Are there any movies you just don't 'get'?

Cantona's Collars

Some movies and franchises are extremely popular with critics/the public but you just don't 'get' them.
Harry Potter for example is a behemoth of a movie franchise but it leaves me cold-I find the movies tedious and very samey.Some of the movies that critics fawn over are the same,you watch them because of the critical acclaim and then find you've wasted 2 hours of your life.

Blatter

Yeah, Avatar. Heap of sh*te.

Jax Teller

I watched the 3 matrix films and I still don't know what went on

D e e

Harry potter, lord of the rings, avatar, twilight, basically every hyped nerdy movie of the past 10 years or so.

Nolanger

Enternal sunshine of the spotless mind - complete sh1t, shallow, pretentious movie that appeals to people who think modern movies are amazing!

Otis Driftwood

The Dark Knight.Its an average movie that for some reason people get their panties in a bunch when its critisised.

Boo Radley

Nolanger wrote: »

Enternal sunshine of the spotless mind - complete sh1t, shallow, pretentious movie that appeals to people who think modern movies are amazing!

My goodness, that's quite a generalisation. I personally like the film but wouldn't consider myself fitting into the neat little box you provided for me just because I do like it.

With regard the OP, Mulholland Drive is a film that just didn't do it for me. Seemed like a very conscious attempt at being abstract for abstracts sake.

banshee_bones

Donnie Darko.


Really didnt get it, gave it a chance and watched it a second time. Still nothing. Overhyped shíte imo.

James Forde

No country for old men


Not saying it's a bad film (don't want to open that can of worms)

just don't get it

e_e

Slumdog Millionaire

I've seen hundreds of movies but I'd honestly place this in the bottom 10 I'd ever seen. Really patronizing, cheap and manipulative film.

SVG

Definitely Inception. I just could not understand all the rave reviews- it had me wondering whether I'd seen the same film as everyone else.

Another one is Crash (the 2004 one). I absolutely hate this film. It really whacks you over the head with its message- utterly patronising. I can't believe it won Best Picture at the Oscars.

phasers

+1 for Crash, patronising rubbish

ReacherCreature

Nolanger wrote: »

Enternal sunshine of the spotless mind - complete sh1t, shallow, pretentious movie that appeals to people who think modern movies are amazing!

Absolutely agree with all bar a little bit with the last. It's boring, stupidly convoluted, pretentious, and just dire. A wasted opportunity with two good leads - the rest of the cast were extremely annoying. All that meant that I could not "get" the film. Just didn't work.

johnny_ultimate

Nolanger wrote: »

Enternal sunshine of the spotless mind - complete sh1t, shallow, pretentious movie that appeals to people who think modern movies are amazing!

I take great offence to the last part, and tbh a hell of a lot of modern films are amazing. Down with generalisations! As for Eternal Sunshine, still my film of the 00s, and by a distance.

Funglegunk

Naked Lunch. The most ****ed up film I have ever seen, no idea what its even about.

Mickeroo

David Lynch's movies are the only ones I've ever seen where I did not get what was going on. (mulholland drive, lost highway etc.)

run_Forrest_run

memento - I get it but what I can't get is why so many people think it's a good movie..meh.

Magnolia - WTF!
Vanilla Sky - Sh*te really.

krudler

Mickeroo wrote: »

David Lynch's movies are the only ones I've ever seen where I did not get what was going on. (mulholland drive, lost highway etc.)

Thats why they're genius, not pretentious twaddle, backwards talking dwarfs are so like, deep man.

Faith+1

Titanic- What the hell was that about?:P

AwayWithFaries

Mickeroo wrote: »

David Lynch's movies are the only ones I've ever seen where I did not get what was going on. (mulholland drive, lost highway etc.)

I'd agree his films are all over the place. Really hard to follow.

livinsane

Funglegunk wrote: »

Naked Lunch. The most ****ed up film I have ever seen, no idea what its even about.

Try reading the book, now thats a head****.

Hated Solaris. Only film that nearly caused me to walk out of the cinema. Oh and Inland Empire by David Lynch. Christ almighty. Loved Mullholland Dr and The Last Highway though.

FortuneChip

I'm not a Harry Potter fan, only saw the first two movies I think. But for some reason, I get the appeal, for whatever reason. I can see why they're so successful, and why there's massive "hooplah" about the series coming to an end.

