The Most Under-Rated Movie of the Last Ten Years?
The decade draws to a close, and most of us will be feeling a sense of surreality as we reflect on what we were doing on New Year’s Eve 1999 – I was with four of my dearest friends; we had a gorgeous dinner by the fire, watched the London Millennium Dome’s opening ceremony define New Labour’s hubris (until a certain war in the Gulf); at midnight we literally did stand on the street and shout hello to everyone else who opened their door. At that moment, I hadn’t seen ‘Magnolia’, soon to supplant ‘Wings of Desire’ as the film-most-likely-to-be-named-my-favourite-when-you-ask (I’d say they’re both pretty even now; the passage of time tends to iron out all your favourite movies into one long film marathon. Film I’ve seen the most often? Field of Dreams. Film I’d most like to see again right now? Hirokazu Koreeda’s After Life. Film that every time I see it becomes increasingly difficult to deny a place as ‘Greatest Ever Made’ TM? 2001. Or Touch of Evil. Or Vertigo. Or La Regle du Jeu. Or La Belle et la Bete. Or Close Encounters. Or Once Upon a Time in America. Or Fantasia. Or Solaris. Or. Or. Or)
And now we approach the end of another decade. The friends I was with on Millennium Eve don’t see each other so often anymore; only two of the five even live in the same city, but we’re still in touch, from time to time at least. Sometimes we talk about movies. There have been at least 2500 films released in the US, UK and Ireland since January 1st, 2000. I’ve probably seen a third of them. The decade’s end provides the opportunity to, as they say, discuss. So please do join me.
My method? Well, Top 100 lists are obvious, Top 50 too restrictive, our friend Glenn Kenny has gone for a happy medium, having just posted a Top 70 (and his comments section suggests it will be soon be a Top 71, as there’s always at least one film that gets left out). And so, emboldened by Glenn, I’ll be posting some thoughts about the decade 2000-2009 over the next few weeks (My thoughts on Roger Corman’s ‘The Intruder’, previously planned for today will have to wait).
So, if you’re interested in my thoughts on ten years at the movies, let’s make a start.
I’m going to do three posts on this topic – beginning with the most over-rated and under-rated films; then a ‘runners-up’ list; then a list of the best films of the decade. These lists are, of their nature, entirely subjective, rooted in my particular prejudices, wounds, joys, knowledge and desire. You may dearly love a film that isn’t here; or you may loathe one that I adore. That’s fine with me – this list doesn’t exist to validate or challenge anyone else’s preferences (although I do want to challenge some of the accepted norms of what passes for entertainment, and to shine a light on some films that might otherwise be too easily ignored).
Some initial headlines:
And so, the lists begin:
Films of the Past Decade that I’m Not Supposed to Admit to Liking But Do
Finding Forrester: for being the only film in which Sean Connery cries without winking at the audience.
Cast Away: for a truly great central performance and honest engagement with the question of loss.
Thirteen Days: for being a political film about US foreign policy that lionises dialogue over threats; and turns that dialogue into the most exciting fuel for a thriller you could imagine.
Black Hawk Down: for trusting the audience with a recognition that war is horrifying, and that Somalis are human beings.
Crazy/Beautiful: for providing Kirsten Dunst with a platform for her considerably subtle acting chops, and giving the great Bruce Davison the meatiest role he had all decade.
Changing Lanes: for being far more intriguing about addiction and racism than its reputation would permit.
Frida: Julie Taymor’s first utterly fascinating and visually astonishing film of the decade.
Across the Universe: Taymor’s second.
The Hulk: Shot like a real comic book, presenting the struggle to get out from under your parents as the most titanic battle of all; best Nick Nolte rants of the decade.
Crash: It made me think about how we relate to each other; and that anything can happen. That’s what it was trying to do. I know it’s fashionable to denounce this film as if the fact that it feels staged (like a play, or, shall we say, a movie?) makes it the cinematic equivalent of demonic spawn; another way of looking at it would be to say that ‘Crash’ seems to have been critically mauled simply because it succeeded in what it was trying to do.
De-Lovely: The vastly undervalued Kevin Kline as Cole Porter in a film that comes alive with fantasy: perhaps the best musical of the decade.
