In defence of two of those films, The Sacrifice is breathtaking, but if you're the kind of person like the author's idiot brother who makes his demands so plain, then no, it's not the film for you - it is just a tiny bit more cerebral than Die Hard.

Eyes Wide Shut, as I have explained to anyone who cared to listen, wasn't finished. That's why it sucked.

WB shouldn't have released it. Instead they crowed like buffoons about how Kubrick had submitted his "final" version just before dying, ignoring that for every other film he made he submitted many many "final" versions before he was satisfied. There is no reason to suppose EWS would have been treated any differently if he hadn't have died - and we can't really blame him for that...

I personally enjoyed Eyes Wide Shut. Sure, it wasn't A Clockwork Orange, but still better than most films.

There was a film of some quality in there trying to get out.

I think it could have been truly stunning, but in it's current form is a sketch - a work in progress.

But yes, a "bad" Kubrick film is still streets ahead of a "good" Michael Bay film.

I wish Bay was here to comment on that...

I think he would probably agree :)

I'd hope so, otherwise we'd have the very definition of Chutzpah.

Man......Planet of the apes.... it didn't seem like a Tim Burton film at all, so horrible and shiny.

A friend of mine put it well about Burton's version of planet of the apes. He said, "It was like the took all the coolest stuff from the original, threw it in the garbage and decided to make a movie out of the rest." Here here!!

I had no idea Tim Burton directed the remake... I didn't know he could make a bad movie.