I hated the film 'Nope'

Submitted by jonah_wilkie t3_11amgrq in movies

I found the film frustrating, and if it was a horror film, it wasn't scary. I think Jordan Peele has his own genre now, where it's neither this nor that. I liked 'Get Out' and liked parts of 'Us'

My biggest problem was the characters. Daniel Kaluuya was fine. He's a brilliant actor and can do anything he's asked to. Keke Palmer's character was a loud, annoying, over the top prick, who would rather throw snacks at a big on the camera rather than climb onto that part of the roof and push it off. But Angel was by far and a way the worst. He goes to someone's house, screams like an idiot, massively overshares with people he's not familiar with, and just invites himself into the rest of the film

The monster was rubbish. Why did it hide in a cloud? What was it? Where did it come from? What did it want? It wasn't explained, and it wasn't shown how it ate those people at the show. The film doesn't want to show the most interesting parts of the film.

The best parts of the film were the flashbacks to the sitcom and the murderous ape. I would much rather watch a film based on that

0

Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

Terrible-Painter4332 t1_j9su14a wrote

Explaining what the alien is wasn't part of the story so having these pointless questions isn't really film criticism....

109

rockincharlierocket t1_j9tzkgu wrote

i think its fair to include. for me i was also upset they didnt expand on the monster or its origin or whatever, but i can tell that the mosnter isnt the point of the story so i still enjoyed it

​

edit: came back to see these down votes even though i clearly say "i understand the monster isnt the point of the story and that i just like sci fi? hive mind at it again

−35

Terrible-Painter4332 t1_j9tzx22 wrote

What would learning the origins of the alien add to the story or mystery even?

34

rockincharlierocket t1_j9u0ofr wrote

i just like sci fi and aliens and find new takes on them interesting like in Nope. but in my comment i also say "but i can tell the monster isnt the point of the story so i still enjoyed it".

​

edit: confused why i have 14 down votes after clearly saying i understand the origin is not the point of the story

−19

shzza t1_j9vc18g wrote

so you want nope: prometheus?

7

rockincharlierocket t1_j9vdt69 wrote

honestly tell me where i say i want that because i am genuinely curious

−3

shzza t1_j9viwhs wrote

you said you wished they expanded on the origin. it was just a joke mash up, not anything serious.

6

Galac_tacos t1_j9tc57l wrote

I think if you need to have every aspect of a not particularly complex film that has already laid out every point then maybe Peele isn't for you. Hate is a strong word, and one not remotely warranted by your criticisms. Your questions about Jean Jacket do nothing but prove the point that either you were distracted and didn't pay attention or somehow can't comprehend such a simple explanation.

71

zoexbelle t1_j9t9mvg wrote

The abduction scene is still the most intensely disgusting thing I’ve ever watched and I love this film because of that

69

sullenosity t1_j9tolwc wrote

Watch Fire in the Sky. That's what the abduction scene is loosely based on.

21

Guyver0 t1_j9sutmg wrote

> Why did it hide in a cloud? What was it? Where did it come from? What did it want? It wasn't explained, and it wasn't shown how it ate those people at the show.

I feel like all those points were explained and shown.

68

WiryCatchphrase t1_j9sxczt wrote

Some people really just don't understand movies. Maybe they were too drunk or high when watching it or got distracted, maybe they're just stupid.

41

rockincharlierocket t1_j9tzon7 wrote

or just use cell phones the entire time then get upset when they dont understand it. 5/6 questions were answered in the film. really the only one was "where did it come from" we assume space but thats it. everything else was answered

14

Mech-Noir t1_j9udmj1 wrote

Some people are just seriously stupid. People like OP are why we have a lot of "made by committee" films. He's the lowest bar you have to make movies for and we're all dumber for it.

