Movies that will never be bad

[laggyteabag]

People thought that Scott Pilgrim was a bad film? I loved that film!

OT: Pacific Rim: I dont think it did as well in cinemas as I hoped it would, sure the story is cliché and some of the acting is fairly... meh. But it has Idris Elba in it which is a plus, and there's just something appealing about watching a huge hulking mech rocket-punch a huge hulking alien. Its just FUN.

 

[redisforever]

Matrix Trilogy: Like many, I was confused about what the hell happened to The Matrix. Then, a few years ago, I watched all three in a row on a day. A LOT of what was confusing and didn't make sense became clear once I saw them for the second time in a row.

I did the same, and honestly, I liked them. 2 was pretty decent, with some FANTASTIC action scenes, probably the best in the whole series, and 3 was... well, it was ok. I certainly had much worse experiences with some movies. As a whole, pretty damn good series.

 

[MrBaskerville]

I've always been confused as to why The Libertine was panned by most critics, to me it's one of the best films i've seen. And everyone seems to despise Lady In The Water, i thought that movie was pretty good overall, with some funny moments. To me, Shyamalan didn't start to suck until he made The Happening. Signs is still one of my favorite horror movies, that's another one people seem to hate. Was the water thing stupid? yeah, but it didn't seem that important to me, i mostly like the movie because of the mass hysteria and family drama, it's an interesting take on the genre.

 

[Sarah Kerrigan]

Someone's already mentioned the Boondock Saints 2, so I was ninja'd...
But i'll say Doom, mostly because you're supposed to take it as a mindless video game movie, and when you do, it's awesome.

Mention goes to pacific Rim as well, one of my favorites of this year. It's not bad guys, turn your mind off, you'll be fine.

 

[Quazimofo]

Wait, you honestly mean ALL the Star Wars prequels? Including Phantom Menace and that crock of horseshit Attack of the Clones? Watch Redlettermedia's review of Phantom Menace, and then think again. Just throwing it out there.

Everyone's watched that review and they clearly don't give a damn. I don't, I love the prequels, even Attack of the Clones (Yoda fighting sith Christopher Lee? Yes please.).

Suckerpunch is one of my favourite all time movies.
Tron: Legacy was awesome and fun.
The second Matrix movie is my favourite of the series (dem fight scenes).
I didn't realise Kingdom of Heaven had any bad feeling towards it? It shouldn't. It's epic.
Or Fifth Element for that matter, I've always considered it a Sci-Fi must see.
Ang Lee version of Hulk, booyah.
Osmosis Jones, was witty creative and cute.
Away We Go was just goddamn transcendent.
The Men Who Stare At Goats was beautiful and hilarious.

WHOAH WHOAH WHOAH! Hold up! There's people who DISLIKE Osmosis Jones?
And the second Matrix movie really does have some kickass fight scenes. More than enough for me to enjoy the movie.

As for me? Well?.. I dunno. I haven?t seen many movies I dislike, but the only ones I can think of are all really good. I enjoyed the Scott pilgrim movie, but I read the books only after seeing the movie. I?m grateful for this since it has allowed me to enjoy both (if I saw the movie before, as someone mentioned above, the poor translation would have really pissed me off. As it stands, the movie is an enjoyable but markedly different version of a similar story).

Kung-pow, kung-fu hustle, the man with the iron fists, and uh?.. Anyone hear of that old blaxploitation parody ?I?m gonna get you sucka?? I f*** love that movie. So stupid in so many ways, but just fantastic. Gotta love them old cheesy flicks.

 

[Battenberg]

This is an easy one for me - the original Judge Dredd film (with Sylvester Stallone), that's probably the film where there's the biggest difference between public opinion and my opinion. I'm well aware it has a ton of flaws and it doesn't stay true to the comics but then I saw the film first so that never mattered to me. Basically I just think it's a good laugh like 'Speed' or 'Hollow Man', not a cinematic masterpiece or a film that makes you think; just a bunch of action sequences and cliches.

EDIT: Hang on I'm confused now - is this thread basically meant to be films everyone hated that you like? Because I'm seeing a lot of people saying how much they liked X popular film, for example one person's answer was Labyrinth which is actually the highest rated blu ray on Amazon UK. Perhaps critics didn't like it when it came out but I think it's fair to say that the general consensus of people who've seen it is that it's good fun.

