NickAndNora34

Film You Tried to Watch but Couldn't Get Into It?

94 posts in this topic

EASY RIDER (1969).  Thrice.  Could not stay interested.  Hell, the plot-less 1967 biker movie 'THE GLORY STOMPERS' is more entertaining.  It starred Dennis Hopper, too.

 

     I couldn't even attempt to watch that Peter Jackson 'HOBBIT' stuff.  No thanks.  I would watch Jackson's movies HEAVENLY CREATURES or DEAD-ALIVE, though. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I tried to find this thread before but forgot what forum it was in:

 

I tried to watch Thoroughbreds Don't Cry for Judy, but Mickey irritated  me too much.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On The Waterfront . I knew the fame of it, watched it, and sat there afterwards like...."Nope. No effect."

 

I wasnt really bored with it. I finished it. I just thought..."Ehh, it was ok."

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That movie gave me motion sickness.  I still haven't seen it all the way through.

Believe it or not, I just watched this film last night with a group of friends after we all went trick or treating, and you're not missing out on much. This movie was not scary at all. I gauged this on the fact that I was able to go to sleep last night without issue. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Flynn and Niven started out as good friends.  Eventually they parted ways.  I haven't read Niven's autobiography.  I'd love to read it.

 

I read his first one, The Moon's a Balloon, and loved it.  In their early days when both were living the playboy lifestyle they were close friends.  Niven's background was more conventional than Flynn's and I think he was just more stable.  He married twice, the second time after losing his first wife in an accident, and seemed to enjoy family life.  He spoke fondly of Flynn in the book right up to his death and mentioned a conversation with him in which Flynn claimed to be studying the Bible which Niven hoped would be of benefit to him.   

 

There's a lot of amusing anecdotes in the book but not much kiss-and-tell.  This is the kind of read I like.    

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was able to finish it, but Finian's Rainbow did nothing for me. It was overly long, hokey, dated, frenetic, passe, and featured an obnoxious performance from Tommy Steele as Og the leprechaun. I felt bad for Petula Clark who was generally talented but she had almost nothing to work with. Fred Astaire, who is usually one of my favourites, seemed way past his prime although he was much more enjoyable than Steele. The only real highlights were Don Francks as Woody Mahoney and Al Freeman Jr. as Howard who were likeable support for Clark and Astaire. The story of Finian works much better as a musical as highlighted by the original Broadway production's version of How Are Things in Glocca Morra? For me the movie was rather boring and predictable.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Lord of the Rings'

 

The battle going on for 24/7 hours.

 

and also don't understand why hobbit received three movies.

 

but movie is better than reading book.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blowup (1966).

 

Still don't know what the film was about.

 

However, I liked it when Vanessa Redgrave did those weird, jerky movements while listening to some jazz. She was so uncool and nerdy at that moment I found her rather endearing. (Reminded me a bit of myself out on the dance floor). Well, that's ten seconds that I liked in the film, anyway.

 

Okay, to be fair, I also found it intriguing when David Hemmings returned to the park where there had been a murder. There was an eeriness there (all that stillness, with only the sounds of the wind) that appealed to me, making me think of how much I like Val Lewton films.

 

I was just hoping, though, that it was all leading to something . . .

 

Maybe it did, but, whatever it was, I missed it.

 

Time for me to turn on Cat People or I Walked With A Zombie.

I think it is a horribly dull picture.  I've never understood its status.  I can remember when the infinitely superior BLOW OUT was in theaters and reviewer after reviewer mentioned that it as an inferior homage to BLOW UP..  They're all nuts!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Lord of the Rings'

 

The battle going on for 24/7 hours.

 

and also don't understand why hobbit received three movies.

 

but movie is better than reading book.

I completely agree and since I never read the books, I kept getting character and place names confused so I had no idea who was going where :)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On The Waterfront . I knew the fame of it, watched it, and sat there afterwards like...."Nope. No effect."

 

I wasnt really bored with it. I finished it. I just thought..."Ehh, it was ok."

I agree. After hearing so much about it, I just had to see it and at the end I felt like "that was it??"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Out of Africa' (1985)

 

Tried several times because I'm a big Redford fan.