3

Confident_Object_844 t1_j9um17r wrote

I wonder if people who praise this film know much about film at all. It fails on many level especially as a horror movie. Peele is highly highly overrated, I did like “us”, even that wasn’t a masterpiece. Even the over hanging theme in “nope”, which is such a shitty title to being with😆, is extremely boring and simple. Peele try so hard at making an intelligent horror that it almost become laughable. some good horror films with great themes and execution, try something like “eyes without a face(1960),possession (1981) or almost any Lynch film. To say someone doesn’t understands movies cause they don’t follow all positivity around “nope” is really a stupid statement in itself.

−19

Terrible-Painter4332 t1_j9xvfgg wrote

This snobbish attitude is really embarrassing btw. Trying to brag about the films you watch while at the same time providing surface level criticism isn't a good look. How is "the title is stupid" criticism in any way and how is saying "you don't know much about film" trying to help your point? Instead, explain why it's boring, what parts you think is simple, how does the film fail cinematically since you know so much about film. Even a passing comment is more criticism than anything you've said.

1

SomeBoxofSpoons t1_j9ueqjs wrote

They really said they didn’t understand why an animal would camouflage itself.

11

DaikaijuSokogeki01 t1_j9tjadb wrote

Film literacy is dead.

46

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9uz2dp wrote

I don't think so at all. Certain audiences have always hated slightly ambiguous, theme/symbol priority type media. Look at 2001 A Space Odyssey, that got really mixed reviews when it first came out in '68. Some folks hated it!

10

micahs12 t1_j9uk0mo wrote

We can thank Marvel for that

−9

OlicityMakesMeSad t1_j9vuh4g wrote

I can love an MCU film but also take the time to really appreciate EEAO or find out why something else is thought-provoking but blaming popcorn flicks personally in my opinion ain't it.

4

fonduktoe t1_j9tvhqq wrote

Watch it again without looking at your cell phone the whole time.

34

Runnid t1_j9u2otv wrote

I watched it without my phone. It sucked. All the Jordan Peele films suck, they'd make good twightlight zone episodes tho.

−43

fonduktoe t1_j9u33xp wrote

Oh I don't imagine it would make the film better for you but, based on the negative points you made, it seems like you missed a lot of the actual movie or just didn't pay attention well. C'est la vie.

6

WatchMoreMovies t1_j9teqci wrote

It puts the viewer in the position of the characters: meaning we know as much as they do, based on their best guesses. The fear is meant to come from both the unknown and the hubris of characters who either think it's fake or think they can control the creature.

30

COstargazer t1_j9w1xcq wrote

This. I didn't think things like this needed explaining, but obviously, here we are. And you nailed it.

1

AJ1639 t1_j9txko2 wrote

I don't know if you realize this, but Peele's films are usually allegorical. And each of his films has felt less and less of a need to overtly spell out the allegory for the audience.

In Get Out the allegory was explained in a exposition dump while Kaluuya is strapped to the chair watching the TV.

In Us the allegory isn't really explained, but the mechanics of the others are. The audience is still left to determine what the surface people and others are suppose to represent in society.

And in Nope nothing is explained beyond conjecture. Yet there is still allegory. I mean there is simple idea of how humans exploit creatures in order to film them. Which involves aligning interests. Throughout the movie this is achieved with the alien by feeding it horses. Yet, this isn't the alien's true motivation, and as such the human characters still view it as savage due to their inability to understand the alien's desires. You can then take this explanation as an allegory for things like slavery. Where slaves were forced to work, and physical punishment was used to ensure work. So that is the physical punishment aligns interests because the slave doesn't want to be whipped for instance and the owner wants labor. Yet when this failed slaves were often talked about as untrainable brutes or savages.

All I'm saying is the allegory of the film is there you just need to put in the effort to look for it.

18

AlanMorlock t1_j9ts0dd wrote

I'm a little confused didn, you miss the part where it inhaled all the people from the show?

14

PrecisionHat t1_j9tvfir wrote

Your first mistake was going in expecting to watch a horror movie. It's not horror, and neither was Get Out or Us.

I can agree about most of what you said about the characters.