Also I wanted to add Sucker Punch following suit with a lot of other people - a vastly misunderstood film (admittedly its own doing).

 

[Spaceman Spiff]

I freaking love Doom. It's not only my favorite video game-inspired movie, but it's probably in my top 20 favorite movies ever.

That's what I came here to say. DOOM was a movie I loved and I've never met another person (except on the internet) who liked it even a little. I think perhaps in part it's because people wanted a horror movie and it's not scary at all. It's just such a fun action movie and with Karl Urban and The Rock starring, plus all the well clichéd supporting characters it's hard not to find someone in it to like.

I also really like the Michael Keaton Batman movies. Now, these are quite widely loved but since the Cristian Bale trilogy I've been noticing a lot of people trash-talking the older movies, and this will not stand!

Was it billed as a horror movie? My first time seeing it was on some premium cable movie channel, I don't really remember the advertisements for it. Everybody I've talked to about it (irl) has pretty much said that it's awful. I'm with you though, I think it's a fun sci-fi action movie. The characters were kind of cliche, but they were believable and likable.I also loved the FP portion at the end.

I also agree with about the Michael Keaton Batman films. They were solid. Keaton really pulled off Batman and Wayne, and Buton did great job creating a dark, gothic atmosphere that wasn't overly serious.

 

[Drummodino]

People saying The Dark Knight Rises: that was not considered a bad movie by the masses. 8.6 on IMDb and 88% on Rotten Tomatoes are pretty indicative of that. Just because the Escapist community by and large hates it (why I have no idea) does not mean everyone does. Sure it was the weakest of the trilogy but I still watched it in cinemas twice, and I bought the bluray. It's a damn good film period.

OT: I loved Scott Pilgrim. I had no idea what it was about and it blew me away.

 

[Bocaj2000]

Blade Runner, The Machinist and Memento spring to mind. Oh, and Primer, which being a movie made on a $6.000 budget should be mandatory watching for anyone in the movie industry.

Let me add to this:
-Minority Report (my introduction to PKD)
-Upstream Color (same director as Primer)
-Pi (brilliant black & white film #1)
-Following (brilliant black & white film #2)

These movies, and the ones you mentioned, changed how I see and make films.

 

[Dr. Cakey]

Er, I'm not very good at this. Despite my pretentious attitude I actually follow the crowd most of the time. So, um...

Iron Man 3: This is actually a very well-liked movie, and it also seems to set to be highest-grossing movie of the year. Nonetheless, The Escapist is not this movie's biggest fan, so I'll include it.

Tron Legacy: Another vote for Tron Legacy, huzzah! It's difficult to articulate the experience of watching this movie, but the feeling of absolute catharsis when they get back into the real world is truly extraordinary.

Pirates of the Caribbean (franchise): Okay, most people like Curse of the Black Pearl, but other than the eye-bleedingly awful At World's End, I really enjoy the Pirates franchise. Dead Man's Chest was the first one I saw, and it's really cool and could have been the setup to a really great movie. Pirates 4 was...well, it wasn't Pirates 3.

Evangelion 3.0: You Can (Not) Redo: I haven't seen it yet, but I'm giving it a preemptive thumbs up. There's no way a movie so many other anime fans are butthurt about can't be good.

 

[Salus]

The Fountain: The best "spiritual" movie out there in my opinion. Darren Aronofsky explores our concept of death and dying, and I believe this film is EXTREMELY important viewing for our generation, a generation that is increasingly troubled by questions such as "what happens when we die" and "do I have a soul, or am I just the sum of my parts?" The most cathartic movie I've ever seen. Who dies? We quest for everlasting life, but is life not already everlasting? Did we come into this world, or did we come out of it? Are we strangers in an alien universe, or are we the apples on an apple tree? And when we die, is anything lost, or it is just another transition?

 

[King Billi]

Not necessarily.

I've never understood why so many people find it hard to believe that they may like something bad. Or, conversely, dislike something good.

It's okay to like things that are objectively "bad". It's okay to dislike things that are objectively "good". There are plenty of, say, bad films that I like. Yet, I'll openly admit they are bad.

