No.329
ITT classic movies that you didn't understand the hype for. Pic related, my ones (Les 400 Coups, Battleship Potemkin and The African Queen), also a lot of Hitchcocks films. Can anyone explain what makes these more than just pretty good? And what classics did you lot not really get?
No.331
Gonna have ro agree with 400 Blows. Didn't really like it.
The Maltese Falcon and Modern times as well
No.334
Had some grate shots and scenes, but found it dull.
>inb4 gets hate for the next week
No.337
>>334I think the problem with Kane is that it's just so constantly praised that it builds up a really high expectation, whereas I went into it feeling quite cynical and thus rather enjoyed it.
No.341
>>331Glad I'm not the only one, like it was some decently done realist cinema, but realism had been done before in Italy for a while so it wasn't revolutionary.
And nothing that bad happened to him, he was just a bit of a dick and suffered the consequences of being a dick.
No.345
Why the shitty taste?
No.346
>>345What do you mean? And if you're saying that we have shitty taste for disliking these then you're missing the point.
The point is we enjoy films of this type generally and these are the ones that are thought to be especially good that we didn't enjoy.
No.347
I understand the innovations for its time, but I didn't liked it a lot.
No.350
>>347I hated the jump cuts personally except for when it was used at the end
No.352
The Bible of French New-Wave, apparently.
The easiest in accessing and understanding film of Godard, apparently.
A good film, and not utterly boring and convulted mess, apparently.
I enjoy French New-Wave, but Godard is the cancer of that period.
No.353
File: 1411319198978.jpg (56.65 KB, 472x700, 118:175, image_slide_show_new_10024….jpg)
>>352Shit, forgot the poster. Just easily, as I've forgotten this film.
No.355
>>353>>347Absolutely agree, Le Mepris is far more enjoyable though
No.359
>>347>>353I was planning on seeing this quite soon as well, probably won't now, I'll go for some other Goddard instead.
No.363
I always have a hard time for Bresson. I wish I could appreciate him, but his films are neither emotional nor interesting to me, with the sole exception of Au Hasard Balthazar.
Cassavetes. I guess I was expecting a lot from his filmography after watching A Woman Under the Influence, but since then his stuff has felt stale and underwhelming.
Also, I am unable to enjoy classics like All About Eve or The Godfather.
No.371
Yeah, The African Queen wasn't very good. The opposites attract romcom premise has worked better elsewhere. I was only entertained by the mileage they got out of rear projection, and by Bogart making goofy faces toward the end.
No.372
>>371But I thought it was worse than not very good like it was just soooo fucking stupid, and I know that's kind of the point, to be all a bit silly, but it was just stupid to the point of pissing me off.
No.376
>>371I prefer Huston's later work
Heaven Knows, Mr. Allison with Robert Mitchum and Deborrah Kerr. It sort of mirrored and perhaps surpassed the scale of what he was attempting in African Queen in terms of tone
(without the special effects that lost their lustre after a couple decades).
No.437
>>352not a fan of godard myself. I thought Breathless was massively overrated
No.438
>>363I can understand how his directing style can annoy and make his characters come off as insincere and dead, but I find it odd that you choose Au Hasard Balthazar where his model technique is arguably applied worst. Similar themes are less sloppily executed with his later film Mouchette although the story isn't as good. If you can't appreciate A Man Escaped then that's your fault and not Bressons.
Cassavetes is hit or miss. A Woman Under the Influence is probably his only Masterpiece, but I would still urge you to watch Love Streams if you haven't already.
No.440
>>359Nah, Breathless is actually one of Godard's better films. Most of his other Nouvelle Vague films are soporific tripe, and you'd only hate him more if you chose to see them first.
Although I think he does have a kind of subversive talent when it comes to filmmaking which is occasionally a success. I really enjoyed Masculin-Feminin and even more so, Week End, which I found to be hilarious.
No.441
It's been a while since I saw The 400 Blows but what I loved about it was how easily relatable the main character was. He was a a hundred million children rolled into one, making every bad move, loss, or failure, regardless of how truly tragic, all the more powerful. The last 10 or so minutes especially were utterly devestating for me, seeing the mother say he was no longer her child, and then the ending.
The camerawork was also undeniably fantastic, making it one of the best and most realistic presentations into the life of a city I have seen.
No.443
>>441That's the thing though, I didn't find him even mildly relatable, everything he did was just an annoying dick move.
His parents and teachers all tried to help and he just kept being a fucking prick.
And I wouldn't even say the camera work was fantastic, it was good, sure,
but as good as Truffaut's other, in my opinion, better, films like Jules et Jim.
