Movies you hate that everyone else likes

I'm really curious to see how the next Avatar goes down.

Cameron's movies have arguably been headed down the toilet in the 21st century but so far his ticket sales have never dropped. Will the Avatar sequels finally be when that happens? Or will Cameron have a sharp enough sense of the audience & industry (he sure did for a long time) to make a movie that sticks with people longer than Avatar #1 did?

i think his big old head got him in a pickle this time. he thinks he's got another star wars here. i don't think so....

for the ten plus years he's been promising the next one.. or next four.. ;o)

cyclocrosschris said:

Warcraft. What a pile of bantha poo poo , unwatchable if u have no idea of the game, at least Ghostbusters was watchable

Click to expand...

That bad? I've been debating whether or not to watch...

batguy said:

I'm really curious to see how the next Avatar goes down.

Cameron's movies have arguably been headed down the toilet in the 21st century but so far his ticket sales have never dropped. Will the Avatar sequels finally be when that happens? Or will Cameron have a sharp enough sense of the audience & industry (he sure did for a long time) to make a movie that sticks with people longer than Avatar #1 did?

Click to expand...

I still cant believe they are devoting a theme park to it. Kinda crazy. I kind of want it to flop hard. Is that bad? Cause the first one doesnt deserve as much praise as it got. Well, not praise really, money I should say. One could argue that its Avatars fault that started the whole "dumbing down of movies for foreign audiences" because of the effects and crappy plot.

I continuously try to like Blade Runner. Have watched it probably 8 times now, trying to see what the fuss is about. Can't do it. It's a fine movie, but not worth the praise it receives. Liked the source book, though.

cyclocrosschris said:

Warcraft. What a pile of bantha poo poo , unwatchable if u have no idea of the game, at least Ghostbusters was watchable

Click to expand...

Warcraft is a movie that everyone likes?

Let's see...

Jurassic World. This one is probably the closest I've come to "hating" a movie.
Any movie Seth Rogen, James Franco, and Evan Goldberg were involved in. Enough people seem to hold their movies in high regard so...
Avatar. Shiet. I can't believe I had forgotten about that one 2 years ago when I first posted in this thread.
[strike]Deadpool. Apparently that kind of humor is not for me.[/strike] I'm on the brink with this one, not because of the comedy, it's the story I'm unsure of.
Finding Dory. BORING.
Laika movies. I can't get invested their characters. I think I won't bother with them anymore.
Illumination Entertainment movies. Besides Despicable Me (I loved the first one), they have nothing really good.

RModin said:

I continuously try to like Blade Runner. Have watched it probably 8 times now, trying to see what the fuss is about. Can't do it. It's a fine movie, but not worth the praise it receives. Liked the source book, though.

Click to expand...

I like the idea of Blade Runner more than the actual movie. As in I like the world, visuals, the story but I really have to be in the mood to watch it. That said I own more than a couple copies of it.

interstellar

Jurassic park
The new apes movies. I feel that by having the apes simply be a genetic mistake by the humans, they undermine the intelligent evolution discussion of the originals

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

i honestly cannot see how people don't like finding dory.

i usually don't like pixar movies, as i find them not as good as other companies like dreamworks. but this one i enjoyed alot.
even if i think it wasn't needed and the lead character would not make a good lead character

ONEYE said:

Star Wars, all the goofy aliens, and it's just too geeky/nerdy for me.

Click to expand...

I wonder why you are banned

astroboy said:

...The new apes movies. I feel that by having the apes simply be a genetic mistake by the humans, they undermine the intelligent evolution discussion of the originals.

Click to expand...

Have you seen all five of the original Planet of the Apes movies? The "intelligent evolution" you mention was pure speculation advocated by Dr. Zaius. Apes becoming the dominant species was essentially the result of three "evolved" apes traveling back in time to modern day (circa 1973), and two of them having a child (Caesar) who grew to adulthood and propagated the intelligent version of the species.

Here's my list of movies/ shows that either are so bad they are painful to watch, or simply so-so movies that are overrated by a large fan base and the general public.

Titanic, Avatar, Interstellar, Deadpool, Rogue One, Jurassic World, Batman V. Superman, Suicide Squad, The Walking Dead, Game of Thrones, the new Ghostbusters, Knocked Up, The Hangover, X-Men: Days of Future Past, X-Men: Apocalypse, American Hustle, (Coen Brother's) True Grit- by the end I wanted to shoot that little girl myself she was so ****ing annoying.

The hangover is awful.

The cast was good, but there was no script.

There was one funny joke. That shot of "the morning after".

After that, there was nothing. It was a painful ripoff of "dude, where's my car?". And THAT movie had the sense to quit while it was ahead
Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Zombie_61 said:

Have you seen all five of the original Planet of the Apes movies? The "intelligent evolution" you mention was pure speculation advocated by Dr. Zaius. Apes becoming the dominant species was essentially the result of three "evolved" apes traveling back in time to modern day (circa 1973), and two of them having a child (Caesar) who grew to adulthood and propagated the intelligent version of the species.

Click to expand...

I haven't. I gave up after the second one. I always got the impression that they were pale sequels to the real movie. (Kind of like Rambo)

It's unfortunate to hear that they retconned the evolution aspect. That was a very important part of the movies' contribution to science fiction .

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

How can you retcon something that just speculation to begin with?

Princess Leia being Luke's Skywalker's sister was never technically a retcon. It still felt like one.

astroboy said:

I haven't. I gave up after the second one. I always got the impression that they were pale sequels to the real movie. (Kind of like Rambo)

It's unfortunate to hear that they retconned the evolution aspect. That was a very important part of the movies' contribution to science fiction .

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk

Click to expand...

The evolution aspect was never truly part of the apes taking over, though. As was stated by Zombie_61 that was essentially just propaganda by Dr Zaius to try to suggest that apes were naturally the top of the evolutionary chain.

Retconning things becomes an interesting subject when you start having time travel in a franchise as well.

To me, personally, the reboot films do a better job of showing how a Planet of the Apes would begin without relying on something that physics states is impossible...traveling BACK through time. I always kind of felt like that was a weak way of explaining how the situation started in the first place. The reboots idea of testing cognitive drugs on animals is, again to me personally, a much better way of "starting" the idea that apes will end up being the dominant species on the planet. I mean, if you think about it humans are only dominant because of our intelligence...we aren't strong, or fast, or really very physically adept...so if you take a bunch of apes and suddenly make them as smart as us, there's a good chance we'll end up losing that battle.

For what it's worth, the reboots also could be argued that they stick a bit more closely to the source material. In the original book there was one chimp who first spoke, and that was kind of the start of it all. That is actually the case in the reboots, generally speaking. The original sequels, however, have the apes travel back in time where they end up being famous and everyone knows about them. This contradicts that source material as there was no mention of three apes showing up out of nowhere who could talk and then became famous.

So anyway...the rebooted films fit more with the source material, offer an explanation for why the whole thing started that relies on a much more believable cause, and don't really retcon anything because the time travel aspect makes it so really a filmmaker can do whatever they want, as they can always explain it away with "it changed the future" or whatever when "such and such went back in time."