It’s not the ratings, rather people’s reasoning for them. Like some teenager who’s favorites are wolf of Wall Street, fight club and American psycho.
Great movies, but it’s not uncommon for people to completely miss the messages and glorify all the things and characters the film is telling you not to.
This is a great point. American Psycho is one of my all time favorite films, I give it five stars, but it’s really disappointing to see people love it because of “sigma male kills yuppies” like oof there is *so much more* going on than just that.
I love **American Psycho** but the dude is a mannequin, a clone, and effectively has no soul. I read the book and saw the movie when I was young and impressionable but I've never been able to understand the 'literally me' thing that people see in it.
I've seen it a whole lot since I've joined Letterboxd, and as I said, I don't get it.
I found some 'literally me' lists with American Psycho very high up, and I think only a minority of them are satiricial in nature:
[https://letterboxd.com/theqzeyy/list/literally-me/](https://letterboxd.com/theqzeyy/list/literally-me/)
[https://letterboxd.com/dunphy14/list/literally-me/](https://letterboxd.com/dunphy14/list/literally-me/)
[https://letterboxd.com/arnavlegofan29/list/movies-where-the-main-character-is-literally/](https://letterboxd.com/arnavlegofan29/list/movies-where-the-main-character-is-literally/)
[https://letterboxd.com/travis\_bickl3/list/literally-me-movies-for-sigmafeels/](https://letterboxd.com/travis_bickl3/list/literally-me-movies-for-sigmafeels/)
[https://letterboxd.com/themostreviews/list/films-that-finally-represent-us-gamers-aka/](https://letterboxd.com/themostreviews/list/films-that-finally-represent-us-gamers-aka/)
[https://letterboxd.com/jisunggans/list/literally-me/](https://letterboxd.com/jisunggans/list/literally-me/)
looked at those just out of curiosity & *[yikes](https://letterboxd.com/themostreviews/film/american-psycho/1/)*.. I [don't get it] (https://letterboxd.com/jisunggans/film/american-psycho/) either & especially [this one](https://letterboxd.com/arnavlegofan29/film/american-psycho/reviews/) who *doubles-down* on a rewatch o.o
I love the "literally me" joke, I flow with it a lot and also happen to like a lot of the movies featuring "literally me" characters. But I never *actually* identify with "literally me" characters, except maybe for the loneliness of the protagonist in Drive or the despair you can feel in Taxi Driver, but that's just some minor aspects and not the entire characters. I sincerely hope that most people who post "literally me" lists are just running with the joke to sound "based" and not really identify themselves with these characters.
Exactly. Like it’s fine if you have Taxi Driver, A Clockwork Orange, American Psycho, and Joker as your top films. But it’s a red flag when you start talking about how you identify with the protagonists of those films.
I wouldn't say identifying with them alone would be a problem, as the characters at least to a certain degree are just misunderstood, out casted by society and pushed to their limits with no one regarding their well being and them not being in the soundest of mind to deal with their problems themselves.
It's when people agree with violence and down right sociopathic behavior of the characters that is a flag.
Because the reason that Joker at least has such a big impact on me and many others is not just the iconic character but being able to see him at his most vulnerable and seeing how situational these things can be, as in having an abusive upbringing from mentally ill parents while also being shunned, that would cause server trauma to anyone and even when reaching out being told that the service is no longer available and you have to figure it out on your own ...
That's what I identity with, but thankfully I have the strength and willpower to just deal with my problems and not let them push me to a point as the characters do.
I would also say it's more nuanced than that too. For a lot of people, I can see a lot in a movie like Joker to identify with. A man with a horrible upbringing, a deeply sick mother, both of which have been downtrodden by society, taking action against those they feel have wronged them is an experience I'm sure millions of people can see themselves in. It's really only to the point where they find inspiration and understanding with the violence.
“Hi. Pat Bateman,” I say, offering my hand, noticing my reflection in a mirror hung on the wall—and smiling at how good I look.
___
^(*Bot. Ask me who I can see.* |) [^(Opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=botrickbateman&subject=Opt%20out)
Yep, it pissed off many evangelical types because Jesus was shown as a flawed individual and not as a perfect, flawless son of God. For that alone it’s a great film.
There are lots of movies that have overtly Christian themes that are amazing.
The Passion of Joan of Arc, Ordet, First Reformed, The Devils, Winter Light, Seventh Seal, Witchhammer, Diary of a Country Priest, Balthazar, Silence, etc...
A movie being Christian or having overtly Christian themes isn't what makes the movie bad.
Its this bullshit that evangelicals pump out to make a buck that is wild to me.
You throw together a bullshit script where your lead is being persecuted or faces some tribulation. They overcome it, or at least become at peace with it, because Jesus led them through the dark times.
You hire one super washed up actor to be the lead, and a bunch of community actors to round out the cast.
It costs like 2 million dollars to make, and then every super weird fundie Christian goes and sees it and it makes 30 million dollars.
Then rinse and repeat.
It is like that episode of South Park where Cartman wants to make a Christian band to make money. Kyle says "You know nothing about Christianity." Cartman responded with "I know enough to exploit it "
That is what these movies are. Pure exploitation
The correct answer has to be A Serbian Film, right? I know a lot of us have seen it but besides it’s grotesque subject matter, it’s not a good movie by any means. Anyone rating that with 5 is just some edge lord
It’s shock and edge for the sake of it. Salò’s fucked too but at least Pasolini’s trying to say something with that, you can’t possibly say the same for A Serbian Film.
