Unpopular Opinions

[proserpina65]

i don't get why people dislike her actually

 

I have no opinion of Keira Knightley one way or the other as a person, but I hate her as an actress because she simply cannot act.  She has one set of mannerisms she uses in every role, and aside from Bend It Like Beckham, it almost never suits the character and is particularly out of place in period pieces.  She was the utter antithesis of Lizzie Bennett, although everything about that movie (other than Judi Dench and Donald Sutherland) is the perfect definition of 'suck' - the writing, the directing, the set design, the costume and hair design, etc., were atrocious.  (The members of Monty Python would've done a more authentic representation of the characters and the story with an all-male cast.)  Plus, as Oakgoblinfly pointed out, Ms. Knightley seems absolutely incapable of properly opening her mouth; her jaw is always clenched like she's suffering from lockjaw.

I infinitely prefer the first Star Wars to the others in the trilogy and was so offended by jar jar Binks and so bored by the whole thing I didn't make it through the others (should I try again?)

 

NO

[proserpina65]

But Cate Blanchett as fake Katharine Hepburn

 

And she got an undeserved Oscar to boot.  Viriginia Madsen was completely robbed that year.

(The whole "royale with cheese" conversation does nothing for me)

 

It's also inaccurate, or at least it was when I was in Paris in 1995.  In the two French McDonald's I visited, one in Paris and one in Carcassone (I was a cheap college student - don't hate me), there was no such thing as  a "royale" or "royale with cheese" on the menu - it was "le Quarterpounder" and "le Quarterpounder avec frommage".

Edited July 24, 2014 by proserpina65

[CaughtOnTape]

I never got the big deal about Brokeback Mountain.  

[VanillaBear85]

I like the Pride & Prejudice with Keira Knightley.

[Julia]

I like the Pride & Prejudice with Keira Knightley.

I think it was intended as a version of the story for people who aren't particularly invested in Austen, who avoided showing her characters acting other than like gentlemen and -women, because that was their only grip on a place in society and a possible good marriage.

I think if I hadn't read the book, I would have been able to look at the Keira Knightley version more objectively. As a Jane Austen adaptation, though, I thought it failed pretty badly.

Edited July 24, 2014 by Julia

[ruby24]

I love the book, have read it many times, and the 2005 film is one of my all time favorites. I always look at books and film adaptations as being totally separate things though, because I think they should be. The film should stand on its own and be accessible to anyone.

 

The movie was beautiful, romantic, and Keira was great in it.

[aradia22]

 

I think if I hadn't read the book, I would have been able to look at the Keira Knightley version more objectively. As a Jane Austen adaptation, though, I thought it failed pretty badly.

This is my problem with casting her in book adaptations. The one that stands out for me is Never Let Me Go (which, like P&P, was incredibly flawed beyond her performance). If I've read the book I'm annoyed. Even if I haven't read the book, I still know she's doing a terrible job because she's always Keira Knightley and never the character she's supposed to be playing. Atonement didn't bother me as much but maybe that's because you didn't have to feel all that attached to her character. She's got a supporting role in a Benedict Cumberbatch movie that doesn't seem so bad. And I'm curious about Begin Again though it seems like a rental so I probably won't see it for months.

[Jeebus Cripes]

Plus, as Oakgoblinfly pointed out, Ms. Knightley seems absolutely incapable of properly opening her mouth; her jaw is always clenched like she's suffering from lockjaw.

 

If her jaw is bugging you guys, make a point to avoid A Dangerous Method. 

[Athena]

If her jaw is bugging you guys, make a point to avoid A Dangerous Method. 

 

I really wanted to watch this movie starring Fassbender and Mortensen until I read that Knightley was the object of their affection. I am not a fan of hers, and I agree she can not really act. I saw her in a miniseries when she was 13 years old, and she's more or less acted the same since. I don't feel she has a lot of range, just a lot of jaw.

[Haleth]

My beef with Keira Knightly was that she was sooo overexposed a few years ago.  Seemed like she was in every movie that came out, regardless of how ill suited she was for the role.  (Gueneviere?  Seriously?)  Since she's been more selective recently she doesn't bother me as much.  I did love her in P&P even if she interpreted Lizzie's character differently than other actors.  Sometimes remakes are wonderful, sometimes not so much.  YMMV but it takes some courage to approach a beloved story or character in a from a different angle.  (And I thought the direction of P&P was wonderful, especially with the camera following a character thoughout the house like in the ball scene, and with the positioning of windows.  I would say the use of mirrors got to be a bit repetitive though.)

