Jump to content
 
Search In
  • More options...
Find results that contain...
Find results in...

How long did it take you to watch that movie..?


Kid Dabb
 Share

Recommended Posts

I'm not talking about watching the whole movie in one sitting. I'm talking about seeing bits and pieces over a long period of time - eventually seeing the whole movie.

 

I've seen many films this way, though I can't immediately recall the titles. I'll catch 30 minutes in the middle around August 2015, then 10 minutes of the introduction in February 2016, then.. 

 

Well, that's the idea. Eventually, I'll see every part of the film, just in a Quentin Tarantino - Pulp Fiction kinda way, you know.

 

Sometimes I get the opportunity to watch one of these from beginning to end with no introductions interruptions, after I've seen the whole in a fragmented way. Watching them in the above fashion, sometimes I form conclusions about what the story is and am always surprised when I see it as a whole.

 

I read books that way too.
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not talking about watching the whole movie in one sitting. I'm talking about seeing bits and pieces over a long period of time - eventually seeing the whole movie.
 
I've seen many films this way, though I can't immediately recall the titles. I'll catch 30 minutes in the middle around August 2015, then 10 minutes of the introduction in February 2016, then.. 
 
Well, that's the idea. Eventually, I'll see every part of the film, just in a Quentin Tarantino - Pulp Fiction kinda way, you know.
 
Sometimes I get the opportunity to watch one of these from beginning to end with no introductions, after I've seen the whole in a fragmented way. Watching them in the above fashion, sometimes I form conclusions about what the story is and am always surprised when I see it as a whole.
 
I read books that way too.

 

 

That's really interesting, Kid.  For myself, I don't like it when I can't watch the whole movie in one sitting.  Once I get into it, I want to keep with it and not lose the 'momentum'.  Plus, it could be that the following day I forget facts and I miss out on things.

 

If I can't get into a movie on all I can watch the first time, I usually don't go back and give it a second chance the following day, or whenever, unless another poster raves about it and/or encourages me to try it again.  I've had good luck that way, liking a film that I turned off initially.   :)

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

That's really interesting, Kid.  For myself, I don't like it when I can't watch the whole movie in one sitting.  Once I get into it, I want to keep with it and not lose the 'momentum'.  Plus, it could be that the following day I forget facts and I miss out on things.

 

If I can't get into a movie on all I can watch the first time, I usually don't go back and give it a second chance the following day, or whenever, unless another poster raves about it and/or encourages me to try it again.  I've had good luck that way, liking a film that I turned off initially.   :)

 

There were many films I'd seen the first 15-20 minutes of (from their introductions on) and found myself losing interest. I'd leave and see bits of them over time, trying to stay interested. I believe Gone with the Wind was one of those. With all the hype, I made a point of watching from the start, only making it about 30 minutes in before I lost interest. It wasn't until some 30 plus years later that I sat through the whole film. I must have seen at least 90 percent of the movie in out of sequence fragments before that.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were many films I'd seen the first 15-20 minutes of (from their introductions on) and found myself losing interest. I'd leave and see bits of them over time, trying to stay interested. I believe Gone with the Wind was one of those. With all the hype, I made a point of watching from the start, only making it about 30 minutes in before I lost interest. It wasn't until some 30 plus years later that I sat through the whole film. I must have seen at least 90 percent of the movie in out of sequence fragments before that.

I usually give a film about 20 minutes or so before I decide if it's worth sitting through the whole thing. Kind of unfair, probably... maybe I should be more patient.

 

If a poster recommends a film I really try to sit through it, and I like seeing what people here find good.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A good example is tonight's presentation of Breaking Away (1979). I have absolutely no interest in cycling, and the only thing I've found of interest is a Mercedes Benz convertible. 

 

I've watched bits and pieces of this film over so many years, I could cut and paste the whole thing together in my head. I've seen virtually the whole film in 5 or 10 minute clips and will most likely never sit and watch it from start to finish.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Interesting idea for a thread here, Kid. I like it.

 

And so in MY case, the first movie that comes to mind where I had only seen bit and pieces of it before finally some ten years now sitting down and watching the whole of the film was LAWRENCE OF ARABIA.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Brain Eaters.  It has the most ridiculous music score.  Even if you are not paying attention, the music alone tells you when something drastic is happening.  About once every two minutes.  