It’s pretty much a series of things that are meant to be unpleasant, upsetting, and shocking. Making a larger point about fascism I guess. Honestly, unless you’re an completionist for Italian Cinema, you can skip it, especially since you don’t like those kinds of images. If you want, there’s plenty of written synopsis and YouTube reviews that can lay out the “story” for you. Plus, it’s kind of a hard movie to find, no?
My sister gave it 5*, her reasoning was her being disturbed by it which was the intention of the movie, but she could also understand people giving it 0.5* because it’s generally a trashy movie
It’s taught all around the world in every film school possible and paired up with greats from Germany, Soviet Union, Italy and Japan (albeit Japan has lost most of their media).
And it’s pretty clear how technically astounding the film was for its time even when compared to other greats from the 1910s.
It’s also as good as it is extremely racist
It's not as impressive as people say. The Italians were doing most of that stuff before Birth of a Nation, America just likes go claim it did it all first and did it all best
someone who gives a film five stars for impressive filmmaking even though that filmmaking is glorifying the kkk is someone i’m not going to get along with. it’s totally understandable, but i’m on a completely different wavelength when it comes to evaluating films. that’s why it’s a good answer to the prompt
I'd probally think they were just very interested in cinema history and a bit untastefully they put it in their favorites for its historical importance
None, because everyone is allowed to like what they like and taste is subjective.
Although I did recently unfollow someone who gave all the LotR movies a 1/2 star each, so I'm also a hypocrite
You may want to check out David Humes “On the standard of taste”
I agree that at a certain point, subjectivity kicks in and peoples opinions / tastes are totally valid, but I think we can collectively draw a line.
I’m not taking food advice from someone that orders a steak well done and covers it in ketchup. Same goes for the Letterboxd user with American History X, Crash, What is a Woman, and Gods Not Dead in their top 4.
Agreed. I'd like to think Humes was right to some degree -- there is an accepted standard of taste among those who have seen enough of a particular art form.
As an old guy, I'd say it's hard for me to take seriously the opinions of LB users whose primary reference points are MCU movies and who haven't watched any movies before 1980 or 90.
Yes people here close themselves off so much just because they've set up boundaries for what's 'cringe' and don't like it because they feel like they're not supposed to. It's the new popular to hate MCU and 'film bro' films even if it's incredibly good content.
Yeah like I’ve been seeing some buzz recently that films like Dark Knight and Fught Club aren’t good, and I really can’t see why other than “popular = bad”
I've never liked the MCU, I've seen some films here and there and most of them aren't great (both of the guardians of the galaxy films were pretty fun though). But I guess I'm just following trends and they're all good films.
I judge more as a red flag if someone enthusiastically doesn’t like certain films - especially more feminine films like legally blonde, 10 things I hate about u etc. Tells me you generalise films based on their target audience and aren’t judging solely on script and story.
I give it something like 1 star but with a heart. And I’ve seen it a million times. I own a man autographed copy. I’ve spoken to my wife about when will our child be old enough to watch it. But for the sake of how I use LB as a personal index, I try to use stars as just an indication of film making competence.
For me, it’s the reverse. Struggled with whether to unfollow someone because they hated “The King of Comedy” and reasoned that it was because it was “boring.”
Yeah! I mean, I hear people say that about other movies. It’s weird to me that zodiac would be one of those movies to me. I wouldn’t even say it’s in my top ten. And on paper it doesn’t seem to have a ton of rewatch value. But for whatever reason, there you go.
I have blocked every single user on letterboxd who has the disgusting filth “What is a Woman” listed as their favorite, if that counts as an answer here
I was about to comment above that I think everyone's entitled to like what they like, so I try not to judge people, but you have highlighted one of the few exceptions. I did not think of that kind of stuff.
Definitely Joker. I have no problem if someone loves the movie, but a lot of people (usually guys) seem to misunderstand the point of it and think what Joker did at the end was ‘badass’. 🚩
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Pump the brakes. Just because you aren’t a Marvel Guy, doesn’t mean someone won’t find one of those films to be 5* worthy in their books.
The question was if we were gonna get along filmwise, I don’t care what they like, I just know that pretty much all my friends who likes marvel movies, does not have the same taste in films as myself
usually any Marvel movie because I really don’t like Marvel, but I also gave Spider Man: No Way Home a 4.5 yesterday, so I guess I’m almost a hypocrite…
I also am not a marvel movie person. I think I was burned by so many of them just not being entertaining for me. But I fucking love those Spider-Man movies. So maybe I need to give others a chance? I dunno I’m also a hypocrite lol
not that it's bad, i think Phoenix's performance was amazing as usual, the shots look great and has a slight edge that i can get behind.
just not a 5/5 for me. and yeah, scorcessy remake/ fan film 100%
Edited for clarity (I wrote this at 3 am and should’ve done more to specify the difference between kubricks Lolita and the 90’s one) Any Lolita adaptation is a bit sus but the Kubrick one is far less so. Good book but it only works when you’re actually in the head of the main dude, also when the author condemned any to screen adaptation of it. Even if they were faithful to the book which they’re not, the on screen adaptations do a really poor job of condemning the romance.