Take Army of Darkness, for example. It is objectively, in almost every way, a bad film. It's simply awful. Even so, I love it. In fact, it may be because of it's bad quality and cheesiness that I enjoy it so.

On the other hand, there's something like The Godfather. Objectively speaking, it's an immaculately crafted film. Expertly shot, written, acted, and directed. But, for the life of me, I can never get into it like many do. It's just not for me.

What I'm getting at is, one's personal opinion on a particular piece of media doesn't determine whether that thing is objectively good or bad. However, it doesn't matter. The only thing that is important is whether, to you, the thing is enjoyable.

I've heard this explanation before and to be honest I really don't get it.

To say something is "Bad" is to say there is something wrong with it, something I don't like. If I happen to like something in spite of its flaws then clearly they aren't significant(in my eyes), I can still recognise these flaws exist for the benefit of other people but I don't need to concede that they affect the overall quality of the film because as stated they are clearly not important to me.

Also as you stated if the supposed "Bad" quality of a given film is precisely what you enjoy about it then all those supposedly bad features are instantly made good in my opinion. For example Army of Darkness is a purposefully ridiculous and cheesy film isn't it? It's not trying to be anything else... If this film was intended to be that way and that's exactly what you expected from it then how can it be said to be bad at all when it succeeded in delivering what it promised?

Alright, I'll admit right now that this really all just comes down to semantics and the use of the word "Bad" but in all honesty I'm not the kind of person who tends to like things ironically or "because they are bad" If I really like a film there is often a genuine reason why.

Like you say yourself the only thing that is important is whether to you the thing is enjoyable so no one else should need concern themselves with it.

 

[SilverLion]

I... kind of like Pirates of the Caribbean 3.
Now I know it has flaws, like the amount of talking scenes compared to action scenes, but I feel people blow these flaws WAY out of proportion to what they are. Yes, I like the fact that everyone is betraying each other every nth of a nanosecond. For Jack Sparrow and Beckett it makes sense, as they're amoral men of no conscience, while for Elizabeth and Will it seemed like a natural conclusion to their story arcs. They've had their marriage indefinitely postponed by means of shadowy government affairs, they've sailed with Jack and the Black Pearl crew for so long and they've been put in many life or death scenarios. Yeah, I think they'd end up being quite jaded after all this. and man, that final battle is GORGEOUS!!!

 

[end_boss]

I've heard this explanation before and to be honest I really don't get it.

To say something is "Bad" is to say there is something wrong with it, something I don't like. If I happen to like something in spite of its flaws then clearly they aren't significant(in my eyes), I can still recognise these flaws exist for the benefit of other people but I don't need to concede that they affect the overall quality of the film because as stated they are clearly not important to me.

Also as you stated if the supposed "Bad" quality of a given film is precisely what you enjoy about it then all those supposedly bad features are instantly made good in my opinion. For example Army of Darkness is a purposefully ridiculous and cheesy film isn't it? It's not trying to be anything else... If this film was intended to be that way and that's exactly what you expected from it then how can it be said to be bad at all when it succeeded in delivering what it promised?

Alright, I'll admit right now that this really all just comes down to semantics and the use of the word "Bad" but in all honesty I'm not the kind of person who tends to like things ironically or "because they are bad" If I really like a film there is often a genuine reason why.

Like you say yourself the only thing that is important is whether to you the thing is enjoyable so no one else should need concern themselves with it.

First and foremost: everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I'm not trying to take that away from anybody. If you like it and believe it's good, go for it. However, your argument that as soon as somebody likes something it ceases to be bad would therefore mean that there is no such thing as bad because at least one person will like anything. Therefore you deprive yourself of any sort of negative opinion, because anything that you dislike isn't bad the second one person out of six billion happens to like it.

Also, who's to say it's not the other way around? If something is intended for enjoyment, then wouldn't it instantly become "bad" the second that somebody in the world doesn't enjoy it?

Sorry, I realize my post sounds confrontational, and it's not meant to be. I'm just saying that there are objective aspects by which to look at any form of art, and subjective aspects. Everybody is entitled to like something for any reason. Whether or not that makes it OBJECTIVELY "good" is up for debate.

