pointless films or plots

Cookie_Monster

soups05 wrote: »

if you had seen it from the start you would know its based on a true story. the crazy 8's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSX_8888_incident

so while the parts did not fit with your view, they were there because the actual people were there. Don't quit your job to become a film critic lol

'based' is a very loose term. There is very little in common apart from the concept, even a quick read of the wiki article confirms this.

Boscoirl

They could have cut 9 hours out of lord of the rings if they just fly in like they flew out

bucketybuck

the_pen_turner wrote: »

I agree but their characters served no purpose to the film. there should have been no need for any of what they did if the first guy had simply walked back and turned off the train

I guess you're not a fan of "Raiders of the lost ark" then...

Ulysses Gaze

Star Wars Episodes 1-3. Completely unnecessary films that added nothing to Episodes 4-6.

Made by George Lucas purely to fatten his bank balance.

Badly written, badly directed, badly acted ****e. All 3 of them.

Plopsu

Royale with Cheese wrote: »

Over Christmas I got bored and decided to watch an old film I'd heard mentioned a good few times but had never seen.... Fast Times at Ridgemont High.

It is the definition of a pointless film. There are various subplots, each as pointless as the next. Then the film ends, thankfully after only about 90 minutes.

Both Jennifer Jason Leigh and Phoebe Cates take their tops off. That's the point!

Plopsu

Boscoirl wrote: »

They could have cut 9 hours out of lord of the rings if they just fly in like they flew out

While it's never explained in the movie, there is apparently a reason for this. IIRC, the eagles have a non-interventionist policy due to the fact that something they did in the past was largely responsible for Sauron's rise to power in the first place (though that raises the question of why they help Gandalf several times).

the_pen_turner

bucketybuck wrote: »

I guess you're not a fan of "Raiders of the lost ark" then...

no .I hate all of the indi films and similar stuff

the_pen_turner

soups05 wrote: »

if you had seen it from the start you would know its based on a true story. the crazy 8's

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CSX_8888_incident

so while the parts did not fit with your view, they were there because the actual people were there. Don't quit your job to become a film critic lol

that doesn't bear any resemblance t the film. they slowed down a run away train that had breaks applied and ran up beside it to turn it off.


still pointless film half of it added nothing to the film

valoren

bucketybuck wrote: »

I guess you're not a fan of "Raiders of the lost ark" then...

The primo example of a pointless plot.

The nazis would have found the head piece and would have found the ark in the Well of Souls, they would have opened it before taking it to Hitler and they still would have been killed by the wrath of God regardless of Indy.

Another for me is The Matrix.

Once Neo was killed, in any way shape or form, he was always going to be 'The One'. He needed to die to become operational so to speak. It ends with him giving the Machines a stern rebuke about their carry on over the phone and then he flies off on a jolly. Pointless. As a stand alone film is is unsatisfying. The Matrix still exists.

The sequel then showed that his being The One was actually completely pointless anyway as he was merely an intentional plant all along, in a wash rinse repeat destruction cycle of Zion, after some dancing in Zion and psycho babble nonsense.

razorblunt

Splitting the Hobbit into 3 movies, sorry, 3 terrible movies.
The CGI was appalling, it was like a video game for the most part.
Pure gluttony and greed.


Special mention to the plot of Superman Returns. Lex Luthor wants to use kryptonite to create an island and build Real Estate on.
Never mind the fact is built like a melted welly.

AndyBoBandy

razorblunt wrote: »

Splitting the Hobbit into 3 movies, sorry, 3 terrible movies.
The CGI was appalling, it was like a video game for the most part.
Pure gluttony and greed.

This irked me as well. I didn't enjoy them at all.

LOTR - 3 books became 3 movies (cut the last hour or so off the last one and overall they're a good watch)
The Hobbit - 1 book became 3 movies (3 terrible movies, apart from the odd few good sequences).

loyatemu

any sequels that ruin the original - "Highlander 2" is a good example; they were aliens? FFS!

remakes that dumb down the original - e.g. the English language version of "The Vanishing"

Mister Vain

Titanic 2
Speed 2
Dumb & Dumber to

me_irl

I liked Birdman...

redcup342

Sharknado and it's amazing sequel Sharknado 2

Sebastian Dangerfield

I watched Geralds Game recently and couldn't get what all the fuss was about. Woman gets trapped in the house and has to escape - fair enough. What was all that stuff about Joubert about? What did it add - what purpose did it serve?

valoren

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

This irked me as well. I didn't enjoy them at all.