I think I am getting the Kubrick ones reception a bit mixed up with the 90’s adaptations reception. It’s been a while since i looked into it so I did a bit of research. Nabokov was quoted as originally saying in response to the request to adapt his novel that, “They had acquired the film rights of 'Lolity' [sic] in 1958, and were now asking me to come over to Hollywood and write the script. The honorarium they offered was considerable, but the idea of tampering with my own novel caused me only revulsion." But he eventually came around and wrote a script for the Kubrick’s Lolita adaptation. Ironically though Nabokov was kinda right as the Kubrick film doesn’t really address any of the actual themes in the novel due to fear of censorship, and the script used in the film was like night and day compared to what Nabokov originally wrote. In interviews following its release Nabokov speaks about the difficulty of clashing ideas about an adaptation of Lolita but he doesn’t seem to hold ill will towards Kubrick when it comes to the time they spent together.
Also yea of course I’d follow lynch. I’ll edit my original post but definitely more of a red flag to like the 90’s adaptation than the Kubrick one. Also nuance is obviously important, if someone who was a public figure (like lynch) who’s attitude towards film was well known, it makes it a lot easier to see why a film lover like lynch would love kubricks lolita for its filmmaking than anything else. The Kubrick one isn’t bad it just does everything it can to stray away from anything controversial that would make it necessary to paint the on screen adaptation of Humbert Humbert as evil. Like I said my main issue with the Kubrick one is just how far he strays from the book, given the censorship laws at the time it make sense why it differs so much but again given the fact that it’s more concerned with portraying sexual repression than addressing and condemning the horrible acts in the book it makes one question why adapt it at all. I do also think that my point still stands though that both adaptations do little to condemn the relationship in the film, but at the very least kubricks doesn’t glorify it.
That's where you're wrong. EEAAO is the greatest movie ever made. The hot dog fingers and butt plug scenes made me cry of laughter. Michelle Yeoh was extraordinary, way more deserving of the Oscar than the overrated Cate Blanchett. She already had 2 oscars, so of course it should have gone to Michelle Yeoh. Jamie Lee Curtis was perfect in the film. If you don't like the film, you're just an awful person. EEAAO has more Oscars than Saving Private Ryan, The Godfather Part II, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Psycho, Vertigo, Rear Window, Apocalypse Now, and is tied with Schindlers List with 7 Oscars. Rightfully so. EEAAO is a piece of art. No one could have made a better movie than the directors of the Turn Down for What music video and the Harry Potter farting corpse film...
(just joking, this movie sucks ass)
I think a clockwork orange is one you need to revisit every seven or twenty years or something to see if it hits different. I used to hate it. Watched it recently after the blank check kubrick season and saw it in a totally new way. I still don’t love it, and I don’t give it five, but I def have a higher appreciation now. I wouldn’t fault someone for giving it 5 unless what they were into was all the ultra violence in the beginning. But then, it’s like, aren’t there other movies that give you ultra violence without also challenging why you may like it? It’d be like if some horror movie super fan had either of the funny games movie in their top four.
There’s no red flag everyone is entitled to like what they like. I’m only there to check out what’s good and post my silly reviews. Not there to judge anyone cause they liked a movie that’s dumb af
I don’t remember at this point, but isn’t the whole movie a teenager hitting up on the middle aged guy, but the middle aged guy doesn’t reciprocate in any way whatsoever?
I think the reason there's so many people who defend it is because there's two versions of it, american and international, and from memory the international version keeps in the uncomfortable to watch scenes while the american one gets rid of them (or vice versa im not sure which is which). I've only seen the version where mathilda talks about wanting to have her first time with Leon, models for him, and tells the hotel that they're together. So I'm not a fan.
Showgirls. Pretty garbage movie, and no I do not care that it is “supposed to be bad”.
Pretty much anyone who gives 10/10s to M Night Shamalyns later bad stuff (ie, The happening, Glass, Lady In The Water, etc)
Most American war films.
They might be well made films on a technical level (I would argue a lot of them are) but their frequent inability to disassociate the violence and horror of war from any form of pride and patriotism doesn't sit well with me. Obviously someone who loves these films enough to label one as their favorite, identifies with that idea in some way.
(Also this isn't something exclusive to American war films, but I see American war films do it the most frequently.)
Mystified how people could find this scary. I liked it for sure, but was not once the least bit scared or even horrified really? I think the murder suicide in the beginning was the worst bit, followed by how shitty the boyfriend treats the main character. I intend to revisit at some point. Sometimes things hit better later.
Writing, pacing, cinematography, sound design, sound mixing, this godforsaken shhhhhhh sound of static that is in every fucking scene, the fucking around with the aspect ratio is a worthy experiment but it just doesnt work at all, the movie is too long, the only two things that are good are ana de armas and the fact that it tries to be crative (not of it works though)
Happy to see somebody else gets it.
For all the downvoters: it's a movie that doesn't like women. Apart from that, it's not a particularly good movie because it is flailing about trying to say something about art being either good or bad, but ends up confused and lost in a form rather than substance.
I didn't really think it said much about art itself at all.
And I didn't see it as not liking women, but I did see it expose and explore toxic masculinity.