 

Mind kept wandering (or sleeping).

 

But I'll try again someday. Someday I'll get through that movie.

I can see why you would say that. Without the breathtaking score, I'm not sure if I could watch the film.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I really want to like Terrence Malick's films. In theory, they're just the kind of films I love -- leisurely, beautiful, carefully constructed, experimenting with technique, etc. -- but I have been unable to get into Days of Heaven or The Tree of Life. However, I loved The New World. That connected with me. But none of his other films have.

Days of Heaven! Oh my gosh. That's 2-3 hours of my life I can never get back. I had read so much about the cinematography that I just had to see it and oh my goodness was I disappointed :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Lawrence of Arabia. I watched maybe the first half hour and it just didn't grab me.

I love everything David Lean did, but I am totally exhausted at the end of Lawrence of Arabia.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"Cleopatra" (1963).  A four hour movie, the first 1/3rd with Elizabeth Taylor & Rex Harrison is good;  but after Harrison's Julius Caesar is killed, film becomes a chore to stay awake through. Taylor is OK, but Burton is sleep inducing, for me.  I eventually got through the complete film (it was on two videocassettes), but film is deadly dull, overall.

It is quite long. But I thought that they did quite a good job despite all the production problems.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It is quite long. But I thought that they did quite a good job despite all the production problems.

 

The funny thing is the film is about half as long as the director wanted.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Blowup (1966).

 

Still don't know what the film was about.

 

However, I liked it when Vanessa Redgrave did those weird, jerky movements while listening to some jazz. She was so uncool and nerdy at that moment I found her rather endearing. (Reminded me a bit of myself out on the dance floor). Well, that's ten seconds that I liked in the film, anyway.

 

Okay, to be fair, I also found it intriguing when David Hemmings returned to the park where there had been a murder. There was an eeriness there (all that stillness, with only the sounds of the wind) that appealed to me, making me think of how much I like Val Lewton films.

 

I was just hoping, though, that it was all leading to something . . .

 

Maybe it did, but, whatever it was, I missed it.

 

Time for me to turn on Cat People or I Walked With A Zombie.

 

The best thing about BLOW UP is the Yardbirds.  I love seeing the youthful Jimmy Page and Jeff Beck and I love their music.  The rest of it, not so much.  Yeah, Val Lewton used wind earlier and better.  At least things happen when the wind is blowing in a Val Lewton movie rather than in BLOW UP.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bit overdramatic there, SleepyDog?  DAYS OF HEAVEN only runs 1 hr 35 minutes -- I watched it when it was on recently.   

 

      At least if you're going to use that now-irritating phrase "I can't get those 2-3 hours of my life back" use it for a movie that actually runs 120 minutes instead of 95.  :rolleyes:    

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Days of Heaven! Oh my gosh. That's 2-3 hours of my life I can never get back. I had read so much about the cinematography that I just had to see it and oh my goodness was I disappointed :(

 

Bit overdramatic there, SleepyDog?  DAYS OF HEAVEN only runs 1 hr 35 minutes -- I watched it when it was on recently.   

 

      At least if you're going to use that now-irritating phrase "I can't get those 2-3 hours of my life back" use it for a movie that actually runs 120 minutes instead of 95.  :rolleyes:    

 

Maybe it just felt like 2-3 hours.

 

:)

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The best thing about BLOW UP is the Yardbirds.  I love seeing the youthful Jimmy Page and Jeff Beck and I love their music.  The rest of it, not so much.  Yeah, Val Lewton used wind earlier and better.  At least things happen when the wind is blowing in a Val Lewton movie rather than in BLOW UP.

 

Especially when they smash the guitar much as Jimi Hendrix and the Who a year later.

 

Blow Up and L'Avventura are two films that you generally don't like the first time you see them because you are expecting a straight forward mystery story with a satisfying ending and... surprise!

 

Yet both are highly entertaining when you watch them a second or third time because you finally "get the point". Everyday people are easily distracted in life and they lose out, particularly when it comes to carnal pursuits (either sex or collecting stupid propellers from antique shops). There is lots of whoopee going on in both movies, which is why a missing lady is never found in the sea and a corpse disappears in a park.

