MovieChat Forums > The Perks of Being a Wallflower (2012) Discussion > Probably the worst movie i've ever seen

Probably the worst movie i've ever seen

posted 12 years ago by mauno5000
183 replies | jump to latest

I almost wish i was over exaggerating but this is the biggest pile of hipster-garbage gibberish i have ever laid my eyes on. I only got to around the 1h 10 min mark because it had a high rating in imdb, and oh how it just goes to show that imdb rating isnt something you can rely on.

The only explanation i can come up with is this; there is an army of harry potter whiteknighting emma watson nerds here who give an automatic 10 to every movie she is in. That or the feminists did it, because this writer-director obviously hates men. They just happen to share the common ol' story how you will get molested by men when you are a 10 year old girl. Really? Right-o, i will be sure to never watch another movie from this director/writer, or anything with emma watson in it. She is the definition of overrated. Goodbye.

[–] Link6321 12 years ago

by - knttori on Mon Feb 18 2013 14:31:44

That or the feminists did it, because this writer-director obviously hates men. They just happen to share the common ol' story how you will get molested by men when you are a 10 year old girl. Really?

I was wondering why you said that, but when I read the sentence after that, instead of saying "aahhh," I proceeded to smack my head. SPOILERS: The same movie also had a female molester; and it's a bigger story, too, considering the victim was the main male protagonist, Charlie.

I love how you went overboard on the "zomg, this is all hipster and feminist BS" considering you didn't even finish the movie. This is why I never bother commenting on stuff I've never actually seen, so as not to risk sounding like a complete idiot. Also, I understand that the movie may simply not be your cup of tea, but must you proclaim that this movie only has a high IMDb rating because of "whiteknighting Emma Watson nerds who gave it an automatic 10; or the feminists did it, because the writer-director obviously hates men"? What, are you the center of the world, or something? There's really just absolutely NO way a movie can actually be good without your approval, huh? It's so sad that you think that...and funny.

[–] mohammed-4 12 years ago

I loved the movie and disliked Emma Watson's acting in the film. She was the weakest link.

[–] wens-garbell 12 years ago

Is the person asking if you like Emma Watson's performance or not? I don't think so!

[–] Fig_Neutron 11 years ago

[–] mauno5000 12 years ago

Okay, so it has a random twist in the end and the director isnt a feminist. My mistake, but I simply wasn't strong-minded enough to watch it all, the movie is just simply too bad. I don't go around flaming mediocre/bad movies in imdb, this is my first post ever here. So yeah, that my approval thing you said just sounds random. I'm simply stating my opinion and wondering how many like-minded people there are here, because it boggles my mind how this movie is in imdb top 250. I sincerely hope it drops out of there soon.

As for the highlights of this movie, it consists of hipsters acting cool by listening to 60-70's music and making mixtapes and then some more mixtapes(sigh). The fight scene? Surely deserves some kind of an award, i mean come on, a scrawny guy beats 3-4 football players on his own and has no memory of it. After that they can all be friends again. Thats good writing at its best right, right? And then there is the rockabilly theater scenes, of course it sold out every show. If they did that garbage in a real theater, you would see 10 people in the audience at most. It's all so pretentious, i might have thrown up if i watched until the end.

[–] zaphod08 12 years ago

I'll admit I only watched it because I like Emma Watson, but I happened to like the movie as well. As for your statement its probably the worst movie you've ever seen, I have to question just how many movies you've actually watched. There are literally hundreds if not thousands of terribly made movies.

In the kingdom of the blind, you're the village idiot.

[–] Siamois 9 years ago

I'll admit I only watched it because I like Emma Watson

That's creepy.

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] saluk64007 12 years ago

Are you just trolling? That was Rocky Horror Picture Show. It's not my thing, but it's definitely a thing. Those shows do sell out, especially in the 90s when this movie takes place.

You may not have liked the movie, but it's pretty clear your experience in the topics the movie dealt with are extremely limited. So you never made a mix tape? You can only watch a movie with characters who are exactly like yourself?

But I mean, there is certainly a sadness to these characters. If you can't relate, then I guess good for you!

[–] TheatreGeek13 12 years ago

Okay, so it has a random twist in the end

Define random...

because if we're going by your definition, everything is random, instead of, you know, being written with a specific ending in mind, and everything foreshadowing and leading up to it...

if you're talking about charlie's aunt molesting him, that is the absolute least random thing ever, seeing as it's in the book, and you know, foreshadowed, and all...?

seriously, did you even WATCH the entire movie?

but those are my thoughts, and you can't have them!

