There are lot of a moments in a movie that can annoy, bore, frustrate, anger, or make you feel negative. Maybe it is a lack of structure in the plot, horrific special effects that go beyond fake, a lack of excitement or interest that the film should provide, or maybe it could be something else. Still, there are some parts that can make you start hating a film.
So, what I am getting at here, at what point/part in a film or with what thing in a film would cause you to start hating the movie you are watching?
Things that start making me a hate a film is an overusage of stock footage (Frogs), one too many terrible musical numbers (Titantic: The Legend Goes On), the feeling that film is just getting more pointless and less interesting with each passing scene (Blood Beach), or the lack of tension or excitement that should be found in the film but isn't (Shark Swarm).
for me, it's the amount of blood, car chases, and/or my tastes, which varys at times
A movie with the number of "Too Dark To See" scenes like Alien Vs Predator: Requiem. A movie that could actually have enough lighting to see what's going on but doesn't.
With me, it's a number of things:
1. Stock footage, like IG stated. That's a super-cheap tactic used in old movies. No excuse to pad your film with this crap.
2. Bad, bottom-of-the-barrel acting. Some cheese acting is good. When it's down at the bottom of the trash can with the grime, rancid bits of meat with maggots on it, slime from bad produce, etc., it's not okay.
3. Lame special effects. You can constantly see wires, boom mikes, hands pushing things over, shadows of the crew, blood looks like paint, etc.
4. Plot devices that either go nowhere or have nothing to do with anything. Why did he/she decide to do that? How did the director pull that idea out of his @$$? What kind of teleportation/ESP powers does the killer have? How did that person not know that was going to happen?
5. When I can guess EVERYTHING that will happen. Just watch them jump through that window. Smash! Yeah, that girl is gonna be dead pretty soon. Three minutes later, stab! Yeah, I bet in a 'twist' ending, that guy is the killer. Shock! Surprise! :lookingup:
6. Long moments without dialogue where it's needed, because nothing is happening.
7. Dumb endings. Especially LAME setups for sequels.
Usually at least a few of the above have to happen in a movie for me to hate it. I'm generally pretty patient with films unless I'm really tired.
I generally don't hate things about a movie when watching a movie. I guess sometimes it's people that make me 'hate' a movie.
For example I watched Friedkin's Bug and thought it was awful. Yet people kept raving and calling it a masterpiece. So I watched it again with a crowd. The movie was still bad and the crowd was actually laughing at the movie and making fun of it. Evidence enough for me that Bug was a stinker, even though I already knew on my first viewing.
The Bug praise continued however, and got more bizarre. People I knew online suddenly broke down admitting how touched they were from watching Bug, one even shared that he actually cried during a showing. I felt like I was stuck in a bad Twilight Zone episode.
In the end it was all the people drooling over a lousy movie that made me dislike it even more.
Amusingly enough, Bug was voted recently into the Hall of Shame at the very same forum that praised Bug when it first came out :bouncegiggle:
It varies. I don't like the stupid comedy genre. Things like the Will Ferrel movies and the Epic Movie series are just terrible. I guess it's the twelve year old jokes that p**s me off.
Also, little or no plot and movies that rely heavily on special effects. For instance, Transformers 2, no friggin plot. I walked out. Another example, Children of Men. Loads of special effects, but an amazingly interesting story. I loved it.
Also no sympathy for characters. That can, in part, be bad acting or just characters who are all arseholes who I don't care about.
Interesting question. Actually, a great question.
If I had to sum it up in one word, that word would be mediocrity. I've watched pretty much every type of movie you can think of, with budgets from what looks like several hundred dollars to hundreds of millions, and the one thing that always grates is the unwillingness to try.
For instance, I have seen many no-budget films which are god-awful, but at least you get the sense that they are trying. I might not like them, but I can sense the filmmakers were at least trying. On the other hand, I've seen purported hundred-million dollar films which were worse, because you can sense the filmmakers never ventured beyond the tried-and-true.
