posted
I saw a preview for a movie this break when I was at the theatre with a sister and cousin to see King Kong:
the first clue that I was not going to enjoy even the preview was the announcement: "From the Producers of Remember the Titans"
Here's the crux of the thing. The movie I am talking about is that new basketball couch movie (sounds familiar...) about a white couch who is the first in some league to start black players (sounds familiar...) and they grow together as a community and overcome adversity.... etc. The PREVIEW made me feel cheep and manipulated.
There is a clip in it where the couch is yelling "You do not. Back.. down. EVER!" And there is this ra ra part of my simian brain that just goes well, RA RA RA. Why do we watch these movies? For pity's sake why does it happen that when each and every one of these sappy, manipulative, revisionist "True story" sports success films is released, I have to endure relatives and friends telling me it is inspiring, noble, bah, etc.
I am not against telling the story of a principled guy standing up for his views on equality (even in a sports movie), but I am SO against the way every one of these things turns into a Puff Fest that leaves me feeling like have been drugged and taken advantage of at a wedding shower.
They all turn into coma inducing milkshakes where whether the team wins or loses in the end (its more popular for them to learn the leason and lose these days) they do it as a TEAM. Ugh. This story was good once. I mean that it was good One time. The first time. Many thousands of years ago when it was first told by the wise old players of some forgotten game in mesopatamia, and it has survived these eons to bore itself into our skulls and fill our ears with cotton candy and oh so sugary coca cola.
Am I being a bit Harsh? Not nearly enough I think.
posted
At any rate, I do agree with you about those sports 'feel good' movies. I wasn't sure where you were going with the adjective "puffy" but the movies in that genre are pretty formulaic and ultimately not very good.
Posts: 22497 | Registered: Sep 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I saw the title and thought it had something to do with how Puffy Treat is usually the first one to post movie news here. Like maybe he resented Puffy always beating him with movie announcements.
posted
With a wife born in Jamaica, I will tell you that "Cool Runnings" was not a very accurate depiction of the Jamaican Bobsled effort, and worked hard to play up them as some sort of fools who got lucky.
Jamaica finished in 1994 (after their initial debut) ahead of both US Bobsled teams, and continue to this day to put out a hell of an effort in the event.
The movie which was done for over-the-top comic effect was not a great portrayal of how hard the competitors worked and the determination that went into keeping their sport alive.
Posts: 202 | Registered: Aug 2005
| IP: Logged |
I resent puffy feel good movies. I may also resent some of Puffy's movies, but not categorically
About my original argument, I meant to elicit some feeling as to how people respond to what I see as the overt and cynical commercialized manipulation of these "Feel Goods." For instance, make the movie cheesily gooey (nice one?), but then add in the ever so slightly sharpened edge of race tension so that people can't say the movie is utterly useless without seeming calous and non-politically-correct.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I agree with you Orincoro. I think the biggest problem I have with them is that all of the characters are cliches. Even the one (or sometimes two) that is supposed to be deep is usually just "the deep guy" instead of actually being deep. Nothing makes me care about any individual in it, so I am unmoved by the touching scenes.
Posts: 1947 | Registered: Aug 2002
| IP: Logged |
There is this thing about film now where it seems directors only need to "reference" or pigeonhole a character and rely on the audience's intuition and instinct to recall better written examples and paste their nobility onto the new character! Directors apparently don't feel the need to actually build new characters, just dredge up a few rememories of old used up models and graft more dialogue and story onto them, like a game designer uses a game engine to generate the majority of the laws of a game.
We see this most in Sports feel-goods where the characterization becomes so noticably poor, we find ourselves consciously searching for the film reference of that character.
Or take Tarentino movies, which rely on the viewer knowing a whole lot about the conventions of tough guy characters and movie mechanics (not surprising from an ex vidstore clerk?). The thing is, Tarentino arguably does this well, and it is certainly intentionally done. Feelgoods do it out of incompetence.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I don't particularly like Dr. Feelgood flicks, but I don't resent them. What about them makes you so angry? The fact that the film-makers are intentionally trying to manipulate your feelings? Or the fact that they succeed, as you admit?
