• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Most underrated movie of 2003

Page 3 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.
Kill Bill.

Though, I suspect Lord of the Rings is going to get the shaft at the academy awards.
They make some very questionable choices. Saving Private Ryan lost to Shakespeare in Love!?!? WTF.
 
Originally posted by: Snapster
Originally posted by: Cougar

No, absolutely not. I'm not one that's all too picky about movies but this one did not deserve the hype it got. It was so long and drawn out (dare I say, boring) that I could barely make it through the whole thing without falling asleep. Bloody English need to learn how to make a horror movie.
Click to expand...

Oh and I suppose the likes of Alien isn?t good enough of a horror movie (Ridley Scott - English btw). Also Alfred Hitchcock didn't know much either.
rolleye.gif
It actually hits home more when you know the places in the film. If it were in your state or say NYC it would have more impact for you. And not all horrors have to be in your face slice n dice, guns blazing churned out crap either.

Life of David Gale & City of God were very underrated. Equilibrium had little backing, but it wasn't anything special imho.
Click to expand...


My, my...looks like someone's got their panties in a twist. I didn't know that Ridley Scott was english, and I wasn't thinking about about Alfred Hitchcock (although I wouldn't exactly lump all his movies into the horror category...Dial M for Murder comes to mind). You made 1 fatal mistake when coming to your thoroughly flawed conclusion, A horror movie doesn't need to be in your face slice and dice for me to like it. I thought the first blair witch project was excellent and that had no in your face stuff and a budget of what, $50,000? Aliens is one of my favorite movies, but ask yourself how good it would have been without a big hollywood budget? The days of monster movies being oh so freaky by giving you only short glimpses of the monster are long gone (with Signs being a notable exception). Oh, and the location of the movie adds nothing to it's value. There have been a few movies shot in my home town but just because I can identify the locations it doesn't make me like the movie more.

28 days later was terrible. The concept was good but the delivery was terribly flawed. Bottom line is, there are a million and one flesh eating zombie movies and this one doesn't cut it. There was virtually no suspense in this movie except in the end. If hollywood had gone back and re-did the move it very well may have been "in your face" but it also would have been infinately better.

Do yourself a favor and step away from the computer for a second and unbind your shorts 'cause they seem to be affecting your rationality.
 
Shattered Glass

Do you like threads with the OP being caught in his own lie? You will LOVE this movie -- the movie about ultimate PWNAGE!

I never caught it in the theater because... well... no theater nearby was showing it, but some exploding star thing helped me out. 🙂
 
Originally posted by: SaltBoy
Shattered Glass

Do you like threads with the OP being caught in his own lie? You will LOVE this movie -- the movie about ultimate PWNAGE!

I never caught it in the theater because... well... no theater nearby was showing it, but some exploding star thing helped me out. 🙂
Click to expand...

Isnt that based on a true story?
 
The Last Samurai.

LOTR: Return of the King was highly overrated. Watching an old geezer, wearing a white robe with a long staff and riding around a castle with white horse, and repetitious battle scenes got really old.
 
Originally posted by: Cougar
Originally posted by: Snapster
Originally posted by: Cougar

No, absolutely not. I'm not one that's all too picky about movies but this one did not deserve the hype it got. It was so long and drawn out (dare I say, boring) that I could barely make it through the whole thing without falling asleep. Bloody English need to learn how to make a horror movie.
Click to expand...

Oh and I suppose the likes of Alien isn?t good enough of a horror movie (Ridley Scott - English btw). Also Alfred Hitchcock didn't know much either.
rolleye.gif
It actually hits home more when you know the places in the film. If it were in your state or say NYC it would have more impact for you. And not all horrors have to be in your face slice n dice, guns blazing churned out crap either.

Life of David Gale & City of God were very underrated. Equilibrium had little backing, but it wasn't anything special imho.
Click to expand...


