Discussion of movies and ReelThoughts topics

It is currently Sun Dec 28, 2014 4:20 pm




Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next
Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were 
Author Message
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Aug 15, 2009 10:40 pm
Posts: 819
Post Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Now before you start listing every bad movie ever made, this thread is meant to be a little more specific than that.

This thread is meant for moves that SHOULD have been awesome, but because of a few stupid mistakes, they weren't.

For example:

Hollow Man

God knows this movie should have kicked major ass. But the film needed a stronger sense of atmosphere, an actress who can act instead of Kim Dickens, and less cheesy gore. The biggest mistake of that movie is where
[Reveal] Spoiler:
Sebastian kills the dog by slamming it against the cage repeatedly...after it licks his face!
What the FUCK were they thinking?

_________________
My movie review site:

Mighty Mike's Raging Reviews

http://mightymikesragingreviews.blogspot.com/


Sun May 12, 2013 6:56 pm
Profile WWW
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6503
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Les Miserables (2012). It's an incredibly cinematic story already, the music works great on stage, and everyone involved WANTED to do it justice, but they cast two actors who didn't have the chops for the roles and I-a-love-a-the-closeups Tom Hooper as director

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun May 12, 2013 7:29 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Oct 13, 2012 2:42 pm
Posts: 1136
Location: New Zealand
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Alien 3.
Star Wars Prequels.

I don't really have to explain these do I?


Sun May 12, 2013 7:39 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Apr 06, 2009 5:07 pm
Posts: 1623
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Solaris (the 2002 one)
Eyes Wide Shut
Waterworld (Great premise. But failed in execution).
Pearl Harbor
W
Prometheus

_________________
This ain't a city council meeting you know-Joe Cabot

Cinema is a matter of what's in the frame and what's out-Martin Scorsese.

http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=1347771599


Sun May 12, 2013 8:10 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 30, 2009 1:35 am
Posts: 1788
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Hancock and Anger Management.

_________________
Evil does not wear a bonnet!--Mr. Tinkles


Sun May 12, 2013 8:53 pm
Profile
Critic
User avatar

Joined: Wed Jul 29, 2009 9:35 am
Posts: 6503
Location: Easton, MD
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
For the record, folks, if you don't explain why, your contributions are really boring.

_________________
I'm lithe and fierce as a tiger


Sun May 12, 2013 9:02 pm
Profile
Online
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 826
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
The first one that came to mind was Congo. The book was an intense, epic thriller from cover to cover for me. The film turned out to be one of the most disappointing, cheap-ass films I've ever seen.

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun May 12, 2013 9:05 pm
Profile WWW
Cinematographer
User avatar

Joined: Wed Oct 10, 2012 4:40 pm
Posts: 560
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Spiderman 3 - the real tragedy was that the first half of it WAS a good film. Then the studio execs decided that Venom had to be another villain in the film and that Harry Osborn couldn't remain a villain (leading to the fucking awful butler reveal scene). Goddamn you, Hollywood.

Unthinkable - This is one of many examples of films that were ruined by their endings or climactic (near the end) scenes. The whole point of the premise of the film was how far one would go to protect society, and the ending basically showed how the studio decided to neuter it because they felt that it was going too far.

_________________
"Attack ships on fire off the shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser Gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in the rain."


Sun May 12, 2013 9:10 pm
Profile
Online
Assistant Director
User avatar

Joined: Sat Dec 15, 2012 9:35 pm
Posts: 826
Location: Puerto Rico
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Ragnarok73 wrote:
Spiderman 3 - the real tragedy was that the first half of it WAS a good film. Then the studio execs decided that Venom had to be another villain in the film and that Harry Osborn couldn't remain a villain (leading to the fucking awful butler reveal scene). Goddamn you, Hollywood.


Spider-Man 3 had everything it needed to be great, and although I'm not as harsh on it as most people, it pisses me off thinking how good it could've been.

