Why does everyone hate this movie so much.
It has its flaws, but I thought it was pretty cool.
Yah, I'm confused too..?? think I voted 7/10 and yet it has a 5.6? that's a lot hate :D
share
MovieChat Forums > Gamer (2009) Discussion > Why does everyone hate this movie so muc...
Because it's unique and not typical Hollywood crap that people are used to.. which confuses close-minded people and further alienates them as an audience..
___________________
"That's pretty dangerous building a road in the middle of the street..."
I think a lot of people just don't get it. The movie is at least a satire which is holding a mirror up to the audience and our "society". There have to be stereotypes and cliches!
sharetim,
You hit the nail on the head, this movie is fun, occasionally brilliant, satire. Although it is a bit rough around the edges, and can use some polish in places, it does a pretty good job of making its point. I gave it a 7/10, but, for me, it lost points for pacing problems and the editing - which may have been deliberately choppy at times for effect.
It is so strange to me that this smarmy, sarcastic, self-indulgent, self-obsessed, nihilistic, aloof, and faux intellectual society we live in can't appreciate satire. It also occurs to me that perhaps that was a point the movie was trying to make.
Hmmm...a movie that makes you think? That'll never sell! People don't want to think!
Agreed. The way you phrased it, "occasionally brilliant [...] satire" sums it up perfectly. You just need to look beyond the immediate surface and connect it to the bigger picture to see how intelligently told this film actually is on very many levels which is surprising for a movie that first of all attempts to be an action flick, part cyberpunk flick.
Sometimes I am even wondering if what appears to be bad acting, one-dimensional characters and bad script is intentional too. I don't know. Man, it messes with your head so much, I am not sure if the entire movie itself that I just saw was real or was it just another virtual reality game in the mind of a self-obssessed teenager?
Good grief, finally someone who has a decent opinion of this underrated movie.
I agree with all the previous posters.
Gamer is different, intense, controversial, disturbing, hardcore, fairly brilliant, and not as shallow as it may seem on the surface. That's why close-minded and/or overly sensitive people can't appreciate it. The main cases are 3:
1) Most people are bothered by the story, which is satirical, uncomfortable, and thought-provoking.
2) Many people expected a common, silly action movie that doesn't require thinking, which Gamer is not, so they were upset by it.
3) The others just dislike it and consider it "stupid commercial crap" because of its massive nudity and violence.
True, it has its flaws, but does it deserve a 5.3 average score? Not at all.
It's a solid 8 in my book. Fu** the haters. :-P
"There are few things as fetching as a bruised ego on a beautiful angel."share
There is no way to miss the point, they made it so widely exaggerated and ridiculous that it's attempt at satire just made it seem like it was trying too hard to be satirical. Satire shouldn't be so obvious. Which brings me to point number two... Gamer requires absolutely no thought. They tell you what to think. They tell you we should be afraid of our society because video games have jaded us to the point of not caring about humanity. This was made obvious throughout the entire movie. Trying to invoke thought and conversation does not mean shoving the writer/directors opinion down the audiences throat. Honestly, when it came to this movie, the nudity was the only good part. Gamer is different, yes, but that doesn't mean it's good. It had potential to be a decent movie, but it tried too hard and in doing so failed. The cinematography was horrific and headache inducing - shaky, closeup and at times disgusting shots that did a poor job of doing what good cinematography is supposed to do. The directing didn't do any better. This future world has this abundance of technology but they can't fix video glitches? Really? Count that among countless other plot holes and moments where you just can't suspend your disbelief any more and the whole thing just reeks of 15 million dollars that should have been spent literally anywhere else. Anyone who thought this is a "thought provoking" movie obviously does not use their brain very much and needs to have the point literally implanted in your head to figure out the meaning.
Gamer had lots of good actors, but nothing for them to do. With the exception of Michael C. Hall, they mainly wasted their actor's talents by making them play robots and caricatures.
Truly awful.
I feel like this review does a decent job of summing it up for you http://screenrant.com/gamer-review-pauly-24418/
amen ^
i turned this piece of *beep* off in the first 20 minutes. ironically, this movie would probably be a cool game.
I just saw this movie for the first time yesterday. I agree with the people who like the movie, but I also agree with you. It is done in such a way that you don't have to think about it and unless you are very dim, you can't miss the point they are trying to make. That being said, I think most movies that have come out in the last ten or more years are like that. They spend so much money on the actors and the sets, and pushing it through quickly that they don't give the writers enough time to work on the flaws or they change the concept to appeal to the masses. It doesn't mean that the concept wasn't good or that there is nothing to take from this movie. It just means that the people who want to be able to talk about this with their friends or message board buddies can have it broken down for them plainly.
All that it takes to make money on a film is to make people curious enough about it to see it at the movies, rent it or buy it.
Well said. Bad directing and shoddy writing which doesn't fully realize its ideas are what held this movie back. I don't think its bad, but the final product is frustrating because it could have been much more. The Surrogates suffers from a similar problem.
Gamer is no more thought provoking than Paul W.S. Anderson's Death Race remake.
I also thought it was pretty decent.
My World: http://www.imdb.com/list/xV-oKAMa9aA/
Right. The first time I saw it I was like "WTF," I didn't really like it at first. Especially the lame ass ending (that's still my only complaint; it's fruity).
But after a watching it another couple times I actually really like it. It's not like...The Godfather quality of movie but it's still pretty enjoyable and all. Michael C Hall was *beep* great and I normally *beep* hate Gerard Butler but he was decent.
Not to mention that a lot of the effects and the way they made the simulation worlds look was pretty cool. A lot of gratuitous stuff but certainly not the remake of I Spit on Your Grave style (not that either version of ISOYG really needed a hell of a lot of what they had, either).