Now, Twilight... For the life of me, I just can't fathom the movement behind these. I was unfortunate enough to see the first movie, and found it absolutely dreadful. I know girls will all flock to see this handsome lad etc, and I'm sure there's some allure to vampire romance, eternal together and what have ye but it's over my head.
Slightly off topic.
I know it's fantasy romance but seriously, there's come screwed up messages in this movie considering it's a load of impressionable teenage girls going to see it. At one point he tells her that she is his "Heroin". He tells her he's dangerous, she distances herself from normality, and becomes obsessed with this dangerous bloke, all whilst in High-School. Yeah, grand message to be sending out... Rant over

I convinced myself Eternal Sunshine was "Brilliant" a few years later and a second watching, it's very average. But when I first saw it, I was also in the mindframe that Donnie Darko was as intelligent as movies got. I was 16, what else was I to think

I didn't care for "The Godfather", it insists upon itself...

Mickeroo

FortuneChip wrote: »

I'm not a Harry Potter fan, only saw the first two movies I think. But for some reason, I get the appeal, for whatever reason. I can see why they're so successful, and why there's massive "hooplah" about the series coming to an end.

You are dead right about Twilight, but if you've only seen the first two HP movies you need to start watching the others. At least give the third one a chance(Prisoner of Azkhaban), it was directed by Aflonso Cuaron who made Children of Men and Y tu Mama Tambien, it was not until the third film that I started taking the film series(and same goes for the books actually) seriously. Things get darker and more grown up as the series progresses. Just my two cents

Skerries

Faith+1 wrote: »

Titanic- What the hell was that about?:P

3 hours long

krudler

Faith+1 wrote: »

Titanic- What the hell was that about?:P

A cliche ridden script but a monumental technical achievement and a behemoth at the box office, one of the last true "event" movies of the past 15 years, along with LOTR, the SW prequels and Avatar.

PirateShampoo

American Physco, i still dont get the ending.

Sir Gallagher

500 Days of Summer, I don't get how so many people enjoyed this sh1te. Wannabe pretentious, hipster crap, with two utterly unlikeable lead characters.

The Cool

+1 on 500 Days of Summer - I turned it off after 40 minutes because I was just plain bored with the plot already.


I don't understand the High School Musical franchise at all. It's about high school, finishing it and moving on to wherever grown up life takes you, but it's for 6 year olds - makes zero sense.

AnonoBoy

El Topo.

F*ck off with your pretentious wannabe-mystical nonsense.

The sort of film that sits in art students DVD collections so they can tell each other how much they get arthouse movies. It's not even an arthouse movie, it's a self-indulgent storyless piece of crap - a feature length video art project that a 1st year art student would be embarrassed about about 2 months after making it.

And y'know what? It's not even that well made.

Fittle

The English Patient.

Worst film ever. Walked out of the cinema with three question marks above my head like this (well, that's how I thought I looked!).

e_e

Mickeroo wrote: »

David Lynch's movies are the only ones I've ever seen where I did not get what was going on. (mulholland drive, lost highway etc.)

You don't need to have understood a film to enjoy it.

Some people favor mystery, atmosphere and intensity over the basic constructs of a plot. A film like Inland Empire is so intense and terrifying because it throws logic and convention out the window, leaving the viewer in an uncertain place. I find it thrilling myself and I still put that up as the scariest film I've ever seen.

MrStuffins

Mickeroo wrote: »

You are dead right about Twilight, but if you've only seen the first two HP movies you need to start watching the others. At least give the third one a chance(Prisoner of Azkhaban), it was directed by Aflonso Cuaron who made Children of Men and Y tu Mama Tambien, it was not until the third film that I started taking the film series(and same goes for the books actually) seriously. Things get darker and more grown up as the series progresses. Just my two cents

This is exactly right! I could never bring myself to watch the Harry Potter movies but my girlfriend made me.

Hated the first one, hated the second one............ but then the 3rd installment, Prisoner of Azkhaban, was really really good. Very dark and at times scary! It's because of this movie i really got into the franchise and have enjoyed each movie since!

johnny_adidas

Role models - one of the few movies ive walked out of the cinema

maximoose

MrStuffins, have you read the Harry Potter books? Just wondering out of interest, from your post it doesnt sound like you have, and I for the life of me cannot understand how anyone who hasn't read the books can enjoy the films. They are REALLY bad films.

As for films I didnt get.... Paranoid Park and Let the Right One In. Boring, boring, boring.

