basically...that's what i think of it: The Worst Movie Ever. Don't waste your time renting this. Read the book first, otherwise you'll be dissappointed. They only do three stories, which is quite lame if I do say so myself. I don't understand how people actually like this movie.
share[deleted]
I think you both have good points to make, however no less than the great Roger Ebert himself did not like this movie. See his review dated August 6, 1969 in Chicago Sun-Times or on Roger Ebert.com. He did not like it and gives excellent detailed analysis of the film's serious flaws. I tend to agree with Ebert, but we all should at least consider his knowledgeable opinions, whether we like the movie or not.
[deleted]
Agreed- they could have chosen better stories from the book, however, this movie deserves a little credit- Rod Steiger was excellent in the role of a lifetime. Maybe this just isn't your type of movie; It's for thinkers.....
shareYes, I get a kick out of some people rating movies. It's like asking someone what their favorite flavor of ice cream is. Then the arguments ensue about who is right and wrong; good and bad, etc. Worst movie ever? There must be something worse? Things can always be worse. Then things can always be better too. It depends who you ask. Is the movie screen half empty or half full?
I suppose the Illustrated Man is going to be rated like any other science fiction. I am just discovering it by way of the movie poster in a space art science fiction history book. [By the way, they do not show that poster here nor in Wiki. I used the male model in it for a new pastel sketch idea from the surface of the moon - Google Mark Seibold or see markseibold.com as I am an astronomer-artist, of course I think 2001: A Space Odyssey is the greatest film of all time; then I have many others in the greats and foreign greats, but do my friends tell me what is good and bad as an artist? No, I think not; as I am the artist. I know what great art is and how it is produced. I like parts of Bradbury's F 451 but not all of it, so I suppose I'll like parts of Illustrated Man. We'll see.
True. No matter how 'bad' a movie is, some people will find something to like about it, and no matter how many people endorse a film as a 'masterpiece', there are always some people who will say it's utterly overrated crap.
The problem with bringing Bradbury stories to the screen is that his stories are always so cerebral. There's always a lot of internal monologue and internal conflict that is really difficult to portray onscreen. Movies/TV shows are expected to include a lot of physical action & witty repartee in the dialog, and this often doesn't suit a Bradbury tale. Fahrenheit 451 was very good in parts, but was boring in others. Same with The Illustrated Man and The Martian Chronicles. For that matter, 2001: A Space Odyssey had some looong, boring sections which Kubrick got us through via the incredible and hypnotic special effects shots.
But, anytime you try to bring an internal conflict to the screen, there will be problems with how to stage it. Nowadays, it seems filmmakers just want to fill the screen with lots of fighting robots, superheroes, gunfights and explosions, since it makes money and it's easier than adapting something like a Bradbury story.
But, with the rapid increase of independent films (made on cheap budgets) we are seeing a renaissance of story and character development in entertainment media. There are more films made now than at any time before, and the variety and choices available are staggering. You just have to look for them, most of them won't be coming to your local theater, or even your local Redbox on DVD.
<sigh> On every board, there's always one idiot trumpeting "worst movie ever."
Well, eventually one of those guys is going to be right. But not this time. 'Illustrated Man' is hardly a masterpiece of cinematic art, but worst movie ever? I can think of many more worthy contenders for that title.
Anything by Ed Wood.
Any number of boring, pretentious "intellectual" foreign films.
Anything with 'Andy Warhol' in the title.
Any Japanese monster flick.
Any movie based on a video game.
Anything starring Adam Sandler, Paul Reubens or Pauly Shore.
Almost any teen comedy from the 1980s.
And the list goes on.....
Hey, Ed Wood is a good movie!
sharejbaker1-2 was not saying that Tim Burton's Ed Wood was bad - he/she was saying that any movie by the real Ed Wood is bad.
which i agree with - B Movies never did it for me.
but about The Illistrated Man....i havent read the book - this was a random pick up at the store for me. I didn't understand it and i agree - it could possibly be one of the worst movies ever. I did enjoy the acting performances; especially the two leading men (well, it focused mostly on them anyway). The movie itself was horrible; i'm sure it didn't do the book any justice because Ray Bradbury is a great author...
