Its definitely better than Forrest Gump (upon recent viewing. I loved it as a 16yr old back in 94 more than BB now but it doesnt hold up well) and Titanic.

While the blockbusters are better this year i'd say Ratatouille was better than Wall-E and 300 and Transformers were more enjoyable than this years blockbusters (other than maybe Iron Man). TDK is brilliant offcourse and a better film but the 2007 blockbusters outside of the May 3 were quite good too.

The oscar/smaller films - 07 had many classic. This is much weaker in that respect.

Personally I find Forrest Gump to be delightful and hilarious, just not as deep and powerful as BB, also, I believe Titanic is easily one of the most overrated movies of all time! It's love story is romantic enough, but I don't see where it succeeds outside of that one piece. BB works on multiple levels, (a love epic, a great directing piece, a fascinating personal study, even just an epic time oriented fable.)

I almost forgot about 300! and yes Transformers was entertaining, and don't forget I am Legend which I loved. Outside of the summer it was good for Blockbusters. and I totally agree about the classics, there were so many more ambitious films last year. However Ratatouille did not even TOUCH the brilliance of Wall-e, which is my second favorite film of the year and favorite animated film ever.

When did this thread become insane?

crash

How is the script terrible?

1. The retelling of Benjamin's story through narration.
2. Katrina.
3. Many cop out in rergards to Benjamin's "condition" (dimentia? Really?)

that's all for now. Forrest Gump was way better than this. Not sure about Titanic.

No more Forrest Gump jesus

The retelling of the story made for an interesting combination of narration, from the Caroline, Daisy, and Benjamin, it was a creative direction to go in, and allowed for multiple voice inflections and techniques to telling one story. Also the modern day scheme allowed for escape from the story which made Benjamin's fable all the more compelling to me. Although I can see how that would rub you the wrong way.
Dimentia was just to emphasize the fact that while his body grew backwards his mind went forwards. I though it was a fine way to hit home a point.

dementia

i think people who are criticizing the movie and using the script as an excuse, and raising the same issues as Sam, obviously weren't paying attention or see very few films like this, and probably prefer something a bit more loud rather than subtle.

Shit, even this is far better than Forrest Gump.

Yes, the barely serviceable dialogue and complete lack of a character arc for Benjamin and his seemingly non-existent internal monologue were totally the result of my lack of attention-paying skills.

Subtle? How about the early allusion to Exodus where Benjamin's dad holds the baby Ben and peers down at the water contemplating tossing him in?

A brash sea captain.
Meet the Robinson's ripped off. Baby left at the doorstep to a kindly black woman, who happens to be one dimensional.
A completely unnecessary sister subplot.
How did Benjamin know the sequence leading to the crash?
Hurricane Katrina.
Nobody asks questions. The state lets a kid live at an old folks home.
I get sick of racism in movies, but they lived in 1920's Louisiana.

I got the "subtlety." I just think there was a better way to do the movie. Someone else mentioned that Fincher and co. didn't really let themselves go in regards to the fantasy element of the story. That's what I was missing. I mean did NO ONE (who knew or noticed) think it was incredible that he was aging backwards???

Although I didn't flat out hate this movie the way some folks here seem to, I think "subtle" is the absolute last word I would use to describe anything about it.

the greatness was subtle it wasn't there!

i've already explained why Fincher used the "retelling" aspect, and Katrina in this thread. and u know some of you are still unable to get it.

The dialogue I thought was rather consistent those of many love stories, to which this movie is. the fact the no one notices him aging is ur problem. What about the clock that went backwards for along time?

and the fact he is aging backwards, is the fucking fantasy u stupid people. what more did you want? him riding a bicycle over the moon?

The clock was designed to go backwards. People and the gov't in E.T., noticed E.T., which was what led to the climax.

The reason people complain is because that although this is a fantasy, it takes place in the real world or at least 99% the real world. This isn't Harry Potter or LOTR or Time Bandits where someone like Benjamin would be an everyday occurrence.

The dialogue was cut down and as little as possible which was intentional AND an advantage for this movie. This isn't an Aaron Sorkin film here, people don't have to spit out 50 words a second. I loved the almost-less-than-necessary dialogue provided, it made for a more subtle and simplistic film. Also Benjamin's character was thoroughly described and created without having to talk all the time. The lack of dialogue assisted in proving the fact that Benjamin was really a rather average man who had a certain condition that did not really separate him from the world, only from his true love.
Also that explains the lack of fantasy, they did not want to overstate the fact that Benjamin ages backward, it was supposed to be understated which allowed for him to almost seem normal in the movie.
I'm sure I'll get backlash for this but this movie is much like the twilight series in a way, a man is pushed aside from both society and his true love because of one external characteristic, except in twilight he overcomes the separation from his love, in BB he overcomes the separation from society.
And BB is an infinitely better movie, but that's another argument.

I'm not talking about any supposed lack of dialogue or, as you suggest, Mamet/Sorkin quick speak. Rather, I speak of the dialogue that is present in the movie; a rancid collection of deadly, on-the-nose summations of all of the movie's thematic concerns. Yikes. The complete lack of character present in the final product is a direct result of the fact that no one ever says anything unique or illuminating. You don't need a lot of dialogue. But you do need good dialogue.

How does a lack of words and speech suggest Ben is average? Average people don't speak? What?

Why invoke Twilight? Why not Phantom of the Opera? Or Edward Scissorhands? Or the Grinch? Or the thousands of other movies that fit that paradigm?

I'll grant you that it's like Twilight in that both movies approach their fantastical elements with a leadenness usually reserved for CBS prodedurals.

Well, they completely deviated from the source material (which was a dark, satirical farce to begin with) and only kept the backwards-aging conceit.

Upon thinking on it further, I am bumping my grade up to A+.