[–] sjokoladenam 12 years ago

You are making a fool out of your self, you obviously don't realize that this movie is set in the 90s.

"Don't touch the watch."

[–] fatpie42 12 years ago

If it's set in the 90s that's pretty dodgy, because there is not a single CD to be seen throughout the film's run time. CDs came out during the 80s, but the early 90s everybody had them (particularly these kids from upper middle to rich families). CDs completely replaced vinyl by the early 90s, but that doesn't mean that these children don't prefer vinyl, so that's fine. That they were only using tapes and not CDs is fine too, but to see absolutely no CDs anywhere makes it a pretty poor representation of the 90s.

[–] Dragula_75 12 years ago

I graduated high school in 1993 and the first CD I ever got was in 1992 so it's not completely out of the ordinary that they're mostly using cassettes. I liked the movie a lot especially since it reflects certainly that time in my life to a degree.

[–] bripay 12 years ago

In 1991 and 1992 CD's may have been around, but Cassette tapes were the norm. (Cassette tapes replaced vinyl.) It wan't until mid 90's that CDs really took off when most people could actually afford to buy CD players. I lived it. Class of '90 ;) I still have my mixed tapes boxed up in storage. Just can't bare to toss them out, even though I've got all those songs on my iPhone.

[–] rayner-539-3143 12 years ago

True true!
I was born in 1991 and I used freakin Cassettes until the 21st century.

[–] jwjordan100 12 years ago

They make several references to CDs throughout the movie. But even today, unless you convert to MP3 (which didn't exist at the time) and do it through your computer, it's difficult to make a "mix-CD." So the whole mix-tape thing is a pretty accurate depiction of the time period. The one thing I found a little "off" was that a group of kids who pride themselves on their love and knowledge of music had never heard "Heroes" before? That seemed odd, but who knows, maybe Bowie was embargoed in Pittsburgh or something.

[–] radonys 11 years ago

Exactly my point, sir! I've been like, wait a second, "Heroes" was the almost only song I recognized, and I don't brag about my musical taste like they did. (besides, of course, "Come on Eileen", "All Out of Love" and "Don't Dream It's Over").

Vacation's when you go somewhere ... and you don't ever come back.

[–] mcnamee-19 12 years ago

I was a child in the 90's and I did not get my first CD until 1996. As this movie was set in 1991 it makes complete sense that tapes were so common. I was making mix tapes in 2000, so it really isn't that odd or "hipster". Most people I knew did not have CDs until the late 90's. I thought this was an excellent film.

[–] MrHooba 12 years ago

Most of the people you knew didn't have CDs until the late 90s? Where did you grow up? A third world country? Or Spokane? I guess you still listen to music on your Walkman.

[–] CocksureBurns 11 years ago

Reply to the rude MrHooba:

Most of the people you knew didn't have CDs until the late 90s? Where did you grow up? A third world country? Or Spokane? I guess you still listen to music on your Walkman.

Hush now MrPooba, not all of us could afford CDs until they came down in price a bit, and yeah, some of us were raised in Spokane, but were taught not to make fun of people just 'cause they're not from around here or don't have the nicest, newest gadgets.

It's enough that you're privileged and rub others nose in it, but do you have to be such a dick?

I'll bet you're the only one that calls you 'Mr.'

[–] That-Writer-Girl 11 years ago

My CDs/player entered my home in 1997, so yeah.

*Lindsay*

[–] rayner-539-3143 12 years ago

I used Cassettes until 2001.

[–] jacowium 10 years ago

I still use cassettes, 2015 or not. I have rare recordings completely out of print in any format, and though I've digitised most of them, it still gives me sentimental pleasure to handle the tapes. Hence I still take good care of my tape deck!

Please click on 'reply' at the post you're responding to. Thanks.

[–] kip_russell 12 years ago

Wrong! For example, talking on the telephone to Mary Elizabeth, Charlie says that he listened to the Billie Holliday CD. In that same scene, Charlie was handling a CD. In 1992, there were no burnable CD's yet, no iTunes, so to make a compilation song mix for your friends, tapes were the way to go. Car CD players were rare and expensive. Charlie's brother - a 1st string player on the Penn State football team - who taught him to fight bullies BTW - gave him his old tape player circa 1989 - which was the best the Kelmeckis family could afford (info from the deleted scene on the DVD about Charlie's dead suicidal friend Michael). Charlie fought his first bully in Middle School, thanks to his older brother's lessons - this from the book. The book's author (and film writer/director) was drawing from his personal experiences during the early 1990's.