[Athena]

My beef with Keira Knightly was that she was sooo overexposed a few years ago.  Seemed like she was in every movie that came out, regardless of how ill suited she was for the role.  (Gueneviere?  Seriously?) 

 

That bothered me about her too because I kept wondering, "Is she the only young British actress that Hollywood knows about? She's not even that talented!" That King Arthur movie was actually a bit funny. Her and Clive Owen's love scene looked awkward mostly because of their age gap.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I will admit, that I'm a Pride & Prejudice snob. After watching Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth's version in the five DVD disc that was initially from BBC? A&E?, which literally, was 99% straight out like the book? I'm spoiled. I refuse to watch any other version.

 

"Mr. Bennet! You are so VEXING!" is my favorite line, from Elizabeth's mother!

[proserpina65]

If her jaw is bugging you guys, make a point to avoid A Dangerous Method.

 

If Keira Knightley is in a film, I'm pretty much guaranteed to miss it, no matter how much I might like the other actors or how interested I might be in the subject matter.  I find her to be such a bad actor that she usually ruins an otherwise potentially good film.  (The only possible exception to this rule is if a somewhat obscure actor whom I quite like is also in it, because I have extremely limited access to most of his work.)  I only watched the P&P with her after reading scathing, yet hysterically funny reviews from two of my Austenite friends; for me it works solely as an MST3K-style object of ridicule.

 

Yes, I am also a Jane Austen snob.

Edited July 25, 2014 by proserpina65

[BizBuzz]

I will admit, that I'm a Pride & Prejudice snob. After watching Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth's version in the five DVD disc that was initially from BBC? A&E?, which literally, was 99% straight out like the book? I'm spoiled. I refuse to watch any other version.

 

"Mr. Bennet! You are so VEXING!" is my favorite line, from Elizabeth's mother!

 

Thank you GHSR - I am with you on this.  In my Unpopular Opinion, there is no other P&P except the one with Colin Firth.  ::giggle:: 

[Wiendish Fitch]

My UO is that I don't like biopics about criminals, because they are slanted to manipulate us into feeling sympathy for utterly horrid people. I watched Birdman of Alcatraz, and I thought it was one of Burt Lancaster's finest acting jobs, and it had such an inspirational story… until I read up on the real person. Turns out, he was a murderous, violent sociopath and that the movie took unbelievable liberties with the story of his life and career. As a result, I refuse to watch similar films, such as I Want to Live!, Dead Man Walking, and Monster.

[Rick Kitchen]

I will admit, that I'm a Pride & Prejudice snob. After watching Jennifer Ehle and Colin Firth's version in the five DVD disc that was initially from BBC? A&E?, which literally, was 99% straight out like the book? I'm spoiled. I refuse to watch any other version.

 

"Mr. Bennet! You are so VEXING!" is my favorite line, from Elizabeth's mother!

 

Have you ever seen the Bollywood version, Bride and Prejudice?  It's the first film interpretation I ever saw, and also the first Bollywood, and I was entertained.

 

[GHScorpiosRule]

No, because I can't STAND Aishwarya. She SUCKS as an actress. I'm VERY old school when it comes to which Bollywood movies I watch. Can't STAND the shit that's come out over the past 10 years.

 

I stick to the ones from the 50s-mid 90s. Sure, they're formulaic and melodramatic, but they work for me. Not to mention the actors and actresses could actually, you know, ACT, and had talent, and that was more important than whether they had six pack abs, were a size 0, etc.

[Crs97]

And even the P&P miniseries bugs me because they missed crucial elements from the book: (1) her inner thoughts while touring Pemberley that make clear her attitude toward Darcy didn't change because she suddenly understood how rich he was, and (2) their conversation between engagement and wedding. How do you leave those out?

[aradia22]

 

Have you ever seen the Bollywood version, Bride and Prejudice?  It's the first film interpretation I ever saw, and also the first Bollywood, and I was entertained.

This was also my first Bollywood or Bollywood style production and I too was entertained. Aishwarya seemed fine to me but maybe that's because Martin Henderson was just so painfully bad.

[Wiendish Fitch]

I love How to Train Your Dragon, but does it speak badly of me as a feminist that I think Hiccup is way too good for Astrid?

[Julia]

I'm a Jane Austen snob too, although my favorite Austen adaptation was Clueless.

[roamyn]

I never got the big deal about Brokeback Mountain.

The short story by Annie Proux is amazing, sad & riveting.

The movie, IMHO was robbed thanks to people like Ernest Borgnine & Tony Curtis. Homophobes of the first order who should've realized how many closeted friends & actors there were in the 40-70s and how much hell their life was.

And that's alot of what the movie was abt: how hard it was for those people to live and love and the hell they had to put up with.

[Rum Punch]

My UO is that I don't like biopics about criminals, because they are slanted to manipulate us into feeling sympathy for utterly horrid people. I watched Birdman of Alcatraz, and I thought it was one of Burt Lancaster's finest acting jobs, and it had such an inspirational story… until I read up on the real person. Turns out, he was a murderous, violent sociopath and that the movie took unbelievable liberties with the story of his life and career. As a result, I refuse to watch similar films, such as I Want to Live!, Dead Man Walking, and Monster.

 

This is my problem with "Shawshank Redemption", where Tim Robbins ends up in a maximum security prison with a bunch of swell guys who just happen to be serving life sentences. Oh, sure, they're a little rough around the edges, but great guys just the same.

Edited July 26, 2014 by Rum Punch

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I hate Grease, always have. Sandy didn't have to change. At all. It pisses me off she became a spandex-clad bar wench just to nab some guy she'll probably break up with by August.  I wish the film instead had ended with her telling Danny, Rizzo and Kenickie where to get off.

This is old, but now that I'm all caught up with the thread, I think that Grease is one of the reasons I kind of like the remake of Hairspray better than the original. There's something karmic about John Travolta in drag and a fat suit, and his dancing in You Can't Stop The Beat makes me laugh every time.

[Ohwell]

I used to like Morgan Freeman, but I'm tired of him now and wish he'd go somewhere and sit down.

[Wiendish Fitch]

This is old, but now that I'm all caught up with the thread, I think that Grease is one of the reasons I kind of like the remake of Hairspray better than the original. There's something karmic about John Travolta in drag and a fat suit, and his dancing in You Can't Stop The Beat makes me laugh every time.

 

 

I like the remake better because our heroine doesn't use the term "retard" to describe her special education classmates. Oh, you'll stand up for one group that's disenfranchised, but not another? Up yours, Tracy!

[GHScorpiosRule]

Well, here's one I have and I don't know if it's because I'm not happy that Ben Affleck is playing him, but I was not moved by the trailer for the upcoming movie Batman v. Superman: Dawn of Justice. Yeah, not coming out until NEXT year.

 

I saw nothing "epic" about it, and the way folks at the Comic-con are hootin' and hollerin', as if seeing spoilering just in case

Supes in the glare of the bat signal, is a huge deal, when hello, the name of the movie? BOTH will be in it. I could understand it if it were just a Batman movie, and oh, lookee! A Supes cameo!

 

Or it's just that they're all excited to see it. I dunno.

 

But, I hate the vibe/feeling I get, that I'm some kind of "traitor" or not really a Batman fan (when I am, and he's my favorite), because I'm not excited about this upcoming movie and that I should love everything, be it in the movies or direct to home dvd, just because it's about Batman. I've got online friends who try to guilt me for my opinions. And NO, I wasn't one that went OMG! Heath Ledger for the Joker? Are you fucking kidding me? That keeps getting thrown in my face. I actually thought Ledger was an interesting choice, because he could actually act.

 

(putting on my flak jacket and helmet now...)

[ribboninthesky1]

GHScorpiosRule, I understand where you're coming from.  I don't really have any strong feelings on Affleck as Batman (the one casting that I'm WTF about is Jesse Eisenberg as Lex Luthor), but I see nothing wrong with being a Batman fan and not looking forward to the movie.  I saw the SDCC sneak peak, and I thought, "Um...okay."  I also saw video of Cavill, Affleck, and Gadot come on stage, and they looked incredibly awkward.  Affleck, in particular, looked worn, weary, and like he didn't want to be there (the backlash over his casting could have made him uneasy, to be fair). 

