who gives a fsck if the movie is popular? it doesnt make you "cool" to not like a popular movie. if its not good then how did it win those 11 oscars? obviously a movie which is not great cannot do this. and trust me, these guys are more movie-pro than any ordinary person. when a movie is this good, its good.
IMHO, LOTR sucks. Not because of what everyone else thinks of it but because of what I think of it. I fell asleep in the first one at the movies and wasn't going to watch the others. My brother rented the Two Towers so I figured I'd give it another chance and watch it. There are like 4 storylines going on at once and the characters' names sound like one another so I never knew who people were referring to when they were speaking. Nice cinematography but I don't see much interest for anyone who hasn't read the books.
I wasn't a fan of the genre in the first place so that might explain why I thought it sucked, the whole dragons/middle-ages fantasy style has no appeal to me, I much prefer the (first) Matrix style sci-fi and even then, when they go overboard (as they did in Reloaded and Revolutions) I lose interest.
I wasn't a fan of the genre in the first place so that might explain why I thought it sucked, the whole dragons/middle-ages fantasy style has no appeal to me, I much prefer the (first) Matrix style sci-fi and even then, when they go overboard (as they did in Reloaded and Revolutions) I lose interest.
Because, in the past, fantasy movies have been utter garbage. Look at the Dungeons & Dragons movie. Look at Dragonheart. Finally a series of fantasy movies comes out that is above average, and based on diminished expectations people can't help but wet themselves when the movies actually show a respectable level of quality.
But anti popular doesnt make you any smarter or any more knowledgeable in the art genre you're trying to judge.
Hating something because it is popular is more retarded because you aren't analyzing the work itself, but also judging the fans, which, with any intelligence, should tell you that it doesn't matter. Art is and should always be a 1 to 1 relationship, thus any definitive statements that are possible should always be 1 reacting to 1 and never 1 judging/labeling 1.
And let's not even get into the psycological motives behind making such statements.
They're extremely well made movies...it's amazing that they actually managed to make it into a real live action movie, not to mention how they're very good movies...they'll be remembered and watched 30 years from now...
And this is coming from a baseball fan that has never read the LOTR books.
And this is coming from a baseball fan that has never read the LOTR books.
You nailed my reason for disliking the series as well. I like movies with complex storylines and intricate character development, but that paired with subject matter (fantasy) that isn't my cup of tea to begin with really makes it a turnoff. I could hardly make it through the first one, and the second was nearly unbearable...I felt bored out of my mind. I never tried to watch the third.
Cerb
Elite Member
- Aug 26, 2000
- 17,484
- 33
- 86
Those movies were fantastic.Originally posted by: BostonRedSox
I prefer each of those movies to LOTR. Funny, because I have the dvd's of all the films you mentioned. Oh wait, I'm not supposed to like 'popular' movies like Jaws and Psycho and The Godfather.
The key word was series. Jaws 2 and 3 sucked. As did the Psycho sequels, the Friday 13th sequels are on their own level of Hell.
So, you didn't like it because you couldn't follow three storylines at once, and you couldn't manage to keep track of characters with similarly pronounced names?
I'm not buying that. I think if it were a genre that interested you (which fantasy isn't, as you say), you wouldn't have a problem following it.
Now... Just because you don't care for the genre, doesn't make it a bad movie.
I am not a fan of musicals. But you aren't going to find me bashing Sound of Music.
I'm not a fan of country music, by any means. But I'm not going to sit here and tell you that LeAnn Rimes can't sing.
If you don't like it, that doesn't mean it "sucks" or isn't worthy of accolades. Nor does it mean that the people who do like it are somehow beneath you (i.e. "nerds").
Thanks for an intelligent response. Each movie of the trilogy got a 90+% rating on rottentomatoes.com, which means the vast majority of professional movie critics rated them favorably. There's nothing wrong with saying the movies aren't one's cup of tea, but to say they 'sucked' is just trolling.
HeroOfPellinor
Lifer
- Dec 27, 2001
- 11,272
- 1
- 0
Fellowship was cool (Adventure), the other 2 were "been there done that" types of movies (War movie).
I don't know where anyone can possibly say I disliked the movie because it's 'popular'. To disprove your 'theory', I think Passion Of The Christ is an excellent movie, so that kind of disproves that angle, huh? Wizards, Goblins, and dragons, and that sort of sci-fi is so unappealing, in my own personal opinion. And in my own personal opinion, I think the LOTR series have sucked, bored me to tears, sorry if some of you are so easily offended by that. If stating my opinion is trolling in your opinion, too bad, get over it.
What you mean to say is that personal preference was the reason that you don't like it. The fact of the matter seems to be that any movie based on fantasy is a movie that you wouldn't enjoy.
Does that mean it "sucked" and isn't worthy of praise, or does it just mean that you aren't into that genre.
The ability to see past one's own opinion is a mark of maturity, by the way.
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 21K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter