The Great Movie Tournament - 2000s: Round 1 - Group 4 of 32

[fernandito]

The comment about not watching other movies was somewhat tongue in cheek. But having said that, a lot of the comments about movies getting low votes or "needs more love" often come off as elitist. Sometimes I feel like I am being given homework assignments or being shammed for not having seen it. But to be honest, I am perfectly fine with sticking to "mainstream" movies...

And that's perfectly fine. Cinema covers a wide spectrum of themes, topics, reflections of every day life contorted to exaggerated proportions. Every type of story won't be for everybody.

Your comment about Elitists is half true. Yes, sometimes there's an element of snobbery, but other times it's a genuine sense of lament that others haven't experienced a story that's dear to our hearts.

[mae]

Agreed, for me it's about sharing these favorites with as many people as possible. Not everything is for everyone, and that's okay, but if throughout these tournaments people (including myself - though there are only 11 films I haven't seen in this tournament) discover new things they enjoy, that's great, isn't it?

[amd013]

Agreed, for me it's about sharing these favorites with as many people as possible. Not everything is for everyone, and that's okay, but if throughout these tournaments people (including myself - though there are only 11 films I haven't seen in this tournament) discover new things they enjoy, that's great, isn't it?

To an extent. I understand people want to see their favorite movies move on, and don't mind it too much, but it is just the sheer volume of such comments from several people (so not singling anyone out) that start to annoy me. Fortunately for me most of the movies I like/care about are "mainstream", so they are popular enough that they likely move on past the first round or two, so I guess I don't usually feel the need to push a movie. Also, I am probably more stingy then most on giving out votes. There are several movies that I liked/enjoyed, but just didn't feel they were good enough to get a vote (even in these early rounds).

Maybe as we get further in the tournament I might get more defensive of my favs.

[Still Servant]

The comment about not watching other movies was somewhat tongue in cheek. But having said that, a lot of the comments about movies getting low votes or "needs more love" often come off as elitist. Sometimes I feel like I am being given homework assignments or being shammed for not having seen it. But to be honest, I am perfectly fine with sticking to "mainstream" movies...

Your comment about Elitists is half true. Yes, sometimes there's an element of snobbery, but other times it's a genuine sense of lament that others haven't experienced a story that's dear to our hearts.

Half true? Don't give him credit for that. It's crap. Calling someone, in this case myself because I'm one of the people that he's complaining about being elitist is bullshit.

How would you like it if I made a broad claim that since you mainly like mainstream films that your taste is low-brow? That wouldn't be fair. Considering you're the reason we have two average mainstream films in the tournament (Residen Evil and Underworld) that don't belong, I think I have more reason to complain than you do.

When I point out a film that isn't getting votes, I legitimately want people to see the film because I think they will enjoy it. It's not being a movie snob.

I can honestly say that some of my favorite films are films people here have recommended to me.

I have no problem with anyone liking mainstream films. I love mainstream films too, but I also don't think there's anything wrong with expanding your taste. It seems pretty closed-minded to limit yourself to one style of film.

With all that being said, many of us here are the minority now. You are the majority and that's why it's almost impossible to find any films at the theater that aren't superhero movies, sequels and reboots.

I know some of the taste people have around here and I would not have recommended Hard Candy to you. Just like I wouldn't recommend it to Webstar. There are tons of films I would recommend that are lesser known, but would still appeal to someone with mainstream taste.

[mae]

I had no idea Hard Candy wasn't a mainstream film, I thought it was a pretty well-known and liked movie. It was very big when it came out from what I recall. Bought the DVD just on hype and it lived up to it.

[Still Servant]

I had no idea Hard Candy wasn't a mainstream film, I thought it was a pretty well-known and liked movie. It was very big when it came out from what I recall. Bought the DVD just on hype and it lived up to it.

I would have to look it up. I don't remember it being released near me. When I say mainstream I also mean its themes.

Mainstream to me also means a film you could mention to anyone on the street and they would know it. Hard Candy is not that. If you mention National Treasure, most people would know it as the Nick Cage film.

[mae]

This is closing Monday afternoon.

[webstar1000]

Hard Candy and Matchstick Men are the standouts here for me.

Agreed

[webstar1000]

The comment about not watching other movies was somewhat tongue in cheek. But having said that, a lot of the comments about movies getting low votes or "needs more love" often come off as elitist. Sometimes I feel like I am being given homework assignments or being shammed for not having seen it. But to be honest, I am perfectly fine with sticking to "mainstream" movies...

Your comment about Elitists is half true. Yes, sometimes there's an element of snobbery, but other times it's a genuine sense of lament that others haven't experienced a story that's dear to our hearts.

Half true? Don't give him credit for that. It's crap. Calling someone, in this case myself because I'm one of the people that he's complaining about being elitist is bullshit.

How would you like it if I made a broad claim that since you mainly like mainstream films that your taste is low-brow? That wouldn't be fair. Considering you're the reason we have two average mainstream films in the tournament (Residen Evil and Underworld) that don't belong, I think I have more reason to complain than you do.

When I point out a film that isn't getting votes, I legitimately want people to see the film because I think they will enjoy it. It's not being a movie snob.

I can honestly say that some of my favorite films are films people here have recommended to me.

I have no problem with anyone liking mainstream films. I love mainstream films too, but I also don't think there's anything wrong with expanding your taste. It seems pretty closed-minded to limit yourself to one style of film.

With all that being said, many of us here are the minority now. You are the majority and that's why it's almost impossible to find any films at the theater that aren't superhero movies, sequels and reboots.