I've heard some stories about how the studio was messing so much with Raimi and his vision, that the whole film is just him trolling with the studio. However, I don't know how true it is. But anyway, one of the things that bothers me the most is why studios continue to sign off on the idea of too many villains on one film. It rarely works! And considering how much a fanbase Venom has, I don't see how their vision couldn't see a whole film devoted to Spider-Man vs. Venom alone ($$$). Instead, they force-fed him into the last leg of a film, with a half-baked and mediocre appearance. I've said this ever since seeing the film, but the film should've just introduced the symbiote and left the whole Venom arc for a fourth film.

And although I think there was no need to introduce Gwen at that point in the story, if you're going to shoehorn her into the story, at least give her a decent story to lean on. The way her character behaved, be it the performance or the script, was horrendous. And I won't even start with the club scene. Ugh...

_________________
"Get busy living, or get busy dying"

Visit my site: Thief12 profile


Sun May 12, 2013 10:04 pm
Profile WWW
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 4026
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
I remember being somewhat dissapointed at 30 Days Of Night and 28 Weeks Later, they were OK but I was expecting them to be better then they were. The former was too long in the tooth and had little scares and weak performances, the latter had a handful of standout scenes, but failed to live up to the first film.

With Spiderman 3, i'll amdit there were too many villains, but I actually liked how the storyline with Harry was handled.

I really liked Hollow Man though, cheesy gore and fall(though I will admit the dog scene was a bit much)

I liked Swordfish, but I wish they'd stuck with the original ending.


Sun May 12, 2013 10:32 pm
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
I will say that the way the Harry Osborn character had been handled prior to the movies left something to be desired, and that includes the original comics. He came across as a dork--and not a smart, secretly cool dork like Pete, but a REAL dork. Basically, he was the Milhouse Van Houten of the Spider-Man world. So when he turns to darkness and gets revealed as the second Goblin, it's hard to take him seriously, especially in the wake of the first Goblin. Mind you, while Norman Osborn is no saint in the films, the comic book version is one of the biggest, evilest bastards of any superhero universe. Next to that... Harry Osborn? Come on. You'd have a better villain if you put Ferris Beuller's best friend up there on the glider.

So it was with more than a little relief that the way Harry is portrayed in the movies is much more credible. There's real pathos to the way he decides to adopt his legacy. Some of the credit goes to the writers, but a lot of it goes to James Franco. His characterization seems thin at first, until you realize what he didn't do with it.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Sun May 12, 2013 11:43 pm
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 12:07 pm
Posts: 373
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Green Lantern. This movie sucked a bag of dicks when it had a good director and actors whom I thought would make a good Hal Jordan and Sinestro. What happened?

The Godfather Pt. 3. I know, it was still nominated for best picture, but compared to the greatness of the first two, it sucks.

The Place Beyond the Pines The trailer ruined this movie for me. It's not that it was a bad movie, it wasn't...it was compelling; but it could have been greatly powerful.

Avatar Cameron, for the love of christ will you stop trying to send messages about the environment to the audience and just use your technical prowess to craft another R rated sic/fi extravaganza?


Sun May 12, 2013 11:44 pm
Profile
Director
User avatar

Joined: Sun Nov 18, 2012 2:37 am
Posts: 1202
Location: Laurel, MD
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
The Village-- I didn't think there would be a twist to rival Signs in all its awfulness, but man was I wrong. After this epic fail, I never saw another one of M. Night Shyamalan's movies. I'll give After Earth a shot since it looks different from his usual fare, but I'm cautiously optimistic.

The Prestige-- Christopher Nolan's only misfire. Again, the twist here was something a grade-schooler might find clever (he had a twin brother the entire time!), but for the rest of us, it's worth a patented "Patrick Stewart facepalm."

Trance-- It has the requisite "mind fuck" material, but not the characters (with the exception of Rosario Dawson.... giggity......) to make us care.

Final Fantasy-- A direct adaptation of one of the games might be too much for Hollywood to handle, but I was expecting better than a low-rent Aliens rip-off.

_________________
https://www.facebook.com/ken.rossman.5


Mon May 13, 2013 12:03 am
Profile
Auteur
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 12:02 pm
Posts: 4026
Location: Zion, IL
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Inception- mediocre and not very imaginative or memorable, most of the dream sequences felt like they were ripped straight out of video games, Ellen Page's character was little more then a mouthpiece to explain the rules of the dreamworld to the audience. It could've been a great film, but it feel short. I actually thought Trance was a better film overall.