[–] ClintJCL 12 years ago

No, in the early 90s "everybody" didn't have CDs. I didn't even get a cd player until 1991. The majority of my collection was played via cassette until such a point that the majority of my collection was CDs, which was more like 1993. And I tend to be an early adopter.

-ClintJCL
http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/category/reviews/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl

[–] FizzyGillespie 11 years ago

I didn't get my first CD player until August 1991. The movie starts in September 1991. CDs weren't as ubiquitous as you think in 1991.

[–] TheMouseShadow 12 years ago

lol you are really showing your age you ignorant tool. Most of the music wasnt the 60-70s. they were listening to the Smiths douche. Lots of people did in the NINETIES!!

Oh and you are so ignorant about the Rocky Horror Picture show midnight showings i wont even bother.

Worst troll ever. What are you? 21 or something? i only eask because of the frequent use of the words Pseudo and Hipster you douchebags constantly use.

[–] The-ManWithNoName 12 years ago

Don't forget "Pretentious"...the simple minded love this word. They overuse the sh!t out of it especially on IMDB.

Anytime a film has subtext or deeper meaning than their little brains can comprehend....it's Pretentious.

[–] trackmarked 12 years ago

That's so true. It's a good word, but used too easily.

http://top5movielists.blogspot.com/

[–] ClintJCL 12 years ago

How does one define overuse?

Pretentious does not mean boring - if someone mis-uses it like that, is that over-use, or just incorrect use?

I do think this movie is very pretentious. It's still good, but.... In the end, it acts like it's very poignant, but it's not really that poignant. Just a slice of life with a "enjoy life" message. 1000 movies are like this.

This was done well. I still give it 8/10. But it is indeed pretentious.

A better movie dealing with molestation is Mysterious Skin by Gregg Araki.

-ClintJCL
http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/category/reviews/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl

[–] The-ManWithNoName 12 years ago

I guess a better word would have been "misused".

A lot of times people will use pretentious to describe a film that's slow paced or uses symbolism to get the message across.

And I agree, Mysterious Skin is a more effective film on the subject. I rented it when it first came out and realized about half way through how talented Joeseph Gordon Levit is.

I think this film had to do a lot with just being accepted in a general sense. Even though it touches on some deeper subjects like child molestation.....it really focuses on adolescent relationships and being accepted (or not accepted) by your family, friends, and peers.

[–] teri-jaye 12 years ago

Sounds to me like you don't understand subtext. Would you have liked some explosions?

(Also, this movie takes place in the 90's, hence the mixtapes.)

[–] frank_drebbin_lapd 12 years ago

Okay, so it has a random twist in the end

Are you serious? It was hardly random and hardly a twist. Its was suggested throughout the whole movie.

The movie was very good.

[–] SweeneyLovesLovett 12 years ago

It was set in 1991...Mix tapes were a fad, hardly hipster.
The 60s and 70s were their 'classic rock' at the time, again not hipster.

I don't think you get the fight scene either. It was showing Charlie's pent up dark side that got out for a minute. He had deep deep deep psychological issues if you hadn't noticed.

And you've obviously never been to a showing of Rocky Horror Picture Show, considering that's exactly how it goes. And again, not hipster, everyone and their mother has gone at some point.

[–] ddsheldoncooper1 12 years ago

I understand that everybody has their own opinions on movies, but I can't understand it when their reasons are empty. Look up the definition of a hipster, because there isn't a single hipster in this movie. Oh, and the reason they have mix-tapes is because this movie is set in the early nineties.

[–] engineer_mce 12 years ago

100 % agreed with knttori. I mean seriously 8.1 rating for this crap. Should be around 6.5 or lower. This is a kind of movie u watch and forget. i feel pity for all of those nerds who think that this a masterpiece of 2012.

[–] rayner-539-3143 12 years ago

Did you even notice the movie takes place in the Early 90s? ...
Not the 21st Century.
You speak without knowledge or understanding.

I accept that everyone has an opinion but yours is invalid for that
it lacks research and factual data.

Which puts it in the category of pointless hate.

[–] ClintJCL 12 years ago

Rockabilly? Do you perhaps mean Rocky Horror Picture Show? That stuff goes on every week in tons of theatres all over the country... Including 10 minutes from my house. It is packed every week.