Usually it boils down to the writing, and the writing builds up to the final film. If that core is not there, what was the film made for? Once I realize there is no real core, every moment of a film will grate on me until I'm gritting my teeth in anger at the filmmakers. Then I hate a film, because it's garbage disguised as an entertainment product. This can be the case for both no-budget films and so-called blockbusters.
It's not the only reason, but watching a film the filmmakers don't even care about? Torture.
Quote from: Mofo Rising on January 10, 2010, 03:06:24 AM
Interesting question. Actually, a great question.
If I had to sum it up in one word, that word would be mediocrity. I've watched pretty much every type of movie you can think of, with budgets from what looks like several hundred dollars to hundreds of millions, and the one thing that always grates is the unwillingness to try.
*Cough* Surrogates *Cough*
I hate movies with too many childish scenes, such as The Master of Disguise.
CGI
Characters that are self-righteous, argumentative, conceited - but the writer and director apparently thought we're supposed to like these people. No, I find them detestable. Please kill them immediately.
MTV style editing, where the action scenes are nothing but an incomprehensible strobe effect. Or any of that "artistic" crap done be people who are making sci-fi originals. Don't make the movie look grainy and washed out, don't fast forward the film as we're watching it, don't play with all the controls on the editing machine until your movie looks like a demo for the software.
Quote from: Jack on January 10, 2010, 07:45:57 AM
MTV style editing, where the action scenes are nothing but an incomprehensible strobe effect. Or any of that "artistic" crap done be people who are making sci-fi originals. Don't make the movie look grainy and washed out, don't fast forward the film as we're watching it, don't play with all the controls on the editing machine until your movie looks like a demo for the software.
That pretty much sums up almost every movie made in the past 8-9 years :wink:
I agree with these previously-mentioned factors:
* MTV-style editing (and camerawork, for that matter). I hate all those spinning, diving, swooping camera shots, edited together in rapid-fire fashion. I believe filmmakers are saying, "If there isn't constant fast motion of some kind on the screen, the brain-dead audiences of today won't enjoy the movie." Maybe they are correct.
* CGI (but I only hate unnecessary CGI). CGI has it's place in sci-fi movies and such, but we don't need it to create car chases (I'd much rather see stuntmen doing real driving) or to add clouds to a blue sky.
I also hate when a movie is advertised as the "feel-good movie of the year" or the "must-see movie of the year." When I hear these phrases, it makes me NOT want to see the movie.
Quote from: InformationGeek on January 10, 2010, 08:26:33 AM
Quote from: Circus Circus on January 10, 2010, 06:43:02 AM
CGI
So does that mean you hate Jurassic Park? :bluesad:
No. I loved it when I was younger, but they only used a little, mostly green screen stuff. Now it's all blue screen and everything relying on the computer and actors talking to themselves. Look at kids films now, every single one is some CGI monstrosity about some goofy animal. Making films is about telling a story, working with camera and getting a performance out of your actors. Not about a team of fat guys sat infront of a PC, until you have a "film" a few months later ready for the summer and ready to guzzle money out of f**king morons who'll settle for flashy bulls**t.
I generally end up hating any movie where the flaws - technical or in the writing etc - are so prominent that I cannot overlook/accept them and just go with it. I love a good 'bad' movie; but there is a qualitative difference between 'laughably bad' and 'lame'.
I hate it when they take a good premise and then fall FAR short of its potential: I resent that the premise that hooked me in might not get a second chance, since it has 'been done' (though barely). These days that might not be so for long...but I still hate a hack job that only goes a fraction of the way to realizing what I expected it could be.
Hmm well it could be any number of things really...
Just to look at a few examples of films I hated:
ARMAGEDDON: mind-numbingly stupid, CGI SFX lovefest. Of course you could probably argue the same for most of Michael Bay, Roland Emmerich and Dean Devlin's work. Strangely I tend to like Emmerich and Devlin (although I often wonder why I keep watching their stuff) and not Bay perhaps because their films seem a bit closer to 1970s disaster flicks and/or cheesy mindless B-movie fare of yesteryear, both guilty pleasures of mine. Still ARMAGEDDON and many other films like it are all flash, no soul and substance. Basically the movie equivalent of a shined-up turd.