I did enjoy Green Lantern and Final Fantasy though.


Mon May 13, 2013 12:18 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Sun Oct 07, 2012 6:26 pm
Posts: 2157
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
I was hoping that with Shane Black at the helm and RDJ once again at the forefront, Iron Man 3 would take the irreverent, dialogue-driven humor of the previous two films and go way over the cliff with it. Which it did... a few times. Alas, it wasn't quite the "Kiss Kiss Bang Bang with mech suits" movie I was hoping for.

KWRoss wrote:
(with the exception of Rosario Dawson.... giggity......)

Giggity indeed.

_________________
The temptation is to like what you should like--not what you do like... another temptation is to come up with an interesting reason for liking it that may not actually be the reason you like it.


Mon May 13, 2013 1:01 am
Profile
Second Unit Director

Joined: Thu Oct 11, 2012 5:38 pm
Posts: 265
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Ken wrote:
I will say that the way the Harry Osborn character had been handled prior to the movies left something to be desired, and that includes the original comics. He came across as a dork--and not a smart, secretly cool dork like Pete, but a REAL dork. Basically, he was the Milhouse Van Houten of the Spider-Man world. So when he turns to darkness and gets revealed as the second Goblin, it's hard to take him seriously, especially in the wake of the first Goblin. Mind you, while Norman Osborn is no saint in the films, the comic book version is one of the biggest, evilest bastards of any superhero universe. Next to that... Harry Osborn? Come on. You'd have a better villain if you put Ferris Beuller's best friend up there on the glider.

So it was with more than a little relief that the way Harry is portrayed in the movies is much more credible. There's real pathos to the way he decides to adopt his legacy. Some of the credit goes to the writers, but a lot of it goes to James Franco. His characterization seems thin at first, until you realize what he didn't do with it.


I agree with this a lot, particularly regarding Franco. I've never read the comics but I remember JB describing his performance as wooden. This is accurate but there is something about the way he plays the character that works really well in retrospect. I'm not sure that it was having too many villians that cause the third spiderman film to fail. I think its more like scenes with emo Peter Parker that cause it to fail. Plus, Mary Jane's characterization is all over the place.

The first two Harry Potter films. The stilted direction by Chris columbus really does not help matters but I sometimes wonder if Steve Kloves was a bad choice to do scriptwriting duties. I say this as the only two films that works completely on their own are PoA and OoP. While none sink to the level of the first two, every other film has some serious issue with it. Most of them really miss the mark in terms of the interpersonal drama that occures between the trio but the last two have structural issues.

While we're on the subject, Rent. Can someone pass a law that Chris Columbus just simply not be allowed to do adaptations?

The Matrix sequals. I think these have been hashed out well enough thank you very much.

Return of the Jedi. The prequels always get the hate, but RotJ is probably weaker than even TPM. Probably what you'd really need to do is just have set it on the Wookie homeworld as had been originally planned and never mention the term ewok.

Cloud Atlas. I adored this film and would consider it my favorite film from last year, so what's it doing here? Simple, it's horrifically edited with very few scenes that are simply allowed to stand on their own without being randomely intercut with scenes from other stories. Furthermore, the scenes in the future with Tom Hanks speaking a garbled version of English were difficult to understand. Probably should have had him speak a completely made up language and subtitled it.

_________________
My Blog: Queering the Closet


Mon May 13, 2013 1:10 am
Profile WWW
Director
User avatar

Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2009 10:09 pm
Posts: 1350
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
thered47 wrote:
Return of the Jedi. The prequels always get the hate, but RotJ is probably weaker than even TPM. Probably what you'd really need to do is just have set it on the Wookie homeworld as had been originally planned and never mention the term ewok.