 

I'm taking a wait and see approach overall, but I get why many are underwhelmed and skeptical.  As an aside, I was one who didn't think Heath Ledger could pull off the Joker.  But then, I wasn't ZOMG! about his performance, either, since the Joker is a character where you have to be OTT, or it doesn't work.  But honestly, his take on the character didn't stick with me the way Jack Nicholson's did. 

 

So rest easy, you're not the only one with unpopular opinions about the franchise.  I've never thought a fan had to be all of nothing about it, or any franchise in general. 

[Cobalt Stargazer]

I like the remake better because our heroine doesn't use the term "retard" to describe her special education classmates. Oh, you'll stand up for one group that's disenfranchised, but not another? Up yours, Tracy!

To be fair, because I'm a John Waters fan, the original was made in 1988, nearly thirty years ago. The word 'retard' hadn't yet fallen out of fashion. Beyond that, Waters was the last person you could expect sensitivity from, at least before he went Hollywood.

[Joe]

Yeah. If you like something, you don't have to like every part of something.

[MizArk]

Just caught up on the thread and my UOs:

 

Like a couple of others upthread, I really enjoyed Jim Carrey in his dramatic roles (especially The Majestic, which just rips my heart every time I watch it), despise his comedies, and think his dramatic talents have been sadly ignored. He can express more emotion with his eyes than a lot of more-celebrated actors (UO - Johnny Depp and George Clooney) can with their entire bodies.

 

Even as a woman of a certain age -- I order the senior coffee at McDonald's -- I'd much rather watch hot guys and explosions than a bunch of peri-menopausal women sitting around a table and sniping at each other in fake Southern accents. I enjoy all the Marvel movies and both new ST remakes.

 

Though I liked the 70s Star Wars movies at the time, the newer three have forever ruined them for me. I just can't see Darth Vader as a scary, intimidating villain now that I've seen him as a whiny, emo teenager named "Ani."

Edited July 27, 2014 by Gina

[millennium]

 

Yeah. People keep telling me to give him a chance because we haven't seen him as Bats yet,

 

The truth is, they could cast almost anyone in the role and with the right costume, the right look, and the right FX, fill-in-the-blank could do an adequate job.   Look at the advance pics of Affleck in the cowl released at Comic Con.    I'm already hearing comments like "Oooh, badass!"

 

Well, yes and no.   Yes, because all of the previous Batman uniforms have been pretty dopey looking so when one comes along that finally looks more right than the others, the reaction is bound to be positive.   And no, because the costume doesn't make the character. 

 

Unfortunately, for a great many moviegoers nowadays, adequate is good enough.   These would be members of the same hordes who pay $15 for a ticket (what I used to pay to see a rock concert) and leave the theaters proclaiming "thumbs up" because the movie "had great special effects."  To this day, there are still a lot of people who think Michael Keaton made a good Batman and that Jack Nicholson was a great joker.   Hate to break it to the mediocre masses, but both of them were just adequate, if that.

 

I think the studio is counting on Ben Affleck doing an adequate job.   If he can get through the film without making an ass of himself, the media will chalk up the movie as a success, Affleck will be hailed as a hero and all of us who put our names on that change.org petition will be written off as fanboy and fangurl crybabies.  

 

It's probably a foregone conclusion that the film is going to break all kinds of box office records (presuming it isn't stung by bad press between now and 2016) simply because of the subject matter.   It's Batman AND Superman.   A never-before.   The box office receipts alone will probably be used as ammunition to pooh-pooh the Batfleck protest -- even though it's the subject, not the actor, who'll bring home the bacon.

 

All that aside, there are still some people out here who cherish good acting and great movie-making, and that's why we recoil and cringe at the idea of Ben Affleck as the Caped Crusader.

Edited July 27, 2014 by millennium

[GHScorpiosRule]

I hear ya, millennium.  And here's another unpopular opinion here: I Love the Bale Batman. Love his costume, love his Bruce Wayne, love his Bats. And this is coming from someone who had totally forgotten that Bale was the villain in Samuel L. Jackson's Shaft. Had totally forgotten that he was American Psycho. I was like, at the time, who is this guy? In the one minute trailer that we saw. Schoumacher (sp?) totally RUINED Batman for me. I did like the first Keaton Batman, but couldn't buy him as Bruce Wayne. And the slobbering mess that was Penguin, when it started out so well, and the ridonkulousness of how Selina became Cat Woman? Just no. But it was still miles better than the next two.

