Wait, so is this a scenario where I get to watch that film, then I suddenly die as soon as it ends? Or do I get to watch it on repeat for all years to come? Or do I watch that movie once and never watch any movie ever after that point? Or do I get to watch the movie once, but it’s slowed down to fit the rest of my lifespan?
I always had vibes of why Click is so bad, that it cheats at evoking emotion, that the main character is an ass and still doesn’t earn his torture–and that torture goes on and on and on and …!–and that he doesn’t even learn any valuable lessons in the end!
Then Big Joel did me the favor of analyzing why Click is so terrible. So yeah, even without seeing CK, the choice is laughably easy.
Terrible and obvious bait but I am wondering why you picked those movies they’re both pretty old and there are newer examples of universally low rated movies than Click
I know what Citizen Kane represents, its artistic significance, all that jazz. I studied cinema for a short while as an undergrad, I watched it a couple of times, studied many parts with teachers. It still bores me to death.
Click is entertaining, but it would bore me to death after a week.
I want my answer counted as Citizen Kane, but I’ve never seen it and my actual answer is that I would just watch the Orson Welles wine commercial outtakes for my desert island times.
Did you know that he wasn't drunk? He had taken a sleeping pill or something and accidentally had to stay awake. After the couple bad takes they let him take a power nap and then they did a legit take of the commercial and he delivered it totally normal, it's even on YouTube. Blew my mind a few months ago when I learned that the first time myself
That is very surprising. I always assumed it was a situation of him drinking the product on set, like that episode of Bojack Horseman where Todd drinks a bunch of bourbon while filming a commercial
Yeah, I mean it's for a wine commercial so you instantly think, he's fucking wasted. And he was! But for a different reason lol. Look it up on YouTube, his like actual take of the interview, it's really trippy seeing him say all that stuff totally straight for once
I’ve never seen Citizen Kane, but I find it hard to believe that Click is “more profound” lol. It’s pretty straight forward as far as scifi goes. I agree that it has a surprisingly emotional ending, but I don’t think that speaks to it’s profundity, but more to it’s relatability.
I would hope there would be more to glean from CK after many watches: the writing would have subtext, the cinematography is more deliberate. Click is pretty much exactly what it says it is, you can easily get the full value out of it from a single viewing.
So my pick would be Citizen Kane. Or nothing, as someone else said.
I won’t say you’re wrong, everyone has their opinion but I recommend watching Citizen Kane before deciding it’s worth abandoning Click for. You might watch it once and curse the heavens that you didn’t pick an Adam Sandler classic
I recommend watching Citizen Kane before deciding it’s worth abandoning Click for.
Oh internet, never change lol.
Personally I don’t consider Click to be a Sandler “classic”, Click came much later once he started into the romcom scene. But yeah, I should watch CK before I make the most important decision of my life. Who knows, maybe I’ll want a do-over.
Scifi?! Click ain’t anything close to scifi. Its a magic remote. Given by a magic shop. Genre-wise it plays more like a horror comedy. Monkey hand -kinda horror.
Also Citizen Kane isn’t worth watching for most people. About a journalist making storm in a water glass over something that had a lot simpler explanation. Cinematic it has a lot of good tricks… For its time! Those tricks are taught to first year movie maker students, and are today used EVERYWHERE, so much that you barely notice it anymore. Click have definitely used the same tricks, and 80 years more of cinematic tricks. If you had to choose only one to learn from, you should choose Click.
It sounds like you agree with me on both points 👍.
Sci-fi isn’t about the science (which is often hand-waved away completely), it’s about the philosophical implications of the hypothetical technology. And as famous scifi writer Arthur C. Clarke put it, “Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic.”
I also said that Click is the move that has more relatability, which is the same as saying, “Citizen Kane isn’t worth watching for most people”.
The point that CK’s “tricks” are outdated, commonplace, and also used by Click is completely valid though.
it’s about the philosophical implications of the hypothetical technology.
And the movie isn’t about the remote or its philosophical implications on society or a person. It is just a MacGuffin to deliver the lesson. Click is about the guy and his wishes coming true in the worst way. A common, old horror trope. Which is why I think it isnt technically scifi.
(I know genres can be a bit subjective. But I find it fun to discuss stuff and test my assumptions.)
Heh, well, the genre of Click is not a hill I’m about to die on, but suffice it to say, I think we could find many a sci-fi (that we both agree are sci-fi) that purely hinge on the formula of: macguffin enables some quirk in reality, and the rest of the story is exploring how the main character(s) behave in response.
Wikipedia calls it science fantasy, which I disagree with.
Add comment