Movies You Don't "Get"

S

SifuPhil

R.I.P. With Us In Spirit Only
Location
Pennsylvania, USA
Did you ever start to watch a movie, only to turn it off in frustration, anger or disgust after a short while?

Seabreeze's thread on Jeff Bridges reminded me of his movie The Big Lebowski. When it first came out everyone was telling me I HAD to see it, because he reminded them so much of me.

I got my Sunday-go-to-meetin' clothes on, went to the theater one evening and, after about 15 minutes, walked out. I just could not understand the movie, where it was going or why The Dude was such an overbearingly annoying character. When my friends asked what I thought of the movie I had quite a surprise for them.

To this day I still can't watch that movie - I've tried several times and always get angry within the first 10-15 minutes. It's like there's a subliminal rabble-rousing message in that film meant just for me, because everyone else raves about how wonderful it is.

Do you have a movie like that in your life - one that, for whatever reason, you just can't stomach?
 

Alrighty then.

Moulin Rouge. Oy vay, I do have to say it is the most visually stunning piece of crap I have ever not watched. I just couldn't make it for more than a few minutes.

Master And Commander: I was bored to tears after about 20 minutes I think I made it. It was mind numbing for me.

Hobo With a Shotgun: Ok granted I wasn't excepting anything too good, well I wasn't disappointed in that regard. We both had to just turn it off, the goriest movie I have EVER seen, well sort of watched anyway.

And my number one I just didn't get it movie.

The Best Exotic Marigold Hotel

Oh where to begin, I can't even begin to remember when the last time was that I was so extremely bored with and had no interest in anything about the characters in a film than this one.

It has a message, life rarely turns out the way we plan, so roll with it. And you just might find yourself in a much better place than you could have ever imagined, or you could just drop dead and that really throws a monkey wrench into your plans.

I'm old, I already know this.

It did have a good ending, mostly it was good because then the film was finally over.

We sat through it because someone near and dear to me said it was one of the best films they had ever seen and just LOVED IT. ​

From here on in, I will be a bit suspect of their choices, in all things.


 
A lot of the new movies have that effect on us; guess we're just not 'with it' these days....that's ok, tho. :p

Can't think of any specifically, but we did watch The Color Purple the other night, and tho it was good, we both got confused, since we didn't always know who was who; so many time changes, and we watched it in two parts, sooo...
 

Just yesterday, through Netflix, I started to watch the Hunger Games. Wife said she read the book so I thought it was going to be good. Maybe I just didn't get it but I shut it down shortly after it started.

Decided on a good John Wayne movie instead.
 
Gone With the Wind! I read the book first. I dragged my protesting logic circuits through it, page by agonizing page, with the erroneous conviction that there must be something that eventually makes the total tosh of it all come to some kind of meaningful point.

Nup.

Finally garnered the courage to sit through the movie. I was probably the oldest person never to have seen it before by then.
The movie would show me what everyone else seemed to see... there had to be something I was missing as this story kept being put up as a 'classic', an icon... it kept popping up top of the best ever movie lists.

Nup. Still absolute adolescent crap. To me it had the romantic depth and insight into human relationships of Twilight and the historical context had no relevance to me at all culturally, nor did it bear all that much resemblance to how history pictured it in what I'd read of it.

I have no idea why it, or any of the cast ever won a pay packet, let alone an Oscar.
Viv especially profoundly disappointed. Great actress?? Kidding right? H a m!
I guess anyone would have found it hard to keep a straight face with some of those lines but really, it was soapie level acting. She may though have nailed the character of the vacuously idiotic Scarlett, she was pure 'soap' after all. That anyone could accept such a hollow, selfish b***h as being 'the heroine' of anything eludes me totally. She was about as deep, and lovable, as Paris bloody Hilton! The only thing that could have given the story credibility was if someone had fetched her the backhander she so desperately deserved!

Gable phoned his performance in. At least I hope that wasn't the best he could do, never was a fan so didn't study him much.

Siiiiigh. The hours I wasted on that damned silly yarn. I 'get' it's existence. It was a flight of adolescent fancy written by someone with a teenaged romanticised view of life. TG she only wrote one! What I don't get is that anyone else sees it as something wonderful.
It was Mills and Boone!

It was a waste of film and cinemagraphic talent on a grand subject trivialised by stupid characters. A potential masterpiece with stick figures painted into it.

aaaagh!

Pulp Fiction. It took 4 viewings of this one to 'get' it. Call me doh! But when it finally all fell into place it became a fave. I just don't know why it was necessary to mess up the time lines quite so much, a tad too 'clever' imo.

I never even bothered to watch the Matrix type ones, life's too short and complicated enough already, so thanks anyway.
 
Last edited:
Here are a few of the ones I love to hate, in no particular order other than how they spewed out of my brain ...