Frankly, it's an art knowing what will sell - as much an art, in my opinion, as knowing what critics and the intellectual community will deem worthy. What's the bigger success: the blockbuster hit with the hot young cast and big name brand actors that a computer could have written that grosses 80 million at the box office, or the indie flick full of unknowns that garners tons of critical praise at the Sundance & other film festivals and never has a fan base that could be called anything larger than "cult"?
The same thing applies to music. If a cookie cutter pop punk group like Simple Plan or Good Charlotte can make millions of dollars cranking out songs that use the same four chords (G, Emadd9, C, D - or similar, in a different key), or a group that repeatedly receives critical acclaim and has crap for album sales, like YoLaTengo?
Seems to me that they've both met with a certain degree of success. I certainly sympathize more with the idea of a well made movie/album succeeding, but I can't fault geniuses who make movies and music specifically to make money - and do it well.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Also, keep in mind that both Remember the Titans and that new basketball flick - whatever it's called - are based on true stories. The fact that they happen to share very similar plots is, well, not exactly the fault of the people who wrote the script. It's more like Disney saying "Hey, Remember the Titans did REALLY well - let's duplicate that box office success with another based-on-a-true-story movie of the same variety."
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Even if they are "based on true stories", doesn't mean that won't end up being trite and cliche. It also doesn't mean that they have to. I can bet the new movie will spend a lot of screen time showing the prejudices of all the white people and then have them magically realize their prejudices and support the team. I also imagine the real story is a lot more interesting than that and might actually be worth watching if Disney wasn't involved (except possibly as distributor).
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
I kind of feel that way about Forest Gump. Like it's a movie designed to make people go "Aw" which in term just makes them t hrow oscars at it.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sports movies bore me to death because ALL of them are the same. Team has trouble. Team must overcome adversity and learn to work together. Cue montage of hopeful game scenes. Team wins trophy.
quote:I kind of feel that way about Forest Gump. Like it's a movie designed to make people go "Aw" which in term just makes them t hrow oscars at it.
Yeah - if you've read the book, this feeling is amplified more than a little bit.
quote:Even if they are "based on true stories", doesn't mean that won't end up being trite and cliche. It also doesn't mean that they have to. I can bet the new movie will spend a lot of screen time showing the prejudices of all the white people and then have them magically realize their prejudices and support the team. I also imagine the real story is a lot more interesting than that and might actually be worth watching if Disney wasn't involved (except possibly as distributor).
True...but would it sell as well without the sugar coating? (I don't mean to imply that success and depth are mutually exclusive)
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by erosomniac: I certainly sympathize more with the idea of a well made movie/album succeeding, but I can't fault geniuses who make movies and music specifically to make money - and do it well.
It doesn't take a genius to make money. It doesn't take a genius to make a sports movie. I think it takes a soulless Hack to produce most of what Disney "Contributes" to film.
And I have no compunction about faulting cookie cutter bands for pulling the wool over our eyes and convincing people that their music is worth something because of the pretty packaging.
You brought up the music thing, and I wonder if you remember or were a part of a few other threads on the subject. I have mantained in those and I'll say again, just because people like something, doesn't make it good. 6 billion people CAN be wrong. Call it instinct, call it arrogance, whatever: I believe that there is such a thing as a dividing line between what art is worthwile and what art is meaningless. I don't know if I AM someone who knows the difference, but I think I have some idea, and i care about what that difference is.
I think of my young cousins now. They live in the central valley Ca, and their parents buy them Britney spears records, NSync, Hilary Duff, etc etc. All disney offshoots I believe. The kids range now between 11 and 2. And they think this is what MUSIC IS. They really do. Its not anything to do with, "to each his own," they've never even heard of Bach. I am known to be a more extreme Classiscist than most, and I take it more seriously than most people, but this is a form of neglect. Our society neglects itself, its children and its future by repeated exposure to UTTER CRAP. We come to be so desensitized and excepting of metiocrity that a children growing up ignorant of the great music traditions of their ancestors are seen as average kids.