You started out sounding like an idiot, but then you came back to the thread and dug an even deeper idiot hole to throw yourself down. Reading your posts is like watching a trainreck.

-ClintJCL
http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/category/reviews/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl

[–] lucy-obc 12 years ago

you are so ignorant, i personally don't particularly like this movie either but what the hell are you talking about?

[–] roofall 11 years ago

by
knttori

She is the definition of overrated. Goodbye.

No kidding, lolz. What did you expect from her? :-0

(not everyone can pull a Natalie Portman)

99% of new films are garbage

[–] ahmad_hunk 11 years ago

I totally agree to you. "how this movie is in imdb top 250?". It fooled me alright. Yes it may have been watchable but should not lie in IMDB 250. So for the sake of rest of people I'm gonna give it a 1.0/10

[–] roxist 11 years ago

this might have been asked before but...you do know that the movie takes place in the 90s, don't you? However, as I see this thread is going for many pages and I just replied to your 2nd post, I assume you do know it takes place in the 90s already. it feels weird to read "hipster" about some kids who lived in the 90s and listened to music on tapes just because you got the decade wrong.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] sevenmarie 11 years ago

actually the Rocky Horror showings is STILL a thing in Pittsburgh at the Hollywood theater in Dormont. They do it once a month and it sells out every time.

http://www.steelcityrockyhorror.com/shows.php

[–] lunalonewolf 11 years ago

Omg. I can't even. This movie is good because it's for people who relate to Charlie, like me. This movie is about a boy, in my opinion, trying to cope with everything. Charlie do have alot of fears and sadness and almost every scene in this movie is put there for a reason. This is a movie dealing with emotions, drugs, love, abuse and it's actually a movie for everyone. I think this movie should get people to think..and ugh i'm frustrated.

[–] ejhozo7 10 years ago

Well, it seems like you missed all the points in the movie, yet you still rage about it like a kid, who accidentally dropped his candy. The story wasnt about hipsters acting cool by listening to 60-70's music, they were listening actually to the music of their time(mostly 70's), hence the mixtapes and such.
Guess you never heard of the "The Rocky Horror Picture Show" either, it's just one of the most famous musicals ever...
Grow up kid.

[–] FizzyGillespie 8 years ago

It takes place in the 90s. People made mixtapes in the 90s.

[–] dark_elf02 8 years ago

This goes to show how you failed to pay attention to the movie's details. This isn't some hipster drama about a bunch of "present day" teens listening to 60's & 70's music and making mix tapes the old way. It's set in 1992, hence Dexy's Midnight Runner's "Come On Eileen" being played at the homecoming dance. Most of the music is from the 80's.

In the book, Charlie was taught how to fight by his older brother. It wasn't mentioned in the movie, but it honestly doesn't matter. Maybe he simply caught most of those football players off guard. Or maybe, despite being football players, they're not nearly as tough as they appear to be when they are ganging up on one guy.

Who the hell cares. In the end, you decided to deride and judge a movie that you both didn't finish, and failed to realize that a good portion of the things you hate about it (hipster stuff), actually are of the time and place that they are meant for.

As for the Rocky Horror Picture Show, that is real and although it doesn't have quite the following now as it did back then, back in 1992 it was still wildly popular and given that they live right outside of Pittsburgh, it's conceivable that a theatre could have been filled at that time.

The movie is actually pretty good if you look at it through the lens that it was meant to be viewed. A shy "wallflower" who is scared to put himself out there and participate in life, meets people who give him the chance to spread his wings. This is all against the backdrop of abuse and mental illness that is inflicted upon multiple characters.

Maybe you should pay a bit more attention from now on and actually finish movies, think about them for more than 2 minutes before posting such garbage again.

[–] porcelain_god2000 12 years ago

First post ever for OP and Link6321 just destroys him. Probably should not post again.

[–] roofall 11 years ago

Fact of the matter is, movie was pretty pathetic.. So it doesn't really matter how the arguments here went like. ;-)

99% of new films are garbage

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] TheatreGeek13 12 years ago

have you ever seen that's my boy? or anything with adam sandler? because those movies should be at the top of your sh!t list.

just because you didn't GET it, or relate to it, or identify with any of the characters, doesn't make it a bad movie. it's a well made film, well written, well acted, well directed. YOU are in the minority, i'm afraid, and that's fine if you didn't like it, but to say it's the WORST movie you've ever seen?

surely, there's something else out there that deserves that moniker.

but those are my thoughts, and you can't have them!