Friday Night Lights: An American sports film which isn’t afraid to let its subjects lose.
Shall We Dance: The most entertaining Richard Gere/J Lo dance flick you’re ever likely to see.
Kingdom of Heaven: A much more thoughtful representation of Christians and Muslims fighting than had ever previously been filmed.
The Lord of the Rings: They’re huge, they’re brash, they’re unsubtle, and Peter Jackson is far too quick to resort to sweeping overhead shots of battlefields and rivers. But it actually does tell a fun story – with some archetypal meaning – very well; and you can’t say fairer than that.
Inside Man: A thoroughly entertaining heist thriller with the best Christopher-Plummer-says-Dear-God scene in cinema history. And a little bit of post-9/11 Spike Lee politicking too.
The Prestige: It tricked me, and I liked it.
Bobby: Like watching ‘Airport’ or ‘Hotel’ as written by Robert Frost with a touch of Naomi Klein. When you’re in the right mood, that’s a good thing.
Apocalypto: Like being dragged behind that Raiders truck, Indy-style. Except it was fun.
The Lost City: Andy Garcia’s polemic about Castro’s Cuba; politically skewed, but gorgeous to look at, and even moreso, to hear.
Kung Fu Panda: Amazingly enough, you will believe a Panda can fly.
Keeping the Faith: Amazingly enough, you will also believe that a Ben Stiller-Ed Norton/Rabbi-Priest comedy could remind you of Billy Wilder (and I’ve always liked him ;-))
Films I’m Either Supposed to Like but Don’t; or Were Already Bad to Start With
Be Kind Rewind: The most disappointing missed opportunity ratio of trailer-to-actual-film I can think of
Watchmen: Took a brilliant piece of philosophical reflection and turned it into a blood bath that included the burning alive of an African American man by hot frying oil.
The Curious Case of Benjamin Button: To paraphrase Jett, I get older faster just by thinking about it.
Gladiator: Guys fight several times; there’s a tiger; some guys in togas. It’s very loud.
A Beautiful Mind: Shockingly inaccurate film about serious mental health issues.
Religulous: Shockingly disingenuous film about religion.
An American Carol: Shockingly dishonest film about politics. (Great Robert Davi performance, though.)
K-Pax: Shockingly inaccurate film about serious mental health issues (part 2).
Pearl Harbor: The Second World War as fought by robots who didn’t know it began before December 1941.
Swordfish: A pro-American terrorist film starring John Travolta and Halle Berry’s chest.
Chicago: A film in which no discovery seems apparent: everything’s in a plastic mold.
Vicky Cristina Barcelona: A film in which one of the characters is doing graduate studies in ‘Chinese’ but hasn’t learned that there’s no such thing.
City of God: A well-edited film that made the horror of childhood violence look like a music video.
Anger Management: Perhaps the reason Jack Nicholson is now apparently semi-retired.
Kill Bill: A hymn of worship to female-aping-male-violence is not pro-women.
The Life of David Gale: A film that portrays anti-capital punishment activists as willing to be executed themselves to prove the point is as nuanced in its view of mental distress as ‘A Beautiful Mind’.
Man on Fire: A film that tries to make Denzel Washington look like Jesus just after going on a murderous rampage, and portrays Mexico as hell on earth before printing an apology on the end credits. Probably the most unpleasant experience I had at the movies in the past ten years.
The Motorcycle Diaries: Like Soderbergh’s later (and pretty magnificent in some ways) film, this Che biopic refuses to engage with the dark side of Guevera. It seems so committed to playing him as an angel that telling the truth (that he killed people; lots of people; and sometimes summarily) eludes it.
V for Vendetta: One of several films that seem to think that a really cool, like, way to make people happy, like, would be to blow everything UP, man, and, like kill everyone who disagrees with us.
The Last King of Scotland: Which purports to offer some psychological insight into human evil, but turns into nothing much more than a well-crafted chase film.
