Universally agreed terrible film(s)

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Los Angeles. Well the San Fernando Valley, really. Pretty sure the company is situated in Studio City, which is also where I worked as a production assistant.
 

HannahB

Well-known member
I think hes referring to the theory (i.e. "The Death of the Author", "What is an author?") that textual interpretation doesn't necessarily need to be determined by the intentions of the text's author. No longer is hermeneutics governed by the transcendent author, according to those who may consider this a watershed moment in literary theory.
Thanks… but @woops - am still none the wiser in this context
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Did the IATSE pending strike really impact you? Pretty sure it was resolved, but I've only had sporadic secondhand information.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
What?
- already stated I disagree with the ubiquitous appraisal of Citizen Kane, many do…& dislike the film a lot - one reason why is the very reason you have told me it is proliferated as THE thing - by certain sectors who claim dominance in a certain area of filmmaking and film history. Anyhow who cares what I think
Kane is just an example to demonstrate the concept, it's not important here. We get the concept, now let's find one we can agree on and justify as fulfilling the opposite of the role that Kane - rightly or not - does fill.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Me no. I am in UK. The US has had a travel ban since March 2020 and it is due to lift Nov. 8. Been here 1 year helping my mum. My job does not have a union. Does yours?
Oh I misunderstood you at some point, thought you were stuck in US.

But no, to my knowledge neither PAs nor script evaluators have unions, although for a while I was considering in-routes to Local 44, the craftsperson union, to which my cousin now belongs.
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
Kane is just an example to demonstrate the concept, it's not important here. We get the concept, now let's find one we can agree on and justify as fulfilling the opposite of the role that Kane - rightly or not - does fill.
Have you seen The Room? The film was pseudo-sacred at the school I went to in Chicago, ritualistically akin to The Rocky Horror Picture Show, which I haven't yet seen.
 

HannahB

Well-known member
Kane is just an example to demonstrate the concept, it's not important here. We get the concept, now let's find one we can agree on and justify as fulfilling the opposite of the role that Kane - rightly or not - does fill.
I do not get your concept. Only certain people think Kane is a good film, certain dominants who also reflect the story itself - that is my point. You don’t get my concept which would talk about colonizer settler white patriarchy extraction industries moving people off their land and white male Hollywood exclusivity and control of historical narratives and archives: at that time look at ASC photographs, those crane shots in Kane were ONLY ever operated by straight white men. so now let’s talk about hubris- Kane is unwatchable. Welles is overrated to the max. Many films not in the dominant category have been lost. Meanwhile the extreme angles and constant use of extreme depth of field is too much for me. People do have different opinions obviously
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
Have you seen The Room? The film was pseudo-sacred at the school I went to in Chicago, ritualistically akin to The Rocky Horror Picture Show, which I haven't yet seen.
I've never seen it. But I know it's a cult bad film and so I think it's not what I'm looking for here. Perhaps a slightly arbitrary rule but a) others have expressed that same feeling and b) It's my thread so I make the rules.
 

HannahB

Well-known member
I do not get your concept. Only certain people think Kane is a good film, certain dominants who also reflect the story itself - that is my point. You don’t get my concept which would talk about colonizer settler white patriarchy extraction industries moving people off their land and white male Hollywood exclusivity and control of historical narratives and archives: at that time look at ASC photographs, those crane shots in Kane were ONLY ever operated by straight white men. so now let’s talk about hubris- Kane is unwatchable. Welles is overrated to the max. Many films not in the dominant category have been lost. Meanwhile the extreme angles and constant use of extreme depth of field is too much for me. People do have different opinions obviously
Things have to be conceptually interesting also
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
I do not get your concept. Only certain people think Kane is a good film, certain dominants who also reflect the story itself - that is my point. You don’t get my concept which would talk about colonizer settler white patriarchy extraction industries moving people off their land and white male Hollywood exclusivity and control of historical narratives and archives: at that time look at ASC photographs, those crane shots in Kane were ONLY ever operated by straight white men. so now let’s talk about hubris- Kane is unwatchable. Welles is overrated to the max. Many films not in the dominant category have been lost. Meanwhile the extreme angles and constant use of extreme depth of field is too much for me. People do have different opinions obviously
Yes, but it's merely an example of a dominant opinion. Several times I've said that opinion may be wrong but I've explained quite clearly in small words why your no doubt excellent points about extremely straight white cameras are not at all relevant to what we are talking about here.

Let me just say this very simply. Forget how good or bad Citizen Kane is, forget I ever mentioned Citizen Kane, forget that a film called Citizen Kane ever existed. Please never ever mention Citizen Kane again. Ever. Please.

Instead, apply your knowledge and intellect to suggesting a film that we will all agree is really bad. That noone will stick up for, and which has no kind of kitsch value or cult following of the so-bad-it's-good kind and which can become the archetypal bad film in the way that Cit... that The Bicycle Thief is for good. That's it.
 

HannahB

Well-known member
Yes, but it's merely an example of a dominant opinion. Several times I've said that opinion may be wrong but I've explained quite clearly in small words why your no doubt excellent points about extremely straight white cameras are not at all relevant to what we are talking about here.

Let me just say this very simply. Forget how good or bad Citizen Kane is, forget I ever mentioned Citizen Kane, forget that a film called Citizen Kane ever existed. Please never ever mention Citizen Kane again. Ever. Please.

Instead, apply your knowledge and intellect to suggesting a film that we will all agree is really bad. That noone will stick up for, and which has no kind of kitsch value or cult following of the so-bad-it's-good kind and which can become the archetypal bad film in the way that Cit... that The Bicycle Thief is for good. That's it.
Only if you say it in a more condescending manner like this guy:
Or as PASTICHED here
 

Clinamenic

Binary & Tweed
I've never seen it. But I know it's a cult bad film and so I think it's not what I'm looking for here. Perhaps a slightly arbitrary rule but a) others have expressed that same feeling and b) It's my thread so I make the rules.
I think most of the bad films that have had wide viewings tend to be cult bad films. I think plain old bad films don't tend to get enough viewings for there to be an established near-universal opinion about them.
 

IdleRich

IdleRich
It just occurred to me, in relation to the title of this thread, that perhaps there aren't any.
Certainly an hypothesis worth exploring.
Perhaps every potential candidate is either wiped from the collective memory or achieves cult status.
Heaven's Gate was long a byword for a disastrous film but I think that's always been more about the finances than the film itself.
 
Top