  1. Eyes Wide Shut - starring Tom Cruise and that pretty Aussie gal he used to be married to. ;) Went to see this with the wife on date night - would have been better off staying home and watching a Sid and Marty Kroft retrospective. I squirmed more in my seat during that movie than a 3-year-old with ADHD and an upset stomach.
  2. Once Upon A Time in America - publicized as being the magnum opus of Goombah Goon flics, this pathetic endeavor, despite an all-star cast being led by Bobby De Niro, was a snorer. At almost 4 hours long - one-sixth of a day! - you would think they could have done something interesting. Unfortunately you would be wrong.
  3. The Da Vinci Code - another one of those blockbusting must-sees with rave reviews that I fell asleep quarter of the way through. Talktalktalktalktalk - weird symbols - talktalktalk. If I wanted that I'd start texting on my cell phone.
  4. Driving Miss Daisy - I got that it was about a black dude driving an old white lady around. Anything more profound than that was lost as I left the theater early and went home to play with my cat.
 
Driving Miss Daisy was "ok", but nothing memorable....I loved The Da Vinci code- the book-didn't see the movie. Eyes Wide Shut was one of the dumbest ones I've seen since "Fargo". Yeah; your family is in imminent danger, and you stand arguing in the store, while your daughter wanders off, and you don't notice. Don't care for Tom Cruise or Nicole Kidman much.
 
Phil, I've only seen one of those you listed. As to what I don't like....ANYTHING with Tom Cruise after his first 5-6 movies. I once adored the man, saw TOP GUN at least 5 times, then bought the movie (I have purchased maybe 5 movies total, so it was special.) Then his persona began to gag me w/a spoon and he began making movies I struggled to make sense of.

I may have seen 10 min of MOULIN ROUGE...gawdawful movie!!! There is nothing remotely appealing to me about movies that aren't realistic, tho they bring in the crowds. As Old Hipster said, "I'm old and I know it", but the huge money makers such as HUNGER GAMES/Vampire related anything....pphhtt!! Couldn't pay me enough to even sit down for it!!

Southern gal here who has never sat through GWTW. I've seen all of it over the decades, but never at one sitting. It always loses me along the VERY long way. (And parts of it were way too "soapie" + I was never a Gable fan either, Di.)

On the other hand, I've seen DRIVING MISS DAISY a half doz times and wish I could see it again, simply excellent acting. (Different strokes, different folks.) I remember a reference here as to enjoying an actor so much they would listen to him read a phone book. Morgan Freeman is that and then some for me, with what seems like 25 or so TV advertisers in agreement. JMO, but I don't recall a better performance than he gave in MS. DAISY, other than Dustin Hoffman in RAIN MAN. I'm picky as heck with movies, always have been, and lean toward well acted w/several layers romantic comedies or a good mystery/with lots of twists. They are so few and far between. IT'S COMPLICATED was the last comedy I laughed out loud often, thoroughly enjoyed, and a total chick flick! But then I always rave over Meryl, she's the best I've ever seen!

Remember posting THE GREAT GATSBY held my interest about as long as MOULIN ROUGE did and I cancelled my $5.00 movie order after 15 minutes. Seriously shiddee movie!!!
 
I walked out of The Da Vinci Code......boring. I like most all Tom Hanks movies, especially Cast Away, but not Forest Gump, a big loser IMO, I agree with Katy on Driving Miss Daisy, one of my favorites....another is Terms of Endearment....and Di, a very good review of GWTW, another boring movie, background music and all.
 
Jackie22 said:
I walked out of The Da Vinci Code......boring. I like most all Tom Hanks movies, especially Cast Away, but not Forest Gump, a big loser IMO, I agree with Katy on Driving Miss Daisy, one of my favorites....another is Terms of Endearment....and Di, a very good review of GWTW, another boring movie, background music and all.
Click to expand...

Jackie, you and I are probably in the minority on FOREST GUMP. Everyone else I know loved it. I adore Tom, and CAST AWAY was far and above more entertaining to me. Carrying a film is one thing, carrying it with almost no conversation is on an entirely different level. Genius!!!

I had just been laid off from the law firm and was in depression. Read one chapter of Da Vinci and took it back to the library. Required WAY more concentration than I was capable of.
 
...talking Tom Hanks...his new movie, Captain Philips, is well worth seeing if you get a chance. You will not get bored watching it, let me tell you..lol

I'm getting off topic here.
 
I don't think either really had a point Warri, even Arthur Clarke as much as admitted he'd lost the plot for 2001 and settled for pretending it was more deep and meaningful than the dead end of an imagination track that it really was. The movie's point was using the story to present the cutting edge SFX of the time. It still holds it's own for that alone, but I'd have preferred Hal to wander off alone into the universe a winner to be honest. Would have saved everyone a headache.