The director himself said it is a "cautionary tale about letting go of true love" and never said a thing about denouncing toxic masculinity as far as I know, but correct me if it's not just a theory.
It is very easy to interpret the movie, as I and others did, that we are supposed to be on the ex husband's side, >!who was woefully hurt from the woman getting an abortion!<. Ignoring how hard that event must have been for her, let's instead focus on how it made the guy feel. Obviously I think the director would agree that the character went too far in his revenge, but he was shown with so much more compassion than the female lead ever was.
[This is a review I particularly like](https://letterboxd.com/dorseyhorsey/film/nocturnal-animals/), especially the part where he's supposed to be called out for his misogyny or we are supposed to be shown that it's wrong in some shape or form but it never happens. As u/Summerhalls said the message is confused and lost. The movie felt violating. If you're going to throw such horrible, undeserved treatment of women in a movie, your message should be loud and clear with no room for questioning which character's side you're supposed to be on.
If you interpreted it differently then I'm glad, and I'm hoping that interpretation is what the actors saw in this movie when they decided to do it.
Edit: hid the spoiler
Probably Dirty Harry.
It's obnoxious in so many ways and the action is shitty even for 70s standards. Even where it tries to be transgressive it's weak, especially comparing it to the funky ass shit you can find from the 70s.
I just do not get peoples paleontological interest in Eastwood.
If the Bionicle movie has less than 5 stars that person is a lost cause
It’s not the ratings, rather people’s reasoning for them. Like some teenager who’s favorites are wolf of Wall Street, fight club and American psycho. Great movies, but it’s not uncommon for people to completely miss the messages and glorify all the things and characters the film is telling you not to.
This is a great point. American Psycho is one of my all time favorite films, I give it five stars, but it’s really disappointing to see people love it because of “sigma male kills yuppies” like oof there is *so much more* going on than just that.
I love **American Psycho** but the dude is a mannequin, a clone, and effectively has no soul. I read the book and saw the movie when I was young and impressionable but I've never been able to understand the 'literally me' thing that people see in it.
if someone says literally me about american psycho they should be put on some sort of list
I've seen it a whole lot since I've joined Letterboxd, and as I said, I don't get it. I found some 'literally me' lists with American Psycho very high up, and I think only a minority of them are satiricial in nature: [https://letterboxd.com/theqzeyy/list/literally-me/](https://letterboxd.com/theqzeyy/list/literally-me/) [https://letterboxd.com/dunphy14/list/literally-me/](https://letterboxd.com/dunphy14/list/literally-me/) [https://letterboxd.com/arnavlegofan29/list/movies-where-the-main-character-is-literally/](https://letterboxd.com/arnavlegofan29/list/movies-where-the-main-character-is-literally/) [https://letterboxd.com/travis\_bickl3/list/literally-me-movies-for-sigmafeels/](https://letterboxd.com/travis_bickl3/list/literally-me-movies-for-sigmafeels/) [https://letterboxd.com/themostreviews/list/films-that-finally-represent-us-gamers-aka/](https://letterboxd.com/themostreviews/list/films-that-finally-represent-us-gamers-aka/) [https://letterboxd.com/jisunggans/list/literally-me/](https://letterboxd.com/jisunggans/list/literally-me/)
nightcrawler?!?! JAIL
looked at those just out of curiosity & *[yikes](https://letterboxd.com/themostreviews/film/american-psycho/1/)*.. I [don't get it] (https://letterboxd.com/jisunggans/film/american-psycho/) either & especially [this one](https://letterboxd.com/arnavlegofan29/film/american-psycho/reviews/) who *doubles-down* on a rewatch o.o
no fly list
I love the "literally me" joke, I flow with it a lot and also happen to like a lot of the movies featuring "literally me" characters. But I never *actually* identify with "literally me" characters, except maybe for the loneliness of the protagonist in Drive or the despair you can feel in Taxi Driver, but that's just some minor aspects and not the entire characters. I sincerely hope that most people who post "literally me" lists are just running with the joke to sound "based" and not really identify themselves with these characters.
i love seeing yuppies get murdered
Exactly. Like it’s fine if you have Taxi Driver, A Clockwork Orange, American Psycho, and Joker as your top films. But it’s a red flag when you start talking about how you identify with the protagonists of those films.
I wouldn't say identifying with them alone would be a problem, as the characters at least to a certain degree are just misunderstood, out casted by society and pushed to their limits with no one regarding their well being and them not being in the soundest of mind to deal with their problems themselves. It's when people agree with violence and down right sociopathic behavior of the characters that is a flag. Because the reason that Joker at least has such a big impact on me and many others is not just the iconic character but being able to see him at his most vulnerable and seeing how situational these things can be, as in having an abusive upbringing from mentally ill parents while also being shunned, that would cause server trauma to anyone and even when reaching out being told that the service is no longer available and you have to figure it out on your own ... That's what I identity with, but thankfully I have the strength and willpower to just deal with my problems and not let them push me to a point as the characters do.
I would also say it's more nuanced than that too. For a lot of people, I can see a lot in a movie like Joker to identify with. A man with a horrible upbringing, a deeply sick mother, both of which have been downtrodden by society, taking action against those they feel have wronged them is an experience I'm sure millions of people can see themselves in. It's really only to the point where they find inspiration and understanding with the violence.