And finally, a film whose awfulness speaks for itself, but whose lived experience is like sitting beside someone who changes the channels every ten seconds while hitting you in the face with a frying pan:
Very interesting formulation for your “lists”. There's some that I really agree with you about (Across The Universe, A Beautiful Mind) and some that I don't mostly just in knowing how my viewpoint on violence differs from your equally reasonable standpoint (Man on Fire, City of God & V For Vendetta). But, my major points that I want to mention are;
- why are you not supposed to like The Prestige? It's legitimately one of my favorite movies of the past decade (and possibly ever, I did see it 5 times in the theater, after all), and still hope that one of the characters manages to escape his fate by the end of the movie.
- and I feel the need to have you clarify that the versions of the movies, by Ridley Scott you listed, are in fact the Director's Cuts of Black Hawk Down and Kingdom of Heaven. That latter of which, I would also list in my favorite movies of the decade. Which I couldn't say about the theatrical cut, and if you haven't seen the DC, you really ought to.
- Lastly, I feel like I'd have to list Transformers in the “not supposed to like, but do” list.
Very interested to see the movies that are coming up in your next set of lists. :)
Excellent list Gareth -and I agree with most of your choices and reasons. I won't bore anyone by going into length on any point pro/con, but I would like to say that HULK and TROY are two of my favourite “mainstream action” movies of the past while.
In fact I bought Troy dvd, then the director's cut and now (even after already re-buying a movie once for the first time ever) I'm almost considering buying it on Blu-Ray because I know it will look lovely. Almost. If only Mrs. Rumm knew, she could buy it for me for Christmas, but I can look forward to warm feet over the festive season instead.
Hulk is possible the only Ang Lee film that I actually _enjoy_ instead of admiring. The only thing that stopped me buying/owning it is the _awful_ unskippable ads from Universal on the DVD (that luckily I borrowed from a friend first).
I've heard a lot of good things about Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut, but I wonder if anyone could put my mind at rest one way or the other… PLEASE…
Don't flame me, but I can't think of a Ridley Scott movie that I actually like: Blade Runner, Gladiator, Thelma & Louise and anything in-between I've tolerated. Some of them I've watched multiple times to try hard to like them if not love them, but to me none of his films have heart (soul?) and certainly no humour. Even Alien and The Duellists are “good” in my opinion, without being great.
Technically and visually I really like Ridley's stuff -not enough to sit through the movies though.
That said… and given my enjoyment of 'epic' type movies, Troy being the most recent example of one I liked (not to say I like everything about it of course)… is there any chance I might like Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut, I wonder?
I put myself at the mercy of The Film Talk and its 'dear listeners'… please don't make me suffer through another Ridley Scott movie if I can help it, but likewise I'd hate to miss a movie I could well love.
So, should I risk all on a gamble… this… one… last… time…?
[By the way, assuming your funds-drive is successful, how about a "Dear TFT," section where dear listeners can post questions such as the above and get answers (and REASONS) from your perspective? ...and where us rabble can add our comments too of course]
[...] original here: The Film Talk » The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the … Tags: both-pretty, desire, earlier-produced, favourite, iron-out, mangat, must-add, passage, [...]
Social comments and analytics for this post…
This post was mentioned on Twitter by yanoveomonos: RT @moviesforyou: The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the Decade? #movies http://bit.ly/8ijgkn…
Hi StanleyRumm – Good point – I think an 'ask TFT' section might be a nice idea – perhaps the best way to do it would be for us to answer questions on the podcast. I think you would like the Kingdom of Heaven Director's Cut, by the way. I'm actually a huge fan of Blade Runner, The Duellists, and Alien; have a soft spot for 1492; and when I watched Thelma and Louise recently figured it was magnificent. The past decade saw his budgets grow disproportionately to the quality of the scripts he was working with.
Good question too John – I didn't know you weren't supposed to like 'The Prestige' until a) Jett and b) my wife told me so. Perhaps we can start a campaign to ask Prestige-detractors to defend their spurious attacks?
A clarification: I had the wrong image on the post for Transformers – I would put the first Transformers in the 'not supposed to like, but do' category; the film at the end of the post was supposed to be the sequel. Has been amended now. Though I think I'm stuck with the memories ;-)
It's my gut feeling that people who like 'The Fountain' also like 'The Prestige'.
Perhaps we can discus on the show sometime.
