Classic movies that don’t work for me
A reader named Dan sent me a nice e-mail that reads as follows:
Just wanted to say that I’ve thoroughly enjoyed your reviews over the years and to keep it up! But I have a quick question…. what movies that are universally regarded as classics do you feel are overrated??
Ooh, that’s a fun question! I don’t like to say “overrated,” though. That term implies a certain arrogance: “The people who liked this film over-praised it, whereas I am praising it exactly the right amount.” Just because a lot of people loved something and you didn’t doesn’t mean they’re all wrong or deluded or something. It just means you have different opinions.
But I know what you mean. You mean movies that are supposed to be great that I, personally, didn’t care for. I can think of a few.
“2001: A Space Odyssey” does very little for me. It’s a technical marvel in many ways, especially considering when it was made, and I like its ideas. But the way it’s dragged out feels interminable to me.
“Bringing Up Baby” is a classic Cary Grant/Katherine Hepburn comedy in which the Hepburn character drives me crazy. It’s the kind of comedy where farcical things happen only because she talks too fast and he doesn’t interject quickly enough to prevent her from running roughshod over him. If both people would slow down a second and breathe, the movie would be over. I find Hepburn’s character very, very annoying.
I have never understood the fondness for the movie version of “Grease.” It misses most of the satiric points of the stage version (as do nearly all productions of the stage version now) and comes across as a cheesy pastiche of misplaced ’50s nostalgia.
I know I’m not the first person to observe that while “Citizen Kane” is a masterpiece of cinematography and other craft elements, the story itself is kinda boring.
Akira Kurosawa’s “The Seven Samurai” is another one that has many admirable technical qualities but that leaves me cold, story-wise. Or, rather, the story is fine — it’s the way it stretches on for 3 1/2 hours that loses me.
I have tried to love “Young Frankenstein.” I have watched it twice. Both times, it has failed to do anything more than mildly amuse me. And yet I love “The Producers” and “Blazing Saddles”!
In each of these cases, I watched the films knowing they were considered classics and fully expecting to like them. I did not, in other words, watch them with a chip on my shoulder, hoping they would disappoint me so I could be an iconoclast and dislike them. I mention this because I know that’s how a lot of people approach things that are popular, i.e., “Everyone loves it, so that means it must suck,” and I think that’s an immature attitude to have. But I digress.
August 12th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Eric, you are a profoundly evil man to not like Young Frankenstein! Granted, I think you suffer from having seen other Mel Brooks movies first, because after a while, he uses the same tricks over and over again. Also, I would say that Young Frankenstein doesn’t have as many jokes as Blazing Saddles, but that is because it is much more focused on the story.
August 12th, 2008 at 1:50 am
Seven Samurai is not my favorite of Kurosawa’s either. I prefer his modern life stuff like “Ikiru” and “Stray Dog” more than his classical samurai films. I always watch the Samurai films though, because I have a huge crush on Toshiro Mifune. Stray Dog, Ikiru, Rhapsody in August, and Dreams all beat Seven Samurai in my book.
August 12th, 2008 at 4:00 am
Eric, I see what you mean about all of those films. I’ve seen them all and they are brilliant in their own right, but because of their unrestrained length and self-imposed epic-ness, they can be perceived to be INDULGENT. “Young Frankenstein” kills me though. Nobody makes monsters spontaneously singing show tunes more hilarious than Mel Brooks (think of the alien creature in “Spaceballs”). Whenever I see Peter Boyle squealing out “Puttin’ on the Ritz”, bursts of laughter follow. I physically cannot stop myself.
“Bringing Up Baby”: The dinner table scene is rolling-on-the-floor funny. You know, it always seems that dinner table scenes in movies bring out the biggest laughs of all time. Think about it–”The War of the Roses” had its biggest laugh as guests were at the table (arguably, people might conclude the same thing about “Wedding Crashers”). “Another Stakeout”–biggest laughs at the table. “Meet the Parents” (“I have nipples, Gaylord–can you milk me?”); “The Nutty Professor”–need I even elaborate? May have been the best Murphy moment(s) ever. Seriously, you could make a movie about movie dinner table scenes. Funny stuff out there…
August 12th, 2008 at 5:14 am
Funny, I found Hepburn as an actress very, very annoying. I also could have done without anything Humphry Bogart. I love classics just so long as neither of those two are in it (needless to say, I’ve never been able to force my way through “The African Queen.”).
