Movies that Missed

 

shutterstock_179931563On The Great Debate thread about superpowers (specifically the superpower of flight), a comment by Carey J reminded me of the not-so-great superhero movie Hancock. I thought Hancock had real potential. The basic premise is an alcoholic superhero — but not a mostly functional alcoholic like Tony Stark; a real Skid Row-type alcoholic with Superman-like powers, who can’t fly straight because he’s blind drunk. He causes damage just taking off to fly, not to mention all the havoc he creates while flying, stopping crime, or saving people. Then a PR guy comes along who wants to reform Hancock and rehabilitate his image. The publicist is a loser and schmuck who is also unsuccessfully trying to get a charity campaign off the ground. If you haven’t seen Hancock, what follows is a spoiler alert. 

The PR guy’s wife is actually another super-powered immortal like Hancock and is really Hancock’s wife.When the two of them are together, they start to lose their powers and become vulnerable (she is his Kryptonite and vice versa). she left him back in 1931 after he had suffered serious brain trauma so that he would be invulnerable again and could recover and serve the world. The movie just sort of falls apart from there. It’s a mess. The story has more loose ends than knots that come together.

But it could have been a great movie. It’s like they had this one great image in the beginning, and couldn’t figure out what to do with it. They had the start of the story and a general them (redemption), but had no idea where to take it. Maybe it was the editing of the movie, the rewrites, or a thousand other things besides the original script, but the movie that should have been made did not come together. It’s a terrific example of a film that could have been great but wound up mediocre.

Are there movies that you think were unnecessary misses? Movies with great premises, but poor execution? What’s your favorite movie that could have been?

Published in General
Like this post? Want to comment? Join Ricochet’s community of conservatives and be part of the conversation. Join Ricochet for Free.

There are 88 comments.

Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.
  1. AIG Inactive
    AIG
    @AIG

    Danny Alexander:

    #27 AIG

    To borrow Amy Schley’s expression, “Munich” was morally repulsive. Because scriptwriter and avowed Israel-hater Tony Kushner is.

     I didn’t find it all that bad in terms of politics and “morals”, other than some very cheesy dialogue every 30 minutes and the unnecessary sex scenes. The characters were supposed to be conflicted over what they did, but in Sword of Gideon you understood why, and the lengths they went to be different from the terrorists. In Munich, it made no sense as to why they were “conflicted”.

    Rather, the acting was terrible and the characters were not developed.

    They took a TV movie with a shoe-string budget and second-rate actors, which had characters which made sense, that you cared about and good dialogue, placed in “realistic” situations…and somehow made it much worst with a much bigger budget. I guess all that budget must have gone towards getting Ciaran Hinds to do a nude scene. Well worth it. 

    • #31
  2. user_549556 Inactive
    user_549556
    @VinceGuerra

    Iron Man: The first scene where it was Iron Man vs. terrorists was fantastic. I thought we were in for some retribution wrapped up in third world everyman justice. Then it became Iron Man vs. supped up evil Iron Man knockoff, and the whole superhero-defender-of-the-helpless theme dissapeared.

    The Cider House Rules: I found out later that this was a Planned Parenthood propaganda film from the get go, but at the time I was unaware, and always thought that it had great potential to show the contrast between two individuals, both physicians, who held vastly different beliefs about abortion. It was a great film, that is until the end, when the younger doctor realizes that he was naive and ends up performing an abortion because it was the “right thing to do.” So frustrating.

    • #32
  3. user_549556 Inactive
    user_549556
    @VinceGuerra

    The Cowboys: Two rules broken in this one.  1) Children should never be given swear words as dialogue, or get drunk on-screen.  2) Never kill off John Wayne. Otherwise I would have loved this movie.

    Revenge of the Sith: I would have been much more satisfied had Palpatine deceived Anakin into believing that the Jedi had killed, or caused to be killed, Padme. Then Vader’s treachery, spawned of hatred and revenge over his lost love, might have been more palatable. And his turning on Palpatine in Return of the Jedi, out of love for his children would have been consistent.

    • #33
  4. user_2505 Contributor
    user_2505
    @GaryMcVey

    “Cider House” was a frustrating mix. To be honest, fifteen years in I don’t remember some of the story details. It had some good life lessons and messages about self-discipline and responsibility, but wrapped in a plot similar to 1941’s “Boy’s Town”, except in this one instead of Spencer Tracy, Father Flanagan is an abortionist.

    • #34
  5. user_105642 Member
    user_105642
    @DavidFoster

    “True Crime.”  The novel, by Andrew Klavan, is outstanding.  In the movie, they changed the innocent man who was condemned to death from white to black…which completely wrecked one of the plot elements so that the story made no sense.

    • #35
  6. skipsul Inactive
    skipsul
    @skipsul

    The Dark Knight Rises – an overlong tiresome blending of too many plotlines, too many twists, and too many overlong action sequences.  I just could not wait for that film to just end so I could go home and go to bed.  I liked Batman Begins, but then it is hard to mess up an origins story.  However DKR turned me off of Nolan for good.

    • #36
  7. skipsul Inactive
    skipsul
    @skipsul

    Gary McVey:

    “Indiana Jones and the Crystal Skull”. The first and third films were anti-Nazi, so the roll of the chronological dice meant that a Fifties sequel would parallel that with anti-Communism. OK. But to take the supposed “curse” off that, they had to make the Fifties into the usual pit of McCarthyite kneejerk horrors that seem to morally repel Indy Jones. Why, G-men and red baiters ran wild at one of their typical nests of iniquity, an Ivy League university.

    Most 65 year olds in 1955 were not particularly fond of ACLU politics, but Indy’s got some moral equivalence going; he must have been watching David Susskind on that 12 inch DuMont.

     We saw this one after it came out on DVD.  My wife had, I thought, rented it.  After seeing it I said “I want my money back!”  She said she got it from the library.  I replied, “Then dangit I want my life back!”

    • #37
  8. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Vince Guerra: The Cowboys: Two rules broken in this one. 1) Children should never be given swear words as dialogue, or get drunk on-screen. 2) Never kill off John Wayne. Otherwise I would have loved this movie.

     In real life, John Wayne was conservative, of course, and Bruce Dern was a liberal.  When it came time for the scene, before filming began, the conversation went something like this *

    John Wayne, “You know that half of America will hate you for this scene?”

    Bruce Dern, “Yes, but the other half will love me for it.”

    * I’m too lazy to look this up to get the exact story, so am paraphrasing.  It’s good enough for me.  If it’s not good enough for you, feel free to correct it with all proper citations.

    • #38
  9. Blue Laser Inactive
    Blue Laser
    @BlueLaser

    TheRoyalFamily:

    Transformers.

    How do you mess up a movie about a war between transforming giant robots?

    Make it about the humans.

    And not just any humans, either. The movie was more about Sam and his personal problems. If it had focused more on the general human issues with giant robots using our planet as their battlefield, it could work, and quite well. This is what makes the better Godzilla movies work, after all. So Bay could have his military porn, and it wouldn’t hurt the movie; indeed, those parts showed just what we (the audience) were dealing with, in terms of robo mayhem.

    But no, we had Sam and His Robot Pals: The Movie.

     And to top it all off, cast Shia Labeouf as the protagonist, a terrible, utterly unlikable actor with zero charisma  who looks like a tall 14-year-old boy.  Also, make the movie 3 hours long because, hey, it worked for Lord of the Rings, right?

    • #39
  10. Blue Laser Inactive
    Blue Laser
    @BlueLaser

    skipsul:

    The Dark Knight Rises – an overlong tiresome blending of too many plotlines, too many twists, and too many overlong action sequences. I just could not wait for that film to just end so I could go home and go to bed. I liked Batman Begins, but then it is hard to mess up an origins story. However DKR turned me off of Nolan for good.

     Not to mention that you could only understand maybe half the words that came out of Bane’s mouth.  Seriously, I was wishing they’d give him subtitles.  And it might have been more entertaining had the two best action sequences not been featured in every trailer of the movie.

    IMO the Christopher Nolan Batman movies are all extremely overrated for two reasons.  One, Heath Ledger died after the second one, so everyone felt obligated to make this movie into something more than it was, a superhero movie with tons of plot holes, and two, because Batman has become a saint in the wide world of geekdom (I know, I AM a geek) and for most Millenials these movies were the first time in their lives Batman wasn’t made campy.

    • #40
  11. Hartmann von Aue Member
    Hartmann von Aue
    @HartmannvonAue

    Darn you. I have a deadline.