I'm sure the The Prestige haters explanations would lead to the same kind of fiascos in discourse, that it would seem your conversations on The Fountain have been. And Jett's right. I love The Fountain, as well. (What can I say, Hugh Jackman had a great year in 2006. With these two “masterpieces” along with a strong performance in a lesser movie, X-Men 3: All Hell Breaks Loose; and my third favorite performance of his was the Aardman Productions (Wallace and Gromit) animated film, Flushed Away. (He was also in Happy Feet, and Woody Allen's Scoop, but I didn't care much for the former, and haven't seen the latter.)
And I have a gut feeling that people that hate The Prestige, liked The Illusionist. A far inferior movie, where the magic tricks were basically impossible and ludicrous. :P
I saw the theatrical cut of KoH, and didn't particularly like it – other than the amazing visuals, which both of the Scott's are known for. And I only recently saw the Director's Cut, and thought that it was amazing. It adds depth to a lot of the characters, brings in a lot more of the diplomatic elements, that I guess were present around the rulers of Jerusalem of the time. (It's about the second Crusade, btw)
It's got it's share of gore and violence, but it's very reflective of what it is to partake in a holy war, and in some of my favorite moments; the flexibility of established religions to just do what it can to sustain itself.
I'd recommend it. And I'd actually recommend the Director's Cuts of all of Ridley's movies. They may not change your mind on him as a filmmaker, but they're far superior to the movies that tend to get released to the theaters.
[...] This post was mentioned on Twitter by Andy Steel, ShoeChick, Stephen Croke, Jason Bellamy, Felipe Rodríguez and others. Felipe Rodríguez said: RT @moviesforyou: The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the Decade? #movies http://bit.ly/8ijgkn [...]
I didn't see The Fountain, but I thought Requiem For a Dream was so laughably awful (and so overwhelmingly praised) I have absolutely zero hope there's any chance I'd like The Fountain.
Aronofsky's first movie, Pi, was good but only really in a “what a really neat high-class student movie this is -wonder what he'd do with a real budget?” kind of way. Well we found out -he makes the same kind of student movie, with the same effects, but with bigger sets.
I really liked the look and feel of The Prestige, but I was too distracted by the elephant-in-the-room “twist-to-come” it was spoilt overall for me. I agree its sum is greater than this one twist however and I plan on watching it again. I like Christopher Nolan films on the whole, but I think they would be dangerously brilliant if only there was a _teensy_ bit more depth to them.
I agree with John's point that The Illusionist suffers badly for having ridiculous “magic”, but I can appreciate it being ridiculous because that is how the audience at the time would have seen it… “achieving the impossible!”
There's no way to recreate that feeling in today's world of cinema. Otherwise, the film also suffers from twistisitis, but more than anything else, it dies due to an inadequate budget.
I have to say that I didn't care for either of Aronofsky's first movies. Both rang cold and sterile to me, like they were out to punish their stars and show us the grotesqueness of patterns and drug use. The Fountain, was the complete opposite. It felt purely from the heart and a deep study on life and death and our place in the universe. Also the scene where Jackman uses the quill pen to tattoo himself is probably one of the strongest and most moving scenes I've ever witnessed in a movie.
As for The Prestige, I can't say that the story is really deep, but what it does is show us two people that are willing to stoop to any lengths to outdo another. And the man who would seem to be the hero, by the end, truly turns out to be the villain. The magic in that movie, and I'm not talking about the tricks seen on screen, wowed me. I saw it twice in a row, then went back three separate times in the following weeks. It was my favorite movie of 2006 (even though I considered Children of Men to be the best movie of the year).
[...] The Film Talk » The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the … [...]
Same here, with “Prestige”. I liked it okay, but was distracted for the same reasons.
Of the two “magic” movies that came out, I liked “Illusionist” better. Both were fairly absurd, but I thought the movie did succeed in placing you in the era in which the movie took place which kept my attention.
For what it's worth, KofH Director's cut is very good (especially on Blu-Ray – wow!).
Nice to see a mention of Cast Away. For a main stream movie I was impressed by how slow (in a good way) it becomes half way through, and avoids the cliche of having Hanks return back to the arms of his patiently waiting woman.
I'm going to throw some fuel in the fire and say that I thought There Will be Blood was my over praised film of the 00s. Almost 3hrs in the company of a really unpleasant man is not my idea of fun, or art for that matter.