:|
IN a world with Carrot Top and Vanilla Ice, this subject doesn't even warrant consideration. I saw this as a kid late at night, and the story with the men stranded on Venus where it always rains just stuck in my head. I'll probably always like it for that reason. sure the book is better, isn't it always? Heck, Bradbury's work is about provoking thought and setting up interesting situations, I have yet to see a good film version of one of his works.
He doesn't create compelling characters like Asimov did, so its more about the situation. I wonder what it would be like to live in a world where reading is criminal, or where it rains all the time and you can't ever escape it, or if I would euthanize my children to spare them the horror of the end of the world.
If all this film does is depict a brief glimpse of some of those stories, then its elevated above most of the trash that is mass produced for no reason than to show endless gore with no thought.
The works of Ed Wood do not even make it up to "B" and saying it does is an insult to Roger Corman, for one.
CB
Good Times, Noodle Salad
I saw this movie and I think its a classic. Rod Steiger and Claire Bloom's acting are good. The lead actors play different characters and they are good in them. Placing the story in the rural south was an interesting idea. The old south contrasted with futuristic stories was original and entertaining.
Now why, why, is the movie bad? That they didn't use certain stories from the book is not good enough reason. Other people may like the stories more that are not your favorites.
The movie still has too many good things going for it to call it the worse movie.
[deleted]
Personally, I think "Gummo" was the worst movie ever. But it at least didn't have shots of Rod Steiger's ass.
shareAnd let's not forget the marvelous scifi potboilers of the 50s ... Leech Woman, Queen of Outer Space, most Brit scifi of that period, too.
The Illustrated Man is not an easy, casual viewing, and if you don't pay attention to it, it'll seem lame and pointless.
Therefore there will always be plenty of 20-somethings that regard it as a waste of time since it doesn't have a lot of nudity, simulated sex, gun battles or car chases. Most of them, if they could read, would consider L Ron Hubbard as a great author.
Or "The Room" by Tommy Wiseau.
Schrodinger's cat walks into a bar, or doesn't.
I really enjoyed Illustrated Man. I didn't care as much for the little inter-segmental conversations of the "wrapper", but I loved each of the actual vignettes. Rod Steiger is the MAN and Claire was quite cute enough.
All good wishes!
And for every movie, no matter how clearly not bad even if one does not like it, there are several idiots that vote 1. But from a voting population that can rank The Shawshank Redemption as greatest of all time, what can one expect?
CB
Good Times, Noodle Salad
I'm inclined to agree with the sentiment of this comment. The majority of the time when people make posts on IMDB proclaiming a film to be the "worst movie ever" they may as well just be stating that they've seen very few films indeed.
But I've got to strongly disagree with some of the categories you selected for films that are apparently worthy of "worst movie ever" status:
"Anything by Ed Wood."
Obviously these movies are terribly made and ridiculously incompetent but I think there's so much entertainment value that comes from those aspects that I'd struggle to call them the worst movies ever. I'd be way happier watching Plan 9 From Outer Space than any number of massively budgeted yet dull, pandering and generic modern "blockbusters".
"Any Japanese monster flick."
From this I have to assume you've never seen Daimajin (1966) or Matango (1963) both of which are excellently crafted, supremely atmospheric examples of the Japanese monster genre. Sure they're B-movies at heart and aren't going to be to everyone's taste but they're executed extremely well for what they are. The original Gojira is also way more serious, dark and effective than most people are willing to remember.
"Almost any teen comedy from the 1980s"
Are you kidding me? Fast Times At Ridgemont High? All of those incredible John Hughes comedies? Those are some of the best teen movies ever and exhibit a hundred times more heart, cleverness and wit than anything of that ilk that gets released nowadays. In fact I'd say 80's teen comedies in general are some of the best coming-of-age movies ever made.
I know this is all totally subjective at the end of the day but there's no way I can sit back and be quiet while great cinema is dragged through the mud!
Question: Is this the movie that had a few guys on a planet that constantly rained? They got so sick and tired of it raining all the time that the tried to drown themselves by laying on their backs and tilting their heads even further back so that it would literally rain in their nostrils; thus eventually drowning them??