[–] mauno5000 12 years ago

I have not seen that's my boy, but i have seen quite many movies with Adam Sandler. Lots of good ones too; zohan, chuck & larry, click, billy madison etc. I am not saying they are masterpieces, but solid comedies that were funny. You must have something against Adam Sandler, i'm sure you have your reasons.

And i do not go out of my way to find the most hideous movies out there, this just happens to be the worst one i've ever seen. I gave it more thought over night and really, nothing even comes close.

As for how many movies i've seen, i have rated about 1100~ titles in imdb, but i have seen a little more than that.

Yes it's true i can't relate to the characters in this artsy-fartsy-hipster movie at all in any way, but i can't relate much to schindlers list either yet i think it's a fantastic movie. So imo, that is a bs thing to say. My thoughts are better than your thoughts.

[–] sjokoladenam 12 years ago

The reason you can't relate to the characters is probably because you was a douche bag in high school.

"Don't touch the watch."

[–] wiseowl103 12 years ago

OK, first of all, the word "hipster" doesn't really describe the characters in this film. Hipster means "following the latest trends and fashions". The core three characters are clearly outcasts, "Hipster" implies popular. Listening to classic rock does not make you a hipster, it doesn't make you an outcast either - not in the 90s and not now. Making mix tapes was actually quite a common pass-time back then. After that, it was mix-CDs, and these days playlists - but we don't really exchange playlists anymore like they exchanged tapes in the movie. Remember this was before you could get music off the internet, or google the lyrics to a song you hear on the radio.

If the OP had issues with the content, particularly the storylines involving abuse, then that's a legitimate enough reason to dislike the story. I had no problems with that storyline at all, I thought it was well executed and not the least bit far fetched. These things do in fact happen.

This is highly subjective, but I thought Emma Watson was absolutely luminous in this film.

The fight scene - has anyone here ever actually been in a situation like that? Well I have, and I'm here to tell you that scene was dead on. Note: Charlie doesn't fight off a group of jocks, he hits the leader in the face, bloodying his nose.

In many ways, this film cannot be considered "real". The dialog is just a little too witty, and Emma Watson is far too good looking to be an outcast at any school. However, I believe all of that was very intentional. Perks of Being a Wallflower is shot with a lot of soft light, and it seems to contain a lot of what made the 90s a good period to be a teenager, which makes the audience nostalgic. It has a certain dream-like quality to it, almost like the whole story is a memory. Which it is, the book was actually written as a series of journal entries. The OP might prefer a film like "Mean Creek", which lacks the sentimentality of Perks of Being a Wallflower.

My site: http://hubpages.com/profile/Drake0525
"Long days and pleasant nights!"

[–] ClintJCL 12 years ago

You do not have a good sense of what hipster means.

-ClintJCL
http://clintjcl.wordpress.com/category/reviews/
http://www.flickr.com/photos/clintjcl

[–] zeuanimals 11 years ago

There's different types of hipsters, there's the "before it was cool" ones, the "only vintage and only old-school" ones, and plenty more. I know a lot of hipsters who buy vinyl because it's "hip", they don't actually know much about sound production and how vinyl's sound better, they just buy it because it's a thing. I would say that this movie attracts hipsters, but in no way is it a bad film, it's actually one of my favorite films of last year. I watched this movie more times than The Avengers and TDKR combined, which would add up to two times for The Avengers and one and a half for TDKR.

[–] That-Writer-Girl 11 years ago

It has a certain dream-like quality to it, almost like the whole story is a memory. Which it is, the book was actually written as a series of journal entries.

Actually, the book was written in a series of letters to an unnamed recipient.

In many ways, this film cannot be considered "real". The dialog is just a little too witty, and Emma Watson is far too good looking to be an outcast at any school.

Patrick says that Sam used to be popular until she started listening to "good" music aka his music. It was her choice to be an outcast, but others' choice for her.

I agree with your other points, though.

*Lindsay*

[–] The-ManWithNoName 12 years ago

You sound really ignorant and like you might be an all around unpleasant person to be close to. This film wasn't about hipsters, it was about friendship and the impact people can have on each other...Especially when dealing with personal issues. One day, you might get it, but it's obvious you don't and that's ok.

[–] Link6321 12 years ago

by - knttori on Tue Feb 19 2013 12:07:59

i have seen quite many movies with Adam Sandler. Lots of good ones too; zohan, chuck & larry, click, billy madison etc. I am not saying they are masterpieces, but solid comedies that were funny.