As for the monster, I'm happy they left a lot unexplained. I think it's bad when a film explains everything about those kind of elements (one of my main gripes about Prometheus and Alien Covanent).

A lot of people refer to Nope as Sky Jaws and I think that's pretty accurate.

14

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9uzg31 wrote

>I think it's bad when a film explains everything about those kind of elements

Totally, unless the entire point of the film is to set up a larger universe, like Star Trek or Lord Of The Rings. I would argue that Get Out more closely resembles a classic horror/drama film though.

6

PrecisionHat t1_j9w3bgt wrote

Get out is definitely the closest to horror in my view. Us isn't far off either, but it's just got a lot of comedy relief that detracts from the scariness, imo. Nope felt a lot like Jaws. The thing OP said about Gordy is spot on, though. Best part of the movie and definitely the creepiest.

1

Mcclane88 t1_j9vki1h wrote

Get Out and Us are horror movies though. What other genre do you think they are?

2

PrecisionHat t1_j9vt8gl wrote

Suspense/Thriller. In the case of Us, it's got comedy elements as well.

3

732dlrowthgiliwt t1_j9u627n wrote

I liked parts of the movie but overall, it's a pretty weak film. Get Out was the only Peele movie I loved. Us was also weak.

9

Rayliex t1_j9svp9m wrote

You sound like my mum.

Sure, the film wasn't for everyone, but this film was absolutely incredible. The entire metaphor and over all theme was just so well thought out.

Also, whilst I agree with it not being entirely a horror, there are some pretty wildly horrific scenes.

Maybe this was just a movie for those with a sense of media literacy? but even then, I'd find it pretty easy to have fun watching a sci-fi/western/horror without much knowledge on the theme.

7

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9uzo85 wrote

nothing is more frustrating than having a parent nonstop not understand the movies you like lol. My mom watched Everything Everywhere All At Once and was ranting about how long it was, how empty the film was of rich meaning. I'm like...damn were we watching the same movie!?

4

Stepjam t1_j9vv2s7 wrote

My mom didn't get EEAAO at all either, but she generally bounces off less concrete movies. She likes her police procedurals and period dramas.

1

rhofl t1_j9v7iua wrote

I do not think that Peele’s movies require media literacy. They are on-the-nose type alegory movies.

1

Rayliex t1_j9vmxc2 wrote

To a general audience, I wouldn't think so. Many people didn't see the connection of Gordy to the main plot and were confused by it.

Also this film is pretty layered I'd say, going from the idea of exploitation to Jean Jacket being a representation of the film industry. I don't think a lot of people would have gotten that on a first watch, or at least instantly. I certainly didn't.

2

rhofl t1_j9w659g wrote

It might be expactation of mine which built up by his two movies or maybe I have been trying to go deeper on the movies which is a habit I developed after watching many movies. In a sense, it is a media literacy, however, if you have seen all of the previous works of a director and dig deep on what it is trying to tell, I think that ypu would have much prepared mindset. It might be a crude example but, at the early MCU movies people did not know after credits scene but as it got bigger people started to expect it. That is the way I think about Peele’s films. Like characteristics of Lynch movies which you can put all of your brain-power to decyphir it (except Elephtman) but still cannot fully explain what they are telling.

2

Rayliex t1_j9xa278 wrote

I haven't seen Jordan Peele's other films, though I am planning to since I really enjoyed Nope. People each have different ways of watching films and if you watch enough you definitely build a skill of digger deeper and understanding media literacy.

Though to a general audience, it tends to only go surface level.

For example, most people will see Alien as a movie about just Ellen Ripley against the Xenomorph and such, whilst others will see the deeper ideas of pregnancy and rape.

1

moviefan1997 t1_j9t26ab wrote

I personally loved Nope. I think it's the best film that Jordan Peele has made so far, but I respect your opinion.