ReacherCreature

johnny_adidas wrote: »

Role models - one of the few movies ive walked out of the cinema

Why didn't you "get" it? I thought that was a simple film to comprehend.

s_carnage

A serious man. Couldn't wait for it to be over

MrStuffins

maximoose wrote: »

MrStuffins, have you read the Harry Potter books? Just wondering out of interest, from your post it doesnt sound like you have, and I for the life of me cannot understand how anyone who hasn't read the books can enjoy the films. They are REALLY bad films.

As for films I didnt get.... Paranoid Park and Let the Right One In. Boring, boring, boring.

Nope, I always found the whole Harry Potter thing unappealing to me. thought it was for kids. And it was for kids, IMO, up until the third movie.

theparish

The Girl with the dragon tattoo both movie and book
What was all the hype about.

JP Liz V1

Revolver from Guy Ritchie - It was very confusing

plus Watchmen maybe because it was an awful film

theparish

How could I forget The Da Vinci Code movie and book WTF.
Never reading a book based on a best seller list and hype again.

happyfriday

Synecdoche, New York. I just did not get it, it was beyond pretentious, a real 'Better of Ted' Jabberwocky movie IMO!!

Rabble Rabble

maximoose wrote: »

MrStuffins, have you read the Harry Potter books? Just wondering out of interest, from your post it doesnt sound like you have, and I for the life of me cannot understand how anyone who hasn't read the books can enjoy the films. They are REALLY bad films.

As for films I didnt get.... Paranoid Park and Let the Right One In. Boring, boring, boring.

Priosoners of A. stands on it's own. The rest assume you have read the books, or follow the book too closely.

Rabble Rabble

happyfriday wrote: »

Synecdoche, New York. I just did not get it, it was beyond pretentious, a real 'Better of Ted' Jabberwocky movie IMO!!

A what now?

I wanted to like this, Ebert loved it, and I like Kauffman. But I could not. it was too bleak.

smk89

Freddy got fingered. did that film even have a plot?

Rabble Rabble

Boo Radley wrote: »

My goodness, that's quite a generalisation. I personally like the film but wouldn't consider myself fitting into the neat little box you provided for me just because I do like it.

With regard the OP, Mulholland Drive is a film that just didn't do it for me. Seemed like a very conscious attempt at being abstract for abstracts sake.

Mulholland Drive is a fantastic piece of film-making, Lynch at his best, making the ordinary extraordinary and weird. Also it is has a fully understandable plot line, a beginning, middle and end, but not in that order.

I take issue with Eternal Spotlight as a bad movie too. Its a excellent script, the script writer being more important than the director in this case, however to tell a story backwards, in a way it never happened, and yet tell the story is great and skilled writing.

Rabidlamb

Primer, I watched it & didn't understand a thing.
I then read the online explanations & the different timelines & watched it again.
I was only more confused than before.

happyfriday

Rabble Rabble wrote: »

A what now?

I wanted to like this, Ebert loved it, and I like Kauffman. But I could not. it was too bleak.

Jabberwocky was referenced in the show Better off Ted, but after a quick google I see it is actually a poem (nonsence verse) written by Lewis Carroll in Alice Through the Looking-Glass and Alice hit the nail on the head and makes clear what I could not.

'It seems very pretty,' she said when she had finished it, 'but it's rather hard to understand!' (You see she didn't like to confess, even to herself, that she couldn't make it out at all.) 'Somehow it seems to fill my head with ideas— only I don't exactly know what they are!

That is exactly my view on Synecdoche, New York

johnnycnandy

Donnie Darko. There's a big difference between 'clever and original' and 'weird for the sake of weird'. Crusty's love it though.

kryogen

I am gonna go with the first 3 that pop into my head, No country for old men, Slumdog Millionaire (be tough to think of a worse movie i have seen tbh) and Twilight

Auvers

PirateShampoo wrote: »

American Physco, i still dont get the ending.

he didnt actually do anything it was just a delusional fantasy

Mickeroo

e_e wrote: »

You don't need to have understood a film to enjoy it.

Some people favor mystery, atmosphere and intensity over the basic constructs of a plot. A film like Inland Empire is so intense and terrifying because it throws logic and convention out the window, leaving the viewer in an uncertain place. I find it thrilling myself and I still put that up as the scariest film I've ever seen.

I still found them entertaining alright, Mulholland Drive is ridiculously creepy at times too. I don't think they're bad, but theres a certain point where I kind of feel well whats the point. The good side of them is you can re-watch them many many times and come up with different interpretations and that, certainly not a bad thing. The thing with those movies ( mulholland more so than highway) I found it really hard to interpret at all. Not seen Inland Empire yet, but plan to at some point.