MovieChat Forums > Rumble Fish (1983) Discussion > To the 101 people who voted this a 1

To the 101 people who voted this a 1

posted 16 years ago by Choudder_Boy
58 replies | jump to latest

I accept that everyone has an opinion and is free to give it. I am not stopping anyone, just want some justification.

Did you vote it 1/10 because you didnt understand it? Was it to complex for your brain?

Or perhaps you thought you were going to see a gangsta movie and then voted 1 in spite?

OR due to the fact its black & white, a part which I believe is crucial to the movie.

Just go watch meet the spartans & norbit and dont try to educate yourself. Your all doomed. with retardation!

[–] StarryKat 16 years ago

That many people?! SERIOUSLY?! I am shocked.. I know that I am biased as I obviously love it but really, how can it be voted as a 1? Ridiculous.

I actually felt like vomiting at the Meet The Spartans trailer, ew.

www.rumblefishonline.com
Wrong Side Of The River - A Rumble Fish fan site!

[–] Ace19444 14 years ago

Watching Epic Movie gave me a splitting headache, actually made me feel physically ill (I will give credit where it's due though, the guy playing Jack Sparrow in it had funny moments).

It's then that I realized that the only reason I couldn't stop laughing during Date Movie was because I was high XD

[–] cook_13 16 years ago

I think it isn't worth a serious discussion. Those people wouldn't get it even if you did explain the whole plot from A to Z.
They just wouldn't...

[–] CDOJr1961 16 years ago

The world is full of ignorant people.

Luckily, only 101 have voted on this movie so far.

[–] PenTheater 16 years ago

a 1?
We've all seen 1's, but there was nothing that could be a anywhere near a 1 for this movie.
Certainly a movie can be too deep for some people, and some people
have no idea what symbolism is in story telling, sad but true,
but a 1?
it would have to be spite.
this was movie magic!

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] med_1978 16 years ago

I wouldn't say this movie was a one but it is certainly not a 10. I mean I like some of Coppola's work "The Godfather Trilogy, The Cotton Club, The Outsiders".
I like some of the Actors involved, Diane Lane is one of my Favourites and Matt Dillon is a good actor too also Mickey Rourke has put in some great performances before his career took a nosedive into garbage like "Harley Davidson & the Marlboro Man". I could not really enjoy this film though, I have sat through it twice and tried to like it but I cannot really see anything here worth revisiting time and again. I mean the acting is good all round and parts of the film are interesting and there are some interesting camera shots and angles. But to me the film never really grabs you and pulls you into the plot and characters. I was interested up until Motorcycle boy appeared, then I kept waiting to see what would happen and what he would do as does his character's Brother played by Matt Dillon. However nothing really interesting happens, and the film just sort of meanders to it's conclusion. I would give it a 5 or 6 out of 10 and no more.

[–] DaVooz 15 years ago

I agree with med_1978
"I like some of the actors involved, (...). I could not really enjoy this film though, I have sat through it twice and tried to like it but I cannot really see anything here worth revisiting time and again. I mean the acting is good all round and parts of the film are interesting and there are some interesting camera shots and angles. But to me the film never really grabs you and pulls you into the plot and characters. I was interested up until Motorcycle boy appeared, then I kept waiting to see what would happen and what he would do as does his character's Brother played by Matt Dillon. However nothing really interesting happens, and the film just sort of meanders to it's conclusion. I would give it a 5 or 6 out of 10 and no more."

What is with the obnoxious soft voice of Rourke's character? It is not in reference with Rourke's reputation.
What was the message and what was the big revelation? What on earth was the point? It wasn't the facination of being on skid row was it? So what happened in California and was mom crazy (all dads claim mom is crazy)?

I gave it a 6 not a 5 because of score and some images and the look of the film.

[–] HotRod_SC 13 years ago

Man, just a thought: even if you don't like the story, the plot doesn't make sense, the characters seem too superficial, and the movie moves too slowly for you, just the complete brilliance of Mickey Rourke's acting in here is worth the ticket, time and time again.

Mickey is like one of those classic theater dramatic actor. He really can pull some serious pain and deep emotions through all his worthy performances. It's an insult to his career to have just recently won an Oscar, I know Double Team and Once Upon a Time in Mexico weren't really critical acclaim material, but when he feels like it, Mickey can seriously make a whole movie.