My, my...looks like someone's got their panties in a twist. I didn't know that Ridley Scott was english, and I wasn't thinking about about Alfred Hitchcock (although I wouldn't exactly lump all his movies into the horror category...Dial M for Murder comes to mind). You made 1 fatal mistake when coming to your thoroughly flawed conclusion, A horror movie doesn't need to be in your face slice and dice for me to like it. I thought the first blair witch project was excellent and that had no in your face stuff and a budget of what, $50,000? Aliens is one of my favorite movies, but ask yourself how good it would have been without a big hollywood budget? The days of monster movies being oh so freaky by giving you only short glimpses of the monster are long gone (with Signs being a notable exception). Oh, and the location of the movie adds nothing to it's value. There have been a few movies shot in my home town but just because I can identify the locations it doesn't make me like the movie more.

28 days later was terrible. The concept was good but the delivery was terribly flawed. Bottom line is, there are a million and one flesh eating zombie movies and this one doesn't cut it. There was virtually no suspense in this movie except in the end. If hollywood had gone back and re-did the move it very well may have been "in your face" but it also would have been infinately better.

Do yourself a favor and step away from the computer for a second and unbind your shorts 'cause they seem to be affecting your rationality.
Click to expand...

And yet you base your comeback on one point in my text. Your point initially is that the British should learn how to make a horror movie, when you are basing your facts on one film that you didn't like. If the British spent the same amount of money on films that Hollywood does we'd have allot more good films out in the market. Yet we can't because of the influx of Hollywood only cinemas which make huge amounts of money for them. It's not that the British don't know how to make films, we just don't have the budget available all the time to just throw into films like Hollywood does. I mean any film made in the UK must suck, according to you, right?
rolleye.gif
My answer only dictated a few off the top of the head examples that the British can make good horror films, even more so when we have some money behind it. Your generalisation of British is just a testament to how much of a closed minded individual you show yourself to be. As for the in your face horror, partial error in generalising on my part, but then again most people pay for it because it requires little thinking, and anything that requires some thought or imagination is 'boring'. I personally find those churned out films tiresome.

Oh, any more petty personal attacks whilst you are at it, I love laughing at them. Then again, that is British humour for you!
 
Movies like City of God end up showing in the IFC or Sundance channels. Amazing the number of good movies I've seen in those channels. There's always some surprising unknown little movie with a great story.
 
Originally posted by: Snapster
And yet you base your comeback on one point in my text. Your point initially is that the British should learn how to make a horror movie, when you are basing your facts on one film that you didn't like. If the British spent the same amount of money on films that Hollywood does we'd have allot more good films out in the market. Yet we can't because of the influx of Hollywood only cinemas which make huge amounts of money for them. It's not that the British don't know how to make films, we just don't have the budget available all the time to just throw into films like Hollywood does. I mean any film made in the UK must suck, according to you, right?
rolleye.gif
My answer only dictated a few off the top of the head examples that the British can make good horror films, even more so when we have some money behind it. Your generalisation of British is just a testament to how much of a closed minded individual you show yourself to be. As for the in your face horror, partial error in generalising on my part, but then again most people pay for it because it requires little thinking, and anything that requires some thought or imagination is 'boring'. I personally find those churned out films tiresome.

Oh, any more petty personal attacks whilst you are at it, I love laughing at them. Then again, that is British humour for you!
Click to expand...


You know, I was going to let this slide, but I figured since I've got nothing better to I'd have some more fun 😉

You're taking this far too seriously which will most likely result in some sort of anurism so settle down a bit before we need to send for an ambulance. Having said that, are you so loyal to your country that your ego can't take it when someone insults one of your movies? Seriously, think about it...you're getting all fired up about 1 sentence, "Bloody English need to learn how to make a horror movie". Put your national pride aside for a moment and recognize that just 'cause something's English it doesn't mean it's great. My comment may have been a generalization, but it was also required for how much hype this stink bomb got.

Just so you don't think I'm some thick headed dolt, I've done some research I've learned that a couple of my favortie horror movies are English in one way or another, but they're also surrounded by mountains of absolute crap. A diamond in the rough can hardly be considered reason enough to start a flame war (or can it?).

As for the "petty personal attacks", can you do me a favor and point one out to me? I guess I'm just so closed minded that I can't even tell when I've attacked someone on a personal level. In case you can't find any I'm gonna try to think of some more "petty personal attacks" because they make you laugh and I think everyone should be happy.

Bloody English also need to learn how to use paragraphs. <--- do I need to insert an emoticon here, or are you going to lecture me on English typing skills now?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top