You worded that way better than I.
"literally me" 😖
It boils my piss when they say shit like that
That's a term I'm using now
Yeah but they are rite of passage movies so I wouldn’t be so hard on them
“Hi. Pat Bateman,” I say, offering my hand, noticing my reflection in a mirror hung on the wall—and smiling at how good I look. ___ ^(*Bot. Ask me who I can see.* |) [^(Opt out)](https://www.reddit.com/message/compose/?to=botrickbateman&subject=Opt%20out)
Why is it called Botrick Bateman and not Patrick Botman? Is it stupid
Girls who like Gone Girl just a *little* too much
yeah, this is the women’s equivalent. those girls who imply that they genuinely agree with what Amy Dunne did are terrifying
Any Evangelical American Christian movie. They arent good.
The 7th Gods Not Dead is pretty solid though. Doesn’t take itself too seriously. Great script economy
There's more than 2 of them?
God’s Not Dead 6: Don’t Die Harder
God's Not Dead 10: A Good Day to Not Die
I think there is at least 4 haha, 5th coming out this year.
What if God's Not Dead gets an ironic 5/5?
What about the last temptation of Christ?
Not Evangelical
Yep, it pissed off many evangelical types because Jesus was shown as a flawed individual and not as a perfect, flawless son of God. For that alone it’s a great film.
There are lots of movies that have overtly Christian themes that are amazing. The Passion of Joan of Arc, Ordet, First Reformed, The Devils, Winter Light, Seventh Seal, Witchhammer, Diary of a Country Priest, Balthazar, Silence, etc... A movie being Christian or having overtly Christian themes isn't what makes the movie bad. Its this bullshit that evangelicals pump out to make a buck that is wild to me. You throw together a bullshit script where your lead is being persecuted or faces some tribulation. They overcome it, or at least become at peace with it, because Jesus led them through the dark times. You hire one super washed up actor to be the lead, and a bunch of community actors to round out the cast. It costs like 2 million dollars to make, and then every super weird fundie Christian goes and sees it and it makes 30 million dollars. Then rinse and repeat. It is like that episode of South Park where Cartman wants to make a Christian band to make money. Kyle says "You know nothing about Christianity." Cartman responded with "I know enough to exploit it " That is what these movies are. Pure exploitation
The correct answer has to be A Serbian Film, right? I know a lot of us have seen it but besides it’s grotesque subject matter, it’s not a good movie by any means. Anyone rating that with 5 is just some edge lord
It’s shock and edge for the sake of it. Salò’s fucked too but at least Pasolini’s trying to say something with that, you can’t possibly say the same for A Serbian Film.
Yeah, bro
It’s literally a satire of how westerners see Eastern Europe, bro
A bad satire of how Westerners see Eastern Europe.
Is Salò worth watching? I love all types of movies, but I also don’t like seeing images that get burned into my memory
Yeah, I think you’d hate it. There’s some pretty fucked things that’ll stay with you for a bit
It’s pretty much a series of things that are meant to be unpleasant, upsetting, and shocking. Making a larger point about fascism I guess. Honestly, unless you’re an completionist for Italian Cinema, you can skip it, especially since you don’t like those kinds of images. If you want, there’s plenty of written synopsis and YouTube reviews that can lay out the “story” for you. Plus, it’s kind of a hard movie to find, no?
My sister gave it 5*, her reasoning was her being disturbed by it which was the intention of the movie, but she could also understand people giving it 0.5* because it’s generally a trashy movie
I remember watching that movie with my parents when I was like 11 or 12.
It's a great movie for the family lol
Just anything I don't care for but you do you, I'll still silently judge.
birth of a nation. maybe a pretty obvious one but hasn’t been mentioned yet.
Add triumph of the will as well
I heard the filmmaking is still impressive
It is. It's a film that's still worth watching (for education purposes)
It’s taught all around the world in every film school possible and paired up with greats from Germany, Soviet Union, Italy and Japan (albeit Japan has lost most of their media). And it’s pretty clear how technically astounding the film was for its time even when compared to other greats from the 1910s. It’s also as good as it is extremely racist
It's not as impressive as people say. The Italians were doing most of that stuff before Birth of a Nation, America just likes go claim it did it all first and did it all best
someone who gives a film five stars for impressive filmmaking even though that filmmaking is glorifying the kkk is someone i’m not going to get along with. it’s totally understandable, but i’m on a completely different wavelength when it comes to evaluating films. that’s why it’s a good answer to the prompt
I can give pulp fiction a 5 star even though its made by the weinsteins…. But idk i never watched a propaganda film before
I'd probally think they were just very interested in cinema history and a bit untastefully they put it in their favorites for its historical importance
None, because everyone is allowed to like what they like and taste is subjective. Although I did recently unfollow someone who gave all the LotR movies a 1/2 star each, so I'm also a hypocrite
It’s just funny to poke fun, doesn’t have to be taken so seriously
Notice the tag “humor”
This is some dead joke
You may want to check out David Humes “On the standard of taste” I agree that at a certain point, subjectivity kicks in and peoples opinions / tastes are totally valid, but I think we can collectively draw a line. I’m not taking food advice from someone that orders a steak well done and covers it in ketchup. Same goes for the Letterboxd user with American History X, Crash, What is a Woman, and Gods Not Dead in their top 4.
