Loved Classics you didn't like

"All that Heaven Allows", beautifully filmed, but the script is a trite melodrama. There is one scene, where the lead character is presented with a TV set, and she looks as if a child just died. That scene may be the nadir of 1950s cinema.

I do not care for Gone With The Wind.

Richard Kimble I agree with you on Breakfast at Tiffany's and Easy Rider. Roman Holiday was fun but a rather empty film, not deserving of "Classic" status.

Classics that I don't like?

I can't stand 2001: A Space Odyssey. To quote Andrew Sarris: it's "...a science-fiction project so devoid of life and feeling as to render a computer called Hal the most sympathetic character in a jumbled scenario. 2001: A Space Odyssey also confirms Kubrick's inability to tell a story on the screen with coherence and a consistent point of view. Kubrick's tragedy may have been that he was hailed a great artist before he had become a competent craftsman."

I find M (1931) dreadfully, and deathly, dull, in spite of Peter Lorre's brilliant lead performance and the famous balloon scene. In fact, while I approve of his work in theory (paranoids in a world of those actually out to get you), I find most of Fritz Lang's movies to be dull. I really only liked Ministry of Fear (oh, and Metropolis too!), and, even then, there were elements to criticize.

I think Night of the Living Dead is a terrible movie, in addition to its holding the dubious honor of kicking off the deplorable modern "zombie" craze.

I always used to think The Haunting ('63) overrated and its remake ('99) underrated (OK, before everyone skins me alive, the remake is not a good movie, but there are parts and ideas of it that I think were somewhat clever--and the set design is gorgeous, as Roger Ebert emphasizes in his review. The climax, however, is both risible and terribly executed). Having watched the original again last Hallowe'en, it's better than I remembered it, and rather eerie, even though I still prefer the opening sequence, in which director Robert Wise is able to show off his excellent technical filmmaking skills, to the rest of the movie and find Julie Harris's acting, particularly her voiceover, to be more annoying than creepy.

Alastair Sim is one of my favorite actors, but I find his Scrooge ('51) overrated (not bad, but overrated). I think Albert Finney gave a better Scrooge performance and that George C. Scott's version was my favorite all-round Christmas Carol adaptation.

Does The Producers count as a classic? Does Airplane? I think the former is overrated (again, not bad) and the latter both overrated and bad. Airplane wins my award for the most overrated movie of all time, tied perhaps with Quentin Tarantino's--er--efforts. I really dislike it.

I found In a Lonely Place interesting but muddled, despite two stellar central performances (from Bogie and Gloria Grahame). I'm not a great fan of Nicholas Ray's works.

Not too crazy about Little Caesar or Scarface ('32), despite one of my favorite actors (Eddie G.) in the former and one of my favorite directors (Howard Hawks) helming the latter. I've seen a good number of superior '30s and '40s gangster flicks.

Oh, and the big one that I forgot--High Noon! Nope, never liked that movie. Nor did Howard Hawks or John Wayne, apparently, because it inspired them to make a rebuttal to it in Rio Bravo.

Wow, how's that for negativity? Don't worry, I can make a list of my most underrated films too!

I'm not a big fan of Howard Hawks films (although I did enjoy Red River).

Oops, yes, Hawks.
I'll edit my original post

I find some of David Lean's movies, especially LAWRENCE OF ARABIA and DR. ZHIVAGO vastly overblown, with more attention to sweep and spectacle than to story and character development.

I love GWTW and ROMAN HOLIDAY, and while I'll admit that CITIZEN KANE is brilliant filmmaking, it doesn't enthrall me, especially since the title character is disturbingly like Donald Trump.

I like Dr. Zhivago; I must confess to never having seen Lawrence of Arabia. (I know, I know!)

You may be interested to know the critics at the time agreed with you on Zhivago. The Wikipedia page details a number of their criticisms, and my favorite critic, Andrew Sarris, wrote, "...David Lean has labored on but one additional superproduction, Dr. Zhivago, a work with more commercial than critical success, a work also of the most impeccable impersonality, and not even an Oscar to show for such self-abnegation." 

As I said, I do like Zhivago, but I think that, on the whole, Lean was stronger in his salad days, with (relatively) smaller pictures (not "superproductions") like Great Expectations, Oliver Twist (a particular favorite), and Brief Encounter, because his ego had not yet gotten the better of him. That happens, unfortunately, to many of even my favorite directors.

I'm not going to get into politics, but one of the points about Kane that makes it so brilliant, I feel, is that you're not supposed to like Charlie Kane. Pity him, yes, ultimately mourn for his lost youth and the lack of simplicity that meant more than all the money in the world--yes--but not like him as a person. I think it a great movie, one of the greatest, even though I don't call anything "the greatest of all time" and have my reasons for preferring The Magnificent Ambersons (warmer, more engaging, even as it touches on many of the same themes) and even Touch of Evil.