 

I found Batman Begins refreshing and so like my image of Batman. The horrible voice of Bats notwithstanding. They totally should have dubbed in Conroy's voice for that. Dark Knight was the best. The last one was very weak and I didn't like it because Not enough Batman, and I left the theatre thinking, Bruce you putz. Selina will totally do something to screw you over and it can't happen soon enough, so that you'll don the cape and cowl again.

 

But that's just me.

Edited July 27, 2014 by GHScorpiosRule

[Jeebus Cripes]

The movie, IMHO was robbed thanks to people like Ernest Borgnine & Tony Curtis. Homophobes of the first order who should've realized how many closeted friends & actors there were in the 40-70s and how much hell their life was.

 

This is interesting because if anyone was pinging my gaydar, it was Tony Curtis. 

[ribboninthesky1]

To this day, there are still a lot of people who think Michael Keaton made a good Batman and that Jack Nicholson was a great joker.   Hate to break it to the mediocre masses, but both of them were just adequate, if that.

 

So if I don't think Ledger was an awesome Joker, just adequate, if I prefer Nicholson's Joker, that makes me..a mediocre movie-goer?  That seems to be the implication, so I just want to be clear.  Either way, my mediocre ass will likely see the new film when it comes out.    

[GodsBeloved]

So if I don't think Ledger was an awesome Joker, just adequate, if I prefer Nicholson's Joker, that makes me..a mediocre movie-goer?

 

 

I loved both Jokers.

 

And here's another unpopular opinion here: I Love the Bale Batman.

 

 

He's my favorite.

[GHScorpiosRule]

I loved both Jokers.

 

 

He's my favorite.

 

Same here. They were both good Jokers.  Nicholson's was more of the Animated Universe and Ledger's was more of the Joker from The Killing Joke.

[proserpina65]

Have you ever seen the Bollywood version, Bride and Prejudice?  It's the first film interpretation I ever saw, and also the first Bollywood, and I was entertained.

 

Plus it had Naveen Andrews making like the Indian MC Hammer!

Even as a woman of a certain age -- I order the senior coffee at McDonald's -- I'd much rather watch hot guys and explosions than a bunch of peri-menopausal women sitting around a table and sniping at each other in fake Southern accents.

 

Give me Jason Statham hitting people and driving fast over anything starring Julia Roberts any day of the damn week.

[Ohwell]

Even as a woman of a certain age -- I order the senior coffee at McDonald's -- I'd much rather watch hot guys and explosions than a bunch of peri-menopausal women sitting around a table and sniping at each other in fake Southern accents.

My female friends think I'm suffering from arrested development (act your age!) because I don't like the Southern hag movies (why are they always Southern anyway?).  I prefer action films with hunka hunka burnin' love eye candy. 

[scarynikki12]

It's strange. I remember always liking Nicholson's Joker from when I watched Batman as a kid but I saw the movie the other day and found myself really disliking the character. It came across as The Joker just using crime as an excuse to play Prince songs and made me wonder if all could have been avoided if he'd gotten a job with MTV. Nicholson himself was fine but the writing resulted in the Joker not being as sinister as I remember. Even the animated Joker does a better job on that front. I guess I liked it as a kid because goofy, underwritten, characters appealed more to me then.

[ramble]

Even as a woman of a certain age -- I order the senior coffee at McDonald's -- I'd much rather watch hot guys and explosions than a bunch of peri-menopausal women sitting around a table and sniping at each other in fake Southern accents.

Holy crap yes! I believe my friends & I have enough going on in our lives that sitting around griping & gossiping on a daily basis would be a chore. And I'm in the south & some of us are perimenopausal. Stupid movies.

I'm having an issue with Affleck as Batman also. For me, it's because it's Affleck. I don't care for him or his acting. I can't recall the last movie I saw him in. I am a bleeds black Batman fan. I fell in love with the Adam West TV version as a young girl. I generally cheer any version of the Bat being offered because it's Batman, but Affleck getting to be the Bat makes me sad. I'm sure I'll see it because I can't stop myself when it's comes to Batman. I'm just not too excited about it.