There you have it, ladies and gentlemen. Knttori here apparently defines "solid comedy" as a guy humping an old lady at the back of a salon. No wonder he has a very warped definition of a "random twist" (his aunt molesting him was foreshadowed on LONG BEFORE the end, by the way); it's because his brain is all in mush due to all the Adam Sandler movies he's been exposed to. So, everyone, cut him a bit of slack. It's not entirely his fault.

I can't comment on Chuck & Larry because I've never seen it, but Billy Madison and Click I did see, and they were decent for what they were, especially the latter...but no way in hell are they "solid comedies." I enjoyed the universally panned "Dead or Alive," too, as a mindless popcorn flick, but you will never hear me call it "a solid videogame adaptation."

[–] mauno5000 12 years ago

So you don't like slapstick comedies? Ok, cool, but i doubt they have turned my brain into mush. I think you are trying too hard to sound like some articulate-movie-reviewing-genious-mastermind, cute.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sF8ic3ALu04
The zohan.

[–] Link6321 12 years ago

by - knttori on Thu Feb 21 2013 08:25:47

So you don't like slapstick comedies? Ok, cool, but i doubt they have turned my brain into mush. I think you are trying too hard to sound like some articulate-movie-reviewing-genious-mastermind, cute.

Congratulations! You deserve a medal for completely missing my point. Please, dear sir, show me where in my message did I say I didn't like slapstick comedies. I challenge you. I said you have a warped definition of a SOLID comedy; there's a huge difference between a solid comedy and slapstick, mindless comedy. I even brought up that thing about me liking "Dead or Alive" as a mindless popcorn flick but that I'm never going to call it a solid videogame adaptation like you're calling the slapstick comedy Zohan "a solid comedy."

From this response of yours, it IS very clear that your brain is all in mush. Love how you try to mock me by condescendingly saying "cute"; maybe try again next time when you can actually comprehend simple English (see above). Also, "articulate-move-reviewing-genius-mastermind"? Really? While I appreciate the fact that you're not name-calling me (which is very common on IMDb...so, really, kudos for keeping civil on the insults), it's ridiculous that this is coming from someone who started this thread. I mean, dude, you can't even accept the fact that a lot of people found this movie good without you claiming that this movie only got the rating it has because of Emma Watson's "whiteknighting fanboys and feminists who agree with the writer/director who hates men" (with the latter being a very ignorant claim, at that). To you, there's simply no way this movie deserves its IMDb rating because you don't agree with it. Like I said in my original response: It's obviously not your cup of tea, but you don't have to insult those that did like it...which is essentially what you did in your original post.

You said this earlier:

So yeah, that my approval thing you said just sounds random. I'm simply stating my opinion and wondering how many like-minded people there are here, because it boggles my mind how this movie is in imdb top 250. I sincerely hope it drops out of there soon.

How was it random? Read your original post again, and then this post (quoted). "I sincerely hope it drops out of the IMDb top 250 soon." Why? Because YOU didn't like it, right? That's what I'm saying. People loved the movie, but because YOU didn't like it, you "sincerely hope it drops out of the IMDb 250 list," a list that DOES NOT REVOLVE AROUND YOU. Also, you weren't just stating your opinion. Stating a negative opinion is someone stating a negative opinion; however, what you did was not only state how bad you thought the movie was, you also basically insulted, albeit indirectly, those who DID like it (re: the whiteknighting and feminists thing supposedly being the "only" reason this movie was received well by many people).

[–] mauno5000 12 years ago

I don't like replying to huge walls of text. I can already tell you want to go into a neverending argument, so i will try to keep it short.

Firstly, albeit indirectly as you like to say, you are saying i'm insulting people who like this movie. First of all, ***k me. Second, really? I have insulted the director and Emma No-Talent-Watson and soon to be, you. But that is about it.

Allow me to explain what i meant with "An automatic 10". And i really feel like you are trolling me here, but anyway. In this particular case it's the watson-whiteknights going around imdb giving out 10's to movies they haven't even seen only because she is in it. No, the feminists were not responsible, if anything, they have rated this down for portraying females as molesters, lol.

I guess they could have also seen the movie but still decided to rate it way higher to bump it up the rankings. Yes, it happens in every title listed here, but some more than others. Depends on how big of a star is in the movie/the director/etc Yeah. I have no problem insulting scum like that, i never went after the average viewer, did i? There is lots of posts in the thread about people liking the movie for different reasons and i have not said a word to them.

