this is one of the worst films i have ever seen!
-
Robbmonster — 9 years ago(May 04, 2016 10:11 AM)
Best. Post. EVER.
The conceit is strong with this one.
Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds -
omnitopium — 13 years ago(October 11, 2012 06:39 PM)
His opinion was that the other guy had poor taste in film as he didn't find this movie good. You on the other hand lack tolerance, must be hard being ignorant and pointing out others "flaws".
"where we're going we don't need roads" -
Hazzer_99 — 12 years ago(May 20, 2013 03:44 PM)
The acting was fantastic for sure. The story however was painful with a lack of true depth to the leading character which would have been partially tolerable if not for the empty ending. The editing was slow and arduous, relying on carefully picked, artistic angles for the camera shots, but then hanging on them for two or three times longer than necessary in order to allow Keitel to prove his acting skills in a single take.
All in all, this film is not one of the strongest films of the 90s, that is absolute trash and you know it. Goodfellas, Silence of the Lambs, Shawshank Redemption, Shundler's List, Leon, Pulp Fiction, Se7en, Trainspotting, Usual Suspencts?? I mean the list goes on and on and on with films that trump Bad Lieutenant in almost every respect.
A moving and engaging and memorable experience it may be, but to claim that failure to recognise it's merits as you've put them as being evidence of mental and emotional inferiority is really quite an excessive statement.
A lover not a fighter: someone who finds alternative ways to make their jaw ache -
aalcit — 11 years ago(February 16, 2015 09:18 PM)
Interesting though apparently Scorsese liked this film enough to list it one of his top 5 movies of the entire decade
http://www.rogerebert.com/rogers-journal/ebert-and-scorsese-best-films-of-the-1990s -
SloppyJ30 — 15 years ago(November 26, 2010 08:57 AM)
Not every film has to be about storytelling. Evaluated as a story, I can't argue with you, because BL's plot can be summed up in about ten seconds. It's also an ugly film, both visually and in content. Admittedly, this one is for the fringe element . . highly tolerant film fans only. It's not "entertainment."
For what it was intended to be, it was flawless. Abel Ferrara obviously wasn't out to orchestrate some grand crime epic; he chose to make a film about the last days of a man who had put himself into a death spiral with poor choices, arrogance, and self-loathing.
Thank God for actors like Harvey Keitel. It takes an exceptionally rare combination of chops, preparation, commitment, and a total lack of ego to pull off a role like this. How many "name" actors would even attempt a role like this, let alone pull it off? This is clearly a man who is interested in a challenge more than he is a paycheck.
Frankly, a film this will put a lot of people off by its very nature. It would almost have to be considered a failure unless it did so. The more visceral the negative reaction, the more proof that Ferrara accomplished what he set out to accomplish. Thank you Zulu, and thank you OP!I have meddled with the primal forces of nature and I must atone.
-
DanLives1980 — 13 years ago(July 01, 2012 07:47 AM)
I agree and you've made a great argument here. The plot as far as I understood was Keitel's character trying to divorce himself from his inner despair - regarding the fact that he knew he was falling from a great height - and so tried to do it as amoralistically as he possibly could, to maybe disgust himself so violently that he would break the binds that kept him in his beep life.
He breaks all boundaries illicitly, sexually and moralistically. He's the devil collecting his lost souls with one great big religious guilt trip and the law is the faith that he has fallen from. Before he is reminded by the rape of the nun where he has truly come from. Anyone who can't understand it's plot, I feel, is very sheltered and whereas Ferrara probably aimed for people to watch in disbelief, instead they look away in disbelief.
And I believe Keitel is now 73 years old or approaching, making him almost mid-fifties and accomplished when this film was made, so he was also a humble artist of the highest degree in my opinion. Me and my friends would watch this for entertainment value with beer over the remake or anything that proposes it can please everyone at the same time. Always choose acquired tastes over sugar and water, we don't spend 10 on a bottle of coke, why then on diluted adult entertainment? Thank you for supporting this awesome film! -
njs1999 — 15 years ago(June 30, 2010 12:04 PM)
Couldn't agree more, absolute borefest.
All this crap about it being arty and you have to look deeper into it, blah blah blah!
Should've cut out all the dramatic silences and stupid noises, then condensed it in to a half hour programme to be shown on BBC4. -
Edren — 15 years ago(September 22, 2010 03:17 PM)
It's been a long time since I've seen it, but I do remember hating it. Him walking around screaming with his wang hanging out sort of sums it up for me.
Life is just one damned thing after another - Elbert Hubbard -
necrosadist — 15 years ago(December 21, 2010 10:28 PM)
If the 82 richie rich reflects on your birth year, one wouldn't expect a better statement than the one you made.
Go watch The Titanic, might please you more.
"Do what thou wilt shall be the whole of the Law"