So many films before it had an equally realistic portrayal of life in a city with equally good if not better cinematography, the Italian Neo-Realist movement being a prime example, with films like Rome, Open City which are also much more hard hitting (if you haven't seen any Neo-Realism go watch that shit it's great).
And then there are the later films inspired by that style, best of which I'd say would be The Battle of Algiers.
I'm waffling but my points essentially come down to this: it's realism done pretty well but plenty of films have done it equally well (forgot to mention British New Wave, Saturday Night and Sunday Morning, Kes all that stuff) nothing that bad happens to the kid, which sort of takes away the great power of the realist style, i.e. shocking things happening like in Rome, Open City.
But then again your points stand up against all of that since it's a subjective thing, to you and, presumably, many others he was a relatable character making his almost self inflicted downfall all the more poignant. I suppose what I don't understand isn't why it's people's favourite film but why it's considered one of the greatest, almost on an objective level.
No.445
>>440right, well thanks for the advice, when I do get around to Goddard I'll probably go for that first then.
No.450
>>329The godfather part 1 and 2 it seemed okay but sadly since I'm not Italian I did not get what so great about the films
No.451
>>443There's a sequel to the 400 blows I wonder if seeing that helps or not
No.629
>>451There's a quite long series featuring the character and in all of them he's played by the same actor, as I understand the others aren't thought of as being as good.
No.696
>>334>>337I went in it with quite high expectations and was pretty impressed.
I'd say the plot and storytelling is really strong. When I compare to a lot of it's contemporary Classic Hollywood cinema (Casablanca, Gone With The Wind), the way it flits between past and present and the way you see Kane through each person's description of him evolves throughout. I think that's really clever, along with the multitude of camera tricks and great cinematography.
Speaking of Classic Hollywood Cinema. I really didn't find Casablanca to be one of the best films ever made. I also think some of the quotes are a bit overrated (We'll always have Paris, Here's looking at you, kid) though I do love the line 'Of all the gin joints, in all the towns, in all the world, she walks into mine'.
I didn't find the plot to be very gripping. Nor the way it's presented, or the photography.
No.701
>>696this seems absolutely spot on to me on all counts.
No.705
File: 1411407335184.jpg (534.46 KB, 1399x2093, 1399:2093, Wizard_of_oz_movie_poster.jpg)
Limp and mean-spirited
No.711
>>705I used to think this one was cute and harmless but i watched it a couple of days ago and is just shit, people like it only because of muh over the rainbow
No.736
>>696Overall, I find Classic Hollywood to be packed with overrated pictures. Sure, there were great releases in the making, upcoming talents in an expansive industry who brought us a myriad of masterpieces, but in my opinion some of them have been hyped by
competent institutions to a surreal status. Canon-considered films in the likes Casablanca, Vertigo, The Maltese Falcon, Gilda, Grand Hotel, The Searchers, The Big Sleep… They are all good, but sadly I didn't think they were nearly as great as some sell them. Or maybe I'm just unable to enjoy this sort of cinema, buggered by its narrow creative range and everpresent clichés of American society.
No.744
>>736On the other side, there are some films of that period that I absolutely love: The Asphalt Jungle, The Hustler, The Incredible Shrinking Man, Sunset Boulevard (and any other Billy Wilder film), Citizen Kane, A Touch of Evil, The Man Who Killed Liberty Valance, etc.
No.756
>>736I agree so much with this, it's just partially at least because of the US-centric world we live in and that that sort of wide appeal cheesiness makes people like them, and because they're old and appeal to a lot of people they become "classics" despite not having in my opinion that much value. Although I think Kane is one of the exceptions.
No.847
I wouldn't rank it among the top 10 Bergman.
No.980
>>736agreed. a lot of that shit, you only need/want to see it once. in particular, i hate how obvious many of the performances are. nothing lively or interesting about them.
>>756Citizen Kane is a.) terribly overrated, and b.) a huge influence on a lot of garbage Hollywood pictures of the '50s and the later '40s.
No.982
Why is it such a big surprise to people that popular things are mostly homogenized and unremarkable?
No.1153
No.1195
Week End by Godard
I don't understand the hype over it, tbh.
I must admit, I actually liked it until the scene with the Arab and the Black man were elucidating Godard's commie political views directly into the camera. I liked it up until then because he was doing a good job using metaphors and symbolism to push his agenda, like the long car scene where our protagonists drive ahead of everyone. This scene could represent how the selfish rich in society show no regard for others and swipe aside the poor. I believe the Arab man and Black man scene could've been avoided.
Anyway, after this scene, I think the film became too confusing for me. I think I'll watch it again, but I have a 500gb backlog of films to get through so I'm not sure when exactly.
tl;dr - this film was 2dada4me
No.2011
I sat through Mad Mad World expecting it to get better any minute. It never did.
