guess

[Cremildo]

Back when I was a kid, I watched Blade Runner (not sure if TC or DC) on VHS. I thought it was pretty cold, unengaging, boring. I watched the Final Cur on Blu-ray roughly a decade later... Voilà! Total masterpiece.

[BladeRunner2007]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

Back when I was a kid, I watched Blade Runner (not sure if TC or DC) on VHS. I thought it was pretty cold, unengaging, boring. I watched the Final Cur on Blu-ray roughly a decade later... Voilà! Total masterpiece.

We all were stupid kids at some point

[kylor]

Originally Posted by Cremildo

Back when I was a kid, I watched Blade Runner (not sure if TC or DC) on VHS. I thought it was pretty cold, unengaging, boring. I watched the Final Cur on Blu-ray roughly a decade later... Voilà! Total masterpiece.

Small world; I have literally begun reading the book that movie is based on last night.

On the topic of the thread: Beetlejuice. It took me a good long while to fully appreciate it as the art piece it is. It also took me a long time to appreciate Home Alone and Home Alone 2.

[Jay H.]

There have been plenty of movies I wasn't fond of initially that I now like/love, but there has never been a movie I hated that I now enjoy. For one thing, if I hated it I'm not going to watch it again.

[slumcat]

None.

[UltraMario9]

Spider-Man 3

[Dr Lenera]

If I hate a movie, I resist watching it again. So it's possible that I may enjoy, for example, Mamma Mia, Scott Pilgrim The World, Naked, Man of Steel and many others a second time round, but do I want to take the risk?

Did like Quantum of Solace a bit more the second time after a horrible cinema experience watching it. It's still my bottom 007 film, but there are things I've come to like in it.

Much like it seems many others on here, I disliked [though didn't hate, that's too strong a word] Blade Runner the first time around. Theatrical cut on video. But something weird happened with it. It stuck in my mind, first in a negative way, but after a few years becoming more positive, and when the Director's Cut came along I was gagging to see it. Yet I actually missed the narration [I know, this makes little sense]. Even now, my ultimate version would be the Final Cut with the narration.