EDIT: While I'm here, I see that the CG animated TMNT movie gets negative reviews, and I'm not sure why. All nostalgia aside, it's probably the best of any Ninja Turtles movie.

 

[King Billi]

First and foremost: everybody is entitled to their opinion, and I'm not trying to take that away from anybody. If you like it and believe it's good, go for it. However, your argument that as soon as somebody likes something it ceases to be bad would therefore mean that there is no such thing as bad because at least one person will like anything. Therefore you deprive yourself of any sort of negative opinion, because anything that you dislike isn't bad the second one person out of six billion happens to like it.

Sorry, I realize my post sounds confrontational, and it's not meant to be. I'm just saying that there are objective aspects by which to look at any form of art, and subjective aspects. Everybody is entitled to like something for any reason. Whether or not that makes it OBJECTIVELY "good" is up for debate.

I'm really not trying to deprive myself of negative opinion here. I like debating the merits of various films I like and dislike and I'm not saying that my opinion invalidates anyone elses in regards to the films I consider to be good, just that I don't have to concede to anyone elses opinion regarding what I do or don't like.

I also personally don't subscribe to the notion that ANYTHING can be said to be either objectively "good" or "bad" especially in regards to something as inherently subjective as film.

When it's become common for people say "I like that movie because it's bad" or "I hate that movie though I will admit it is good" then I fail to see how either of those words have any meaning anymore in terms of defining quality.

 

[VoidOfOne]

I really enjoyed Scott Pilgrim vs. the World. Saw it several times. Hasn't gotten old for me.

I also really enjoyed The Last Samurai. There were good, and mediocre reviews, and less than favorable ones, as I try to remember. I also scoffed at it, at the beginning, because it was Tom Cruise on the cover. But I gave it a try, months after its release, and was enthralled. It was a very enjoyable experience.

For Kingdom of Heaven, I saw the director's cut first, on a whim. I was blown away, and was really impressed. I then saw the theater version, and it was the weaker of the two films.

I heard that many people thought Thor was the weakest of the Marvel films; it wasn't to me. I enjoyed it very much.

 

[Vigormortis]

snipped for length

"Good" and "bad" are often, in a colloquial sense, used as descriptors of a persons personal level of enjoyment of the material. Not that one shouldn't be free to express their opinion on how a piece of media affected them, of course, it's just that the use of "good" and "bad" has become almost entirely subjective. (perhaps always have been) Or, rather, have come to be similes for "I like" and "I don't like".

Now, we can argue the semantics of using "good" and "bad" until we're both blue in the face; with both of us having valid viewpoints.

However, in an objective sense, the quality of a piece of media is quantifiable. It's quantifiable in a universal way. I.E., when compared to other, similar bits of media the qualities of the piece in question can be gauged as equal, better, or worse.

To do so takes a lot of specific quantifiers and criteria, I'll grant. Simply asking, "Which is objectively better?", is often not sufficient. Yet, it is possible to rate the quality of a piece when compared to other, similar media.

Just because I like something doesn't mean that thing is good. Even to me. My enjoyment of a thing is not predicated on whether it is objectively good or bad. I can personally enjoy; even love; a thing while simultaneously admitting that the thing is, in an objective sense, of poor quality.

I can love a gastrointestinal-destroying cheese burger from McDonalds and loathe some twenty dollar burger from a five star restaurant. But, I won't lie to myself by saying the MickyDs burger is cooked and prepped more skillfully than the five-star burger.

All I'm saying is: never be afraid to admit your love or disgust of something. Opinions are to be cherished. However, don't also be afraid to admit the "good" or "bad" qualities attributed to that thing.

Oftentimes, admitting to the achievements and failings of the things you love can embolden your admiration and deepen your appreciation of those things.

~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~

Anyway, in an attempt to get the conversation back on track, another film that will never be "bad" to me is Star Wars Episode 1.

Just like with Tron Legacy in my previous post, I will openly and freely admit to how awful much of the film is. However, I easily rank it as the third best Star Wars film; beaten only by A New Hope (2) and Empire Strikes Back (1).

You're free to tell me all the failings and issues with Episode 1. And, I'll almost assuredly agree with you on every point. Yet, I'll still come out of the conversation saying I enjoyed the movie. At least, far more than I did Episodes 2, 3, and 6.