One appeal is seeing many comedians of the era together. Only problem is they aren't doing anything particularly funny here. Maybe all the comedy is just too dated.
It might theoretically work if projected from a 70mm film print and viewed with a packed audience. But overall I think this movie stinks, one of the worst "classics" I've seen.
No.2452
I am fine with films that run over three hours in length. But this is not an interesting film. Ivan's Childhood is usually regarded as the least good Tarkovsky but it trumps this easily.
No.2465
i'll add to the godard love to say that alphaville is pretty terrible. beautiful as she is, you can only get so much mileage out of anna karina close-ups. the "sci-fi" and "futuristic" elements are just inane. then it turns out to have a weird message that says math is ebil because it chokes out muh feelz. yawn.
No.2530
No.2545
>>2452How come you didn't find anything interesting during the entire duration of the movie?
It paints quite the interesting portrait of medieval Russia IMO, and examines issues as the role art has in society.
Hell, I bet some casual movie viewers could even find stuff like the battle scenes interesting.
No.2546
>>2545those scenes were also used as a reference point for the unique battle formations in Spartacus
No.2567
>Vertigo
Felt like a generic love story with a really weak plot "twist"
>The cranes are flying
not a bad film at all, but the characters themselves just felt off: Boris seemed all to eager to just go off and join the army and he seemed indifferent to Veronica most of the time, Veronica gets raped yet still feels she needs to stay with his brother for some reason as his wife, and despite holding onto hope that Boris is still alive until the very end of the movie, suddenly lets go and accepts his death just because of a speech by the general
No.3500
not terrible but it's one of my least favorite from polanski
No.3502
>>334I'm fucking tired of seeing people call this "the greatest film of all time."
It was like a 6/10.
No.3503
>Star Wars as a series
>The Lord of the Rings as a series
>The Godfather, parts 1 and 2
>Trier's Antichrist
>Primer, and Upstream Color
>Mr. Nobody, fuck that piece of shit
No.3524
>>329the african queen is quite a comfy movie…
No.3525
>>980>overratedI almost which this word could be an insta-ban. That doesn't mean anything, that really isn't any kind of criticism of the movie
No.3532
>>2011You must not get its humour. I love that movie, but it defiently has some old jokes and lots of cartoonish slap-stick. Hell, it is a cartoon really. It really does build on itself as the race to the money just turns into a ball of hell, ending on a scene where everything practically blows up. But the humour might not be for you. One of the jokes is that one guy in the glasses that follows that kid through a short cut and they end up traversing through fucking bullshit and ending with him trying to cross a river in his car. The car sinks while he tries to cross it because he really has no choice now so he had to go forward. It's funny to me, but it's defiantly a clean kind of comedy. Cleaner than today anyway.
No.3533
>>3525Yeah, really. Why does everyone's shitty opinions on whether they like it or not affect the movie?
Polite sage No.3534
>>347Even though I did enjoy the film, Godard is a hack.
>>696This, plus the technical aspects of Citizen Kane are just beyond anything being done at that time. The plot is strong, the characters are strong, it innovated in how hollywood films were telling stories, and it's technically a marvel.
>>3503>Star WarsEpisodes IV and V are classics. The directing is good, the special effects were godlike at the time, the score is unmatched, and the characters were well written.
Especially Episode IV. It was essentially an indie film, that Lucas funded himself. Is it an amazing art film? No, but for pure entertainment, the OT cannot be topped.
Lord of the Rings is entirely dependent on the fact that it kills it with Mise en Scene. It's one of the few modern film franchises that could get away with being called an epic, without being a letdown. Like Star Wars, this one is mostly pure entertainment, but if you think of films as art, Lord of the Rings is art in a very literal sense: All three films are beautiful.
Now compare both of these to the later films:
Star Wars Prequels are CGI-fests with broken plots that go nowhere, and characters nobody cares about… Though I'll argue that Episode 3 is an above average blockbuster action film (Still nothing to write home to mama about). The visual artistry wasn't terrible, when they weren't just throwing shit in your face, but that's the thing: Lucas just fills up the camera with CGI and expects it to look cool. There's often no composition to the frame.
The hobbit, on the other hand, has an entirely competent plot, that's stretched for 3 fucking films, and once again, CGI'd to death.
Can't help you with The Godfather part 1. I can find nothing wrong with that movie. The second one has pacing issues though.
No.4967
Rio Bravo is pretty aggravating IMO. I don't know why it's held in such high regard.
