I know this is a somewhat overly-specific category but I think most of us here have seen at least one film where we felt the first half was vastly superior to the second half? I'll give the two examples which immediately came to my mind:

1. Lawrence of Arabia - I think pretty much all of the iconic scenes and lines of dialogue come from the first half which ends brilliantly with TE Lawrence basking in glory when he returns after his successful raid on Aqaba. The second half seemed to me to have run a bit out of steam and the Ottoman torture scene seemed to drag the movie down to a crawl.

2. Full Metal Jacket - I don't think anyone can deny that the first half on Parris Island is what has become iconic and etched in pop culture. The second half in Vietnam still has some very good scenes but it just doesn't carry the same emotional impact as the first half in my opinion.

I don't know that it's the last half, but the climactic part of Contact was anything but. A real let down after the great build-up earlier in the film.

Full Metal Jacket comes to mind immediately for me.

"Arrival". The trailers looked intriguing, it opened a little odd (IMO) but picked up steam. But about two thirds through it started fading and the "payoff" felt as forced as trying to put ten pounds of sh*t into a five-pound sack.

Arrival was so bad. Contact is a much better movie, written by one of the true geniuses of the 20th century. I liked the ending of Contact, and thought it was very thoughtful, especially the scene on the beach. How else would a species that appeared to be "godlike" pull such an encounter off with us primitives from Earth?

I can't think of any movies offhand, but I will generalize and say that at least half of 80s/90s comedies fit your category, Panzer... heck, even ones from the last couple of decades.

It is relatively easy to write a good opening to a story, but much harder to hold things up in the middle and pull off a good ending. I say this because writing is pretty darned hard to begin with, and truth be told to someone unfamiliar with the craft, openings aren't so easy at all, but comparatively easier than the rest of a story.

Apparently Netflix needs to hire better writers for their original movies because I've now seen several Netflix sci-fi movies that had an interesting premise and started off really interesting but then fell flat on their face with the third act. Actually, there even seems to be a new expression now called "Netflix ending" which implies a disappointing ending to a movie that started off so well.

Not exactly half the movie, but LOTR: Return of the King. The ending dragged on and on and on, and wasn’t faithful to the book. Loved the movie up until Frodo woke up in Rivendell again, but from there on in it is a meh-fest.

The original "Stargate" movie with James Spader had me feeling this way somewhat.

Didn't it just.....especially as I thought my bladder was bursting, sat at the opposite end to the gangway. "Surely it's ending now!"...Five minutes later....."Surely it's ending now!".......Five minutes later....."Surely it's ending now!"

Sorry Panzer...just noticed the title of the thread says "Great" films...don't think Stargate qualifies...lol

Sunshine. First half, great thoughtful sci-fi. Second half, Friday the 13th in space.

"Stargate" is a very good science fiction film and I even have it on bluray but of course it's not in the "great" category like 2001 or Blade Runner.

Stripes

+1 David. The basic training part was great. The part after that was forced.

Full Metal Jacket.

But the second half was also good. It's a relative thing.

v6,
boNes

Skyfall. After Bond and his boss flee to his old home, it was just generic.

LOL Welcome back NFB. I think....

I liked "Sunshine" despite how laughable the premise was. This is a rarity for a film that isn't incepted as farce from the get go.

As are the majority of comedies. Most start off to be funny and get laughs, but eventually the writers realize they are following a three act structure, so somehow they must shoehorn a third act in to wrap things up, whereby they duct tape plot mechanisms to the story. Exceptions to this rule are masterpieces such as 1984's "Ghostbusters" and "Groundhog Day." Funny enough, both star Bill Murray. Perhaps because he is exceptional at comedy. Also, perhaps due to them both being written by Harold Ramis, and one of which contributed to by Dan Aykroyd.


Now I'm sad. Where has all the good comedy gone.

It's challenging to make a comedy have a cohesive beginning/middle/end, but can be done.



p.s. Yes I used "duct tape" as a verb.

I had forgotten about that movie. I really liked Sunshine up until it switched from sci-fi to slasher as well.

My top 5 comedy films of all time:

1. The Blues Brothers
2. Duck Soup
3. Monty Python and the Holy Grail
4. Galaxy Quest
5. Animal House

In my opinion, he is the absolute master of dead pan comedy.

Strangely I have never seen this.

I adore the other four you mentioned. My eleven year-old daughter can even quote lines from "The Holy Grail" verbatim.

Many film critics consider it to be the best Marx Brothers film from their entire career.

Sorry, resurrecting this older thread because I finally thought of two that I had been trying to come up with.

First, Amadeus. The movie starts off great, but the last half and ending just seem to lose steam.

Second, Inglorious Basterds. The last third just kind of falls apart, and I don't like the revisionist history ending.

I don’t quite agree with you on Amadeus but I can see where you might be coming from. The first half of the film centers on Mozart’s arrival to Vienna and Salieri’s reaction to that. The second half centers on Salieri’s alter ego of the ghost from “Don Giovanni” and how he uses that to “kill” Mozart. So yes the mood and focus does change significantly from the first half to the second half.

JURASSIC PARK

What on earth are you on. It's a classic from start to finish.

On nothing. I don't do drugs.

JURASSIC PARK: The inferior second half began with the rugrats.