BOOGIE NIGHTS and CLERKS II: too arty/trendy, dull and overlong (BOOGIE). Too much about trying to shock and get a rise out of the audience (CLERKS and BOOGIE). Almost seems childish and immature at times (Both). This can pretty much apply to most of Kevin Smith's other work too.
ACCIDENT (1967): dull, overlong, glorified overimportance put to things that really aren't all that important or or even interesting. Characters who are just dull and/or a bore.
NATURAL BORN KILLERS: I hate movies that repetitively and seemingly endless try to hammer their point down viewer's throats. This film is a good example. Another one that's too much like an endless music video.
shaky camera shots is the #1 cause lately
the lack of suspense, bad CGI, old comedy crap, the amount of stock footage, to a certain degree of bad acting, STUPID PLOTS
I can be pretty forgiving when it comes to acting and the quality of technology. What I can't stand is a bad story. I hate it when a movie uses a string of highly improbable situations and horrible judgement just to get to some "meaty" scenes or the main part of the movie. I also can't stand comedies where all the jokes are based around someone's misfortune.
Quote from: SPazzo on January 10, 2010, 12:55:24 AM
Also no sympathy for characters. That can, in part, be bad acting or just characters who are all arseholes who I don't care about.
Quote from: Jack on January 10, 2010, 07:45:57 AM
Characters that are self-righteous, argumentative, conceited - but the writer and director apparently thought we're supposed to like these people. No, I find them detestable. Please kill them immediately.
I totally agree! I can't believe the amount of movies that surround a group of jerks and one not-so-jerky person that you're supposed to like, but I don't because that person is stupid for hanging around with all those jerks!
1) BAD SCIENCE- I can tolerate Jet Jaguar "programming himself to grow" or THEM being atomic mutated insects. But I can't stand movies that try to be scientific and realistic, but don't actuallly get it even close to right. "Of course its the monster, I did a pH test!" or, "look at those cells, thats Human DNA" "or "We need to run across the hot lava" kind of stuff.
2) Noise and camera movement simulating action. This is just a redo of the old star trek stuff where they shook the camera.
2a) Unsteadycam work- jerky cuts and wobbly camera work.
-Ed
Several reasons:
If it's boring : I can tolerate, even enjoy most bad movies. However, should the movie be boring, it automatically loses its appeal to me.
Horrid acting : Another flaw that ruins a movie. The more I hear these people talk, the more I pray that they will be devoured/killed/butchered by the monster.
Lame lead characters : Oh yes, the ones that are one dimensional, cardboard cut-outs and annoying stereotypes. What's worse is that sometimes we have to root for these guys when no one gives a crap about them.
Bad comedy : Random violence, sex jokes, fart jokes,huge amounts of slapstick and having a kid say or do something that some immature adult or teen would do is NOT FUNNY.
This is a really great question and for me really hard to quantify.
All of the things mentioned in this thread MAY make me hate a movie, but the presence of any one or a number of these "offenses" does not necessarily mean I WILL hate it.
At the end of the day, I think it is just an organic response. There have been movies that I have loved right up until the ending and the "payoff" did not work for me. 8MM was like this for me...great build up as a thriller, total failure when it turned actioney. Having said that, I think the "action" genre is overused as a technique/plot device and takes me out of a movie that set itself up in Acts 1 and 2 otherwise (thriller, drama, etc).
I don't tend to get too upset about fx (traditional or cgi) either way...it's all part of the "art" and it either works or does not...the big exception here is the "did not even TRY" as already mentioned. The few fx in THE CAINE MUTINY were laughable, but that remains one of my all-time favorite films (though the pointless romance subplot almost lost me, it was Jose Ferrer's character and acting that brought me back smiling - actually all the core cast acting).
Movies that can't figure out what they are, ie no real direction, turn me off pretty quick, too. A director with no vision for what he wants the movie to be tends to make a movie that is pretty hard to watch even if the script is excellent. This gets back again to "did not care" but it could also be incompetence, though PLAN 9 remains a fun indulgence.