[RadiantAerynSun]

 

I objectively understand the appeal of Tony Stark/Iron Man.  He's rich, he's funny, he's irreverent, he relishes being a superhero, blah blah angstycakes. In a universe of broody Batman, boyscout Superman/Captain America, prickly Wolverine, etc, he's supposed to be refreshing.  I'm even glad for Robert Downey Jr that it was his comeback vehicle.  But I was bored to tears with the first movie, and it's been downhill ever since.

So not just me!! I don't know what it is about Iron Man, but it is one movie I never finished and just returned back to Netflix. Because I got so bored during it and then never felt like finishing it. And I can't really put my finger on why, because I LOVE Robert Downey Junior.

 

 

Gravity is another popular film that just doesn't interest me, even out of curiosity; it looks like yet another film that is all hat and no horse.

 

I watched it at home on my TV the other week and it absolutely took my breath away, loved it. Not saying the plot was totally believable but it was a worthwhile ride IMO. Maybe that's an unpopular opinion too ;) LOL.

[GHScorpiosRule]

@ramble , I had to like your post because I agree with 99% of it! As much I love Batman (can't you tell by my avatar, heh), I won't pay the money to see this on the big screen, because Affleck, looks horrible, it's like the Dare Devil costume in bluish black. Then there's the fact I don't like him as an actor. He sucks. Or I should say, he does nothing for me as an actor. And I maintain, like I posted in the Dawn of Justice thread, with Supes and Diana being young, then, Bats should also fucking be among that same age, and not the 50ish whatever Snyder is aiming for, because Bats was NOT weary, cynical, etc., before the JL even forms, and that's what that movie is: A Justice League movie. I'm not keen on the age jumping/mixing up for this. And not seeing also because of the horrid casting of Eisenberg as Lex. Awful. Just awful.

[A Boston Gal]

UO: I enjoyed BOTH versions of "Charlie/Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", and I refuse to choose between them (as if anyone was asking me to.)

[roamyn]

This is interesting because if anyone was pinging my gaydar, it was Tony Curtis.

It's a known fact that Tony especially called all his friends on the Board not to vote for BBM. He actually bragged abt it aft voting was closed.

[Ceindreadh]

Val Kilmer is is my favourite Batman and Batman Forever is my favourite of all the Batman movies.

Objectively speaking, maybe it wasn't the best of them, but it was the one I enjoyed most of all.

[Jazzy24]

UO: I enjoyed BOTH versions of "Charlie/Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", and I refuse to choose between them (as if anyone was asking me to.)

Johnny Depp came off as such a smiling, creepy child predator in that movie. I do like Depp he was just too creepy in a child's movie.

My UO: Is that I liked the newer version of the Footloose remake almost as much as the 80s one.

[Athena]

UO: I enjoyed BOTH versions of "Charlie/Willie Wonka and the Chocolate Factory", and I refuse to choose between them (as if anyone was asking me to.)

 

I think what made the 2005 Burton film for me was Freddie Highmore. He was probably one of my favourite child actors. There was something sweet, innocent, precocious, but not annoying about him as a young actor. He was great in Finding Neverland too. 

[Bastet]

Here's a UO, or at least one that is unpopular among fellow fans of classic cinema:  I kind of, sort of like the '90s remake of Father of the Bride better than the 1950 original.  And that stuns me, because the original was written by Frances Goodrich and Albert Hackett, whom I adore (for The Thin Man and so much more).  And, of course, stars Spencer Tracy, Elizabeth Taylor and Joan Bennett.  Directed by Vincente Minnelli.  The remake shouldn't have stood a chance, and in fact I almost didn't watch it.  But there's something about it that charms me, even slightly more than the original.  Maybe it's just updated enough, but with a fundamentally classic feel.  I can't explain why it edges out the original, but it does, at least in terms of rewatchability  -- if the original is on TCM while I'm going around the dial, I may stop and watch depending on what else is on.  But if someone is airing the remake, I will stop and watch every time.

[benteen]

Val Kilmer is is my favourite Batman and Batman Forever is my favourite of all the Batman movies.

Objectively speaking, maybe it wasn't the best of them, but it was the one I enjoyed most of all.

 

I liked Kilmer's Batman too.