It makes me sick. I know not everyone can spend the kind of time I do on music and books and history, and some of you will schoff at me for being so arrogant and highandmighty about it, but Dammit, Britney Spears and Ashley Simpson is not Music. Its passive brainwashing, turning children into mindless trend following image obsessed zombies. Our culture, even at the height of the information age, is becoming so passively accepting of any new media input, that we can't tell the difference between dioreal foulness like Disney and "Art" when we see it.
This isn't an attack on any one person, but it is a question of our values. When you say you can't fault someone for being out to make money and not art? I say take a look at yourself at the age of about Seven, how you listened to everything your parents said and knew it was the truth written in stone. Imagine what you would have thought if your parents had plunked down a brick on your plate and told you it was dinner. Would you eat it?
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Would it sell? Probably not. That explains why Disney is one of the biggest entertainment juggernauts in history. It also explains why they are more often seen as a symbol of all that is trite at home and of American cultural imperialism abroad rather than as an innovative center of artistry and imagination like they used to.
I don't believe that success and depth are mutually exclusive. I believe there are many more ways to measure success, especially in the Arts, than by how well something sells. However, I also don't believe that economic success and depth are mutually exclusive, either.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: I say take a look at yourself at the age of about Seven, how you listened to everything your parents said and knew it was the truth written in stone. Imagine what you would have thought if your parents had plunked down a brick on your plate and told you it was dinner. Would you eat it?
If they had plunked down a pile of empty calorie sugary sweets on my plate and told me it was dinner, I'd have eaten it. Gladly. That's what Hollywood is feeding us. Candy. Not vegetables. And not bricks.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
You know what else? Some people LIKE going to the movies for dessert. They want some sugary goo. That's why these movies are successful. Who's to say that they don't get their sustenance elsewhere? I do.
Maybe you should, too.
Posts: 10397 | Registered: Jun 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:And I have no compunction about faulting cookie cutter bands for pulling the wool over our eyes and convincing people that their music is worth something because of the pretty packaging.
You brought up the music thing, and I wonder if you remember or were a part of a few other threads on the subject. I have mantained in those and I'll say again, just because people like something, doesn't make it good. 6 billion people CAN be wrong. Call it instinct, call it arrogance, whatever: I believe that there is such a thing as a dividing line between what art is worthwile and what art is meaningless. I don't know if I AM someone who knows the difference, but I think I have some idea, and i care about what that difference is.
I think you're making the mistake of elitism. What is "good" in art and in music is almost entirely subjective. That is because what is "good" in art and music is how it speaks to the audience. Not everyone has the same background or tastes and therefore will not get the same things out of any given piece of artistic expression. Just because something has historical importance doesn't make it "good".
A few adjectives more useful than "good" in describing the worth of a piece might be whether it is "original", "unique", "fresh" (especially in music), or "innovative", but even those don't tell you if a piece is "good". Sometimes what follows a groundbreaking piece of music or art far exceeds the original influence, so even though the follow-up piece may not be strictly original it could still be "good" or even "great". Sometimes a piece speaks to the generation (or several generations) after the one in which it was created, even if it failed to find any favor in its own time.
I like Classical music, but it's a genre like any other. There are some very bad classical pieces just like there is bad and good Country music, bad and good expressionist painting, bad and good jazz, bad and good italian food, etc. It's a terrible mistake to discard something simply because it's not in your pet genre.
quote:Our culture, even at the height of the information age, is becoming so passively accepting of any new media input, that we can't tell the difference between dioreal foulness like Disney and "Art" when we see it.
There is a lot about Disney (the company) that I don't like. However, not everything they do is evil or worthless. IMO, Disney was the best thing to ever happen to Stravinsky's "Rite of Spring". And as much as I have feared Disney influence on Pixar, and as much as I resent it when Pixar movies are thought of as "Disney movies" in any way, the truth is that Pixar would never have reached the enormous audience it has without the Disney marketing juggernaut. Ultimately, I think that's a good thing (so far).
quote:but Dammit, Britney Spears and Ashley Simpson is not Music.
This, of course, is simply not true. It is music. It's also very popular music. Saying it's not is like saying cake is not food. Sure it is. It's just not a good idea to make it your only source of food. And just like cake, if you eat it too frequently, it begins to lose its appeal. But just because you are sick of cake doesn't mean other people aren't going to enjoy it. Just because you can't stand sweets doesn't mean a particular cake is bad.