Finally, I almost universally hate formulaic movies. These are movies that are made solely as a business medium with not pretense of art. The romantic comedy genre hits this pretty hard....and we watch our fair share of these. The American ones tend to provide the double insult of not being funny, but at least the UK ones get tend to get a few laughs. This is especially bad if the plot devices used to drive the formula are completely contrived (bad enough if they follow a natural flow). In the romantic comedy formula, this could be the Act 2 break-up being driven by something so completely stupid it would NEVER cause a break-up of any sane people (and why would the Act 3 reconciliation happen once the dude saw how nuts she was to push the Act 2 break-up)?
Yep, formula movies (action, romantic comedy, police/courtroom drama, etc) spark my hatred pretty quick. If I've already seen the movie 1000 times, what's the point?
Came into this thread just now. It seems it has already demonstrated what I was going to say. The initial question, what causes you to hate a movie, is almost equally as complex and subjective as what causes one to like/love a movie, with all the points brought up thus far being relevant to the question. Throw in a person's idiosyncracies and it becomes a riddle wrapped in a mystery. I, for example, tend to abhor remakes, making it difficult for me to objectively appreciate a good one. Or, for another example, I am almost identically in line with Circus-Circus' disdain for CGI, although I think his may surpass my own. A CGI-laced remake would then be particularly difficult for me even to attempt to watch, let alone be able to appreciate anything that might be good about it.
The worst single thing a movie can be to me is boring. Which is why I borderline hate Wings of Desire, which has some other fine qualities (good photography, good performances, Peter Falk) - it's just extraordinarily boring.
when it seems like a***oles made it
Quote from: Mofo Rising on January 10, 2010, 03:06:24 AM
Interesting question. Actually, a great question.
If I had to sum it up in one word, that word would be mediocrity. I've watched pretty much every type of movie you can think of, with budgets from what looks like several hundred dollars to hundreds of millions, and the one thing that always grates is the unwillingness to try.
For instance, I have seen many no-budget films which are god-awful, but at least you get the sense that they are trying. I might not like them, but I can sense the filmmakers were at least trying. On the other hand, I've seen purported hundred-million dollar films which were worse, because you can sense the filmmakers never ventured beyond the tried-and-true.
Usually it boils down to the writing, and the writing builds up to the final film. If that core is not there, what was the film made for? Once I realize there is no real core, every moment of a film will grate on me until I'm gritting my teeth in anger at the filmmakers. Then I hate a film, because it's garbage disguised as an entertainment product. This can be the case for both no-budget films and so-called blockbusters.
It's not the only reason, but watching a film the filmmakers don't even care about? Torture.
Wow this is really almost exactly how I feel. I have a one strict rule for movies and that's : Does it entertain me? My entertainment bar is pretty low and I can find fun in almost anything(Not Jonah Hex though!) If I am not entertained but I think the film makers at least made an honest attempt at making a decent film, then I probably won't watch it again, but I won't actually hate it. If the movie seems to be extruded out of some film makers derry-aire (sp) without a thought for the audience AND it's not entertaining by mistake or in any other way, then I will usually hate it. I'm not sure what that says about me as a movie fan, but that's just the way things work for me.
For me, when a movie isn't entertaining I hate it. If it's boring I won't sit and watch it all the way through (unless I really need a nap anyway), but if it seems to actively insult my intelligence then yes, I will hate it.
Nicholas Cage or Tom Cruise being in it.
Hmmm . . . stuff that loses me in a hurry . . .
1. When every single character in the movie is a despicable person. BULLY falls into that category, so does HAVOC (although the presence of the Goddess Anne Hathaway makes that one more tolerable). Give me one decent character that I can actually like.
2. Stretching it out too long. GANGS OF NEW YORK would have been a much better film if it were an hour shorter. On the other hand, extra time crammed with cool storyline stuff and character development is fine . . . . I have watched my Extended Cut LOTR trilogy several times, and loved it!