Hanging Rock was just a business exercise in catering to the moody, 'spiritual' fad of the time. I thought it worked well for what it was, never occurred to me to take it seriously so maybe I really didn't 'get' it either. The visuals and soundtrack were all I really noticed, the 'non-story' was rubbish and just an excuse to take pretty pics and play weird music. The cinematography was a stunner and what held my interest. We've made a lot crappy movies here but we're not bad with a camera.

Thinking back on other's suggestion I have to agree on most. I didn't mind D.M.Daisy, but then I sat through 'Fried Green Tomatoes..' twice so that's no benchmark. Master and Commander was boring rather than unintelligible. I liked it because I like sailing ships. I was almost able to ignore Rusty's presence. Also think it might be a 'cultural' thing. Maybe GWTW didn't appeal because I had no connection to the Civil War scene, whereas I grew up with stories of maritime exploration and naval history so M & C rang a faint bell in me.

LOTR was utterly incomprehensible to me. I never got past page 23 of the book and was bored witless by roughly half of the movies running times.
What kept me riveted was the 'look' of it. I found it/them pure eye candy. Set art and cinematography saved it/them.
Likewise Avatar's plot was downright pathetically cliched but the visuals were mindblowing!

Uh oh, I think I might be watching movies just for how they look rather than the message they're trying to impart. Have to have a ponder about that. Tch, talk about shallow!
 
Not shallow at all.
One of the reasons I like watching old movies now, including some very ordinary ones, is the scenery.

I also saw GWTW much later in life to see what everyone was raving about.
I found it irritating rather than incomprehensible.
I have enjoyed a number of American Civil War movies from Friendly Persuasion to Lincoln.
Glory was a fascinating movie as far as I was concerned.

I wonder how many Americans would "get" some of our war movies like Gallipoli or The Odd Angry Shot.
Maybe they would get something quite different to Australian viewers.
 
Jackie22 said:
...talking Tom Hanks...his new movie, Captain Philips, is well worth seeing if you get a chance. You will not get bored watching it, let me tell you..lol

I'm getting off topic here.
Click to expand...

I posted a few wks ago how much I was looking forward to CAPTAIN PHILIPS, and have yet to see it. It will be a TV rental, like most others, but I know the story and thought it would be compelling. Thx for confirming.
 
I wonder how many Americans would "get" some of our war movies like Gallipoli or The Odd Angry Shot.
Maybe they would get something quite different to Australian viewers.
Click to expand...

Good point, we(I) seem to have a different attitude to the 'glory' aspect of war movies, although that too is changing now. British war movies seldom acknowledged that we were around at all. I can't watch those post war, John Wayne type ones either but more recent US ones seem to have nailed it.
Apocalypse Now was one of the few movies I ever sat and watched the credits roll on. That was a stunning movie first time I saw it. I 'got' it. But Vietnam was familiar to all of us, while the older wars WWI especially were fought in different regions under different leadership and reported from different propaganda sources aimed at different 'patriotism' triggers.

The cruel irony of the whole Gallipoli fiasco would be overlooked without having grown up with it's history I guess. It must be hard to understand why we still venerate and 'celebrate' a defeat without understanding it's underlying symbolism of our awakening from the 'imperialist' era of 'King and Country'. It was the first glimmer of realization that it wasn't our Country we were being sent out to die for. (Or is that just me?)
Out of curiosity I'd like to hear the Kiwis and Canadians views on that, they were there too.

Can't say I even remember much about The Odd Angry Shot, I know I've seen it but can't remember it.
 
If it helps any I gave a short review of Captain Phillips ... ;)

It's always interesting to see how one person's masterpiece is another person's mutation. For me a lot of it is dependent on how I feel at the time I'm watching it. Chick flicks, for example, never sit well with me - romantic comedy is a personal ho-hum. That doesn't mean there aren't some excellent ones out there, just that no matter HOW well-made they are they'll never "reach" me.

Horror films ... I grew up with the Boris Karloff / Lon Chaney generation of horror. Vincent Price added his own style, and studios such as Hammer epitomized the Gothic genre. But the majority of the new stuff - the teen girls screaming (yeah, thanks, Jamie Lee!), the graphic and gratuitous violence instead of horror ... not my cup of soup, no matter how much critical acclaim they achieve.

Sci-Fi is a mixed bag, again reflecting my own favorite vehicles such as Star Trek. Yet I cannot abide by Star Wars. Go figure. 2001 and 2010 I thoroughly enjoyed, perhaps as Di said because they were (especially 2001) so technically progressive.

Whether I read the book first or after makes a large difference as well. When I read the book first I get a picture of the characters in my head, a picture that is only very rarely produced on the big screen. When I read it after seeing the movie there are moments of clarification, but also of confusion due to artistic interpretation.