Why are you demanding me to give you an answer on the slapstick part all the while you are guilty of quoting me out of context yourself?

While writing this, i scrolled through the current 250 list.. And it is about time that i need to stop taking the imdb 250 list seriously because all it is, is a joke.. Like you. Teehee.

Some ideas for your next post to which i am not going to answer anymore; Come up with something i never even said again and demand answers! Also DO NOT forget to write some words in UPPERCASE to SHOW you MEAN business. Lastly, drop that my brain is mush line somewhere in there, 2 times wasn't nearly enough.

Buh-bye.

Oh and i found this little gem from your post history. First one i clicked on and this is what comes up. "I did hear plenty of good things about it (mostly about Emma Watson being in it), so I gave in."

Enough said.

[–] Link6321 12 years ago

by - knttori on Thu Feb 21 2013 18:44:29

Firstly, albeit indirectly as you like to say, you are saying i'm insulting people who like this movie. First of all, ***k me. Second, really? I have insulted the director and Emma No-Talent-Watson and soon to be, you. But that is about it.

Really. "That's about it." So, exactly, what did you mean by "this movie only has its current IMDb rating because of whiteknighting Emma Watson fans and people who agree with the writer-director who hates men" then? Read what YOU said again; carefully this time. You were suggesting that those who found this movie good are whiteknighting Emma Watson fanboys and feminists.

Allow me to explain what i meant with "An automatic 10". And i really feel like you are trolling me here, but anyway. In this particular case it's the watson-whiteknights going around imdb giving out 10's to movies they haven't even seen only because she is in it. No, the feminists were not responsible, if anything, they have rated this down for portraying females as molesters, lol.

Trolling you? Oh, the irony. As for the highlighted part: HOW CONVENIENT. Idiot, you didn't even KNOW that a female in the movie was portrayed as a molester until yours truly told you about it. What you originally said was that the feminists probably gave this movie an automatic 10 because they agree with the writer-director who hates men (when you thought only a man was portrayed as a molester in the movie). Now you're backtracking.

Here's what you originally said:

I only got to around the 1h 10 min mark because it had a high rating in imdb, and oh how it just goes to show that imdb rating isnt something you can rely on.

The only explanation i can come up with is this; there is an army of harry potter whiteknighting emma watson nerds here who give an automatic 10 to every movie she is in. That or the feminists did it, because this writer-director obviously hates men.

How did "that or the feminists did it (give the movie an automatic 10)" suddenly turn into "if anything, they rated this down for portraying females as molesters"? Goodness. You can't even stick to your own words. "lol" alright.

Why are you demanding me to give you an answer on the slapstick part all the while you are guilty of quoting me out of context yourself?

Do explain. I dare ya. Because the ONLY way I'd be "quoting you out of context" is if you keep backtracking on your own statements -- which is exactly what's going on right now, as very clearly exhibited above. "White" suddenly becomes "black," "automatic 10" suddenly becomes "rated this down." Gee. If I did quote you out of context, it's really just because your own statements apparently have no legs to stand on. Congratulations.

While writing this, i scrolled through the current 250 list.. And it is about time that i need to stop taking the imdb 250 list seriously because all it is, is a joke.. Like you. Teehee.

Haha. This genuinely made me laugh. All of a sudden, I'm "the joke," when it's you who can't even stand up for your own words without going back and altering their meaning using information that you never even had in the first place (e.g. when you originally argued the feminists gave this an automatic 10 because they agree with the writer-director "who obviously hates men" then later backtracked and said "if anything, they rated this down because a female was portrayed as a molester in the movie"). Let that process for a bit, because judging by your responses, you're not very smart...so don't stress yourself out, k?

Oh and i found this little gem from your post history. First one i clicked on and this is what comes up. "I did hear plenty of good things about it (mostly about Emma Watson being in it), so I gave in."

Oh lord. What I meant by that was all the marketing done for this movie basically centered around Emma Watson. And because Emma Watson is in it, whether you like her or not, the fact stands that she IS a big star -- and because a big star is in the movie, it received a lot of marketing, which is why I heard about it. I gave in not because of Emma Watson, but because of "the good things I heard about this movie." The part about Emma Watson was in quotes, in case your mushy brain missed that: It was meant to be a side note. I dare you to check my entire IMDb posting history and tell me if you can honestly classify me as an Emma Watson fanboy, or even just "a fan." Go ahead. I challenge you. Otherwise, shush, mushy brain.