7

StreetMysticCosmic t1_j9tjxcp wrote

> The monster was rubbish

I loved the monster in Nope so I will defend it here, but it's fine if it didn't work for you. This is a copy and paste of an older comment of mine:

The way it works has to be inferred since no one ever figures it out in the movie, but a real biologist wrote a fake paper about it (co-authored by the two main characters of the movie), so I'm not making any of the following up.

The monster is lighter than air because it has thin skin and can fill itself with air like a hot air balloon. Obviously it looks like an alien UFO, but this is a reference to a common explanation of UFO sightings — that they are weather balloons. The creature is finally photographed in an actual balloon accident, and air-filled tube men are used to measure its anti-electric field. The fact that it has an anti-electric field probably means its using a magnetic field to mess with the Earth's magnetic field and fly partially through that method.

It unfolds into a bunch of flaps to catch the wind like a ship's sails. In fact, when its flying forward or sideways its sails could be mistaken on the horizon or in clouds for a flying ship. Like a legendary ghost ship. With the sunset behind it it has an almost angelic or godlike appearance. You even have to bow your head and make sacrifices to it to avoid its wrath. The way it eats is an explanation for livestock abductions and mysterious items in rain, like fish or frog rains. It's not just a monster — it's every monster. Or at least a bunch of them. An all-purpose cryptid for aliens, ghost ships, and even religious beings.

7

everyspice t1_j9sv3ax wrote

I don’t agree that they had to explain what the alien/monster was and not doing so was why it sucked. It sucked because it was so boring. It failed to make me feel anything while watching it. It was a waste of my time. Apt name.

6

Looper007 t1_j9sxhle wrote

I liked Nope, I've seen some people say it's their film of 2022 but for me it wasn't at that level but I enjoyed it a lot more then Us.

The Performances carry the film especially Keke Palmer and some of shots are fantastic. I still think Get Out is still a tough film for Jordan Peele to top and his two films following it have been very good but not at the level of his debut film.

5

thealwaysopenmouth81 t1_j9t2e4v wrote

I 100% agree with everything you say here….. except Keke’s performance. It was like nails on a chalkboard for me

0

Councilist_sc t1_j9u6bf2 wrote

Man Keke Palmer was awesome. I loved the movie. I think it’s Peele’s weakest of his three movies but I view that as more of a compliment cause I still thought Nope was a solid 4 out of 5 stars.

2

mezonsen t1_j9uclt3 wrote

Keke Palmer’s character was one of the most delightful performances I saw in a movie last year. And part of the story is her growing as a character (Daniel Kaluuya’s character does the same, as both represent one-half of their esteemed father and need to grow into their own person over the course of the film) so I cannot sympathize with disliking her.

2

PecanSandoodle t1_j9usl39 wrote

It was a big flying predator from space, like a floating shelled sea creature with gooey parts inside. It wanted easy access to food like any wild animal hence all the theming and exposition about understanding wild creatures but not projecting human emotions onto them that aren’t there.

Why would anything more be explained when our characters were not given more? We aren’t suppose to know everything about the creature because how could we without an alien David Attenborough narrating all that stuff and ruining the mystery?

I don’t consider it a horror movie, more like those thriller alien encounter films that seemed more prevalent in the 80s. It had a handful of horrifying parts but it’s kind of a mystery / action movie with long periods of buildup.

It’s okay if you didn’t like it, I dont think it needed more explanation tho.

2

PMzyox t1_j9wkspz wrote

maybe unpopular but I agree

2

apurpleglittergalaxy t1_ja0foee wrote

It bored the fuck out of me I gave up watching after 10 mins lol

2

GermanCrow t1_j9tog4u wrote

Plenty of movies don’t fully explain the supernatural aspect, instead only revealing some small rules about it (IE: don’t look at it or it will come for you) and whether or not you liked the characters is subjective

1

rockincharlierocket t1_j9tzeq8 wrote

the alien isnt the point of the story, but i agree i really wish they explained it more or where it came from and that keke pamer was a very annoying character. different vibe from daniel. also 5/6 questions were answered i the film....did you pay attention?

