Friday was a list of films you were wrong about. Here are five I am wrong about. As a matter of fact, I’m so sure I’m wrong in not liking them, they each sit in my DVD collection and have been viewed frequently in the hopes that a repeat viewing will finally reveal what all the fuss is about.
But, no. Not yet. Can’t stand any one of them. What am I doing wrong?
–
2001: A Space Odyssey – Some compare this to watching paint dry, but that’s unfair because when paint dries SOMETHING ACTUALLY HAPPENS.
Kubrick was a genius and his intentional stripping of humanity from many of his later films may have been the point, but not always an appealing one. A film without humanity is nothing more than a cinematic coffee table book, something to flip through with your attention at half-mast during a conversation about your day at the office. “The Killing,” “Lolita,” “A Clockwork Orange,” “Paths of Glory,” and “Spartacus…” those are Kubrick’s true masterworks.
“2001” they should loop at Gitmo.
–
Raging Bull (1980) -Technically, “Raging Bull” has a lot going for it, but the ugliness is relentless to the point where you become numb to it. A character study should study a character worthy of your time. De Niro’s Jake La Motta just isn’t interesting. For the whole film we watch the same character act the same way. The situations change, but little else.
After 45-minutes, I get it – I get it – I get it…
Many believe “Raging Bull” wuz robbed for Best Picture by Robert Redford’s “Ordinary People.” Personally, I’d rather watch “Ordinary People” while kneeling on marbles, and my opinion of Martin Scorsese’s “The Departed” is even lower.
–
Vertigo (1958) – A better title might have been “Tedious.” To be fair to Hitchcock, the problem could be as simple as casting. My affection for the Golden Age is deep, but not blind, and Kim Novak wasn’t a very appealing actress. Her “Vertigo” character(s) are blah and her make-up atrocious. Therefore, the James Stewart character’s obsession with her makes little sense, which in turn keeps me at an emotional distance. Change nothing else, but put Deborah Kerr in the Novak role and my opinion might change completely. An obsession with Kerr I can relate to.
–
Anything By Wes Anderson without the Word “Rushmore” in the Title – “Rushmore” is a flat out masterpiece, the rest not so much. Sure, “Bottle Rocket” is okay in that subdued indie kinda way we all feel we’re supposed to like, but Anderson’s films have slowly degraded since, starting with “The Royal Tenenbaums.” There’s no denying he’s a talented filmmaker with a unique voice, and it may just be that I hate “quirky” with the heat of a thousand suns, but the genius of “Rushmore” was the affection we felt for Jason Schwartzman’s irrepressible Max Fischer. Everything Anderson’s done since has jettisoned characters you feel something for in favor of a sterile, off-beat tone.
No thanks.
–
Lord of the Rings: The Fellowship of the Ring (2001 ) – Huge fan of part 2, kinda dig part 3, but the first one is just too episodic for my taste.
We’ve all got a few of these films we dislike that might get us kicked off the cool kids’ table.
Fess up.