I understand railing against things you find insipid. I even do that myself sometimes. But if you have a particular piece of art that you enjoy, it just seems more constructive to promote what you find good rather than to tell everyone else that what they like is crap. I don't "like Brittney Spears" but most of that has little to do with her music. In fact some of her music is pretty catchy.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Amanecer: I agree with you Orincoro. I think the biggest problem I have with them is that all of the characters are cliches. Even the one (or sometimes two) that is supposed to be deep is usually just "the deep guy" instead of actually being deep. Nothing makes me care about any individual in it, so I am unmoved by the touching scenes.
Fortunately, this does not describe Remember the Titans, which is one of the only two sports movies that I've enjoyed.
This one helped me "get" football, just as Bull Durham helped me "get" baseball.
[Edited to add: Admittedly, all other sports movies I've seen have bored me to tears. I agree with the "cliched" appellation to the genre, just not to this specific movie. From my perspective. *smile
Posts: 14017 | Registered: May 2000
| IP: Logged |
I was insulted by this movie. Coach Boone isn't a very nice man in person, and the race issues that plagued T.C. Williams continue to this day (they still can't play night-time games at home because of violence).
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: Coach Boone struck me as a jerk in the movie, too.
This is a much nicer way to describe him than I would have chosen. Lets just say that he wasn't very nice to caucasian students.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
I remember the music thread you started before, and I'll repeat what I said there: your arrogance (and yes, it is arrogance) regarding what is and isn't music is what makes your opinion on the matter worthless.
You're like the English professors who profess that if the common man can understand a piece, then it is poorly written. You're like (heck, you're ONE OF) the musicians who think that anything on the radio is automatically trash and should be written off as having no major contribution to the development of music.
What you fail to recognize is that society creates a variety of standards, PERIOD, and that there are MANY ways to judge a piece of music or a movie. You will not agree with all of (or even most of) these standards - that does not make them any less valid. Human beings automatically pick a realm of subjectivity - what seperates the educated from the elitists is the ability to recognize that your own opinion is just that: an opinion.
I don't like 99% of popular music: that doesn't mean I write it all off as worthless. Tell me where in your classical study of music you can find the same level of integration of vocal syncopation, intonation, lyric balance, rhyme and rhythm that rap incorporates? Can't you see that just like classic operas, many music videos incorporate song and visuals to tell a story? The difference is that the latter is more accesible to the modern masses.
Tante's food metaphor is a good one. Just because you find something so bland, basic or saccharine that it's unpalatable doesn't mean that it isn't food to many other people.
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I remember the music thread you started before, and I'll repeat what I said there: your arrogance (and yes, it is arrogance) regarding what is and isn't music is what makes your opinion on the matter worthless.
I missed his music thread, and can't speak to his arrogance on this thread because I haven't read this entire thread yet. I am, however, suprised that anyone on these boards would be at all arrogant in stating their opinions.
Good job chiding him. I think that a good stern posting has probably taught him the error of his ways.
quote: Just because you find something so bland, basic or saccharine that it's unpalatable doesn't mean that it isn't food to many other people.
You can eat dirt, and tell me that you love dirt, but that doesn't make it food. I'm not saying that I disagree with the statement itself, it's just that the analogy didn't work for me. Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote:You can eat dirt, and tell me that you love dirt, but that doesn't make it food. I'm not saying that I disagree with the statement itself, it's just that the analogy didn't work for me.
I was more or less assuming Tante kept it simple for the sake of not writing out a long paragraph defining exactly what does and does not constitute food in her example (since one would have to take into account that many things are ingestible but not digestible, that many people have allergies or lack a variety of digestive enzymes, etc. etc. etc.).
Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
quote: I was more or less assuming Tante kept it simple for the sake of not writing out a long paragraph defining exactly what does and does not constitute food in her example (since one would have to take into account that many things are ingestible but not digestible, that many people have allergies or lack a variety of digestive enzymes, etc. etc. etc.).
Precisely why the analogy didn't work for me. There were too many immediate addendums that would be needed to clarify the statement.
Posts: 1480 | Registered: Dec 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
I figure that if you don't like those movies, don't watch them. The effort you took in starting this thread took more effort and came from more of an emotional investment than the movies deserve.
