Totally over rated movie - E.T. the Extra-Terrestrial (1982) Discussion

[–] virgiltx 13 years ago

OP: "It is horribly done in direction, writing, and acting."

If the writing and direction are bad, how can you detect bad acting vs bad dialog or bad direction?

Re "...a B-film at best." B-film is a style, not a quality level. Spielberg expressly thought of the Indiana Jones films as "B-movies", maybe E.T. also, which. BTW, was made as a children's' movie.

____________________

reply

[–] Stratego 12 years ago

B-film is a style, not a quality level.

B-film is NOT a style, it's simply a low-budget commercial film (usually with poor production values and little promotion). Technically, this movie is not a B-movie, but I think the OP tries to argue that this movie posseses a lot of the qualities many B-movies are known for.

reply

[–] e25171971 10 years ago

The B-movie is not a style or genre, correct, it's actually exactly what it sounds like: it's the second film that would be played. It's the cinematic equivalent to the B-side of a record, and just as many people stuck around to watch them as those who would actually listen to the B-side. B-movie homage certainly is a genre, however, as the term is defined as a category of artistic composition characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter. A subgenre, sure, but the Throwback Film is definitely constant enough and ubiquitous enough in parent genres to be considered a legitimate stance. Deliberate attempts to recreate what made B-movies entertaining and unique while also markedly improving on the writing, the acting, the directorship, and the special effects (granted by larger budgets). The Iron Giant is a sendup to 50s B-films, and that movie is *beep* fantastic; so too did the most recent King Kong pay tribute to 30s filmmaking styles and one obvious example in particular, while Indiana Jones as well was an homage to the adventure films of that era.

reply

[–] Stratego 10 years ago

B-movie homage certainly is a genre, however, as the term is defined as a category of artistic composition characterized by similarities in form, style, or subject matter

Sure, but that's not what the OP meant. They were referring to the general quality of low-budget commercial films.

reply

[–] e25171971 10 years ago

Sure, but this wasn't a low-budget commercial film, nor are those more broadly what he's talking about - his comment was a direct remark on this film - nor does it actually lack in quality, at least the ones mentioned, nor do things suddenly become B-movies through a change in the film-making standard.
Just because everything has to be as joyless and brooding as Man of Steel and apologize for being a sci-fi/comic book film to be considered "good" does nothing to change the measurable quality a film offers, and this film - "his opinion" or not - is far from devoid of quality and merit.

reply

[–] Stratego 10 years ago

I wasn't necessarily agreeing with the OP. I was just saying to the other poster that B-movies in itself are not a genre and that the OP obviously wasn't referring to the homage genre, but simply the general low quality of B-movies.

nor do things suddenly become B-movies through a change in the film-making standard.

Sure, but I think the OP only tried to suggest that the low quality is similar. Obviously, this movie is not a B-movie, especially not when it comes to the production values and technical quality.

reply

[–] e25171971 10 years ago

Oh certainly, certainly, and I apologize if it seemed to implicate you in being of the same mind as the OP, that's not how I read your comment at all. No, my argument is less against you personally and your own position and more focused on the "devil's advocate" position and the OP's claim as a whole. I didn't grow up with this film really so I have no nostalgic alignment with it, but while he's perfectly entitled to not liking it one cannot have an opinion regarding an objective quality, and this film is flatly not objectively bad. It has cheesy moments, of course, but on the whole it's a very well assembled product, competently shot, composed, and by and large well written - particularly the family scenes. "Greatest movie" is of course a value claim and an opinion, but to call it a well done film is simply to measure the objective qualities it has.

reply

[–] Robbmonster 9 years ago

Actually, E.T. was a VERY low budget film for what it is.

The budget was only about $10 million.

Never defend crap with 'It's just a movie'
http://www.youtube.com/user/BigGreenProds

reply

[–] centauri2014 9 years ago

And to date it has grossed almost $500 million dollars.

Ladies and gentlemen...Mr.Conway Twitty

reply

[–] bijinius 10 years ago

NOTHING Steven Spielberg has ever done is "horribly" directed. There's a few RELATIVELY poor entries - "1941", "Always", "The Terminal" and his "Twilight Zone" spot - but nothing outright horrible. I'm sure I'm not alone in thinking this, am I?

reply

[–] centauri2014 9 years ago

I liked Always. I think 1941 was misunderstood, but The Terminal, I'm right there with you.

