Moments when a piece of entertainment completely lost you.

[maglag]

On Jar Jar Binks, as insulting as his accent was his actions had him....

- Timely rescue of the Jedi and directing them to safety got the plot rolling
- Instrumental in diplomacy to save his people and his planet
- Danced through battlefields unscathed
- Was an outcast but became a celebrated hero of his people for his valor
- His war time heroics saw him become a general, then official representatitive of his people in the galactice senate
-... may or may not have been a pawn (master?) of the Sith...

Clearly Sith Lord Jar Jar Binkious will be revealed as the one manipulating everything behind the scenes in the next movie.

(also he was reduced back to a street clown when the New Republic rose to power since as far as the public cared, he had been a staunch empire supporter).

[MGuy]

Jar jar was also treated as an idiot. Led around by the nose by the white wise men. Fumbled all over the place and accomplished arguably nothing through actual skill or intent. It's not just that he and his race talked kind of funny. It's that he was shown to be a bumblefuck. Lando may have been an ex career criminal who gets clearly rejected and talked down to by the white princess but he was in a position of power, made major decisions for his people, and regretted his actions without being shown to be a bumbling fool. Whether or not the 'greasy' part of him hitting on a woman is bad is arguable because isn't that seen as putting a male in a power position? They also take time to establish that he and Han are basically the same with the black guy going pretty legit all things considered while the white guy is still a criminal running around with what would be considered criminals. I think the womanizer trait was added to stroke the young male ego and make him seem 'suave' and that's usually seen as a positive trait. So I don't know that his appearance and circumstances really come off as a negative for his character. At least it didn't for me and I don't think it comes off that way for the time period or in the memory of most fans. The worst thing he did was turn on a friend and submit to the authorities but he turns and helps them right after.

[Username17]

JarJar's arguably accomplished more than every single non-White human character rolled together, and has suffered none of their humiliation

The idea that Jar Jar Binks hasn't suffered humiliation is simply beyond gibberish. Jar Jar is humiliated by the Jedi, by the Gungan authorities, by the movie itself by treating him as a minstrel show character. Jar Jar is humiliated in the narrative and the meta-narrative. Just fucking stop. The "Jar Jar: Sith Master" meme is a fucking joke because Jar Jar is a joke character. And he's a joke character with an exaggerated black accent. He's an insulting and racist character that embarrasses everyone.

Anyway...

The space worm scene shows Han perform the incredible feature of driving straight.

No. It's a moving space worm. Flying inside a stationary Star Destroyer hull is impressive, but significantly less of a feat than flying out of a moving space slug that's trying to eat you or attaching yourself to a star destroyer that is moving and actively trying to locate and attack you. Those are just more impressive things to do. Further, Han does that forcefield jump that Rey can't in the actual movie with Rey in it. Rey isn't the best pilot in every movie, she explicitly isn't even the best pilot in the movie where she is shown being a pilot.

Now you can make the argument that Rey's piloting is accompanied by more impressive visual effects than the various shit Han gets up to. That's fairly obviously a question of A New Hope and The Force Awakens having budgets of $11 million and $245 million respectively. But Rey's piloting is very specifically not better than Han's in world. Not between movies, and not within her own movie.

-Username17

[shinimasu]

The force is objectively kind of bullshit though in the same way bending from Avatar is kind of bullshit or Magic in Harry potter is kind of bullshit. We get just enough explanation of how they work to make them seem like stable parts of the universe they exist in, but not so much explanation that the author can't basically do whatever with them.

Why can Azula shoot blue fire and Zuko can't? Because reasons. Possibly genetics.

Why are some wizards able to cast complex spells with ease while others struggle to perform basic charms? Because reasons, possibly genetics.

Why are some force users capable of hurling twenty five people against a wall, while others will only ever really be able to do heightened empathy and maybe some weird dream stuff? Midichlorians. But we pretend those don't exist so you might as well say "because reasons" here too.

"being innately good at the thing some people are just innately good at" doesn't trip my bullshit detector. The force itself has suffered pretty bad power creep as a whole, it gets more impressive and more offensive with each subsequent iteration.

[Occluded Sun]

[quote="Count Arioch the 28th]"Kind of like superhero movies, they're awesome but looking back after viewing a few times they don't hold up.[/quote]

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?

[Count Arioch the 28th]

[quote="Count Arioch the 28th]"Kind of like superhero movies, they're awesome but looking back after viewing a few times they don't hold up.

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?[/quote]

In my opinion? I could always watch Pee wee's big adventure, the first Ghostbusters movie, Labyrinth, Dark Crystal, or the LotR trilogy.

I'm not a critic and don't have a particularly educated opinion about movies, so take that with a grain of salt.

[Chamomile]

I really dislike the idea that you need some special education to tell which movies are good. A good movie is one that stands up to repeated viewings, full stop. A good critic is someone who's good at explaining why some movies stand up and others don't, not someone with special, rarefied taste in movies different from the general audience. The latter can happen naturally to critics who get significantly more exposure to films than the general audience, so it's not like there's a secret movie critic cabal who decide in advance which movies will be dubbed good, but it still makes critics worse at their jobs, not better. It's a side effect of watching a whole lot of movies, whether or not you've also learned how to analyze them at all.

[Stahlseele]

[quote="Count Arioch the 28th]"Kind of like superhero movies, they're awesome but looking back after viewing a few times they don't hold up.

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?[/quote]
I just watched the 5 hour version of DAS BOOT again.
For the . . i don't rightly know, probably somewhere in the 3 digit number time.
Akira, Macross - Do you remember Love, The Transformers - The Movie from 1986 . . Ghostbusters 1 and 2 . . Terminator 1 and 2 . . All of them i have watched several times as well and i would still watch them again and again.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I did take a movie appreciation class as an elective back in college. It was interesting learning about how movies were made and it was interesting seeing movies I otherwise would not have watched, but the teacher was one of those "Write your opinions here. And by your opinions I mean my opinions word for word" teachers.