Recently, Francis has been making 8 stars experimental movies, I'm sure if he was to ever collaborate with Mickey again, both could be skyrocketed into the mainstream once again.

now this is acting: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2458172160/tt1528718

[–] Vid-2 11 years ago

He hasn't won an Oscar!!!

[–] scooter338 16 years ago

RE: "Was it to complex for your brain?"

The word is "too." Who's the retard?

[–] Choudder_Boy 16 years ago

LOL. Oops! A spelling mistake, well in the UK "to" is used alot more often than "too". Just run along and go watch Cedric: Codename Cleaner lol. you *beep* loser.

[–] 16 years ago

[deleted]

[–] BenGrimms_Thing 15 years ago

I had to go 7 just based on the style and Rourke and Lane. I have never liked Hinton's work. Maybe if I knew more of her background it would help. Dillon played RustyJames, Dallas and Tex very similarly to me. However he came so close to the way I remembered loathing the character in the novel(s) that I have to give him alot of credit for his portrayal.

On the other hand Rourke was very subtle. The soft voice he used and the calm demeanor were spot on for me. Dillon on the other hand, I wanted to crush his skull every time that he spoke. However, with a character like RustyJames, perhaps I was supposed to?

[–] Jes' Sayin' (5947) 10 months ago

Lane isn't in it very much. Rourke gets annoying with his constant whispering/low talking. I had to turn the captions on to get what he was saying.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] scott_glynn1985 15 years ago

LOL. Oops! A spelling mistake, well in the UK "to" is used alot more often than "too". Just run along and go watch Cedric: Codename Cleaner lol. you *beep* loser.

that has got to be one of the funniest things I have ever read

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] tommyallen-1 15 years ago

I haven't rated this movie. I saw it 20 years ago and don't remember it well enough to rate it. I was just looking up some information about the movie and stumbled on this thread.

I'm really surprised that people are surprised someone would rate this movie (or any movie) a "1". It's simple: some users on IMDB will give a movie an excessively low rating to attempt to bring down the movie's overall rating to where he/she thinks it should be.

Example: A movie has an IMDB user rating of 7.5. A user thinks that the movie was lousy and should only have a rating of 5.0. If this user rates the movie a 5.0 it will only slightly reduce the movie's 7.5 rating. However, if they give it a "1", that will move the movie's rating closer to the 5.0 that the user thinks it should be. I have no proof of this, nor have I done it myself, but I'm sure this is why many users give decent movies a rating of "1".

And to "Choudder Boy":

I'm not the grammar police, but if you're going to declare people are "doomed. with retardation!", you might want to use proper grammar (it makes your claims of retardation more valid):

"Your all doomed. with retardation!"

That should be "You're all doomed."

-Metta

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bm206996 15 years ago

What films do you consider to be good?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] bm206996 15 years ago

So what movies do you understand?

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] chibiryu12 15 years ago

I freakin loved rumble fish.

But that response was the funniest thing I have ever read.

[–] 15 years ago

[deleted]

[–] HotRod_SC 13 years ago

Yeah, I guess you are right, I am "one of those people", lol. Tho I'd never give a "not-so-good" movie a rating of 1.0. The lowest I think a movie I didn't get would deserve would be a 4.0, even if that doesn't change the overall rating.

For example, I think the lowest this movie could get should be 9.0, while I think this movie is either a 10.0 or pretty close to it. In my case, it was a no brainer to give it a 10.0 score, but if I could, I'd certainly give this one a 1000000 stars score. It's a hidden gem, Francis should try to re-release this one, I think it would fare much better than back then.

now this is acting: http://www.imdb.com/media/rm2458172160/tt1528718

[–] Meurglys3 15 years ago

The only movies that ever deserve 1s are movies that have at least an overall rating of 5 or less. Otherwise people aren't serious when they give a movie a 1. The movie may be terrible but it most likely deserves a 3 or 4. People give movies 1s when they feel like being an ass.

___________________________________
Fishes can't fly and neither can I

[–] kittd82 15 years ago

Is it necessary to drag in the old insults, to make a point?
Calling on peoples intelligence, just because they don't like a movie that you did, is just not right.

I like this movie, and that is what matters to me. I don't care if it was voted various graphic icons.

This is A Sig
---
IMDB...its not fanboard