 

I had it on and found it really hard to concentrate on something I was working on at the time.  So I paused it.  Then things got too quiet so I played it some more.  Then it got too loud, so back to pause it went.  Finally I just said heck with it, put my project away, and played it all the way through.  Yeah baby...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Funny thing.

 

The first time I saw any part of IT'S A WONDERFUL LIFE, I came in just as Stewart got kicked out of Nick's place, and gave that  wide-eyed terrified glare to the camera while that organ was whining in high pitched vibrato.  I didn't know yet what was going on, and thought, "THIS is one weird-azz movie!"

 

I checked the TV book to learn the name and kept an eye out for it.  Took me two more years to finally see it all the way through.

 

 

There are many more movies I've had the sort of experience you refer to, and it galls me to be able to recall just the one.

 

Interesting topic.

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

There were many films I'd seen the first 15-20 minutes of (from their introductions on) and found myself losing interest. I'd leave and see bits of them over time, trying to stay interested. I believe Gone with the Wind was one of those. With all the hype, I made a point of watching from the start, only making it about 30 minutes in before I lost interest. It wasn't until some 30 plus years later that I sat through the whole film. I must have seen at least 90 percent of the movie in out of sequence fragments before that.

 

Many years ago I watched Gone with the Wind with my aunt because she loved that movie, and she wanted to spend time with me.  My aunt passed away but I never could watch the movie on my own without losing interest.  I don't think I've seen it to completion in decades.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this question brings to mind how i saw many movies on their first-run release.

 

in the 50's/60's movies had what were referred to as "continuous showings." when the downtown (first-run) theater opened at 11 am, it would show a series of shorts (newsreels, toons, coming attractions, brief featurettes)  and then the main feature. when the main feature finished, the lights would come up, there would be a brief (about three minutes) intermission, which allowed those seated to exit the theater. then the sequence would start all over again.

 

this led to irregular starting times for the main feature. the local paper would list the starting times for the feature and would look something like this: The Caine Mutiny (11:22, 1:52, 4:22, 6:52, 9:22).

 

so i would see many movies sort of backwards, say the last 2/3'rds first, then the first third later or some fractional arrangement like that. when i'd go to a theater and saw a movie with a friend or a date, we'd say "this is where we came in" when the entry point began to show again. i would think many saw classics this way. of course since the showing times were published, one could always time their theater arrival for the very beginning of the flik.

 

besides The Caine Mutiny, i saw On The Waterfront, The Country Girl and I Want to Live like this the first time. local/suburban/2nd Run theaters usually only had two evening showings at about 7 & 9 pm, with one or two afternoon showings on weekends which were timed to allow for the 7 pm evening start. only extremely rarely would i come to a theater late for the 7 pm  show, and then stick around for the  9 pm show to start so i could pick-up the part i missed at the earlier showing.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going on 20 years and I still haven't seen all of The Ten Commandments.  I've only seen bits and pieces here and there around Easter when it's played on ABC.  I think ABC has the rights to it, so I would actually need to exert energy to see the movie somewhere other that ABC.  I'm not a big fan of religious epics anyway but one day I'll watch the complete movie.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

this question brings to mind how i saw many movies on their first-run release.

 

in the 50's/60's movies had what were referred to as "continuous showings." when the downtown (first-run) theater opened at 11 am, it would show a series of shorts (newsreels, toons, coming attractions, brief featurettes)  and then the main feature. when the main feature finished, the lights would come up, there would be a brief (about three minutes) intermission, which allowed those seated to exit the theater. then the sequence would start all over again.

 

this led to irregular starting times for the main feature. the local paper would list the starting times for the feature and would look something like this: The Caine Mutiny (11:22, 1:52, 4:22, 6:52, 9:22).

 

so i would see many movies sort of backwards, say the last 2/3'rds first, then the first third later or some fractional arrangement like that. when i'd go to a theater and saw a movie with a friend or a date, we'd say "this is where we came in" when the entry point began to show again. i would think many saw classics this way. of course since the showing times were published, one could always time their theater arrival for the very beginning of the flik.

 

besides The Caine Mutiny, i saw On The Waterfront, The Country Girl and I Want to Live like this the first time. local/suburban/2nd Run theaters usually only had two evening showings at about 7 & 9 pm, with one or two afternoon showings on weekends which were timed to allow for the 7 pm evening start. only extremely rarely would i come to a theater late for the 7 pm  show, and then stick around for the  9 pm show to start so i could pick-up the part i missed at the earlier showing.