Edit: I decided to edit my post to insert an additional quote from you. This will further test whether or not you can really stick to your own words. I've already pointed out above how inconsistent you are with your statements, so it doesn't really matter...but I thought it'd be fun to test you.

by - knttori on Thu Feb 21 2013 18:44:29

Some ideas for your next post to which i am not going to answer anymore; Come up with something i never even said again and demand answers! Also DO NOT forget to write some words in UPPERCASE to SHOW you MEAN business. Lastly, drop that my brain is mush line somewhere in there, 2 times wasn't nearly enough.

Buh-bye.

P.S. Mushy brain. tee-hee

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Humlon 12 years ago

Agreed. I liked it but I didn't love it. I gave it a 7. Not worth a spot on the top but clearly others think it does. I hope its just not cus they are attracted to one certain actress, cus that doesnt make a movie better..

Please vote Ikiru into the top 250:
www.imdb.com/title/tt0044741/?ref_=fn_al_tt_1

[–] The-ManWithNoName 12 years ago

I don't even think she's all that. She's not unattractive, but I don't see what all the fuss is about.

You're not a writer Fink, you're a goddamn write off

[–] msyndergaard 12 years ago

I was about to watch the movie. Thanks for saving me.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] msyndergaard 12 years ago

I've got a good feeling about his description of it. Hipsters can die in a fire.

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] msyndergaard 12 years ago

hipsters are not limited to young persons. A hipster is someone who values the exclusivity of being privy to art that is not well known. It can be anything, really, but music is a good example. A hipster will enjoy an artist like Joanna Newsom until she's famous. Once she achieves a level of fame, the hipster will scold her for selling out and hate her new fans as bandwagoning and ruining an artist that was once great. It's moronic. It's as if they feel accomplishment from someone else's work simply by appreciating it before anybody else.

[–] nerdsky 12 years ago

This movie was set in the 90's where the music they were listening to wasn't considered hipster-ish the teens in the movie liked popular rock music not underground artists. Don't listen to the person who wrote the thread because it seems that they didn't realize this movie took place in the past.

[–] dancemacabre 12 years ago

I'm shocked how this movie get 8.2 at this moment with almost hundred thousand of votes. movie is so ordinary, cliched, boring and already seen. Only music at the time saves watching movie without being really bored. I truly hope it will fall down on at least 6.8 score. This is not worst movie ever but it isn't one of the best teen movies this times either.

[–] loversarelunatics 12 years ago

and you are so ordinary, cliched, and boring. maybe you never should've been made either.

[–] annlevtex 10 years ago

I agree. It was fine, a good teen flick, but far from the best I've seen.

Emma Watson is not a very good actress. She's cute and appealing, she can play within a certain limited range. But she's mediocre. I imagine a lot of other young actresses who are not famous from a huge franchise like she is could do a much better job with this role and inhabit the character more convincingly.

She hasn't grown much as an actress since Harry Potter, and by her age she should have. Again, she is coasting on her laurels in a major way. I get why people like her as a public figure and person but as an actress? Meh.

[–] The-ManWithNoName 12 years ago

The only thing that could have saved you is your mother using a DIY abortion kit in her 2nd term.....or stopped drinking while she was pregnant.

[–] SavannahNights 12 years ago

I was about to watch the movie. Thanks for saving me.

Just because the OP hated the movie, it doesn't mean you will. Not everyone is going to share the same opinion on a movie.

If you decide your movie choices based on others opinion, you'll end up missing out on movies that you would have enjoyed.

[–] BillHurt12575 12 years ago

If IMDB had a like button, I would LOVE your review!!

[–] jenn26450 12 years ago

What makes you think that just because you're in your 30s that this movie wasn't made with your age group in mind?

I'm 31 and I understood every detail about this film. Every nuance, every "wink wink, nudge nudge" comment. I was a teenager in the 90s so while I didn't go through every event these characters did I knew what it felt like to grow up when mixed tapes were the way to tell people how you really felt and when The Rocky Horror Picture Show truly became a cult classic.

I was lucky enough to not have gone through what Charlie's character did but this doesn't take away from relating to the movie. If anything it makes me feel for them even more.

In regards to the OP, I suggest you sit and watch the entire film. Its fairly obvious you're young and therefore don't get the details that made it so fantastic.

Fabulous movie!

[–] 12 years ago

[deleted]

[–] davinci-tool 12 years ago

TROLL...