Roger Ebert's "Best / Worst Movies of 2004" list! (1 Viewer)

[Matt Stone]

Me too. I love the first film.

 

[JonZ]

IMHO its sucks bigtime.

 

[Mikel_Cooperman]

I saw White Chicks the other night. I am not for this type of movie but it looked funny in the previews and Blockbuster was having a DVD sale. Boy was this a stinker. all the funny parts Were in the trailer.

 

[Ernest Rister]

I have a suspicion that Chris Nolan's Batman Begins is going to make Tim Burton's Batman look as silly as the Adam West/Burt Ward campfests from the 60's. But we've got a thread for such trash talk.

 

[AlexCremers]

The strange thing is that I think so too.

 

[George See]

I don't see why people have a problem with the sets in Dogville, it reminded me a lot of going to theater to see a play. Also the sparse setting made you really focus on the characters face and eyes with no distractions. Not to mention 6 months after having seen the movie I can still picture it in my head which is more then i can say for most movies, that's gotta be worth something.

 

[AlexCremers]

I agree, George. I only saw it once (six months ago) but since then Dogville's images keep on popping up in my head.

 

[Jimi C]

I do not understand the dislike for the Village. What is it that you guys didnt like?>

(I should mention i have not seen it yet, but my friend raved about it and also spoiled the ending, it sounded like a very good film)

 

[Chris]

In regards to "Dogville" I want to give an unrelated example.. the first time I watched "New Jack CitY" I thought it was a passable film. By the end of the year, the more I thought about it, the lower I thought of the film, and today I find it almost unwatchable.

Sometimes, you can make an initial judgement on the film and as time passes think worse of the film. AOTC is a great example. Ron posted one of the first reviews here in this forum and raved on it; claimed it to be far better then TPM (which I agree) but as time went on, more people went from mildly pleased to dissapointed. (I still find AOTC to be a film I enjoy for what it is)

Some films have a way to do that.. I've tried not to dwell on Dogville, because I found it pretty bad from the get go. But, a good recent example of that is "Shark Tale" watching with my kids, I thought "eh" but the more I thought of the film, the less I care for it, and at this point, I'd rank it in my 20 worst of the year.

*shrug* time and a lot of thought gives you a different lens on a film.

 

[Matt Stone]

I liked it, but a lot of people found it immensely disappointing. The film was marketed as a typical Signs/Sixth Sense-esque M. Night thriller and ended up being something entirely different. Read the discussion thread if you don't mind spoilers.

 

[AlexCremers]

Sometimes it's the other way around. It's perfectly possible to only appreciate a movie upon the second or third time you see it. Some films have a way to do that...

------------
Alex Cremers

 

[Joe Karlosi]

How right you are, Alex. It's a shame sometimes, but there are so many films we see one time and don't like which would have appealed to us if they were given a second and third chance. This happened to me with KILL BILL VOL. 2 recently - I didn't like it as much as the first chapter when I first saw it, but I was drawn to see it another time and I came to feel it differently. I saw it 9 times in the theatre as a result (a record for me). The more I saw the film, the more the music punctuated every frame perfectly, the more I picked up on details I hadn't noticed before....

Sometimes I think certain films are at a real disadvantage when seen only once.

 

[Matt Stone]

It's also happened with Ebert. I remember in his initial review of Fight Club, he dismissed it as "macho porn" but later came to appreciate it. I think he even had it at one of his Overlooked Film Festivals.