John Wayne walks between two buildings for 140 minutes. It's all very dangerous because they keep telling us it's dangerous. And there's some pretty boy with Elvis hair shoehorned in, a crass pandering to the teen audience.
I'll grant that Dean Martin is surprisingly great in it, and Walter Brennan is at his most Walter Brennan-y.
No.4976
>>450
>The godfather part 1 and 2
>>331
>The Maltese Falcon
This
No.4984
>>331
>the stuff that dreams are made of
No.5010
I'm gonna echo the disdain for Vertigo, it has some high points for sure and I can't deny its innovation, but overall it was ruined by a mediocre love story and some pretty retarded plot twists (at least the letter scene was supposed to be cut, damn execs).
Also, All Quiet on the Western Front. I absolutely hated the actors' performances, they were overacting constantly. A lot of departures from the book took a turn for worse as well. Maybe it has some merit as a really early anti-war film, but I don't see it.
No.5012
The Sight and Sound poll just makes people disappointed I think.
No.5048
>>3534
>Can't help you with The Godfather part 1. I can find nothing wrong with that movie.
Nor can I, particularly. But I can't find anything altogether right about it either. It works on a technical level, has good pacing, solid writing, what have you. But did anything really entice me about it? The conflict and characterizations all seem pretty skin-deep.
I found parts 2 and 3 (gets trashed unfairly imo) to be the better films for delving into Michael's internal conflicts with taking over the role of Godfather and how that affects the people around him. Plus, 2 had some cool neo-modernist time shifts (albeit the poor pacing that accompanied them.) But as far as I can tell, the love for 1 stems from that it accomplished, however thinly, the "epic" stylization at a difficult transitionary period for the film medium.
No.5085
>>334
>>3502
You guys can't deny that this movie was visually ahead of it's time. It's also praised so much because of the "rosebud" aspect. Citizen Kane is a perfect example of a modernized Greek Tragedy, the rise and fall of a god while also vindicating him at the end. Did he ask for all the wealth in the world? No. Deep down, underneath the hard exterior of this media tycoon was a little kid longing for a childhood that he never had. This theme is one of the most constant of all stories regarding wealth which is money doesn't equal happiness.
We've heard this cliche over and over again but people back in the day weren't numbed by media 24/7 like we are today.
I bet this movie changed more lives then any other movie of all time. It deserves it's praise even if you don't think so.
Just because something's popular doesn't always mean it's shit.
No.5086
>>5085
I think people who disregard CK are either trying to be hipsters or don't understand how important this movie is, which shows that you know nothing about cinema.
No.5089
I feel like Citizen Kane is something you watch very early in your exploration of classics. So you might not appreciate it as much as if you revisit it years later. I've seen it once and barely remember it.
There's also this >>5012 in the back of your mind. "Okay, I'm strapped in to experience of one of the best films ever made. Let the nonstop greatness begin." And no film can really live up to that.
No.5093
can the people who don't like Citizen Kane expand a bit? saying it was "dull" or boring is just an awful criticism. different strokes I guess, but that just makes me think that you really haven't developed a "true" appreciation for cinema, not to sound like a snobby asshole, but it is what it is
Citizen Kane really is one of the most remarkable films I've seen, especially when you put it into context of what came before it (and after) and the amazing craft that must have gone into its creation. the editing, sound, cinematography, all of it is just amazing to me, especially considering the time it was made. all those "best films" lists tend to be silly imo (vertigo number one?), but Citizen Kane really is, to me, one of the greatest films of all time (maybe not best, but greatest, and I do think there's a distinction)
I'll also add that the first time I saw it, I was quite high on DXM and the way the movie is shot melded perfectly with that state of consciousness
No.5198
>but influence!
>but for the time!
Jesus Christ. I like Citizen Kane even but it never fails to get under my skin when people try to appeal to context instead of the actual merits of what's on screen.
No.5202
>>5198
there's nothing wrong with appreciating the context and craft of a work as well as its content. it's all a part of it. not to mention Citizen Kane's content has held up incredibly well, still one of the most creatively shot films ever imo and also still very thematically poignant and extremely relevant to what's currently going on in the world (and what has always gone on in the world)
No.5212
For me it's Anatomy of a Murder. I liked the Saul Bass titles (pic related) but I thought the movie was on par with a TV courtroom drama. Pretty average stuff. Stewart was supposed to be an edgy character but I didn't buy it.
No.5213
>>329>>5093>>3502>>5085>>334>>331
Hmm, something in me wants to differentiate OP's use of the word 'hype' into 'what people appreciate' and 'what impact it had on film history'.