August 12th, 2008 at 7:31 am
Once again, my life is vicariously justified through the cinematic opinions of Eric Snider.
I’ve recently attempted to rewatch “2001…” and just didn’t get it. In a non-theatrical presentation, can anyone get through the ending without hitting the fast-forward button? I’ve tried multiple times to get through “Young Frankenstein”, but it does nothing for me despite my enjoyment of other Mel Brooks films. I’ve never been able to get through “Bringing Up Baby” despite it being one of my wife’s favorites precisely because of Hepburn. I also agree with “Citizen Kane” being rather boring.
Beyond that, looking at IMDB’s top films, I’ve seen but have never been able to get into the Godfather films, “Pulp Fiction”, “One Flew Over the Cuckoo’s Nest”, “12 Angry Men”, “Casablanca” or “Goodfellas”.
And despite it being the adjusted highest grossing film of all time, I have yet to bring myself around to actually watching “Gone With The Wind”.
August 12th, 2008 at 8:02 am
I loved “Citizen Kane.” It’s certainly on my top-five list. And if I had to put a comedy in that select group, it would probably be “The Producers” (the original).
That said, my vote for the most overrated movie is “Gandhi.” I wonder if those who love this movie do so as a way of praising the man’s accomplishments. I thought the movie made Gandhi an unbelievable character — he came across as more perfect than Jesus, and he was boring besides. It could have been a great film if Gandhi had been portrayed as a real human (he actually had some very serious flaws, which would make the film all the more compelling if portrayed), but as it was it fell completely flat.
August 12th, 2008 at 8:17 am
@ Jacob M: Eric isn’t evil… he is just a pawn in the game of life.
August 12th, 2008 at 8:54 am
I wonder though, could a movie be overrated if it is vaulted up in the all important box office numbers by repeat, rather than unique, viewers? Clearly when it comes to subjective opinions and polls, this wouldn’t work as well, but I could see a movie being considered brilliant by virtue of its take, but buoyed by a limited set of viewers who all saw the movie 7-10 times.
And when two movies are relased as similar times, one praised and expected to make cans o’ cash while another is expected to flop. Lo and behold, the flop does disturbingly well, while the projected winner was overrated clearly by the studios and arguabley by the critics who forecast great things for the film.
And even then, I wonder how much a movie may be given a higher rating in opinion polls because of peer pressure. I can think of more than a few movies that I found kind of draggy or otherwise disappointing, and clearly would not be on my top 10 list, but I would feel tempted to list on a “best ever” poll because everybody else does. See Godfather II, The Return of the King, Gone with the Wind, and many others. I’m sure I’m not the only one who feels this way.
Could any of these conditions merit an overrated title?
August 12th, 2008 at 9:23 am
I thought Citizen Kane was dull, and I fell asleep during Grease. I actually managed to get through Gone with the Wind, but good gracious was it long and annoying. I really wanted to like those movies too.
August 12th, 2008 at 9:41 am
I agree with you somewhat on Citizen Kane. Sometimes the story was a little boring, though it was funny and entertaining other times, I think.
I’ve been methodically going through the non-R-Rated top 100 films from AFI with my husband… We’ve just got to Gone With the Wind and I rented it already. I hope it is not as boring as some of you say it is. :/ I’ll be sad.
I liked Casablanca a lot! It had really smart dialogue, was funny, and had a nice moral at the end of the story. Not technically a moral, I guess, but something along those lines.
August 12th, 2008 at 9:46 am
When do we get some more children’s letters to Raven-Symone? I just realized we haven’t had any in a while.
August 12th, 2008 at 11:53 am
This just cements my opinion that Eric is the critic who’s movie opinions most closely match my own. I think an awful lot of people feel that way, too.
August 12th, 2008 at 2:28 pm
Thank you for letting me know I’m not the only one mystified by the appeal of “Grease.”
