What makes a movie GOOD?

[MistaTastyCakes]

I see all these movies people are into, and it's hard for me to relate. I guess I like weird movies.

My favorites would have to be Momento, Fight Club, and Four Rooms. I spose (for the most part) I like pretentious indy flicks

Really, I like movies that are completely different from other movies coming out these days. New concepts, non pre-fabricated plots, and sometimes a movie that makes ya watch it two or three times to make you say "whoa, that's how it works.. cool" is my preferential one. What makes a movie good, to you? Other than blanket statements like "it doesn't suck" or "it's interesting"

 

[wfbberzerker]

movies that try to be different without ending up cliched or too dumb usually are very good. also, independant movies tend to be very good.

my picks:

memento
donnie darko
snatch
fight club
lock, stock, and two smoking barrels.
insomnia
boondock saints

theres prolly a bunch i'm forgetting that i like a lot, i just cant think of any right now.

 

[tweakmm]

T&A basicly

 

[Zim Hosein]

Originally posted by: tweakmm
T&A basicly

A true film connoisseur

 

[MistaTastyCakes]

T&A? Then, why watch movies when you can download pr0n?

 

[conjur]

Good casting and chemistry (Jaws, Shawshank Redemption)
Good suspense and effects (Alien)
Good writing/acting (Anna and the King)

But, hard to say what makes it good, but, generally, acting/writing. I've seen horrid movies with great actors and the movies sucked because of the piss-poor writing or plot and vice versa.

 

[tweakmm]

Haha, to be serious: it has to be the cinemetography. Rent any Kubrick or Guy Richie film to know what I'm talking about.

 

[Koing]

Jenna Jamison

 

[Actaeon]

The ending.

Just look at 6th Sense. The whole beginning sucked. Till the end. With that "twist". It suddenly became "good".

 

[blackdogdeek]

i have eclectic tastes. i like most of the movies mentioned on here so far especially memento and shawshank. but i also like movies like jackie chan movies or jet li movies or other movies that are action-based with less emphasis on plot. i also like gangster movies.

it's really difficult to pinpoint what it is that makes a movie good to me. if the directing/writing/acting are good though i am able to suspend my disbelief better or longer and that is definitely a plus. as long as one of those 3 are very strong then the movie will probably have a better chance with me.

 

[conjur]

Originally posted by: tweakmm
Haha, to be serious: it has to be the cinemetography. Rent any Kubrick or Guy Richie film to know what I'm talking about.

Ishtar had Vittorio Storaro for cinematography and it SUCKED.

 

[tweakmm]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: tweakmm
Haha, to be serious: it has to be the cinematography. Rent any Kubrick or Guy Richie film to know what I'm talking about.

Ishtar had Vittorio Storaro for cinematography and it SUCKED.

he did do Apocalypse Now, I think that makes up for it

 

[GhettoFob]

Originally posted by: tweakmm
T&A basicly

 

[Yossarian]

has to have characters that you care about.

 

[edro]

What makes a movie GOOD?

boobies.

 

[Angrymarshmello]

Violence, nudity, or comedy makes a movie good

 

[SuepaFly]

I have about three catagories of "good" movies:

1. Movies that fill the time and entertain me. When I'm bored and don't want to think, just be entertained in that manner, movies that are funny with little else fit the bill.

2. Movies that make me say "Whoa." Like interesting plots with in depth characters. They make me think for a short while, but then I don't really think about it any more.

3. Movies that make me say the superlative of "Whoa." It may have the plot or the characters, but some combination of those two, but it has some underlying message or something that makes me stop and apply it to a situation outside of the movie. Like In The Bedroom, not a big fan of the movie, but I keep thinking to the last scene where the father kills the guy and he climbs back in bed, then his wife gets up and asks what he wants for breakfast. What would I do if I just did that? How would I feel? Or the Matrix, chances are that there are no robots using my body heat for energy or whatever, but what is fooling me in a more subtle way, what if what I think is real isn't?

 

[NokiaDude]

My Favs:
Electric Dreams
Donnie Darko
American Beauty
AI: Artificial Intelligence
Resident Evil

 

[HombrePequeno]

Originally posted by: tweakmm
Haha, to be serious: it has to be the cinemetography. Rent any Kubrick or Guy Richie film to know what I'm talking about.

Like Swept Away.

Some of my favs:

Boondock Saints
Snatch
Gattaca
Fight Club

I don't know what makes them good, I just know that I like them.

 

[Schadenfreude]

I'd say the main point of a movie is to develop & envelop a new world for the viewer:

To create a whole new world where the viewer understands how it works, however, there's a lot at stake here -

-Actors have to be believable - lousy actors lets you know how "fake" the story is

-The plot has to be believable/comprehendable, at least - a hole in the plot breaks the rhythm of the movie, taking the viewers away from the experience

-There has to be an introduction to the story - easy for some flicks, such as ones set in a modern setting, but for others, such as Sci-Fi where everything's set in the future, it's hard to walk the line where everything's explained (where everything feels like it's forced onto you) and letting the viewers grasp what's going on in their own (it's like walkiing into the middle of a movie - what's going on?).

-You know this stuff, rising action, climax, resolution, all that crap - where's the conflict? What is it?

-Focus - don't lose focus of the main story - sometimes people rely too much on the "envelop viewer in their world" and add in things that are entirely unrelated to the movie - it's nice to see a snippet now and then, but it's even nicer to see that it's somehow related to the movie in the end.

That's about it. For me, I try ignore the hollywood junk because it's too cookie-cutter - you see where the plot's headed and how it's going to be resolved after watching the first 10 minutes, so for that viewer, there's no conflict to begin with.

And of course, gratuitous sex don't hurt neither.

 

[stormbv]

unpredictability, good performances

 

[Anubis]

acting, story, cinimatography... all that stuff. and its also taste, each person differes. here are some of my faves


snatch
fight club
lock, stock, and two smoking barrels.
boondock saints
Shawshank - possibily teh bestmovie ever
Big Lebowski
Office Space
Jaws
The Shineing

 

[Schadenfreude]

Oh, almost forgot cinematography - I can spot a lousy cinematographer a away with the excessive amount of special effects *coughBoondockSaintscough*.

And I hate the majority of martial arts flicks released in the US because, well, their cinematography really, really stinks. Really bad. If you really watch, all their movements are really really jerky, unlike the fight cinematography found in HK flicks - it's not a problem if they go down in the first few strikes, but in those flicks, they usually have a 5 move string, which goes - punch-pause-kick-pause-kick-pause-etc., or is just plain lousy - if you see any of Chuck Norris' early flicks, he friggin' kicks a foot away from the person and the other guy goes down! ARGH!

:|:|:|

 

[VTHodge]

Originally posted by: wfbberzerker
independant movies tend to be very good.

I think independant films get an undeserved good sentiment. The reason that you (and many others, I am not singling you out) think that you like all of them is that you are only exposed to the best. You never hear about the bad indy flicks, which are actually the majority. Every high budget movie gets heavily advertised, good or bad.

One a different note:
In a sociology class that I took, the teacher made the claim that the most important reason that people go to see movies is so that they can discuss them later. I think this is the logic behind the reason people like the "whoa!" movies. They lead to better discussion later.

 

[dolph]

Originally posted by: conjur

Originally posted by: tweakmm
Haha, to be serious: it has to be the cinemetography. Rent any Kubrick or Guy Richie film to know what I'm talking about.

Ishtar had Vittorio Storaro for cinematography and it SUCKED.

hey, i actually liked ishtar!