With this distinction, I can say from the bottom of my heart, that I'll never try to tell myself or anyone else, that films like citizen kane or potemkin are 'fun', 'entertaining' or even that 'thought provoking'.. But having read and watched a great deal of film history/theory (*tips fedora*), I get what importance the new stylistic features they put into use, and for that they can be greatly appreciated. It's kind of exciting when you realize, that this director was the first to do this, and then thousands of directors and tens of thousands of films copied it.
I loved 400 blows, because I identified with the main character, I thought the acting was good, and I liked the lack of any goal orientation and thus the vacuous pace of the film, which emphasized the films existential theme and feel.
To me, it's a matter of personal taste and feelings versus intellectual appreciation. Obivously, for every one of the great films that were canonized, there are many others just as good or better that fewer people know of - the ones we try to talk about on this board in general.
No.5214
No.5253
Who likes this one?
I had minimal connection to either actor. Peck seems too stuffy for a romantic fling. Can a /film/ette explain the wide appeal of Audrey Hepburn to women?
I dare to say that it needed to be shot in colour (black and white is better for New York than Rome).
No.5255
>>847
What's your top 10 Bergman, then?
Not even challenging you. I agree. Just interested in your opinion, since I really like Bergman.
No.5256
>>3500
I got this on Criterion because I liked Knife in the Water so much. Learned the hard way to become more familiar with a film before I go and spring on a DVD/Bluray.
No.5257
>>5253
I love this movie. Overall, I think it may be that I'm a fan of Stanley Donen, especially when he teams up with Hepburn.
I can see what you mean with Peck. He is a bit stiff sometimes. It sees like the way his character was written, he could have benefited from being a little more smarmy. But it wasn't a major detriment for me.
I'm not sure what you mean by Hepburn. I don't think she appeals only to women. In fact, the only specific praise I hear about her from girls is her fashion, and that's only every once in a while. She has just as large a men/cinephile fanbase as she does a woman fanbase.
I think she's a genuinely good actress with a very specific style. Certain roles are perfect for her, specifically this one and Charade. She's has a mixture of "girl next door" because of her naive and innocent sounding delivery and elfish features, but she also has a sense of "above-you-elegance". Again, this works really well for her characters Roman Holiday and in Charade. I think the part she was least suited for was Eliza Doolittle. She's too pretty and charming to play that ugly duckling role in the beginning. But she does a good job, anyway. I like her a lot so I still thoroughly enjoy My Fair Lady.
No.5259
This is the only Marx film I've seen. I definitely still want to see what their other work has to offer, particularly A Night at the Opera.
But as for this, I hated like 95% of it. The only parts I enjoyed were the musical number in the courtroom and the famous mirror gag. Everything else either irritated or confused me.
I didn't understand the appeal of Harpo or Chico, as they seemed more like annoying menaces than endearing clowns. Groucho, too, was simply a nuisance and didn't impress me. I suppose it's not my kind of humor. Maybe it would be if they took more time to get me on the side of the characters.
No.5263
>>5259
duck soup is GOAT, and this is coming from someone who finds the silly goofy three stooges like comedy awful and stupid. I throughout fully enjoyed that marx movie.
yesterday i saw night at the opera and was way worse than dock soup imo.
groucho is the best of them with his highly ironic and double intended wordplay, chicho is the middle ground of them going all over the spectrum. the anthem scenes were hilarious
No.5265
>>5263
By the Anthem scenes, do you mean when Rufus T. Firefly makes his introduction and doesn't know the song is for him?
I enjoyed that scene and was hoping the movie would get funnier from there on out. It didn't aside from the Mirror Scene I mentioned.
Groucho's one-liners go by too fast, most of the time, for me to hear. A lot of people like this, but I just find it irritating. Even when I catch the line, it's more just like "Oh, that's clever" instead of genuinely funny.
I'm willing to concede that this is just my unpopular opinion though. I'm not trying to hate it, I just didn't like it. A lot of people try to assert that they are more right in their opinion on a popular movie. I get that most people disagree with me. I just don't personally go for those characters.
I wouldn't say that about Mr. Smith Goes to Washington, though.
I just watched that an hour ago for the first time and hated it. I'd watch Duck Soup twice in a row before I watch Mr. Smith again. That's a movie where I seriously don't understand why it's well regarded. You'd have to be crazy to enjoy that one.
No.6240
YouTube embed. Click thumbnail to play.
>>331
>Modern times
Really? Why?
I don't like The Kid which rates very high. It starts well but eventually the humor is replaced by saccharine melodrama. The dream sequence was cool but had nothing to do with the rest of the movie and only made it more disjointed.
(I embedded a good scene from the beginning)
No.6241
Most of them. They just seem to ride the waves of their time and hype they got back then.