 

I love it that a photographer (David Hemmings) first tries to scam a lady (Vanessa Redgrave) because he took incriminating pictures of her having an "affair" in the park. Blackmail is part of his profession. Then, after blowing them up, he sees a man with a gun in the bushes and initially thinks he saved a man's life by interrupting the rendezvous. Only he didn't. There is a body that shows up in the other images. Then he returns to the park and finds a corpse. Only this time he forgets his camera! This guy was literally "glued" to his camera during the first half of the movie!

 

Note that he "made love" to a model with his camera early on. Later he "makes love" with two naked sex kittens without his camera. It is afterwards that he forgets his camera when he returns to the park and finds the corpse! He is camera-less the rest of the movie.

 

Adding to the fun, Vanessa's character re-appears as a phantom later and may quite possibly be involved in the murder as an accomplice... at least we suspect this, but aren't sure. (Echoes of Vertigo, another movie nobody feels neutral about here.)  Neither is he. In addition, he isn't getting help from his friends because they are too busy enjoying whoopee or getting high on pot. Even the model he used a camera to "make love to" earlier is occupied in Paris... only not geographic Paris. Just "far out" Paris in her brain.

 

I love the mime performers. So much symbolism there. They appear at the start just as we see Hemming's character intermingle as a scruffy factory worker before "transforming" into a high class photographer in his fancy set of wheels. Right away, you don't know what is real and what is just a mirage. The mimes re-appear at the end after he gets his camera but can no longer find the corpse. Thus, they play tennis with invisible balls... which seems down right silly until you realize this photographer forgot his camera when he needed it. So it makes perfect sense that he plays tennis with them with no tennis balls. Might as well enjoy your self like the Yardbirds performing with a broken guitar (a remnant of which winds up in a street and ignored by the people as trash).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

THE MALTESE FALCON.  Tried, again, last night, to get engaged in it, but it just doesn't grab me.  I wish it did.  I always feel I SHOULD like it; but, I don't.  Every film isn't for everybody.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I got nauseated with Jean-Luc Godard's Weekend. The traffic jam wreck is an impressive tracking shot, but the rest of the movie is just too angry and ugly. All of the animals slaughtered (goose and pig included) were so unnecessary. I can understand a slaughterhouse documentary like Blood of the Beasts (not that I can stomach it, but I am thankful it and others were made so that people don't assume their meat is just something in saran wrap), but what was the point killing innocent animals simply to explain your disgust with capitalism? (Surprisingly I was less bothered by the horse's death in Andrei Rublev maybe because you don't realize the horse is dying. Also that movie spared the cows by supplying special suits so they wouldn't literally burn.) Yes, I have seen The Rules of the Game and Walkabout but have avoided Apocalypse Now.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Much as I enjoy comedy and am a fan of James Stewart, I just couldn't get into Harvey.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gotta go with Billy Wilder's The Fortune Cookie. Critics say the comedy is deliciously black. I found it to be flat and repetitive and virtually unwatchable.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

     When I think of 'THE FORTUNE COOKIE' I think of the movie firmly as a Comedy-Drama.  It seems to have been marketed as a comedy alone.  And it's not.  I'd opine that Billy Wilder's 1981 movie BUDDY, BUDDY is a comedy and his 1974 remake of 'THE FRONT PAGE' is a comedy.  Very little in the way of dramatics in either of those.  Not so with THE FORTUNE COOKIE where there's a number of dramatic moments.  I've seen THE APARTMENT twice and that's more of a comedy even with its dramatic moments than THE FORTUNE COOKIE.   

 

     CatPeoplePerson → If you're a glutton for cinematic punishment try and watch the 1981 release SECOND-HAND HEARTS.  It's alleged to be a comedy.  If you found "The Fortune Cookie" unwatchable try giving "Second-Hand Hearts" a go.   

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

New Members:

Register Here

Learn more about the new message boards:

FAQ

Having problems?

Contact Us