I saw that movie only once, about 6 years ago, and I was pretty sure that Rod was in it and I've back-tracked him to this movie, but I'm unsure if this is the movie. If I'm right, and this is the movie....then I totally agree with the OP. The movie sucked. It wasn't for thinkers, it just flat out sucked. If you want a movie for thinkers, "BRAZIL" comes to mind!!!
I've never seen the movie, but that is one of the stories from the book, so I'm assuming it is this.
shareWhat you're thinking of is "The Long Rain." Its in the book of short stories titled "R is for Rocket." They're actually on venus or uranus I think.
shareI remember this movie well and the book that "inspired" it. If the story was in "R is for Rocket" that would not surprise me. The book (and the movie) depicted the story of astronauts stranded on planet Venus and how they had to seek shelter in habitats dispursed on the planet's surface. An interesting story and even more so when you consider what we now know about the environment on Venus. I saw this movie a couple of years or so before reading the book and of course the book was better. If you want to consider a premise taken from other media, consider the last few minutes of the movie "Dark Star" and then re-read the story in the book "The Illustrated Man" entitled "Kaleidoscope." Thought provoking story.
shareIt's on Venus, and it is indeed in The Illustrated Man.
shareYes, this is the movie.
shareI read the book, as per usual it's better than the film. Worst movie ever - HAR - RUMPH! There's so much junk that has piled up since The Great Train Robbery over a hundred years ago it's mind-blowing. You could watch ten "worst movies ever" a day and it would be years until you'd get to The Illustrated Man. Just for a recent candidate (not for worst ever, just obviously worse than The I.M.) try Battlefield Earth...
shareAt least Battlefield Earth had a story. The Illustrated Man had 5 separate semi-stories that didn't even ATTEMPT to engage the audience. And what was
the flash-back story concerning Felicia supposed to be about ? ? ? ?? The movie made NO sense. I bought it yesterday at Sams Club because it was CHEAP (Five bucks and change) and concidered a classic. Well... now I'm not so sure about the classic bit. I didn't care for the characters, and at the end, I wanted the drifter to pick the rock up again and REALLY bash Carls brains out. Then leave the dog there to lick up the mess. Now to be honest, I've never read the book. But I may get to it one day. As to Battlefield Earth... I loved the book. Much better than the movie. They only filmed about the first 200 pages if I remember properly, and I believe it was a 12-13 hundred page tome. Read it. You'll love it. Later, CKB.
Watch Criminally Insane Part 2 or Lunch Meat. Those movie are beyond the worst movies of all time. It has been many years since I last saw this movie but I remember thinking some of it was rather creepy. I will have to check it out again.
-PCyst
Why is there a "worst movie ever" topic in every frickin film's message board on imdb?
shareBecause you always have someone that feels that the movie of discussion is the worst movie ever.
-PCyst
Well, it is a comment that is ill-used in this case. Some Yuppie swine feels cheated out of the five dollars he spent for it at Sam's Club. Waaaaaaah.
While it's not on my Top-10 list, or my Top-50 list, it's one of the better novelizations of Ray Bradbury, and it was quite advanced for its time. The moods that it sets are evocative, alienating, and bizzare. It is an intelligent movie, a movie for people who think. It was Science Fiction before Kubrick's 2001-- do y'all *remember* that genre?
Worst movie ever... don't make me laugh. You don't remember Laserblast, or Deathsport, or Space Mutiny? How 'bout A*P*E*? Cars That Eat People? Congorilla?
Don't preach to me. I didn't say it was the worst movie ever. By the way, I own all of those movie that you talked about and I happen to like Laserblast! Going back to The Illustrated Man, I liked this movie. I just watched it again after many years and it has great atmosphere. The movie is a little bit confusing at times but that is what gives it its charm. Definitely not the worst movie out there.
-PCyst
good movie. Leisurely paced, but Steiger gives a powerful performance. Like its a play.
"Now shut up, Shut up! All you do is make noise in the world"
-Carl
illustrated man
[deleted]
For all its ambition, cinematography, Oscar-winner level talent (Steiger) the bottom line is that this movie is just not very good. Plain and simple. Not the worst ever but it is just bad. No less than Roger Ebert himself wrote in the Chicago Sun Times on August 6, 1969 that he didn't like it and it left him disappointed.