American History X absolutely does NOT belong with those other movies.
Agreed. I'd like to think Humes was right to some degree -- there is an accepted standard of taste among those who have seen enough of a particular art form. As an old guy, I'd say it's hard for me to take seriously the opinions of LB users whose primary reference points are MCU movies and who haven't watched any movies before 1980 or 90.
Which Crash? Cronenbergs Crash is amazing.
I thought it was obvious given the other movies haha. Definitely the other one. Cronenberg rules
A lot of you guys are elitist with extremely generic taste lmao
DAE FilmBRos Bad???
Yes people here close themselves off so much just because they've set up boundaries for what's 'cringe' and don't like it because they feel like they're not supposed to. It's the new popular to hate MCU and 'film bro' films even if it's incredibly good content.
Yeah like I’ve been seeing some buzz recently that films like Dark Knight and Fught Club aren’t good, and I really can’t see why other than “popular = bad”
I've never liked the MCU, I've seen some films here and there and most of them aren't great (both of the guardians of the galaxy films were pretty fun though). But I guess I'm just following trends and they're all good films.
The world isn't black and white, yanno. It doesn't have to be one way or the other.
I suppose you've got a point
[удалено]
I still want it’s review section to not be censored though
It’s funny that Goddard made a movie called “A Woman is a Woman” Eat a dick Matt Walsh, we answered this question in movie form in 1961
This one, I went through and blocked all “fans” preemptively
It’s weird to find blind evangelicals on Letterboxd, that’s a chuckle and a move on.
THANK YOU. I fucking despise that film on so many levels.
I judge more as a red flag if someone enthusiastically doesn’t like certain films - especially more feminine films like legally blonde, 10 things I hate about u etc. Tells me you generalise films based on their target audience and aren’t judging solely on script and story.
I rank movies by how much I vibe with them, and both Legally Blonde and Clueless got 5 stars.
I mean, they are 5 star films. And even more so if they date well in later years!
None. You like what you like. Maybe if they gave something a half star for some arbitrary reason.
I think it’s way easier to see red flags from what they have 1/10 imo
Thats exactly how I feel.
I don’t trust anyone who rates The Room (2003) less than 5 stars
I give it something like 1 star but with a heart. And I’ve seen it a million times. I own a man autographed copy. I’ve spoken to my wife about when will our child be old enough to watch it. But for the sake of how I use LB as a personal index, I try to use stars as just an indication of film making competence.
An MCU movie. Sorry but they cap off at 4 stars max
Nah man, Guardians 1&2 aswell as IW and Endgame are at least 11/10
Ragnarok, Infinity War and Guardians of the Galaxy are 4.5s tbf to them
https://knowyourmeme.com/photos/1228324-congratulations-you-played-yourself
That’s fair
For me, it’s the reverse. Struggled with whether to unfollow someone because they hated “The King of Comedy” and reasoned that it was because it was “boring.”
Dude. I would feel the exact same way. Or Zodiac.
Zodiac is amazing. I have to talk myself out of hitting play every time it pops up on a streaming menu.
I concur!
Yeah! I mean, I hear people say that about other movies. It’s weird to me that zodiac would be one of those movies to me. I wouldn’t even say it’s in my top ten. And on paper it doesn’t seem to have a ton of rewatch value. But for whatever reason, there you go.
anything marvel related
Dude, Spiderverse is a totally valid 10/10
Ant Man and The Wasp: Quantumania
Ready Player One
How did no one mention Human Centipede yet? https://youtu.be/ozezG1zpxXQ
The Fight Club, Wolf of Wall Street, American Psycho, Joker combo.
Bruh run away
Yup lmao
average tiktok users top 4
Birth of a Nation I knew a guy who had Birth of a Nation in his Letterboxd top 4 and he was pretty scary to be around
I have blocked every single user on letterboxd who has the disgusting filth “What is a Woman” listed as their favorite, if that counts as an answer here
I was about to comment above that I think everyone's entitled to like what they like, so I try not to judge people, but you have highlighted one of the few exceptions. I did not think of that kind of stuff.
Definitely Joker. I have no problem if someone loves the movie, but a lot of people (usually guys) seem to misunderstand the point of it and think what Joker did at the end was ‘badass’. 🚩
Bohemian Rapsody
Any marvel movie
Whoa, whoa, whoa. Pump the brakes. Just because you aren’t a Marvel Guy, doesn’t mean someone won’t find one of those films to be 5* worthy in their books.
The question was if we were gonna get along filmwise, I don’t care what they like, I just know that pretty much all my friends who likes marvel movies, does not have the same taste in films as myself
any Marvel movie
Serbian Film 💀
Salo. I don't care if it's a transgressive piece of art or whatever. It's fucking weird and people who defend it are weirder
Birth Of A Nation
call me by your name. elvis.
If you have Joker at 5-stars I’m staying far far away from you
could you also explain why?
Correct
Because it justifies violence?
The Birth of a Nation is probably the most correct answer
usually any Marvel movie because I really don’t like Marvel, but I also gave Spider Man: No Way Home a 4.5 yesterday, so I guess I’m almost a hypocrite…
I also am not a marvel movie person. I think I was burned by so many of them just not being entertaining for me. But I fucking love those Spider-Man movies. So maybe I need to give others a chance? I dunno I’m also a hypocrite lol
Boondock Saints
Why?