    • #41
  12. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Hartmann von Aue:

    Darn you. I have a deadline.

    The thread will wait, unless they do a Ricothree on us.

    • #42
  13. user_521196 Member
    user_521196
    @OnlinePark

    I agree with Monuments Men but I liked District 9.

    • #43
  14. user_549556 Inactive
    user_549556
    @VinceGuerra

    Arahant:

    * I’m too lazy to look this up to get the exact story, so am paraphrasing. It’s good enough for me. If it’s not good enough for you, feel free to correct it with all proper citations.

    John Wane: “You  know they’re gonna hate you for this.”

    Bruce Dern: “Yeah, but they’re gonna love me in Berkley.”

    • #44
  15. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Vince Guerra: John Wane: “You know they’re gonna hate you for this.”

    Bruce Dern: “Yeah, but they’re gonna love me in Berkley.”

    Thanks, Vince.

    • #45
  16. AIG Inactive
    AIG
    @AIG

    Caroline Park:

    I agree with Monuments Men but I liked District 9.

     Yes, District 9 was a very good movie. South Africa has made a few really good movies recently. 

    Monuments Men…very forgettable. I have already forgotten that I watched it. But then again, it was obviously going to be a forgettable movie: every-time you get 2 dozen high-profile actors in the same movie, it will be a disaster. Especially if it involves Bill Murray.

    • #46
  17. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Remember, this is about movies that should have been great, movies that had great ideas, but poor execution.

    • #47
  18. user_96427 Member
    user_96427
    @tommeyer

    Salvatore Padula:

    Alexander. It was visually beautiful, technically well-done, and generally well acted. Somehow it ended up being horrible overall. I blame Oliver Stone. He has a lot of skill, but no discipline.

    Good entry, but I think it depends on which version you’ve seen.  The Director’s Cut — which I’ve seen — is actually slightly shorter than the theatrical release; from what I’ve been able to anecdotal gather, much better than it.  The “Final” and then the “Ultimate” cuts are much longer than the theatrical release and are apparently worse for it.

    • #48
  19. user_96427 Member
    user_96427
    @tommeyer

    Danny Alexander: To borrow Amy Schley’s expression, “Munich” was morally repulsive.

    You know, I’ve heard this from folks a thousand times but remain completely unconvinced.  Putting aside the factual weirdness of the story, the simple fact is that Mossad agents are shown as being concerned and haunted by the collateral damage they caused while the PLO terrorists are shown to have no such scruples.

    • #49
  20. user_96427 Member
    user_96427
    @tommeyer

    Django Unchained

    There’s a lot that’s interesting in this movie, but pretty much everything involving Candie Land was patently absurd and/or dishonest: particularly, the mandingo fighting, which is largely a fiction and certainly made-up as depicted in the film.

    American slavery was bad enough without having to invent atrocities.

    • #50
  21. AIG Inactive
    AIG
    @AIG

    Tom Meyer:

    You know, I’ve heard this from folks a thousand times but remain completely unconvinced. Putting aside the factual weirdness of the story, the simple fact is that Mossad agents are shown as being concerned and haunted by the collateral damage they caused while the PLO terrorists are shown to have no such scruples.

     Sure. My main problem was that in Sword of Gideon the concerns were well played out, and in a more realistic fashion. It explained why these people were conflicted, and it had much to do with the damage it did to their persons and their family life, rather than the moral equivalency between Israel and the Palestinians.

    In Munich, some of that dialogue just jumped out of nowhere and seemed forced. Very fake. Especially since they kill a woman in their raid in Lebanon, and don’t seem to care at all. I thought they weren’t supposed to kill bystanders? 

    Had they done a scene by scene remake of Sword of Gideon, it would have been much better. Instead they decided to reinvent everything, and lost much of what made Sword of Gideon such a great movie: these were armatures trying their best, not hardened killers.  

    • #51
  22. Ed G. Member
    Ed G.
    @EdG

    Gary McVey:

    ctlaw, there’s a doctoral thesis waiting to be written about the use and misuse of nuclear weapons hardware in the movies. The bomb in “True Lies” looks pretty realistic; the one in “The Shadow”, despite some superficial touches, is not. “Strangelove” makes the grade. “Godzilla” does not.

    The bomb doesn’t have to be realistic to be dramatically effective: the one in “Goldfinger” gets some things right but is mostly fanciful (the core rotates like a cement mixer? Why?). Yet, like the exploding shark at the end of “Jaws”, it’s entertaining and you get carried along.

