[AFGNCAAP]

Originally Posted by Manhunter71

Independence Day,

Awful, idiotic waste of time.

Armageddon,

Non-pretentious fun. Unlike with next Bay's flick the pathos is balanced with humour, so it's more bearable. I had a good time, even better by a second watchthrough, though that puts me in minority, I suppose.

Die Hard,

Adrenaline-packed ride, and nothing a short of a classic, actually. I don't think I've ever heard it really slammed by a critic so I'm not sure why you mention it here (also, it's from 1988. How far back do the "recent" films go? ).

Minority Report,

Fantastic! One of Spielberg's finest creations - even my father, who seems to be allergic to the term "science fiction", appreciated it. Again, more or less a critics' darling. And don't tell me it's not trying to be deep and intelligent (whether it succeeds is a more subjective matter, I know Squarejawhero would say it doesn't ).

any Arnie or Van Damme movie

Any? Some things Arnie or Van Damme did are worth watching, most aren't. Or did you enjoy all?

Donnie Darko,

Admittedly, I haven't seen it, but - Minority Report is "just" an action entertainment, but Donnie Darko is artistic? I'm confused.

Memento,

.SUOINEGNI

The Shawshank Redemption,

Very good. Terrific acting, gripping, humane story. Absolutely nothing "in black and yellow, filmed upside down, and in reverse chronological order" about it, though.

Pulp Fiction

Eek. Second most overrated movie ever. And, more importantly, even its more cool-headed fans should agree it's anything but deep and meaningful. Heck, it's not like it even tries to achieve meaningfulness (not that it is a bad thing in itself) - it's openly toying with form, and nothing more.

So, yeah, not only I liked and disliked movies of both your lists personally, but I can't really tell what criteria you used to put those movies on one or the other (especially as you yourself said you don't see any difference between those two "kinds" ). It makes it rather hard to see your point.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Eek. Second most overrated movie ever. And, more importantly, even its more cool-headed fans should agree it's anything but deep and meaningful. Heck, it's not like it even tries to achieve meaningfulness (not that it is a bad thing in itself) - it's openly toying with form, and nothing more.

Form is exactly as important as deepness, in my opinion. Pulp Fiction, in this regard, is something special, and so isn't meaningless at all.

[pinkgothic]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

[On Armageddon] Non-pretentious fun. Unlike with next Bay's flick the pathos is balanced with humour, so it's more bearable. I had a good time, even better by a second watchthrough, though that puts me in minority, I suppose.

I'd agree with you, actually. So that makes two of us at the very least

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

[On Minority Report] Fantastic! One of Spielberg's finest creations - even my father, who seems to be allergic to the term "science fiction", appreciated it. Again, more or less a critics' darling. And don't tell me it's not trying to be deep and intelligent (whether it succeeds is a more subjective matter, I know Squarejawhero would say it doesn't ).

I would say it does. And I much agree on your opinion about it.

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

.SUOINEGNI

HAHA. Indeed.

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Eek. Second most overrated movie ever. And, more importantly, even its more cool-headed fans should agree it's anything but deep and meaningful. Heck, it's not like it even tries to achieve meaningfulness (not that it is a bad thing in itself) - it's openly toying with form, and nothing more.

It's first on my list of "most overrated movies" (it made me fall asleep...) - what's your first?

Why do we agree so much? You scare me, AFGNCAAP.

[AFGNCAAP]

Originally Posted by Ninth

Form is exactly as important as deepness, in my opinion. Pulp Fiction, in this regard, is something special, and so isn't meaningless at all.

I wouldn't call it that special, as it doesn't do anything that hasn't been done before (by the way, I'd like to get a dollar for each time I heard a self-proclaimed movie buff saying it's the first film told in non-chronological manner ), only louder and bloodier.

Secondly, I'd argue that it is indeed "meaningless" in a textual sense (not: "meaningless for the history of the cinema"), and very much admits it. The suitcase could've had just as well a label saying "MacGuffin" stuck on it, and the chapters could've been shuffled by random, and some people will still insist on seeking for deep allegories, intellectual discourses, hidden meanings, and examples of masterful storytelling in it.

Mind you, I didn't call it bad per se. Just overrated.

Originally Posted by pinkgothic

It's first on my list of "most overrated movies" (it made me fall asleep...) - what's your first?

Godfather

*sits down and waits for the flaming*

Why do we agree so much? You scare me, AFGNCAAP.

Wellll, I wasn't crazy about WOTW, if it makes you feel any better.

[pinkgothic]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Godfather *sits down and waits for the flaming*

Ah, that's on my "overrated movies" list, too. I get stoned by BoyToy over it often enough, hehe.

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Wellll, I wasn't crazy about WOTW, if it makes you feel any better.

Eeeeh. It's still uncanny with the other things, though...

[RLacey]

I don't understand the appeal of The Godfather; I remember a history teacher playing us the opening segment once and being bored out of my mind .

Moving back to movie critics...

[nikoniko]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Godfather

Ahh, but without The Godfather, we never would have had The Freshman or Mafia.