1

jl_theprofessor t1_j9ujxhy wrote

>The monster was rubbish. Why did it hide in a cloud? What was it? Wheredid it come from? What did it want? It wasn't explained, and it wasn'tshown how it ate those people at the show. The film doesn't want to showthe most interesting parts of the film.

​

It doesn't matter because it's 1) not the point of the film, and 2) a metaphor.

1

grahamnortonsdad t1_j9uo66p wrote

Think it might have been my favourite of last year. The twist of what the alien was halfway through shook me to my core

1

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9uyp0b wrote

Plenty of people didn't like it. It's a film that puts more stock in what it's trying to say through symbols and themes than telling a classic hollywood story. I'm guessing you don't consume a lot of ambiguous media, like Neon Genesis Evangelion? I get why you feel the way you do, but its also probably a sign that movies like this aren't for you.

1

No_Significance_573 t1_j9vadb8 wrote

idk i saw a phone recorded clip of not even the abduction scene but like two seconds of the beginning after that dude was screaming. it was unpleasant. but then i was still curious and saw another 1 second clip of the monster throwing it up on the house? but reading about the scene in detail online was enough to disturb me to no end… very glad i didn’t watch the whole thing. it sounded gross from what i heard but then also just reallllly thinking of being digested alive like that, along with the other details along with such a thing…..just…..nope

1

InventasBam t1_j9vc2d8 wrote

Ditto, I disliked it immensely.

1

politeshots t1_j9vi10v wrote

Keke Palmer's character being loud and over the top is completely intentional...

1

Hahndude t1_j9vwl16 wrote

Either you didn’t actual watch the film or you’re really dense.

I’m going to go with you didn’t actually watch it and you’re trying to get internet attention by hating.

1

AudioWoW8 t1_j9w9vvu wrote

Something the world needs more then anything is people being ok with not liking something without bashing and hating it. Everyone has an opinion on everything these days. I saw Puss and Boots with my daughter. Very mild movie for myself. The entire theater loved it. I don’t lay in bed wide awake worrying about maybe not getting it though. I don’t feel the need to run to the top of the mountain and scream “PIXAR SUCKS” I just don’t make time on my own to go see Pixar movies. THAT’S OK

1

AudioWoW8 t1_j9wa7g1 wrote

While we are all here… Where did that big ass shark from JAWS come from?

1

Appropriate_Focus402 t1_j9x7a20 wrote

I would say that your reaction to the movie is stupid. Lots to pick apart, but it’s your reaction. Own it, rather than claiming the movie is at fault for what happened in your brain

1

Sandmsounds t1_j9uunth wrote

You’re saying alot more about you than the movie

0

phudgeoff t1_j9v6n0z wrote

Keke Palmer is annoying in this movie especially on rewatches but I like the movie, itself, more after rewatching it.

0

Mcclane88 t1_j9vkyle wrote

I disagree with your assessment, except for what you said about Angel. The inclusion of that character is odd. Personally, I would be pissed if some employee kept showing up to my house unannounced like that. I wouldn’t mind a version of this movie without him, but having said that he doesn’t ruin the movie.

0

dg25000 t1_j9vmjho wrote

Stupid movie

0

Midnight_Sun_Toph t1_j9vn583 wrote

I wouldnt say i hate the movie, but it for sure wasnt a like. This was def his weakest movie and i feel people just dont want to admit they didnt like it. Peele is suppose to the "savior" of horror so people would lose thier minds if they didnt like it

0

kartoffelstalin t1_j9vzhir wrote

Hated it too. Also I like Keke Palmer but her acting style did not fit in.

0

MrTeeTee23 t1_j9w065z wrote

Yeah i agree with everything u said. i found myself more annoyed and frustrated after watching Nope!! I get all the allegory and metaphors but it was a horrible film experience for me! No disrespect but thats my opinion

0

Rayliex t1_j9tjjlk wrote

Just noticed you seem to make a lot of posts about rugby and sports and such, much more than movies. Not to make assumptions, but maybe movies that make you think aren't really for you.