August 12th, 2008 at 5:04 pm
I’m going to make a very bold statement here about “2001: A Space Odyssey,” so here it goes: If you’ve read the book, then you know the movie handled it all wrong. If you HAVEN’T read the book, then you don’t understand the movie, so stop acting like you do. That’s one of those movies that people praise because they’re afraid they’ll be accused of being stupid if they admit they didn’t get it.
As for “The Seven Samurai,” I love it, but then again I’m a huge Kurosawa fan. The length does seem like much, but I found that it only gave me more time to become truly invested in these characters, which made the climactic battle all the more exciting since you know not all of them will make it out alive.
August 12th, 2008 at 6:04 pm
The Seven Samurai is one of my all time favorites. The first time I saw it, however, I fell asleep for about an hour in the middle. Upon waking up, I found that I hadn’t missed much. Years later, when I watched it again, it really moved me in many ways. I have seen a couple of other Kurosawa films, and they were all good (the things I understood anyway). There’s just something cool about Samurai though.
August 12th, 2008 at 7:03 pm
I agree with you, Eric, on every one of those films I’ve seen (4 of the 6).
Unfortunately for you, I also dislike most Shakespeare. So what does that say about YOUR tastes?
August 12th, 2008 at 8:41 pm
I have to disagree with Eric on Young Frankenstein, although I admit I first saw it when I was very young and in a double feature with High Anxiety (what were my parents thinking?!?), so maybe that influenced my fondness at least for YF. But on everything else, ditto. I’d have to add Chariots of Fire (better than Ambien) and Spirited Away (I want those two hours of my life back!!).
August 12th, 2008 at 9:41 pm
Careful Red–Don’t be knockin’ Chariots of Fire. That film rules like the British Empire and deserves every accolade that it received. A modern film that actually promoted morality and taste among the Limey upper crust. Loved that film.
August 13th, 2008 at 12:21 am
Suskie, I watched the movie first, then read the book. What I like about the movie is that it leaves you with a “what the f@*&^?” ending, and the HAL attack is a spectacularly slow yet tense section. Maybe I just got into the 2 mph speed “action” scenes, somehow. The book, on the other hand, was spectacular for clearing up all of the “what the f@*&^?”-ness of the movie. I remember Mr. Clark saying that he wrote the book while co-writing the screenplay and that he considers them to be almost two different works.
August 13th, 2008 at 12:39 am
Oh “Gone With the Wind” is probably my favorite movie of all time. Even though I’ve seen it more times than I can count, I still get sucked in by Scarlett O’Hara everytime. I think she’s a horrible character, but to watch Vivien Leigh just turn her into that unforgettable icon, it’s worth the time. Plus, it’s fun to watch when you find out how badly Clark Gable & Vivien Leigh hated each other, & how they act around that. I do have to admit that I just want to beat the crap out of Ashley Wilkes though…….that is definitely one character that has to hand in his man card, & not just because of his sissy name!!
August 13th, 2008 at 7:55 am
Monte Python and the Holy Grail.
I know most people love it, but honestly, I can’t stand it. Maybe because every time I watch it in a group, there’s some guy in the corner quoting every line about 3 seconds before it actually occurs.
I’ve given this movie multiple chances, and while it was mildly amusing the first time I saw it as a 12-year old, I’ve since come to just find it annoying.
August 13th, 2008 at 9:50 am
“2001: A Space Odyssey” is definitely one that I don’t get. “Grease” was okay but I never really thought of it as a classic.
“Godfather” is a classic that I just can’t get into, though ironically the video game was pretty good.
I saw “Gone With the Wind” for the first time recently, and liked it, but definitely didn’t love it. I found Scarlett to be such an awful person that I had a hard time caring what happened to her, but I understand that it’s these flaws in her character that make other people love the movie.
August 13th, 2008 at 10:56 am
So which classics deserve there status in your mind, Mr. Snider?
August 13th, 2008 at 11:40 am
I agreed with you the first time I saw 2001. I fell asleep. Of course, I was six years old at the time. I liked it as a grown-up.
Seven Samurai is too long for 21st-century attention spans, but there’s nothing in it that could be cut without diminishing the movie.
Now Titanic, there’s a movie that sucks. I’ve tried to watch it three times, but I’ve never been able to sit through it. Everything about it except for Kate Winslet’s boobies is awful.