[Manhunter71]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Awful, idiotic waste of time.
Non-pretentious fun. Unlike with next Bay's flick the pathos is balanced with humour, so it's more bearable. I had a good time, even better by a second watchthrough, though that puts me in minority, I suppose.
Adrenaline-packed ride, and nothing a short of a classic, actually. I don't think I've ever heard it really slammed by a critic so I'm not sure why you mention it here (also, it's from 1988. How far back do the "recent" films go? ).
Fantastic! One of Spielberg's finest creations - even my father, who seems to be allergic to the term "science fiction", appreciated it. Again, more or less a critics' darling. And don't tell me it's not trying to be deep and intelligent (whether it succeeds is a more subjective matter, I know Squarejawhero would say it doesn't ).
Any? Some things Arnie or Van Damme did are worth watching, most aren't. Or did you enjoy all?
Admittedly, I haven't seen it, but - Minority Report is "just" an action entertainment, but Donnie Darko is artistic? I'm confused.
.SUOINEGNI
Very good. Terrific acting, gripping, humane story. Absolutely nothing "in black and yellow, filmed upside down, and in reverse chronological order" about it, though.
Eek. Second most overrated movie ever. And, more importantly, even its more cool-headed fans should agree it's anything but deep and meaningful. Heck, it's not like it even tries to achieve meaningfulness (not that it is a bad thing in itself) - it's openly toying with form, and nothing more.

So, yeah, not only I liked and disliked movies of both your lists personally, but I can't really tell what criteria you used to put those movies on one or the other (especially as you yourself said you don't see any difference between those two "kinds" ). It makes it rather hard to see your point.

OMG!!!
Where do I start?

You're taking parts of my post and (sometimes in error) adapting them to your misguided replies.
Its obvious you haven't understood the point I was trying to make

At no point did I express an unfavourable view of any of the movies I listed
I was merely listing them as examples of movies that had been considered by critics as intelligent dramas, and others that were regarded more as mindless action movies.

I personally enjoyed all the movies I listed - notably Die Hard - it's one of my all-time favourite movies, but surely you must agree that it is an action movie more than a story/character based drama?
The same goes for Minority Report - I really enjoyed it, but it is a special-effects action movie that doesn't proclaim to be deep and meaningful (and there's nothing wrong with that!)

And my quote about Arnie and Van Damme movies - I never expressed an opinion about them but merely classed them as action movies
Being a martial artist I do have an affinity for Van Damme movies, and with regard to Arnie, all I have to say is watch Commando or Predator - both are classic action movies

You say you don't understand the point I was trying to make.
It was simply this - it annoys me when people put certain kinds of movies down just because they're not deep and meaningful dramas!
Movies don't have to be serious social commentaries to be good - there are many great movies out there that don't conform to that stereotype - people just need to get down from their soapboxes and relax

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

I wouldn't call it that special, as it doesn't do anything that hasn't been done before (by the way, I'd like to get a dollar for each time I heard a self-proclaimed movie buff saying it's the first film told in non-chronological manner ), only louder and bloodier.

It's not just the random order, it's the style. Tarantino has his own style or dark humor, eerie situations, and "blood and gore for kids", and his style explodes in Pulp Fiction, much more than on his other movies (like Jackie Brown or Kill Bill).

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

and some people will still insist on seeking for deep allegories, intellectual discourses, hidden meanings, and examples of masterful storytelling in it.

Some people will find all this in every movie out there. The reason why so many people love this movie is not because they see some deeper meaning, but because it has a unique feel to it.
My father, who usually can't stand movies featuring a single gun or explosion, and mostly sees french movies about the middle age crisis, loved it. Nah, PF is definetely not you everyday mindless flick.

[AFGNCAAP]

I'm afraid you didn't understand my point, Manhunter. I'll try to explain.

Originally Posted by Manhunter71

At no point did I express an unfavourable view of any of the movies I listed

Yup, I understood that. I just tried to convince you that my opinions of the listed movies aren't related to which group you classified it to.

I was merely listing them as examples of movies that had been considered by critics as intelligent dramas, and others that were regarded more as mindless action movies.

Die Hard *is* pretty much that, yet it didn't prevent it from scoring well among the critics. Minority Report is mindless? Pulp Fiction is intelligent? And it's a drama?

I personally enjoyed all the movies I listed - notably Die Hard - it's one of my all-time favourite movies, but surely you must agree that it is an action movie more than a story/character based drama?

Yes.

The same goes for Minority Report - I really enjoyed it, but it is a special-effects action movie that doesn't proclaim to be deep and meaningful (and there's nothing wrong with that!)

No. Perhaps the grimmest vision of the future in recent memory, the issue of free will vs. determinism, and the best murder mystery puzzle that makes a sensible use of sci-fi elements (rather then using them merely as an excuse for plotholes) since Asimov's Robots novels, went over your head? Which probably makes the film even better than I thought, because it can be enjoyed as an F/X movie, despite being so much more than that.

and with regard to Arnie, all I have to say is watch Commando or Predator - both are classic action movies

"Some things Arnie did are worth watching", to quote myself.

You say you don't understand the point I was trying to make.
It was simply this - it annoys me when people put certain kinds of movies down just because they're not deep and meaningful dramas!