[deaddmwalking]

The Princess Bride might be the most repeatedly watchable film in the history of film making.

Chamomile, your argument can be reduced to:

All Sand People walk in a single line, at least, the one I saw did.

Frank is right - Rey doesn't do ANYTHING that we haven't seen other people do. They put all the characters from before into a blender and she's what came out.

The only reason it matters is because if fans can't articulate why it is a bad movie, we're never going to get good movies. It was bad because it tried to be 'safe' and ultimately you can't make a sequel that way. If it it's 'just the same, but different', you might as well watch the original. If it's 'different, but worse', you might as well just watch the original. It has to be 'different, but better' or at least cover different ground to be worth watching.

[Username17]

[quote="Count Arioch the 28th]"Kind of like superhero movies, they're awesome but looking back after viewing a few times they don't hold up.

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?[/quote]

Aliens, Muppet Treasure Island, Empire Strikes Back, From Dusk Til Dawn, Evil Dead 2, The Wizard of Oz, The Maltese Falcon, Rear Window, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Akira, Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein, and Blade.

-Username17

[erik]

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?

Aliens, Muppet Treasure Island, Empire Strikes Back, From Dusk Til Dawn, Evil Dead 2, The Wizard of Oz, The Maltese Falcon, Rear Window, Raiders of the Lost Ark, Akira, Abbot and Costello Meet Frankenstein, and Blade.

-Username17

That's a good list of rewatchables.

edited in totally sFW link that you should turn volume up to max at your cubicle, or church pew, whatever. Eat your heart out Shakespeare.

[EightWave]

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?

Die Hard, Emperor's New Groove, Clerks, Reservoir Dogs, Super Troopers, 7 Samurai, The Big Lebowski, The Fifth Element, most Ghibli movies, In the Heat of the Night, Terminator, Shawshank Redemption

[maglag]

I love it how this thread has crashed so hard that it suffered an underflow error and now half the people are discussing what's their favorite media instead of what's their most disliked media.

How many movies DO hold up after viewing them a few times?

7 Samurai, The Fifth Element, most Ghibli movies, Terminator

Hear, hear, that's the really good stuff.

I'll add Your Name, Gladiator and The Nightmare Before Christmas at the top of my head.

[erik]

I love it how this thread has crashed so hard that it suffered an underflow error and now half the people are discussing what's their favorite media instead of what's their most disliked media.

Good point. How's about an inversion. Movies where I was beyond disappointed and will not watch again, and in some cases didn't even stick it out to watch the whole thing. For point of reference, I'd be willing to potentially watch Highlander 2 again, even though it is terrible.

Babel. Spawn. Lost in Translation. Barton Fink. The Spirit. Babylon A.D.

[Josh_Kablack]

Movies I couldn't make it through due to unwarchability: Tideland; 2001: A Space Odyssey; Eraserhead.

Pretty sure that's an exhaustive list.

I mean The Crawling Terror, Van Damne's Street Fighter, Bayformers, Three Days of the Condor, and recently Future World are all horrible, but I made it through those.

.

[phlapjackage]

Good point. How's about an inversion. Movies where I was beyond disappointed and will not watch again, and in some cases didn't even stick it out to watch the whole thing.

Kingdom of Heaven

[Occluded Sun]

The worst thing he did was turn on a friend and submit to the authorities but he turns and helps them right after.

The Empire is, quite literally, holding guns to his head and the heads of all the people he's responsible for. Lando is pretty clearly not a villain or even a bad person. He's shown to be a decent guy even faster than Han was (it's not really obvious that Solo's not truly a mercenary at heart until he comes back to save Luke).

[Occluded Sun]

I acknowledge all your bad movies, but would like to point out that I saw Batman and Robin, in the theater.

What was that like, you ask?

Torturer ceases electrifying the parrilla, victim ceases twitching.

Torturer: "I see you are no stranger to pain."
Victim: "I've been married..."
Torturer: [nods respectfully]
Victim: "...twice."
Torturer: [winces in horror]

[erik]

Yeah, I caught it in theatre too. Batman and Robin was bad like Highlander 2. It was fucking stupid and awful... but I could maybe see myself enjoying it if I watched it a second time with friends who wanted to mock it while viewing.

Shit, to this day me and my friends still use corny Ah-nold lines when using ice spells, paralysis, or anything remotely relatable in RPGs. Not always, but it does happen. I'm not gonna lie and say I liked it, but I do feel like a better, more cultured person for that I did actually watch Batman and Robin.

This could be a not so subtle form of brain damage, possibly attributable to that movie.

[Count Arioch the 28th]

I liked Batman and Robin. I don't try to say it isn't terrible (it is terrible), but I find it funny and entertaining in its own way.

[Thaluikhain]

Yeah, I like Batman and Robin.

Yeah, it's a silly movie. But Batman is a furry that fights clowns, I don't think he should be too serious. And no constant angst.

[Iduno]

Batman Forever was like an attempt to combine the old Adam West Batman with the more modern version. At least it had some okay parts "Holey rusty metal Batman."

Get Smart was similar, but worse. They stole every single joke they used from the show, and couldn't make a movie I could sit through.

[Occluded Sun]

I did not see the original (no, not the one with Nicholsen, the very first) in the theater. But it is delightful and amusing.

It is different from Batman and Robin in every possible way, except that there is a character named 'Batman', a character named 'Robin', and... that's about it, really.

[saithorthepyro]

Most people have already mentioned my rewatchables, but I’d like to add The Good, The Bad, and the Ugly, Dark City, and The Third Man to that list.