Agree 100% there Tom re There Will Be Blood. Frankly I've had enough of such people and don't find them worthy of attention in the first place.
*DING* <move on>… (can you tell I've been drinking?)(
I just placed my order for Kingdom of Heaven Directors Cut Blu Ray (<£9) and on all your heads be it. …Not really, but I will report back on my findings one day. Estimated delivery date _after_ the 25th of December though so might take a while. I ordered it along with the old Jason and the Argonauts.
…While I'm at it, I might as well mention the other bargains I found on amazon.co.uk… Red Cliff Special Edition (that's both movies -not the guillotined single) for £8.98. I also checked if it's region-locked and according to the site I saw it's not, so I'd recommend my American brethren to check that out if you're looking for something that could be good.
…and yes I thought I might as well go for Troy on Blu Ray since it too was less than £9. Also, Fearless. Never saw that one before. (The Jett Li one -yet another 'risky' purchase if you ask me, since I don't recall ever seeing a Jett Li movie I liked -isn't he a bit bland?)
Also got the 1940s Thief of Bagdad for around a fiver and The Seventh Veil for similar moola. That's my Christmas movie shopping done now. Merry Christmas all at TFT! :)
Er… sorry for hikacking the thread… nice list Gareth!
There's a lot of other reasons to dislike V For Vendetta, but I don't think “it makes people happy to blow stuff up” is one of them. That's a little silly, I think. Why not mention the entire lack of moral ambiguity that was present in the graphic novel, or something like that?
In any case, speaking of 'best-of' lists – coincidently, for the past month and a half, Glenn Heath from that indelible Match Cuts and I have been counting down our respective Top Ten of the past ten years. We're down to our final three, at the moment – the big ones, y'know.
I'd agree with some of you points & disagree with some in particular what you say about City Of God. I personally find that “music video” stylisation of certain scenes adds to the gravity of the scenes that have a more realistic structure.
Most overrated films of the decade for me would probably be A History Of Violence. It was supposedly this allegory about the nature of violence,I might sound like a complete pleb but from what I saw it was a stupid thriller/overly gory action film with some of the clunkiest dialogue I've ever heard (some of the lines sound like they were written for 7th Heaven or Touched By An Angel). 300, was overrated as well. I found it incredibly dull. The action is seriously repetitive & all the stylized slowmotion & nu-metal riffs in the world can't disguise it. But it made millions so what do I know?
In my estimation, the great underrated movie of the decade is actually by Cronenburg as well. Spider is a really thought provoking interestingly structured approach to mental illness.
I loved the Fountain, but was underwhelmed by the Prestige. Definitely preferred the Illusionist.
Gareth has been on me for years to watch THE FOUNTAIN again…we shall see!
I don't really agree with much of what you wrote at all. Kill Bill, City of God, and Gladiator are three of my favorite films of the decade, and if you put Shine a Light ahead of the Departed and Aviator (just guessing at what you were alluding to), that's just insane. But hey, to each his own, right? Guess I should wait on your actual “best of” list before I pass too much judgement… I enjoy the podcast though. Hope you can continue to make it.
Alas JonathanH, I'm afraid I may meet your definition of 'insane'. But, given Michel Foucault's adage that in a mad world, only the mad are sane, perhaps I should take that as a compliment. Glad you enjoyed the movies you mentioned above – I did, too, but only one of them enough to consider it one of the best of the decade. Thanks for listening!
PS: And hey – you loved The Fountain – so surely we agree more than disagree? :)
[...] I Liked in the 2000s but not enough to go to the mountaintop. Or Something Like That. (See here for Part 1: The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the Decade?) So, mere days from the unleashing of the [...]
[...] The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the Decade? [...]
Interesting. That's also the most common complaint I hear about “Raging Bull” — that the protagonist isn't likable. For me, that's utterly irrelevant. If you dislike a film because you can't stand 2-3 hours with somebody like Daniel Plainview or Jake LaMotta, perhaps you've missed the point. You also must hate “The Godfather II” or any other character study that examines the depths of human emotion and behavior through unpleasant archetypes. I personally think “There Will Be Blood” is underrated. Easily one of the best films of the decade.