...and you could have hardly brought less appropriate examples for that. How many people put down Die Hard or Minority Report? You say you don't like snobby attitude towards movies, but then you present a *very* arguable (IMO) categorization into 'mindless action' and 'intelligent dramas'. Don't you see anything paradoxical in that? That's the gist of what I was trying to say.

[AFGNCAAP]

Ninth: Exactly, it's all style and no substance. A perfectly valid reason to like a movie (though - usually - not for me); it's pretending that there's more to it that annoys me. Have you never heard people seriously trying to figure out what's inside the briefcase, or praising Tarantino for inventing the narrative device he uses, or falling for its "ingenuity", or boasting of being able to figure out the correct order of the segments (wow, impressive... ) etc.? You're a lucky man, then.

[RLacey]

I'm increasingly glad that I've never seen Pulp Fiction.

So, Minority Report. Great film, shame about the needlessly tacked on ending bit. I'm almost certainly not alone in thinking it should have ended with the shooting.

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Ninth: Exactly, it's all style and no substance. A perfectly valid reason to like a movie (though - usually - not for me); it's pretending that there's more to it that annoys me. Have you never heard people seriously trying to figure out what's inside the briefcase, or praising Tarantino for inventing the narrative device he uses, or falling for its "ingenuity", or boasting of being able to figure out the correct order of the segments (wow, impressive... ) etc.? You're a lucky man, then.

I guess I am, because I seriously have never heard that kind of things.
I have to say, though, that in the case of Pulp Fiction the style is the substance, so I can't agree with it having no substance.

And... what briefcase, exactly?

Originally Posted by RLacey

I'm increasingly glad that I've never seen Pulp Fiction.

Why is that?
I shied away from seeing it for months, despite everyone telling me that it was great. Well, I didn't regret finally going.

[AFGNCAAP]

Originally Posted by RLacey

So, Minority Report. Great film, shame about the needlessly tacked on ending bit. I'm almost certainly not alone in thinking it should have ended with the shooting.

Do you mean the very last scene, where we see

Spoiler:

Samantha Morton an the twins sitting in the idyllic cottage house somewhere?

It wasn't necessary, but it didn't bother me much.

Originally Posted by Ninth

And... what briefcase, exactly?

[Ninth]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Do you mean the very last scene, where we see

Spoiler:

Samantha Morton an the twins sitting in the idyllic cottage house somewhere?

It wasn't necessary, but it didn't bother me much.

I didn't like this last scene either.
But Hollywood will always be Hollywood.

[natalia]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

I'm afraid you didn't understand my point, Manhunter. I'll try to explain.

Yup, I understood that. I just tried to convince you that my opinions of the listed movies aren't related to which group you classified it to.

Die Hard *is* pretty much that, yet it didn't prevent it from scoring well among the critics.

Had to respond to this (great debate everyone). I think the fact that Die Hard scored well with critics proves Manhunter's point (which I agree with). I didn't score well as a deep movie filled with meaning. It scored well as a mindless action flick -- the kind of flick that some people eschew right off the bat. A couple of quotes from the critics on Die Hard:

"For what it is, this is the top model -- flash, bang, and witty one-liners all included." -- Reelnews

"It's good, dumb fun." -- Washington Post

"A landmark action film." -- SF Examiner

"Marks the peak of the 1980's action boom that made mega-stars out of the likes of Ah-nuld, Stallone and Van Damme." -- Movie View

(All from rottentomatoes.com)

Most of those reviewers scored the movie for what it was -- an action flick. And within those parameters, there were several reviewers who didn't like the movie. However, had they chosen different parameters and tried to compare Die Hard to Citizen Kane, the scores may have all been universally bad.

[Once A Villain]

I can't believe some of the stuff I'm hearing in this thread. Heh. Ninth knows what he is talking about though. In my skimming I think he may have missed one thing that makes Pulp Fiction great (in addition to the other things he said): the dialogue. It's one of the best written screenplays in the last 20 years. Actors dream of saying dialogue that brilliant, that's why so many actors love to work for Woody Allen as well.

And if anyone can call The Godfather an overrated movie, I can't even begin to rectify a problem that severe. So why try?

[pinkgothic]

Originally Posted by Once A Villain

In my skimming I think he may have missed one thing that makes Pulp Fiction great (in addition to the other things he said): the dialogue.

*bashes the dialogue to a bloody pulp*

I'm feeling confrontational. Translation to Normal-Pinkgothic: Looks like our opinions differ. Each to their own.

[squarejawhero]

Godfather = boring.

Well, some of it. The scene with Pacino and the trains in the background is one of the tensest scenes ever commited to celluloid.

[RLacey]

Originally Posted by AFGNCAAP

Do you mean the very last scene, where we see

Spoiler:

Samantha Morton an the twins sitting in the idyllic cottage house somewhere?

This shows that I haven't seen the film recently. I actually meant the totally needless

Spoiler:

shots of Cruise's character with pregnant wife. And, come to think of it, everything after the rooftop scene at the end came across as taking away from the impact of that scene .