−1

KevKevThePug t1_j9ug7em wrote

Definitely an assumption and an asshole one at that. I love football more than anything and I also love movies that make you think. I can also say that about quite a few friends who obsess over sports.

6

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9v0vnd wrote

If we had to take generalizations of football fans and fans of "cinema that asks a lot of the viewer", I think the crossover is at a minimum. I have no real way of confirming this, besides maybe pointing to ask if there's a single movie about football that is also demanding of the audience in this way? There's something almost academic in nature about those ambiguous and thematic types of films. Typically hardcore academia and sports viewership don't have a huge crossover. It's a generalization, and there's tons of outliers, but I would put money on that being the case most of the time. Especially since most people, even non sports viewers, don't really love ambiguous thematic films, which could explain why Nope has a significantly lower audience score than user score. Basically: the average football fan isn't also a film snob.

I agree that calling OP out based on his post history is ludicrous though.

3

Rayliex t1_j9voewa wrote

Yikes, ok I probably should've backtracked before posting my first comment. I was going through OP's post history before to try see if he had made any other film-based posts, I was curious. So when I found that he seemed to have a WAY bigger interest in rugby, I guess I jumped to conclusions.

Though part of what I said was meant to be a joke and really just there to rile people up.

Sports and Movies each have a pretty different audiences when you get down to proper fans in the industries, and when it seems like you only watch films on occasion, it makes me assume that films aren't really your thing. And that would make Nope definitely not your type of movie.

But again, I apologize.

1

Positive-Source8205 t1_j9uevwb wrote

Nope was one of the sorriest movies I ever saw. Very disappointed.

−1

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9uzsyr wrote

I find it so interesting just how split audiences were on this film. Just curious, what types of movies do you usually gravitate towards?

2

Stepjam t1_j9vvhq0 wrote

I genuinely find the split on the movie fascinating. I personally enjoyed the movie a lot, and I felt like it should be a crowd pleasing movie. Like there are some movies I enjoy that I understand are not going to work for everyone (and movies I disliked that I at least understand fall under that umbrella too).

But I genuinely don't get the amount of dislike some people have for this movie. It would be one thing if it just wasn't quite their thing but the outright dislike surprises me. A part of me wonders if it didn't have Peele's name attached to it, would it be so controversial?

1

Positive-Source8205 t1_j9v2bln wrote

I like good movies.

I think Signs is in the same genre. Despite its flaws, I think Signs was a great movie.

I tend not to look for specific genres of movies, though. I just like good entertainment.

0

OtherwiseCricket8982 t1_j9v33id wrote

Surely everyone likes "good" movies, it's just highly subjective what that means. I agree that Signs is similar in that it doesn't explain a ton about the alien. But it's also way more obsessed with telling a story clearly than breaking from film conventions and focusing more on the allegory. I think Us did this too, but imo Nope was more successful in how it did it.

What i'm trying to get at is, and i'm just curious, are there any movies you like that don't explain their plot entirely? Neon Genesis? Tree of Life? Even Perfect Blue gets pretty out there.

3

doubletrouble1792 t1_j9vjy8p wrote

One of the worst movies I have ever seen ( I loved get out )

−1

chilltown69 t1_j9vuoz2 wrote

I wasn't crazy about it. Parts I liked, overall found it a bit boring. I really loved Get Out, but I really didn't like Us. With that said, I still look forward to anything Peele does next.

−2

AfternoonCouncilor t1_j9tibab wrote

I think it was all really smart, however i too really disliked Keke in this. Just way over the top (but BRO she was totally contrasting to her brother!!) I know, i still didn’t like her character. It put me off a movie i probably would have liked otherwise.

−4

ogswoosh t1_j9tqlq8 wrote

Bro nope was not good lmao. So many defensive people over a shit movie lol

−5