Yes!!! Across the Universe is the best movie ever! At the time it was released it paralelled the world then so well. When I show it to people they are like “This is amazing.” I think it would have done so much better if it was advertised more. I remember how I almost cried when the “Let It Be” scene came on. It sent chills down my spine.
[...] The Most Over-Rated and Under-Rated Films of the Decade? [...]
[...] to see and evaluate it for myself (in which case you may find it on one of my earlier lists of under- and over-rated films, and some that I think deserve a second look but which I didn’t feel should be on this list), [...]
OK, Kingdom of Heaven DC arrived the other day and I thought I'd mention that I watched it last night (in case anyone is interested..)
Anyway, I'd just like to thank those who recommended it to me, based on what I had said. I can't say I _liked_ it, but I'm definitely glad I watched it.
I thought the crowd/ battle scenes were among the finest ever filmed -ie. it looked less like CGI than any other I can think of -although the digital blood took me right out of it every time it splashed across the screen. Also I thought a lot of the violence was gratuitous. I can see a need to portray the “violence of the times”, but the scenes I'm thinking of were more to do with cinematic, stylised deaths than realism: eg. sharp end of a pickaxe through a helmet at the top of a head. The way it was shown was.. unnecessary. There were a few more like that.
Sets and costumes were all top-notch.
The beginning of the movie wasn't bad, but after what seemed like an age I found myself checking runtime, praying it wasn't nearly over because nothing much had happened and I didn't want to report back here with nothing but negatives.
Thankfully (kind of) it was only half way through at that point.
In this instance, I think most of the problems can't be levelled at Ridley Scott, but Orlando Bloom… or more accurately whoever cast him. Sure, he's not hard to look at, but he just looks and feels ridiculous in the role.
His character's overnight transformation from grieving blacksmith to son-of-a-knight, legendary fighter, sage, battle strategist, subtle lover and leader of men might have stood some chance if played by an actor who looks like he has _some_ potential to learn and grow, but, though I don't dismiss Mr. Bloom outright as a 'name actor' -he's no leader of men, nor epic-movie lead character.
In short: I can't say I loved it, but I had less problems with it than I did any other Ridley Scott film, so next time I'm dissing him at least I'll have a few more positive things to say. :)
It's also the 2nd-best “epic” film I've seen in the past week.
(Red Cliff 1 and 2 being the better one -blu ray still going cheap on amazon.co.uk last I looked!)
Across the Universe would be in my Top 10 Comedies of the Decade, since it's so bad that it's funny. If you really like The Beatles, you won't like this film.
I agree King Pickle – i'm working on my own 'overrated films of the decade' and put ACROSS THE UNIVERSE on it – too bad since the director is such an accomplished visual stylist – anyhew, may not post it as am not sure i wanna be so negative this holiday season!
I missed this post until now… I agree that it's possible to watch a film without liking the protagonists. I'm not sure I'd toss Godfather II in such a boat (for me at least) because dash it all I think I like Michael despite all that goes on. It's a tribute to the quality of the film that it can portray a person committing such vile acts and still leave the viewer conflicted -or at least with much to think about re: how they relate to you.
It is true I've never been as crazy for Raging Bull as the world and its lobster seem to be, but it's so long since I saw it (though I did try it 3+ times) I'm not sure I'd hold the same view now -or even what those views were. I shoulda writ them down I know.
There are exceptions to the “irrelevant to dislike a movie because the main character is unlikeable” though. For instance I've decided a while back that I have absolutely ZERO interest in watching another “Serial Killer” type movie. I think these characters have been played-out and overexposed already in “popular” media. It's nigh-on hero worship at this stage. Whether the movie is “worshipping” the killer or not, it's invariably living on the “strength” and power of these acts (there are exceptions to this too -Zodiac and Memories of Murder being two notables).
It's all too easy to show such downbeat, soul-sucking, nihilistic acts & protagonists. It's virtually impossible to “diss” them without coming across as a squeamish schoolgirl. We're encouraged to “FACE THE EVIL HEAD ON”. Not to do so is to remain ignorant.