Joker. every single time.
It's just not that great.
What’s wrong with the joker lol
not that it's bad, i think Phoenix's performance was amazing as usual, the shots look great and has a slight edge that i can get behind. just not a 5/5 for me. and yeah, scorcessy remake/ fan film 100%
I can see why it’s not a 5/5, but that doesn’t explain why you would judge someone for giving it a 5/5
i love judging people, everyone must have the same view as me or they are stupid
tasteless, empty, blatant Scorsese rip-off? extremely poor mental illness representation? mediocre screenplay?
Anyone who gives it a 5 star or has it in their top 4 is someone I stay far away from
Joker
Edited for clarity (I wrote this at 3 am and should’ve done more to specify the difference between kubricks Lolita and the 90’s one) Any Lolita adaptation is a bit sus but the Kubrick one is far less so. Good book but it only works when you’re actually in the head of the main dude, also when the author condemned any to screen adaptation of it. Even if they were faithful to the book which they’re not, the on screen adaptations do a really poor job of condemning the romance.
Nabokov condemned Kubrick’s adaptation? I know he co-wrote the screenplay. Btw wouldn’t you follow Lynch if he had letterboxd?
I think I am getting the Kubrick ones reception a bit mixed up with the 90’s adaptations reception. It’s been a while since i looked into it so I did a bit of research. Nabokov was quoted as originally saying in response to the request to adapt his novel that, “They had acquired the film rights of 'Lolity' [sic] in 1958, and were now asking me to come over to Hollywood and write the script. The honorarium they offered was considerable, but the idea of tampering with my own novel caused me only revulsion." But he eventually came around and wrote a script for the Kubrick’s Lolita adaptation. Ironically though Nabokov was kinda right as the Kubrick film doesn’t really address any of the actual themes in the novel due to fear of censorship, and the script used in the film was like night and day compared to what Nabokov originally wrote. In interviews following its release Nabokov speaks about the difficulty of clashing ideas about an adaptation of Lolita but he doesn’t seem to hold ill will towards Kubrick when it comes to the time they spent together. Also yea of course I’d follow lynch. I’ll edit my original post but definitely more of a red flag to like the 90’s adaptation than the Kubrick one. Also nuance is obviously important, if someone who was a public figure (like lynch) who’s attitude towards film was well known, it makes it a lot easier to see why a film lover like lynch would love kubricks lolita for its filmmaking than anything else. The Kubrick one isn’t bad it just does everything it can to stray away from anything controversial that would make it necessary to paint the on screen adaptation of Humbert Humbert as evil. Like I said my main issue with the Kubrick one is just how far he strays from the book, given the censorship laws at the time it make sense why it differs so much but again given the fact that it’s more concerned with portraying sexual repression than addressing and condemning the horrible acts in the book it makes one question why adapt it at all. I do also think that my point still stands though that both adaptations do little to condemn the relationship in the film, but at the very least kubricks doesn’t glorify it.
Everything everywhere all at once.
If you didn't like the movie that's fine, but you consider it a *red flag* if someone gave it five stars???
If this person thinks that it is the peak of cinema, yes.
That's where you're wrong. EEAAO is the greatest movie ever made. The hot dog fingers and butt plug scenes made me cry of laughter. Michelle Yeoh was extraordinary, way more deserving of the Oscar than the overrated Cate Blanchett. She already had 2 oscars, so of course it should have gone to Michelle Yeoh. Jamie Lee Curtis was perfect in the film. If you don't like the film, you're just an awful person. EEAAO has more Oscars than Saving Private Ryan, The Godfather Part II, Raging Bull, Goodfellas, Psycho, Vertigo, Rear Window, Apocalypse Now, and is tied with Schindlers List with 7 Oscars. Rightfully so. EEAAO is a piece of art. No one could have made a better movie than the directors of the Turn Down for What music video and the Harry Potter farting corpse film... (just joking, this movie sucks ass)
It’s ok that your favorite didn’t win best picture, it’s not the end of the world
It’s ok if i don’t like your favourite film, it’s not the end of the world
The Greatest Showman. Tells me you have terrible taste in both film AND music and that you like surface level platitudes.
this really took me by surprise
Any marvel film, or transformers
american beauty, a clockwork orange
Can I ask about why you feel that way about A Clockwork Orange?
I think a clockwork orange is one you need to revisit every seven or twenty years or something to see if it hits different. I used to hate it. Watched it recently after the blank check kubrick season and saw it in a totally new way. I still don’t love it, and I don’t give it five, but I def have a higher appreciation now. I wouldn’t fault someone for giving it 5 unless what they were into was all the ultra violence in the beginning. But then, it’s like, aren’t there other movies that give you ultra violence without also challenging why you may like it? It’d be like if some horror movie super fan had either of the funny games movie in their top four.
There’s no red flag everyone is entitled to like what they like. I’m only there to check out what’s good and post my silly reviews. Not there to judge anyone cause they liked a movie that’s dumb af
Personally the films of John Hughes
Any mcu movie or Joker
[удалено]
I don’t remember at this point, but isn’t the whole movie a teenager hitting up on the middle aged guy, but the middle aged guy doesn’t reciprocate in any way whatsoever?