Ladies and gentlemen...Mr.Conway Twitty

reply

[–] MuchToBeGratefulFor 13 years ago

If you watch it again

"if" we watch it again? Why do you assume that nobody has watched it again? Many of us have seen it many times and continue to enjoy it.

I will bet you won't think it is quite as good as you remember it. There is a reason for this because it is so weakly delivered. It is your memory of the film that gives it such a high score.

Wrong, wrong, wrong.

You must be the change you seek in the world. -- Gandhi

reply

[–] virgiltx 13 years ago

OP: "...does not stand the test of time."

It is rated at 8.1 by "Under 18" IMDb users. They would have seen it probably within the past 10 years.

____________________

reply

[–] ItsEddieHaskellBeyotch 13 years ago

Don't feed the trolls.

"You win some, you lose some. But you live, you live to fight another day."

reply

[–] aadue-186-652060 12 years ago

Just because somebody doesn't like something, doesn't make them a troll. I didn't care for this movie either, but I just watched it at 22, and hadn't seen it before now. If I'd seen it as a kid, I probably would have liked it more. But 22 years of hype and thinking this is a Spielberg movie (from the 80s! which let's be frank was his heyday), and then...not so much.

reply

[–] Kurt1960 12 years ago

Oddly enough, I saw it for the first time at age 22, but when it first came out in theaters in 1982. As a film purist, I wasn't happy with Spielberg's tinkering with the 20th anniversary edition, but I enjoy this movie at least as much today as I did when I was 22.

Well, can't he just beam up?
This is *reality* Greg.

reply

[–] ItsEddieHaskellBeyotch 12 years ago

Repeat. Don't feed the trolls.

"Lemme at 'em! I'll splat 'em!"

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] jejozi 11 years ago

What about people who hate bad classics?

This will be the high point of my day; it's all downhill from here.

reply

[–] nizzemancer-265-952005 13 years ago

I agree that it's overrated, I've never been able to sit through the whole thing in one go on account of how boring and quite frankly stupid everything in it is.

I get it it's aimed at kids, but I was a kid back then too and I didn't find it enjoyable as a kid either.

reply

[–] 13 years ago

[deleted]

[–] nizzemancer-265-952005 12 years ago

Aaaawww Steven Spielberg, is that you?

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Nizzemancer-1 11 years ago

Yeah, because I was sooooo used to CGI at the time of that piece of drivels release...right? Because CGI was soooo overused in the 80's, right idiot?

Butthurt fanboy upset that I find/found his favorite drivel boring.

Light travels faster than sound,
that's why people seem bright,
until you hear them.

reply

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Hendry_William_French 13 years ago

I think this movie is a fine example of almost flawless storytelling. The setting, music, themes and mystery/suspense is done so well.

I grew up with this movie, though. Those who never saw it at a young age would probably miss out on the more central themes that this movie presents, which cover childhood wonder and adventure. This would be totally lost on an older, cynical first time viewer and thus would be harder to understand or connent to.

Pizza? Thin or Thick? Chicago.

reply

[–] zerowing-1 11 years ago

Those who never saw it at a young age would probably miss out on the more central themes that this movie presents, which cover childhood wonder and adventure. This would be totally lost on an older, cynical first time viewer and thus would be harder to understand or connent to.

This.

reply

[–] uignant 10 years ago

I don't see how an older viewer could be unable to pick up on these themes, in fact they surely would be a lot more able to recognise them than a child. Truly though, only the overly cynical would deny the sense of wonder in this movie.

reply

[–] AleksandertheDraconian 13 years ago

I don't agree when you say that the movie has bad acting or something, but I find the movie boring, especially because is for kids. If I had watched it as a kid probably I would have enjoyed it but I never watched it before so now that I watch it for me is boring.

reply

[–] jawsfan 13 years ago

THe original post has to be one of the absolute stupidest, uneducated, and moronic things I have ever read.

As someone who watches "B movies" that most B movie fans won't touch (I.E., the people who think MANOS is the worst movie ever made) - I honestly am laughing like hell at you.

reply

[–] johnnyutahx 13 years ago

Thread summary: OP is a complete moron.

Absolutely nothing to see here folks, move along.

reply

[–] WileyDairyGnome 12 years ago

As someone who watches "B movies" that most B movie fans won't touch (I.E., the people who think MANOS is the worst movie ever made) - I honestly am laughing like hell at you.

Thank you.

-- I am a traveler of both time and space, to be where I have been

reply

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] WileyDairyGnome 13 years ago

I almost pity you. What a depressing ass childhood you must have had...

-- I am a traveler of both time and space, to be where I have been

reply