Film folks that you'll never "get"

[El Jefe]

In honor of Phoebe and me rowing over a certain director, and all credit to a discussion with another female former Animalballer...who are the film (small or big screen) folks or projects that the community at large seems to love, but you'll never quite understand why. This isn't just a "can't stand this person" thing. This is after repeated honest attempts to see what other folks are seeing, and you're still scratching your head going. "Yeah...that sucked."

Directors/Writers - The Coen brothers. Seriously, what the hell am I missing? I've watched about 60% of their filmography. And you know what I find every time? Great cast. Terrible writing. Really crap directing. Cinematography that makes me want to start punching the DCs. The biggest offenders on the list: The Big Lebowski (amazing cast, utterly horrid movie), Oh WHY THE FUCK DID I BOTHER Art Thou?, and No Country for Old Men. Raising Arizona worked when released, but doesn't hold up at all. Fargo is passable. They had a legitimate good flick with The Hudsucker Proxy. But outside of that? WHY?!

Series - Doctor Who. Just, all of it. The whole thing. It is purposefully goofy sci-fi without the actual humor of other goofy sci-fi shows. It is British humor without the funny. It has a continuity and writing that literally just uses a made-up phrase in the setting to hand-wave everything. No attempt, however hokey, to even try to make an explanation. There's British humor sci-fi done better. There's British sci-fi done better. There's goofy sci-fi done better. So it is everything that fits the "so bad it's good" criteria...without the good? I've tried old Doctors. I've tried Doctors who I loved (Eccleston, I'm looking at you). Every time, it just comes back to me with twitching eyes and facial muscles.

Actors - Matthew Mcconaughey. Even in his best films (and there aren't a lot of them), he is the ultimate hambone (that perfect combination of hamming it up, alongside being a bonehead). When it calls for drama, he over-acts at a level that would make that Nic Cage cringe. He'll also find a way to be shirtless. When it calls for comedy...please, for the love of everything, find somebody else. He'll also find a way to be shirtless. When it calls for romance, he'll find a million different ways to be shirtless. The accent, the magically regrowing hair, and the vacant look in the eyes that is somehow meant to resemble thoughtfulness or deep thinking...when it really just means "So how can I be shirtless in this scene?" Before the drastic body morphing, he actually worked well in A Time to Kill. And I'll even give credit for him pulling off a solid Perlman-like performance to elevate Reign of Fire into solid "good B movie" territory. But even in quality films (Interstellar, Dallas Buyers Club), he just comes off as ridiculous.

[Mike]

I understand your Coen Brothers issue. I loved Raising Arizona and Miller's Crossing and O Brother... oh wait, and Burn After Reading. All good films when I saw them. I enjoyed Fargo but it wasn't the be-all-end-all people made it out to be. No Country was just alright. Hudsucker left me cold. Lebowski left me cold. I don't know what makes the difference, but some of theirs just don't work for me.

Doctor Who. I'll give you that one. I find it more enjoyable than you do, but it's more about the nerd hype than anything.

I'll give you McConaughy. I think his strongest performances were Mud and True Detective. I particularly love Mud. Other than those two, I can take him or leave him.

[DMDarcs]

I cannot understand the appeal of Napoleon Dynamite. I cannot understand it to the point that if I hear you say you like the movie in casual conversation, I immediately begin judging you. I'm no fan of Top Gun, but I understand its appeal. But Napoleon Dynamite -- I just don't get it.

[Mike]

Couldn't get more than halfway through Napoleon Dynamite. I just don't get it.

[poorpete]

Napoleon, once I got on the wavelength, I liked it. He's like what an anti-hero is in drama to comedy. Whatever that is, is what he is.

Not going to defend your' indefensible positions on the Coen Bros.

I'm going with "Fight Club" where it's well made, well acted, with ideas-to-discuss but unenjoyable.

[Phoebe]

I don't have time to give this the reply it deserves, but I liked Napoleon Dynamite and here is why: most movies about "nerdy" antihero kids make the person likeable and often even transform them into a "cool kid" in some way at the end. They have to change who they are, in other words, and then we see the swan that was in that nerdy ugly duckling all along. Napoleon Dynamite gives us a rather humorous picture of some harmless but screwed up people - exaggerated yet ALSO kind of accurate! Kind of accurate! We sympathize with the crap hand they are being forced to play in the world of Other People even as some of the characters are unsympathetic. The main guy is the absolute dictionary definition of "dork". He is who he is, full of both the positive and negative like anyone. These characters find crazily unexpected love on the internet, they win school elections (and support their friend in doing so), they burst out with Jamiroquai - JAMIROQUAI, so perfect! - moves onstage, they run businesses - and they don't have to stop being the total dorks they are. Like in his big dance scene - he goes immediately back to his full-dork posture right after channeling something from outer space that his classmates have no concept how to even process. But this kid does it. You never get satisfaction from his stunted relationship with the heroine girl. There is something deeply uplifting and even profound about that, and it's also a silly, funny movie. Tina?! Come on. It's a llama.

[akiva]

Blue Velvet. I thought the story was boring and the acting was overwrought and cartoonish (especially Dennis Hopper).

[Phoebe]

Totally agreed about Blue Velvet, about McConaughey, etc.

I do not understand the fascination with Keira Knightley. I assume any high school has a better actress to offer up.

El Jefe, I must say that even though I still do not get the Joss Whedon thing and he irritates me horribly in many respects, like most people who manage to irritate me horribly for a decade I have ended up deciding I like him after all. His politics are pretty much immaculate and that helps. Bless that annoying pretentious little boob, I actually like him now.

[poorpete]

"Blue Velvet" agreement I also disliked Lynch's "Lost Highway"
Not a complete Lynch-hater, though his impressionistic nightmares are not candy to me, don't think I ever saw a film of his twice.

[Kyle]

Any of Baz Luhrmann's musical films. Or any of the modern musicals, really. Everyone loves this shit and I just don't get it. Coordinated dance sequences and weirdly breaking out in to song. I just don't enjoy it at all.

But weirdly, I love opera. So there's that.

[Mike]

Opera.

[Kyle]

[Mike]

Does the Les Mis movie count? Cuz I loved that.

[Kyle]

[buckett]

[Phoebe]

Opera is absolutely wonderful!

[Kyle]

[poorpete]

Can operas be shorter, please? I've started listening to The Marriage of Figgaro a couple times now and haven't gotten close to finishing it each time.

This is the music thread, right?

[Eliahad]

Start with The Magic Flute.

Generally speaking, Opera is not on the shorter side. I'm trying to think of shorter ones that are worth watching and drawing a blank. Dialogue of the Carmelites is fun, but not a good starter. La Boheme? I really like the music in that one, but the last twenty minutes are kind of where some of the stereotypes of opera come from. Tosca! Tosca is good. Gilbert and Sullivan are nice and light. Barber of Seville? That's pretty traditional.

Hmmmm...I'll keep thinking.

[akiva]

Not sure if it's still widely praised, but I cant believe all the accolades "Gladiator" got. I think it's a mediocre adventure movie.