Posts: 16551 | Registered: Feb 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
Speaking of "dessert" movies: has anyone seen some Bollywood movies? They're exactly like a pink candy floss and leave pink bubbles and little rainbows in your mind I had to be dragged kicking and screaming to my first one ever but then: oh wow, I loved every second of it (Indian guys dancing in sequinned shirts with pyramids in the background? Count me in!)
I mean, they're all terribly exaggerated and melodramatic and all, and you can't watch too many in one go... but if you go and see it let's say every 2 months, it's really relaxing. At last no sex, no nudity, no violence (ok, there was some in the last I saw), and practically no swears (the worst I heard was "bloody" and "goddamned"... and it was from a supposedly very cocky mr cool guy in a fit of anger. AHAHAHAHAHAHAHAA!!!). And I admit it: I was even moved by the blatantly purposeful heart-wrenching moments.
What a sloppy girl I am <sigh> Posts: 218 | Registered: Jan 2006
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sports movies bore me to death because ALL of them are the same. Team has trouble. Team must overcome adversity and learn to work together. Cue montage of hopeful game scenes. Team wins trophy.
Yay.
Hehe, exactly, except add in between the trophy and the montage "Key player makes achingly inspirational speech." Ugh. Yknow, that formula could be applied to Boy Meets Girl movies too.
Posts: 3636 | Registered: Oct 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
Just don't go. I don't go to movies that show sports as an allegory for life. I don't go to movies that have a lawyer as a protagonist. I don't go to movies that feature doctors as major characters. If everyone would practice these reasonable defensive measures, then movies might improve.
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
"Who is against Escapism? The Jailers." JRR Tolkien in defending his work from critics who called it "mere escapism".
Posts: 11895 | Registered: Apr 2002
| IP: Logged |
quote: Sports movies bore me to death because ALL of them are the same. Team has trouble. Team must overcome adversity and learn to work together. Cue montage of hopeful game scenes.
The day is approaching to give it your best You've got to reach your prime! That's when you need to put yourself to the test And show us the passage of time We're gonna need a montage (Montage!) A sports-training montage (Montage!) And just show a lot of things happenin' at once. Remind everyone of what's goin' on. (What's goin' on?) And with every shot, show a little improvement To show it won't take too long That's called a montage (Montage!) Even Rocky had a montage (Montage!)
In any sport, if you want to go From just a beginner to a pro You'll need a montage (Montage!) a simple little montage (Montage!)
Always fade out (Montage!) into a montage (Montage!) If you fade out it seems like a long time (Montage!) has passed in a montage (Montage!) Montage (Montage!) Posts: 4313 | Registered: Sep 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
Nothing wrong with Escapism. But, why pay money to get to know someone that you wouldn't walk accross the street to meet in real life?
Posts: 1167 | Registered: Oct 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I forget which movie I was seeing, but the worst preview experience I ever had included this film, the one about the lost dog-sled team, and one other feel-good movie. Usually there's one flick previewed that I can tell, "I won't be seeing that," but this was three in a row of the same basic genre. I resented them then, that's for sure.
As for the actual films themselves, well it's hit or miss for me. I really enjoyed Remember the Titans because I felt it added some depth to the characters. But when I saw the preview for the dog-sled movie, it was like I felt the umbilical snaking towards me to hoook up and start pumping endorphins. I get irritated when I feel so bluntly manipulated.
Posts: 17164 | Registered: Jun 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
If people enjoy a movie, if people are moved, inspired, or changed by a movie, then it is a good movie. And if you don't find a movie inspiring that other people do, that doesn't mean that movie is bad - rather, it means you don't get what makes it good to those who do appreciate it.
Elitism is a problem. It is unhealthy - it causes people to fail to appreciate things they could take a lot of enjoyment from. Many people consider "good taste" a virtue, but in truth it mainly just harms the experiences of the people who have it. You don't have to hate lesser films in order to fully enjoy greater films. Hating films achieves nothing.