Lucas ultimately decided the Wookiees would've been too technologically advanced for driving home the movie's point of the mighty Empire being taken down by primitive weaponry. Plus, it would've given the Rebels a distinct advantage, as they had a Wookiee among them. All that really needed to be done was to make the Ewoks look a little less like teddy bears. :|


Mon May 13, 2013 9:18 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat Aug 22, 2009 6:19 pm
Posts: 667
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
The one that leaps to my mind is 300. A can't miss story about a small band of warriors fighting a valiant and strategically important battle against impossible odds. The human tension is already built in, but the creators spiced it up with monsters and took the humanity out of it (for me at least). Perhaps it's just me not willing to accept their vision, but I was more invested in the 2 hour show on the History Channel than I was for this production. I love Greek mythology, even the cheesy treatments over the years, but this combination of epic human battle plus mythology didn't work nearly as well for me. I enjoyed the movie overall, but it didn't come close to what I was hoping for.


Mon May 13, 2013 9:51 am
Profile
Producer
User avatar

Joined: Tue Jun 28, 2011 9:04 am
Posts: 2725
Location: Lancashire, England.
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Alexander at the very least should have been a flawed-but-fun sword and sandals biopic in the mold of Troy. But it was just awful from first moment to last.

Be Kind Rewind had almost limitless potential that it didn't live up to.

I suppose you could say Righteous Kill for the De Niro/Pacino element. But somehow I knew that would be shit.

I'm tempted to say Quantum of Solace, even though I do like it myself.

Needless to say the 3rd Matrix installment, which was awful. Although 2 was also a bit of a failure.

I'm not even going to delve into Spiderman 3.

Should Hannibal have been better? Perhaps. It still think it was treated a bit harshly at the time.

_________________
... because I'm a wild animal


Mon May 13, 2013 9:53 am
Profile
Cinematographer

Joined: Sat May 05, 2012 4:33 pm
Posts: 584
Post Re: Movies that SHOULD have been better than they actually were
Les Misérables - The one Best Picture nominee from last year that I hated. Overlong, far too sentimental, and painful to endure. If nothing else, this is an excellent example of how classic works of literature are being dumbed down for modern audiences to appreciate. The performances were over-the-top, the themes were handled with the subtlety of a sledgehammer, and the entire affair felt like a saccharine-laced mess. Oh, and a message for Tom Hooper. Stop. Using. Close-ups.

The Great Gatsby - This year's Les Misérables. Baz Luhrmann's latest assault on intelligent cinema is a glossed-up version of the masterful F. Scott Fitzgerald novel. None of the performances are particularly memorable, although Leonardo DiCaprio's turn as Jay Gatsby represents one of the most spot-on casting choices in recent memory. If only the material he was given had been more daring. Instead, we get a Jay-Z-infused soundtrack, choppy editing, some truly awful production design, and a final product that looks like it was put together by Sofia Coppola. In the end, what should have been a condemnation of the wealth and excess of the Roaring Twenties, as well as the best and worst of the American Dream, ends up being a Nicholas Sparks adaptation set just a few years before the Great Depression.

Iron Man 2 and Iron Man 3 - I don't even have the energy to go on about how disappointing both of these movies are. In the end, neither is as engrossing as the original 2008 film. Both feature an overabundance of villains, far too more story-lines, and a deficit of truly compelling action sequences. Re-watching either of these two movies feels like a chore, making this franchise the Matrix series of the Marvel Cinematic Universe. And if it weren't for Robert Downey, Jr., neither film would have received the generally positive critical acclaim that it garnered.

The Star Wars prequel trilogy - All three of these movies are worthless. Next.

Prometheus - What should have been one of the most thought-provoking science-fiction films of the past few years instead ended up being a trite, forgettable experience at the multiplex, with plenty of plot-holes and idiotic characters to boot. Aside from the sweeping visuals, nothing here is worth seeing. The dialogue is a mess, and the film only carries the illusion of profundity. Ridley Scott should have either made this film on par with his original Alien or scrapped the entire project.

I'll add more later.


Mon May 13, 2013 2:57 pm
Profile
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 69 posts ]  Go to page 1, 2, 3, 4  Next


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google Adsense [Bot], Thief12 and 6 guests


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group.
Designed by Vjacheslav Trushkin for Free Forum/DivisionCore.
Translated by Xaphos © 2007, 2008, 2009 phpBB.fr