Well, I don't agree with that. I also have no qualms about switching the channel when the dying babies of Africa (or any other country) are shown in all their 'glory' -not because I don't care, but because it's too damn upsetting. And me being upset makes zero difference to the problem. …but I know if it was my loved-one lying dead on the side of the road I'd be outraged at the idea of it being shown on TV (much like it isn't done to show for instance the identifiable body of a US soldier in this manner).
OK, I'm drifting off the point slightly there, but still, this is my objection to 'Serial Killer' type movies and I found There Will Be Blood to be nothing other than the portrait of a vacuous man who shares much of these same qualities.
“Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!” …well part of the power such people gain (and strive for) is provided simply BY the looking.
I am as Time. I have no time for such petty individuals.
But 'There Will Be Blood' so much more than just a portrait of a vacuous man. It's an intimate and compelling study of the real foundations of America — not freedom and tolerance, but capitalism and religion. To discount the film based on the unlikability of the main character is a tragic mistake — because that's the whole point!
We'll have to agree to disagree there Eric for the reasons I put earlier. I can't say I care what the point of the movie is/was. I don't like it.
…Beside the points I raised, I also didn't like it because basically it's a 3+hour two-act, uninteresting play. Very well made for all that. Cinematography, starkness and vibrant bleak sound throughout are amazing. I still didn't like the film overall.
I've given it enough of my time. I realise this is an untrendy and almost unallowable viewpoint, but I've given my reasons at least.
I missed this post until now… I agree that it's possible to watch a film without liking the protagonists. I'm not sure I'd toss Godfather II in such a boat (for me at least) because dash it all I think I like Michael despite all that goes on. It's a tribute to the quality of the film that it can portray a person committing such vile acts and still leave the viewer conflicted -or at least with much to think about re: how they relate to you.
It is true I've never been as crazy for Raging Bull as the world and its lobster seem to be, but it's so long since I saw it (though I did try it 3+ times) I'm not sure I'd hold the same view now -or even what those views were. I shoulda writ them down I know.
There are exceptions to the “irrelevant to dislike a movie because the main character is unlikeable” though. For instance I've decided a while back that I have absolutely ZERO interest in watching another “Serial Killer” type movie. I think these characters have been played-out and overexposed already in “popular” media. It's nigh-on hero worship at this stage. Whether the movie is “worshipping” the killer or not, it's invariably living on the “strength” and power of these acts (there are exceptions to this too -Zodiac and Memories of Murder being two notables).
It's all too easy to show such downbeat, soul-sucking, nihilistic acts & protagonists. It's virtually impossible to “diss” them without coming across as a squeamish schoolgirl. We're encouraged to “FACE THE EVIL HEAD ON”. Not to do so is to remain ignorant.
Well, I don't agree with that. I also have no qualms about switching the channel when the dying babies of Africa (or any other country) are shown in all their 'glory' -not because I don't care, but because it's too damn upsetting. And me being upset makes zero difference to the problem. …but I know if it was my loved-one lying dead on the side of the road I'd be outraged at the idea of it being shown on TV (much like it isn't done to show for instance the identifiable body of a US soldier in this manner).
OK, I'm drifting off the point slightly there, but still, this is my objection to 'Serial Killer' type movies and I found There Will Be Blood to be nothing other than the portrait of a vacuous man who shares much of these same qualities.
“Look on my works, ye Mighty, and despair!” …well part of the power such people gain (and strive for) is provided simply BY the looking.
I am as Time. I have no time for such petty individuals.
But “There Will Be Blood” is so much more than just a portrait of a vacuous man. It's an intimate and compelling study of the real foundations of America — not freedom and tolerance, but capitalism and religion. To discount the film based on the unlikability of the main character is a tragic mistake — because that's the whole point!
We'll have to agree to disagree there Eric for the reasons I put earlier. I can't say I care what the point of the movie is/was. I don't like it.
…Beside the points I raised, I also didn't like it because basically it's a 3+hour two-act, uninteresting play. Very well made for all that. Cinematography, starkness and vibrant bleak sound throughout are amazing. I still didn't like the film overall.
I've given it enough of my time. I realise this is an untrendy and almost unallowable viewpoint, but I've given my reasons at least.
Man on Fire is the MOST UNDERRATED MOVIE of all time.Everything about it is brilliant!