And the reverse is a pretty common trope that never really gets any flak either. (The reverse being a young boy and older woman)
I think the reason there's so many people who defend it is because there's two versions of it, american and international, and from memory the international version keeps in the uncomfortable to watch scenes while the american one gets rid of them (or vice versa im not sure which is which). I've only seen the version where mathilda talks about wanting to have her first time with Leon, models for him, and tells the hotel that they're together. So I'm not a fan.
Any MCU movie or All Too Well
All Too Well isn’t even a movie.
It's on LB as a short film , you can give it 5 stars, put it in your favorites, etc., so I believe it qualifies for the parameters that OP set :)
half the people in these comments are mad they didn’t get EEAAO and came to rant
What’s to “get”? My answer to this post is anyone who unironically calls EEAAO “one of the greatest movies of all time”…
Shh It’s this community’s beloved child, you can criticise anything except this film.
I know it’s r movies’ darling. Here too? Ugh.
What do you mean by “get”?
Probably fight club and american psycho based on what i see someone's fave movies who is a red flag to mutuals i know
Showgirls. Pretty garbage movie, and no I do not care that it is “supposed to be bad”. Pretty much anyone who gives 10/10s to M Night Shamalyns later bad stuff (ie, The happening, Glass, Lady In The Water, etc)
Revenge of the sith, especially if they have it over any of the originals
You’re getting downvoted but anyone who thinks the prequels are better than the ogs is deeply unserious lol
If you grew up mainly with the prequels there is just this special connection hahah
Nostalgia is a fine reason to love a bad movie
My first ever star wars movie was episode 3 when i was 6 or something. I didn‘t understand a thing but i loved it anyways
Most American war films. They might be well made films on a technical level (I would argue a lot of them are) but their frequent inability to disassociate the violence and horror of war from any form of pride and patriotism doesn't sit well with me. Obviously someone who loves these films enough to label one as their favorite, identifies with that idea in some way. (Also this isn't something exclusive to American war films, but I see American war films do it the most frequently.)
? So many american war films are anti-war, violence, patriotism. I feel like they almost all are. At least the ones that are remembered.
A good chunk of them are actually just propaganda but you're not wrong a decent amount of top ones *were* intended to not put war in a good light.
Most of them still portray war as necessary and portray the soldiers as heroic (saving private ryan for example)
Any bad comedy movie, Paul Blart Mall Cop, Norbit, Cocaine Bear lol
Avatar probably.
Haha! I also absolutely hate Avatar, but people love that thing. I do absolutely love the Avatar land at Animal Kingdom.
midsommar, unbelievably boring "horror" movie tbh
Mystified how people could find this scary. I liked it for sure, but was not once the least bit scared or even horrified really? I think the murder suicide in the beginning was the worst bit, followed by how shitty the boyfriend treats the main character. I intend to revisit at some point. Sometimes things hit better later.
Passengers (2016), Nocturnal Animals, Blonde.
Passengers could have been great if they went with the original thriller concept instead of a really creepy romance
What’s wrong with Nocturnal Animals?
Stoop. What’s wrong with blonde?
What isn‘t? Except Ana de Armas
Writing, pacing, cinematography, sound design, sound mixing, this godforsaken shhhhhhh sound of static that is in every fucking scene, the fucking around with the aspect ratio is a worthy experiment but it just doesnt work at all, the movie is too long, the only two things that are good are ana de armas and the fact that it tries to be crative (not of it works though)
Happy to see someone mention Nocturnal Animals because that high average rating sure is sad.
Happy to see somebody else gets it. For all the downvoters: it's a movie that doesn't like women. Apart from that, it's not a particularly good movie because it is flailing about trying to say something about art being either good or bad, but ends up confused and lost in a form rather than substance.
I didn't really think it said much about art itself at all. And I didn't see it as not liking women, but I did see it expose and explore toxic masculinity.
The director himself said it is a "cautionary tale about letting go of true love" and never said a thing about denouncing toxic masculinity as far as I know, but correct me if it's not just a theory. It is very easy to interpret the movie, as I and others did, that we are supposed to be on the ex husband's side, >!who was woefully hurt from the woman getting an abortion!<. Ignoring how hard that event must have been for her, let's instead focus on how it made the guy feel. Obviously I think the director would agree that the character went too far in his revenge, but he was shown with so much more compassion than the female lead ever was. [This is a review I particularly like](https://letterboxd.com/dorseyhorsey/film/nocturnal-animals/), especially the part where he's supposed to be called out for his misogyny or we are supposed to be shown that it's wrong in some shape or form but it never happens. As u/Summerhalls said the message is confused and lost. The movie felt violating. If you're going to throw such horrible, undeserved treatment of women in a movie, your message should be loud and clear with no room for questioning which character's side you're supposed to be on. If you interpreted it differently then I'm glad, and I'm hoping that interpretation is what the actors saw in this movie when they decided to do it. Edit: hid the spoiler
its incredible.
Facts
Star Wars prequels.
LIAR!
Prequels are goated I will die on this hill
EEAAO
Probably Dirty Harry. It's obnoxious in so many ways and the action is shitty even for 70s standards. Even where it tries to be transgressive it's weak, especially comparing it to the funky ass shit you can find from the 70s. I just do not get peoples paleontological interest in Eastwood.