    Primitive, yet effective, like Mike Hammer himself, is the “whatsis” everyone seeks in “Kiss Me Deadly” (1955). anonymous will tell us it’s unrealistic. He’s right; yet if the whatsis were a barely sub-critical core assembly, it would exhibit many of the weird, unpleasant traits seen in the movie.

     Yes, there is suspension of disbelief versus lazy filmmaking versus artistic license for good effect. I can handle all but the lazy filmmaking; if there’s no reason to be inaccurate then don’t be inaccurate.

    • #52
  23. Drusus Inactive
    Drusus
    @Drusus

    A few spring to mind:

    LOTR: The Return of the King – The green ghosty people that Aragorn uses to utterly wipe Sauron’s forces off the map in mere minutes render Frodo and Sam’s entire journey pointless. Talk about your deus ex machina. Couple that with 30 straight minutes of Elijah Wood looking strained and pensive while falling into every hole between the Shire and Mt. Doom (not to mention 17 false endings), and you’ve got a real stinker. How it won an Oscar is beyond me. 

    Star Wars: Episode I-III – Talk about having everything and squandering it for special effects. Terrible dialogue, wooden story-telling, and horrible direction ruined the perfect franchise. 

    The Passion of the Christ – Compelling idea, beautiful score and cinematography, great acting, what’s not to like? Maybe just the part where the director decided a compelling story wasn’t needed and half the film could be a grotesque, unbroken torture scene.

    • #53
  24. skipsul Inactive
    skipsul
    @skipsul

    The two Hobbit films so far.  Too bloody long, terrible camera work, excessive plot additions, sloppy story telling.  Made it through the first, turned off the second midway through.

    • #54
  25. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Drusus: LOTR: The Return of the King

    Well, I remember that stuff from the books.  I remember a lot of other extraneous material from the books, too.  But never would I say anything bad about Saint Tollers writing (and live through to tell the tale).

    • #55
  26. Arahant Member
    Arahant
    @Arahant

    Drusus: Star Wars: Episode I-III – Talk about having everything and squandering it for special effects. Terrible dialogue, wooden story-telling, and horrible direction ruined the perfect franchise.

     And don’t forget the bringing to life of stereotypes: The Trocharian, Jar-Jar Binks and co, etc.

    • #56
  27. skipsul Inactive
    skipsul
    @skipsul

    How about the 2 Star Trek reboots?  The last was particularly ghastly:  internally inconsistent, ham-fisted story, bad acting, stilted dialog.  Sure I understand the desire to distance the films from the old series, but this was a bad film on its own merits besides.  Throw in yet another hackneyed plotline involving “military conspiracy” just to make it offensive as well.

    • #57
  28. Drusus Inactive
    Drusus
    @Drusus

    Arahant:

    Drusus: LOTR: The Return of the King

    Well, I remember that stuff from the books. I remember a lot of other extraneous material from the books, too. But never would I say anything bad about Saint Tollers writing (and live through to tell the tale).

     Regardless, Jackson made the wise decision to cut the stupid stuff (e.g. Tom Bombadil) in Fellowship. Too bad he got religion in the end. 

    • #58
  29. user_96427 Member
    user_96427
    @tommeyer

    skipsul:

    How about the 2 Star Trek reboots? The last was particularly ghastly: internally inconsistent, ham-fisted story, bad acting, stilted dialog. Sure I understand the desire to distance the films from the old series, but this was a bad film on its own merits besides. Throw in yet another hackneyed plotline involving “military conspiracy” just to make it offensive as well.

    Into Darkness was a terrible film.  So bad, I’m not sure it counts as a “miss.”

    • #59
  30. thelonious Member
    thelonious
    @thelonious

    A Million Ways to die in the West had a clever premise about how treacherous life was in the old west.  Some clever themes and bases for jokes that weren’t fleshed out very well. Also the story was  clichéd and not well thought out.   A bit too much for gross out humor.  It’s a Seth Mcfarlane movie after all.  Had all the potential to be a great satire of the old west ala Blazing Saddles but was just too disjointed and not very funny.    Also they used modern dialogue instead of the old timey western dialogue.

    • #60
Become a member to join the conversation. Or sign in if you're already a member.