re: name a movie you haven't seen that

Return of the Jedi, Forrest Gump, Full Metal Jacket, Jaws

Ace, I appreciate your response, but it also confirms my point. I like to just watch the show and be entertained. If I'm thinking about camera angle or lighting, then I'm not in the show enjoying the experience. And while citizen cane was groundbreaking, so were the old color zenith TV's - it might be cool to see one in good condition now, but I wouldn't want to have it as my only TV.

Oh, I'm still immature as heck at times, but I just thought it was slow and boring as stink.

quote:

---

Return of the Jedi, Forrest Gump, Full Metal Jacket, Jaws

---

Holy shite dude

Hunger Games

Harry Potter movies

Twilight movies

Resevoir Dogs

The Big Lebowski

Batman Begins

The Fighter

quote:

---

I like to just watch the show and be entertained.

---

I understand that - sometimes filmmakers forget this is the point.

quote:

---

If I'm thinking about camera angle or lighting, then I'm not in the show enjoying the experience.

---

As I am such a fan of filmmaking, I try to enjoy the technical challenges and the way filmmakers overcame them - and this goes beyond the physical parameters - as films evolved (some say devolved) from stage plays, telling the story was supposed to be the point.

Filmmaking technique (such as the industry wide CGI, or certain filmmakers' preference for particular techniques, *cough* Abrams' lens flares *cough*) for technique's sake isn't terribly interesting, but in combination with other factors it can be.

Take the filmmaking in There Will Be Blood - a whole recipe of things make this film visually stunning - and that helps carry over the fact there is very little action - and not much more dialogue. So, the framing and lighting are more important in a film like this, than in a film that has far more action beats per minute.

Kubrick was like that - in that his films were the film equivalent of paintings. The attention he paid to virtually every frame enhances my enjoyment of his films - particularly on subsequent viewings. More commercial "throwaway" films do not have this draw, as a rule.

Michael Bay's films are very entertaining to many. They are not to me. To each his own.

Citizen Kane is one of the most important and well-made, particularly for its time, films ever - regardless of whether or not it is universally entertaining to, say, Gen X and Millenials.

quote:

---

Oh, I'm still immature as heck at times, but I just thought it was slow and boring as stink.

---

And I understand that. Maybe that will change, maybe not. It doesn't make you "wrong" necessarily - but films have definitely changed - I prefer good character interaction to explosions and fakey, cartoonish CGI for 90 to 120 minutes (although I don't mind bits of that to propel the story.)

quote:

---

I saw Heath ledgers joker portrayal for the first time a few months ago, but I'm not into super hero movies

---

The Nolan movies are a crime-drama trilogy that Batman just happens to be a part of. They are not super-hero movies in the strictest sense.

Never seen an entire Rocky movie, all the back to the futures, ET, Rudy, or Top Gun.

Pulp fiction and I've only watched about the first half hour of The Deer Hunter.

quote:

---

The Social Network

---

I really think Social Network is only second to There will be Blood when discussing best movies since 2000. And my answer is Citizen Kane although there are too many old movies I still haven't seen.

I don't know what it is, but I can't bring myself to watch it.