 

Growing up, my theater played all day the same way as you've mentioned. I would sometimes come in at the last 10 minutes of the first showing of the first feature and not see the rest until the following week... or not in the theater at all - on TV years later.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going on 20 years and I still haven't seen all of The Ten Commandments.  I've only seen bits and pieces here and there around Easter when it's played on ABC.  I think ABC has the rights to it, so I would actually need to exert energy to see the movie somewhere other that ABC.  I'm not a big fan of religious epics anyway but one day I'll watch the complete movie.

 

I originally watched this one from start to finish on television years ago, as a child. Now I just watch certain segments, which may not be in order due to viewing over several air dates.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I wasn't a big movie fan as a child, and that's probably because of the system allthumbs describes. My parents rarely went to the movies, and when they did, it was often simply entering the theater whenever and watching until "that's where we came in." Only in my teens did I become really interested in movies, watching from beginning to end.

 

I finally saw THE TEN COMMANDMENTS from beginning to end this March, as one of TCM's Fathom events on the big screen. It was much better than I thought it would be, very satisfying when seen in widescreen and without commercials.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

OH yeah! I'd surely love to have a nickel for every time we went to see some movie in one of those grand old downtown Los Angeles movies palaces and Pop would say, "Okay, this is where we came in. Let's go!"

 

(...make that 5 bucks...a nickel doesn't go nearly as far now days as it did back in the late-'50s and early-'60s, and when this sort of thing happened, ya know)

 

;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's going on 20 years and I still haven't seen all of The Ten Commandments.  I've only seen bits and pieces here and there around Easter when it's played on ABC.  I think ABC has the rights to it, so I would actually need to exert energy to see the movie somewhere other that ABC.  I'm not a big fan of religious epics anyway but one day I'll watch the complete movie.

 

Hard to have missed it when I was a kid.  TV stations(all THREE of 'em back then) would annually show this one, and THE ROBE every Easter or Christmas.  One local station would play 1961's KING OF KINGS  once a year and even got  SIOBHAN McKENNA,  dressed in her MARY costume to "host", in a set made up to look like a manger!  That was in the late '60's.

 

Another one for me was THE POSTMAN ALWAYS RINGS TWICE.  Would catch it at different points whenever I happened upon it, and it wasn't until sometime in the early '80's, when cable finally hit my area, and I bootlegged TMC (The Movie Channel for the dyslexic among you), which would ometimes show  old flicks, that I finally got treated to seeing it in entirety.

 

 

Sepiatone

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

I'm not talking about watching the whole movie in one sitting. I'm talking about seeing bits and pieces over a long period of time - eventually seeing the whole movie.
 
I've seen many films this way, though I can't immediately recall the titles. I'll catch 30 minutes in the middle around August 2015, then 10 minutes of the introduction in February 2016, then.. 
 
Well, that's the idea. Eventually, I'll see every part of the film, just in a Quentin Tarantino - Pulp Fiction kinda way, you know.
 
Sometimes I get the opportunity to watch one of these from beginning to end with no introductions interruptions, after I've seen the whole in a fragmented way. Watching them in the above fashion, sometimes I form conclusions about what the story is and am always surprised when I see it as a whole.
 
I read books that way too.

 

Hilarious!

 

I have had this happen occasionally and I get what you are saying, KD.

 

I usually have a rule though, that I don't start watching a movie if I've missed the opening credits.

 

I can be a pain like this in my movie viewing life, and my friends all think I am annoying. Too bad it cannot be utilized in my everyday life...haha!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hilarious!

 

I have had this happen occasionally and I get what you are saying, KD.

 

I usually have a rule though, that I don't start watching a movie if I've missed the opening credits.

 

I can be a pain like this in my movie viewing life, and my friends all think I am annoying. Too bad it cannot be utilized in my everyday life...haha!

 

Alvy Singer  !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Since it's on as we speak, so to speak; East of Eden (1955) is another I've never been able to watch in one sitting. I'm always catching it here and there, a slice at a time. I think I managed to see a large portion in a viewing sometime last year - not more than 30 minutes or so.

 

I just cannot get into that teenage angst expression thing, acting-wise. I go more for the 'suck it up and suffer on the inside' acting style.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

© 2023 Turner Classic Movies Inc. A Time Warner Company. All Rights Reserved Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Cookie Settings
×
×
  • Create New...