I know some of the taste people have around here and I would not have recommended Hard Candy to you. Just like I wouldn't recommend it to Webstar. There are tons of films I would recommend that are lesser known, but would still appeal to someone with mainstream taste.

Now, I would pretty much let you give me a list of movies and I would like them. It’s fucked really... but you know me better than me brother... but I did like Hard Candy. Lol

[Still Servant]

Now, I would pretty much let you give me a list of movies and I would like them. It’s fucked really... but you know me better than me brother... but I did like Hard Candy. Lol

I'm glad you liked Hard Candy. I wouldn't have thought that would be up your alley.

I know sometimes I try watching something that is outside of my taste and sometimes I end up really like it.

[amd013]

The comment about not watching other movies was somewhat tongue in cheek. But having said that, a lot of the comments about movies getting low votes or "needs more love" often come off as elitist. Sometimes I feel like I am being given homework assignments or being shammed for not having seen it. But to be honest, I am perfectly fine with sticking to "mainstream" movies...

Your comment about Elitists is half true. Yes, sometimes there's an element of snobbery, but other times it's a genuine sense of lament that others haven't experienced a story that's dear to our hearts.

Half true? Don't give him credit for that. It's crap. Calling someone, in this case myself because I'm one of the people that he's complaining about being elitist is bullshit.

How would you like it if I made a broad claim that since you mainly like mainstream films that your taste is low-brow? That wouldn't be fair. Considering you're the reason we have two average mainstream films in the tournament (Residen Evil and Underworld) that don't belong, I think I have more reason to complain than you do.

When I point out a film that isn't getting votes, I legitimately want people to see the film because I think they will enjoy it. It's not being a movie snob.

I can honestly say that some of my favorite films are films people here have recommended to me.

I have no problem with anyone liking mainstream films. I love mainstream films too, but I also don't think there's anything wrong with expanding your taste. It seems pretty closed-minded to limit yourself to one style of film.

With all that being said, many of us here are the minority now. You are the majority and that's why it's almost impossible to find any films at the theater that aren't superhero movies, sequels and reboots.

I know some of the taste people have around here and I would not have recommended Hard Candy to you. Just like I wouldn't recommend it to Webstar. There are tons of films I would recommend that are lesser known, but would still appeal to someone with mainstream taste.

Ok, first lets not blow the elitist comment out of proportion/context. I said certain comments "often come off as" elitest. That is to say I am describing the comments and not the person, although I can see how you might infer that. Also, I never used the word snob. I personally think being an elitest is not necessarily a bad thing. It can be, when it leads to snobbery, but on its own it isn't. I am an elitest in other subjects, and I don't think any of my friends/family would consider me a snob in those regard.

While I have made comments on why I didn't vote for a movie, I have never insulted the nominator, or the persons who's comment I replied too. I understand and respect why the movie was nominated, but I am just commenting on why it wasn't worthy of my vote.

In regards to Hard Candy, you made the statement that you hope people are making a list. And that hard candy "Needs" to be on that list. Yes, I understand why people would like the movie. But it is a particularly dark movie. It is not a movie I would recommend broadly as you did, and would only specifically recommend to people who I have an intimate knowledge of their tastes in movies and subjects.

I stand by my decision not to watch movies based on recommendations in these threads, but you made a critisim of it that I felt needed defending. Basically it comes down to that I know what I like, and that the comments in this thread really aren't targeted so someone with low-brow tastes like myself.

Also, you can be a little at ease that I only half tainted the tournament because Underworld was not seconded. But to be quite frank, comments that some of the movies I nominate are not worthy of being in the tournament are uncalled for. I know you didn't like Resident Evil because it was not as good as the video game, but I have never played the video game, and didn't even know it was based on a video game until after the first time a saw it, so I nominited based on the criteriia: 1) I enjoyed the movie 2) I would watch it again. Those are a minimal requirement for me. (with the exception of some movies that knowing the end make watching a second time less enjoyable).


I was also criticized in the 90's tournament for nominating Showgirls (thank you Mae for coming to its defense) (I'm not sure by who, and don't feel like going back to see). There are many movies in this tournament I saw and don't like, but I don't have the audacity to say they are unworthy.

But yes, based on some of the wording I feel there is a sub-text (unintended I am sure), that "if you haven't seen this movie then what is wrong with you". I don't mind it to an extent, but after awhile, the shear volume of the comments gets annoying. I am just trying to point out how it can read to others who are not fans of all the genre's you are a fan of.

But don't worry I won't taint the 20-60's polls with any unworthy nominations. Maybe I will stay out of the 2010's too, as I suspect anything I like will be nominated by someone else.

[St. Troy]

...But don't worry I won't taint the 20-60's polls with any unworthy nominations...

Please, taint away. The broader the nomination pool, the better.

[Tommy]

You didn't like Kill Bill Vol. 1, St. Troy?

[ladysai]

Amd....I have only seen 3 of the movies in the polls so far, but Im still voting for the ones I liked. There isnt some kind of movie fan cred that we have to prove in order to join in.

Also, I like following along and figuring out what Id like to watch in future. Lots of good critiques to read.

[mae]

The poll has closed. The following six titles are moving on to the next round:

1. Kill Bill: Volume 1 (76.92%)
2. Dodgeball: A True Underdog Story (46.15%)
3. Matchstick Men (34.62%)
4. Ice Age (30.77%)
5. Vanilla Sky (30.77%)
6. Hard Candy (26.92%)

And the following two titles have been eliminated:

1. Best in Show (19.23%)
2. Enter the Void (15.38%)

[St. Troy]

You didn't like Kill Bill Vol. 1, St. Troy?

I didn't see much of it, but what I saw, I did not enjoy at all. I don't think I'm much of a Tarantino person.