It certainly won't stop our minds from going to mush. That has nothing to do with enjoying films you should not. Instead, it has to do with failing to appreciate films on as deeply a level as you should. A film should make you think, cliches or no cliches. For some films this is easier than others, for some films it may be extremely difficult - often it will depend on the person. Kids get little out of Casablanca, but some adults can get quite a bit, even though those same adults might fail to appreciate Pokemon as much as the children can. And for many, films like Remember the Titans inspire in just as much thought as many other great films out there.
I bet there will be people who are very inspired by this new basketball movie, as there were with Remember the Titans. Maybe it will be just kids. Maybe it will be just sports fans. Maybe it will be just people who enjoy this particular type of movie. But the fact that such people exist makes the movie worthwhile. And thus I don't think your resentment is justified. If you can't stand it, don't go see it. But even better, DO go see it, and try to see it in a way that will allow you to enjoy it. You'll benefit the most from that.
Posts: 8120 | Registered: Jul 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
To each his or her own! I need to start a practice of going late to any remotely fantasy/SF film--because as I'm sitting in the theater awaiting my LOTR or Serenity or whatever, I'm sure to have to sit through trailers for all kinds of movies that I would never go see. I'm not really part of the demographic the marketers are targeting there -- oh well. A Puff Fest rah-rah sports team preview would be a welcome relief, actually. Posts: 3149 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
erosomniac! That is exactly what I was thinking of when I typed that.
Anyways. I don't mind cookie cutter movies sometimes. I watch the very occasional chick flick, even though I know that they're going to get together, break up, and get together again in the end. I still watch mindless action movies. James Bond, anyone? I like just about all movies, but sports movies just generally rub me the wrong way. I don't like most war movies either. I couldn't sit through Saving Private Ryan or Enemy at the Gates. I liked Tigerland a lot, but it's more focused on a character's development than all the war, and the this sort of thing doesn't hurt, either. And it doesn't have eight thousand firefights and military things happening in which I have absolutely no idea what is going on because war scenes make my eyes glaze over.
Anyways. My favorite movies are the ones that keep me guessing. Most of the time, I like to be trying to figure something out throughout the movie. But mindless is okay, too.
quote:Originally posted by Artemisia Tridentata: Nothing wrong with Escapism. But, why pay money to get to know someone that you wouldn't walk accross the street to meet in real life?
Because maybe it could get you to understand someone whom your prejudices prevent you from getting to know in real life.
Posts: 6394 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
God, I could sure use a montage right about now.
I avoid sports movies like they cause a rash. Never even seen Bull Durham. I mean, if someone I trust says a 'sports movie' is good, then I may go for it.
For example, I also hate "prison movies" but Shawshank Redmption was very pleasing to me.
I think the problem is the cliche and unrealism. You can have one in a good movie, but when you have both it is the kiss of death. Sometimes, real people superficially resemble a cliche and making them 'real' is where talent and hard work on the filmmaker's part comes in.
You know what I hate worse than ankle-deep feel-good movies? Fakey-pretentious "realistic" movies. These are frequently done by younger filmmakers who don't know jack about real life pain. Sometimes they are done by old codger filmmakers with either an agenda or something to prove. I would put a lot of Oscar-nominated, self-important tripe movies in this category. Fortunately, they are usually either boring or depressing and rarely make a lot of money. I would put, say, Million Dollar Baby in that category.
Posts: 9293 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
Maybe it's just because I'm a super-jock, but sports movies are awesome. I don't see the problem with them. There's a reason why almost all of them are "puffy" and inspirational....they're usually based on inspiring events? Also, it's kind of.....lame......to say that movies, sports movies especially, that are based on actual events are predictable. I sure hope that you can guess that a sports team, one that has already existed, either won or lost their big game.
Posts: 193 | Registered: Jul 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Sports movies just don't make me care about what's going on. Even sports movies about sports I actually like to watch on television (what I like to watch when I'm actually there is different) most likely would not make me care.
Sports I like to watch on tv: Um, ice skating and the X-games. I think that's it.
And Lords of Dogtown looked terribly boring to me.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Dont Know]](graemlins/dontknow.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[Cool]](cool.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
(Indian guys dancing in sequinned shirts with pyramids in the background? Count me in!)![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
erosomniac! That is exactly what I was thinking of when I typed that.