August 13th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
I always thought 2001 was kind of fun but rather silly and took an awfully long time to say very little, (I had read the book and liked it better, but it was still kind of silly — the sequels were more silly). But I have to disagree with Red about Chariots of Fire (which I think is pretty good) and especially Spirited Away (which I love — but it’s better in Japanese that the English dub).
August 13th, 2008 at 2:18 pm
Sweet, my simple e-mail turned into one whole column!!! I’m touched!!!
August 13th, 2008 at 2:47 pm
Jenn, those were awesome comments about Gone with the Wind. Ashley does need to hand in his man card.
August 13th, 2008 at 2:50 pm
I have to say, I fully agree with Jacob M.
August 13th, 2008 at 8:01 pm
I liked 2001 but can understand why some people don’t. I really like Bringing Up Baby (my wife can’t stand it). I liked Citizen Kane (but knew too much about it going into the movie. Can you say “Rosebud”). I like the first half of Grease (the second half totally loses its focus) but would never consider it a classic film. I’ve never been able to get through Gone With the Wind (as others have said, the main character was just too unpleasant plus what a downer of an ending!) I like Mel Brooks’ films but they always seem hit and miss to me. I found High Anxiety the funniest (I like Hitchcock). Young Frankenstein does have its moments but frankly I always thought the “Puttin on the Ritz” scene a bit dumb.
We all have our opinions I suppose. My vote for the most overrated classic movie would probably be Singing in The Rain. Before you throw stones, let me say that I really like the film but having heard how wonderful it was, I was a bit let down when I finally saw it. The plot was always a little weak and seemed to me an excuse to string together some very nice songs and dance numbers. But to be fair, I think Jean Hagen (the ditsy blonde starlet) is one of the funniest characters on film.
August 14th, 2008 at 10:54 am
I recently saw “2001: A Space Odyssey” on cable on one of those HD channels that is starving for content, so they end up showing a lot of HD versions of movies. The first time I saw it was immediately after finishing the book, so it has always made sense. However, I can totally see how it would be completely unwatchable without having read the book. It is visually stunning, but interminably slow. Luckily, I was watching it on my TiVo, and so I just blooped it once to take those scenes at double time, and the experience was vastly improved. Even if the soundtrack becomes silent when you do that. But yeah, at the end where Dave goes into the monolith, and you are teleported into a bad acid trip? WTF?
“Casablanca” and “An American in Paris” definitely get my vote for classic movies that don’t work for me. I only got through Casablanca because the people with whom I was watching it insisted on finishing. Luckily, my wife and I were both bored to tears by “An American in Paris” and we had no problem popping out the DVD and sending it right back to Netflix.
August 16th, 2008 at 7:49 am
I totally agree about Katherine Hepburn being annoying. The only movie I can stand her in is “The Philadelphia Story” because her annoyingness is cancelled out by the awesomeness of the movie having BOTH Cary Grant and Jimmy Stewart. If Grace Kelly had been in the movie their combined awesome glory would have destroyed the camera.
August 21st, 2008 at 4:23 am
I have to agree with Eric’s opinion on 2001: A Space Odyssey, and Young Frankenstein. I just didn’t get them, though my husband likes 2001 and all my family loves Young Frankenstein.
A few years ago I decided to see what I’d been missing and watch some of the old classics. Unfortunately, I started with Breakfast at Tiffany’s, and hated it so much that I didn’t watch any more.
Also (please don’t shoot me, anyone) I never saw the appeal of Close Encounters of the Third Kind. I just found it boring.
April 16th, 2012 at 2:10 pm
I remember seeing Citizen Kane for the first time when I was nine or ten and thinking it was incredibly powerful. I might have even cried. I wonder if those who were bored with it were able to watch it distraction-free. That kind of movie (and I would lump 2001 and Spirited Away in the same category) really works for me when there are no distractions, and I can just get lost is the slow, steady hypnotism of the film. I saw Gone with the Wind around the same time as Citizen Kane and thought it was depressing and miserable (Seriously, what kind of movie ends with a Hero-and-heroine-are-finally-together and they-all-lived-happily-ever-after moment and then GOES ON for another two hours in which hero and heroine have kids, grow to hate each other, and suffer equestrian tragedy?!). But that really works for some people. There really is no accounting for taste.