Many classics such as GWTW, Citizen Kane and even (GASP!) some Bogie films leave me cold. Perhaps they don't translate to modern times for me, perhaps they're just TOO slow, even given the change of movie pacing from the early days until now.

Usually when I become interested in an actor/actress I'll watch everything they've ever done, and while this is educational and worthy of coffee-table bragging rights sometimes this can be counter-productive, especially seeing the artist's earlier, primitive efforts. Bogie as The Oklahoma Kid was a massive let-down to me; Sir Anthony in some of his earlier movies was only adequate. Of course, his "adequate" is better than most actor's "best". :playful:
 
Couldn't handle "Inception"... even after reading through the back and forth analysis from Wikipedia... Understood what was going on, but the deliberate obfuscation was too much doubletalk for me.
And... couldn't get past the first 5 minutes of "Avatar".The same same for "Gravity".
And "8 1/2"... Fellini... overrated.
"Syriana"
"Confessions of a Dangerous Mind"

Lots more that I didn't "get", but the above were more or less critically acclaimed, but disappointing for me.
 
Warrigal said:
The Odd Angry Shot is worth a new look, especially if you also watch Full Metal Jacket for a comparison.
Hard to believe that they depict the same war.
Click to expand...

I'll look out for it, bound to get a rurun around April.
I'm not into war movies so while I've seen most, very few impressed me either way. I've seen FMJ but can't sort the scenes in my mind from umpteen others of the same genre.
As I said Apocalypse Now was the only one that made me feel 'there'. It opened a whole new understanding of those vets I was working with and why they seemed that tiny bit 'odd' sometimes. The scene of the choppers going in with Ride of the Valkyries blaring gave me the only real, momentary, faint perception, felt in the gut, of what men get out of going into battle. The rush, the fear, the power all in one hit. I rewatch it for that scene alone although that first 'epiphany' never returns.
Overall it's still the best summation of the, for want of better word, stupidity and cynicism of war in general that I'm ever likely to see.
It was a little too loooong, it was overstaged and fantasized at the end, but it did deliver the ultimate message that no News camera could furnish with pictures of the starkest reality and that jingoistic flag waver movies totally miss. The underlying lasting effects of it. "The horror".

One I did walk out on was The Young Lions, that was going nowhere after what seemed hours so I wrote it off and went shopping.
But not because I didn't 'get' it. I just didn't care, so it doesn't count.

Citizen Kane, another of life's great disappointments for me too Phil. It was okay, but failed to impress.
 
On the subject of shows I don't 'get'.

DR WHO

Anyone else wander off during the 50th Anniversary episode?
It was a cleverly written plot to re-open some previously closed plot lines but why does it have to be so coooorrrrny?
What completely bewilders me is other peoples' obsession with it.

They're all beside themselves with ecstasy on the Whovian forum, I dare not post an honest opinion of the 50th Anniversary ep there, I'd be shredded.

I did a quick sum and realise I was probably too old when it kicked off. I had the feeling it was around even sooner than it was but I was well in my teens 50 years ago. It seems those who grew up with it are more likely to 'get' into it. I loved the theme music, I'd leave it on until the opening bit ended then turn it off. Gasp.
Only started watching it a few years ago but never blinked () if I missed an ep.

So who's game to admit they watched it and what did you think of it??
 
I do like a good clasic Western, regardless , of 100-s dead and often bizare concept, it is relaxing.
Same with "asian kung foo" movies, where a guy makes 3 salto mortales to go to the toilet, and 3 salto mortales to go back from the loo.
What really gives me the s**ts, are the "studio coloured in" B&W movies.
Can you immagine "CASABLANCA' in color.
The light &shade, the black and white technique, is what makes some movies, films and photography what they are.
Coloring (or colouring)them is bizare and kitch!
 
It was a cleverly written plot to re-open some previously closed plot lines but why does it have to be so coooorrrrny?
What completely bewilders me is other peoples' obsession with it.
Click to expand...
Because it is basically pantomime.
I love panto. This one borrowed heavily from Alice in Wonderland as far as I am concerned.
 
Aussie gals, I loved Gallipoli it's one of my all time favorite movies, along with Breaker Morant, Lantana, Undead and Picnic At Hanging Rock, which I found so hauntingly compelling. Oh The Proposition, one of the best movies ever made, period!

Ok this is movies we don't get, but I had to being those up anyway.

Inception..Huh?!? if I have to work that hard to figure out what the hell is going on something's wrong! Oh another one that made no sense was Looper, it sorta made sense up to a point, but time travel movies have too many variables and the rules seem to change a lot. The Fountain, again I found myself saying "What the Hell!?!"
 

You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top