LOTR - 3 books became 3 movies (cut the last hour or so off the last one and overall they're a good watch)
The Hobbit - 1 book became 3 movies (3 terrible movies, apart from the odd few good sequences).

It's the inverse square law of nature applied to a movie trilogy.

The Lord of the Rings, a rich thematic novel, they initially pitched as 2 movies but ended up making 3. Three books, Three movies. There was more than sufficient 'source' material to warrant 3 movies without diluting the overall quality i.e. the initial source of power was very high.

With The Hobbit, it was the opposite. One children's book extended to 3 overly long movies. It could have and should have been one brilliant movie, but it was all about the $$$. The 'source' material wasn't as rich and the quality was diluted producing 3 sh1t films.



r = Fellowship of the Ring r2 = The Two Towers r3 = The Return of the King

Agricola

The main gripe I had with the Hobbit was the Disneyfication of the trilogy compared to the LoTR. Ok, admittedly it is a lighter story aimed at children but Jackson just went completely overboard with it, aided and abetted by the CGI which he didnt have 20 years ago.

He mentioned he wanted people to have the two trilogies on the one shelf, a 6 film Middle Earth extravaganza, but really the Hobbit is so different in tone to the earlier films that they don't feel like they belong together at all.

YFlyer

Junkyard Tom wrote: »

The Bus that Couldn't Slow Down.

Or the milk float.

PotatoSpud

SimonTemplar wrote: »

Gus Van Sant's completely pointless shot for shot remake of Psycho. It was a complete carbon copy of the original except for the bizarre insertion of random cloud shots during the shower scene and bad acting

You forget that shot of Vince Vaughn masturbating.

Anything that says "starring Liam Neeson"

Fanny Wank

The never ending story

It ended FFS

lmimmfn

Robert Power wrote: »

Judge Dredd 1995. Dredd is accused of killing a journalist in obvious violation of his duty to uphold the law. It is established that murder = illegal. So he spends the movie assaulting and killing countless FELLOW JUDGES who were literally just doing their jobs. Then at then hes a Judge again! Dude you spent the last hour murdering people

He is the law!!!

maudgonner

The Butler Did It.

Grand so.



(*I haven't actually seen the film)

lmimmfn

Ulysses Gaze wrote: »

Star Wars Episodes 1-3. Completely unnecessary films that added nothing to Episodes 4-6.

Made by George Lucas purely to fatten his bank balance.

Badly written, badly directed, badly acted ****e. All 3 of them.

But the prequels do have that Oscar winning scene "I hate sand....."

Rumpy Pumpy

Burn After Reading by the Coen Brothers was one pointless movie. It’s like they forgot to put an ending on the thing. Critically loved, but they make some wretched movies.

fly_agaric

Agricola wrote:

He mentioned he wanted people to have the two trilogies on the one shelf, a 6 film Middle Earth extravaganza, but really the Hobbit is so different in tone to the earlier films that they don't feel like they belong together at all.all.

I suppose that sounds better than my cynical thought that "the money-men demanded we have a second massive LOTR type multi-film saga with attendant LOTR sized box office receipts" + actual plot of the Hobbit be damned!

I think there is 1 good children's film in that book but the story is much lighter + more whimsical than LOTR and needs a totally different approach.
Maybe someone will make the right film out of it someday.

Vladimir Poontang

The Force Awakens and The Last Jedi.

Pointless story, pointless characters. Utter horse****

Robert Power

AndyBoBandy wrote: »

razorblunt wrote: »

Splitting the Hobbit into 3 movies, sorry, 3 terrible movies.
The CGI was appalling, it was like a video game for the most part.
Pure gluttony and greed.

This irked me as well. I didn't enjoy them at all.

LOTR - 3 books became 3 movies (cut the last hour or so off the last one and overall they're a good watch)
The Hobbit - 1 book became 3 movies (3 terrible movies, apart from the odd few good sequences).

My missus is a huge fan of LOTR and Hobbit and even she said the Hobbit being even 1 film would be a stretch.

Hande hoche!

me_irl wrote: »

I liked Birdman...

Find Michael Keaton to be a very watchable actor. He was the best thing about American Assassin.