3. Films that take an innocent concept and turn it into pure perversion. LAND OF THE LOST is a prime example; based on a whimsical, fun kid's show, it was nothing but a platform for crude, sex-based humor throughout. I hated it!
What I can't stand are characters that are just @$$holes for no reason.
I'm not talking about the over the top exaggerated jerks like you might find in 80s teen comedy's picking on the nerdy lead character, or the ones that are just a inch away from twirling their mustaches and tying a woman to railroad tracks, but anyone coming from the R. Lee Ermey school of character acting. The kind where a character is just nothing but a pure @$$hole for no reason other than being an @$$hole, and isn't even a funny one.
I can't stand that stuff.
Any film made about SA's supposedly unique and unjust racial past by a foreign filmmaker who (a) ignores the problems in his / her own country and focuses on ours instead and (b) when confronted about (a) tries to hide behind the hoary old "this is not an anti-South African film, but an anti-apartheid film" excuse. Sorry: back in the day, apartheid was SA and SA was apartheid. :hatred:
This is a good question, I'd never really thought about it that much but my reasons seem to be much like the others' on the board.
It depends a little on the genre. I can forgive anything from an action movie as long as it doesn't bore me. For drama (or horror), if I can't be moved to care about any of the characters I will write a movie off pretty quickly. I guess I really hate any movie where the characters are just presented as stock Types, rather than being given any actual personality. I can't enjoy a lot of comedies for this reason.
When a movie's whole purpose just seems to be the director showing off his kinks, or grievances/prejudices, I hate that as well. Can't stand directors like Neil LaBute or Lars Von Trier; I realize they're talented but everything I've seen from them just feels like reel after reel of whining.
Mofo and Hammock mentioned laziness from filmmakers; I agree, and it's worse if you know the movie had all the resources and budget in the world and still produced lousiness. Number one offender: Michael Bay.
I do tend to resent movies that I personally don't care for but that everyone around me seems to praise. I had the exact same reaction to BUG that hellbilly did, and I probably would have hated it a little less if it hadn't been so hyped. Hated American Beauty when it first came out too.
Bad CGI doesn't usually take me out of a movie, but if it's painfully obvious that they should have gone with practical effects instead, that'll turn me. Example: I AM LEGEND. I was going WTF every time those creatures showed up; how hard would it have been to cake some blood and latex onto a group of skinny extras??
And since I've brought up I AM LEGEND I'll confess that lousy adaptations inspire hate in me. I know it's kinda unfair and I should judge a movie on its own terms, but sometimes I just can't help it, especially if it's a book I loved, or if the movie didn't even get the book's general theme/message right - like the godawful Demi Moore-starring version of THE SCARLET LETTER. I could spend hours discussing how many things that movie did wrong.
@ scumbag: ha you should catch that "i am legend" spoof, "i am virgin" no bad cgi there, just bad humping
i hate any movie that has drama in it. just watched "edge of darkness" last night which could have been a decent action movie except for all those scenes that are supposed to make you sad
i hate any movie that tries to evoke emotions out of you just for the sake of evoking emotions aka emotional pornography
also a lot of ppl mentioned "mtv" type effects. YES! it drives me crazy when the camera won't focus so my eyes are trying to focus and start to ache from it. also any scenes that are strobe or too fast for the brain to comprehend so i feel like i'm being subliminally bombarded
Quote from: Trevor on June 22, 2010, 02:48:30 AM
Any film made about SA's supposedly unique and unjust racial past by a foreign filmmaker who (a) ignores the problems in his / her own country and focuses on ours instead and (b) when confronted about (a) tries to hide behind the hoary old "this is not an anti-South African film, but an anti-apartheid film" excuse. Sorry: back in the day, apartheid was SA and SA was apartheid. :hatred:
I don't want to put words in your mouth Trevor, so I have a question.
It's pretty obvious you're not and almost certainly never have been anti-South Africa. According to you, being anti-apartheid makes you anti-South Africa. So, the logical inference here is you are not and have never been against apartheid. Is that right? :bluesad: